2004 NCAA CONVENTION PROPOSAL
CHART—DIVISION III
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
55 [2-58] |
Financial
Aid -- Athletics Endowments [Amends 15.01.5] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on
the Future of Division III)]. |
To
prohibit an institution from using in its financial aid budget, income from
endowment funds specifically designated for student-athletes and received by
the institution prior to |
Elimination
of endowment funds specifically designated for student-athletes in financial
aid budgets is consistent with the Division III philosophy of prohibiting the
awarding of athletically related financial aid to any student. This
legislated exception to the financial aid requirements was adopted over 20
years ago and is no longer necessary. Further, it does not appear to be used
by a significant number of institutions. A limited number of institutions
provide the ability of being able to offer financial aid to its
student-athletes from a pool of funds not available to institutions that did
not have athletics funds or endowments established prior to |
|
|
56 [2-59] |
Financial Aid -- Annual
Electronic Reporting Process [Amends 15.41] |
NCAA Division III Presidents
Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on the Future of Division
III) (Financial Aid Reporting Task Force)]. |
To require an institution to compare financial aid
packaging for freshmen and transfer student-athletes with the aid packages
awarded to other freshmen and transfer students via an annual electronic
reporting process. |
The principle of no athletics aid is a fundamental
tenet of the Division III philosophy. This proposal will establish an annual
electronic reporting process to permit member schools to more clearly determine
their compliance with that philosophy and related legislative requirements in
Bylaw 15, while minimizing the associated administrative burden and cost. The
report will compare the financial aid packages of freshmen and in-coming
transfer student-athletes at each institution with a comparable group of
nonstudent-athletes. The compilation of data will occur electronically and
data submission will be Web-based. Proposed submission procedures reflect
feedback from members of the financial aid community as well as member
conferences that currently engage in similar reporting efforts. This
legislation is responsive to the membership survey conducted on the future of
Division III, in which 64 percent of respondents supported the establishment
of a financial aid reporting process. The delayed effective date allows for
the implementation of a division-wide pilot during the fall of 2004, and
permits the modification of reporting criteria and procedures, if necessary,
prior to full implementation in 2005. |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
57 [2-56] |
Eligibility
-- Determining Season of Eligibility -- Minimum Amount of Participation [Amends 14.2] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on
the Future of Division III) (Centennial Conference) (College Conference of |
To specify that a student-athlete will be charged
with a season of participation if he or she practices or competes during or
after the first contest following the student-athlete's initial athletics
participation at the institution. |
This legislation eliminates the practice of
"redshirting" and is consistent with the Division III philosophy
that the highest priority is placed on the overall quality of the educational
experience and successful completion of all students' academic progress. It
will permit student-athletes to take part in limited tryouts without
exhausting a season of participation. The retention of existing waiver
options to regain a season of competition (e.g., medical hardship) provides
an opportunity for unique situations to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
This legislation encourages degree completion on a four-year schedule and may
eliminate pressure to lengthen collegiate enrollment for student-athletes who
do not wish to "redshirt." The survey conducted on the future of
Division III indicated that a substantial portion of the membership supports
the elimination of athletics redshirting. |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
57-1 |
Eligibility
-- Determining Season of Eligibility -- Minimum Amount of Participation [Amends 14.2] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council (Management Council). |
To amend 2004 NCAA Convention Proposal No. 57 to
indicate that a student-athlete may practice in the nontraditional segment
without counting a season of participation if the student-athlete missed the
traditional season for academic reasons (excluding academic probation) as
certified by the academic authorities at the institution. |
This proposal specifies that a student-athlete who
misses the traditional segment for academic reasons (e.g., study abroad and
student-teaching) may practice in the nontraditional segment without being
charged with a season of participation as long as the student-athlete does
not compete in that segment. This proposal is based on feedback from the
membership, to allow flexibility for those student-athletes who, due to
academic reasons, participate only in practice during the nontraditional
segment. An institutional academic authority must certify that the
student-athlete missed the traditional segment for a legitimate academic
reason (e.g., study abroad and student-teaching). |
|
|
58 [2-70] |
Philosophy
Statement -- Recruiting [Amends 20.11.1] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on
the Future of Division III)]. |
To revise the Division III philosophy statement to
specify that athletics recruitment complies with established institutional
policies and procedures applicable to the admissions process. |
This principle applies to the identification,
evaluation and admission of prospective student-athletes and is consistent
with existing concepts in the philosophy statement. In order to incorporate
this concept into practice, the Division III Institutional Self-Study Guide
will be amended to reflect the principle, thus encouraging campus dialogue
between the athletics admissions department to assess admissions practices,
consistent with the principle. The proposed legislation is responsive to
results of the membership survey conducted on the future of Division III (84
percent support). |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
59 [2-55] |
Recruiting
-- Permission to Contact -- Self-Release [Amends
13.1.1.2] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on
the Future of Division III)]. |
To grant student-athletes transferring to a Division
III institution the authority to issue, on their own behalf, written
permission that permits other institutions to contact the student-athlete
about a potential transfer. |
This proposal provides student-athletes with
flexibility and freedom to pursue options related to transfer and subsequent
enrollment at a new institution. It grants student-athletes the opportunity
to pursue other educational experiences with some privacy and without fear of
negative repercussion form the current institution. The student-athlete
statement will be updated to provide notice to student-athletes about the
availability of this permission form on the NCAA Web site. To mitigate
concerns about the abuse of this proposal, the enforcement staff and the
Committee on Infractions will be issued a directive to strengthen enforcement
of the transfer contact regulations and issues related to inappropriate
contact with student-athletes. It is important to note that the self-release
applies only for student-athletes transferring from one Division III
institution to another Division III institution. The latter concept is
responsive to the results of the membership survey conducted on the future of
Division III (63 percent support). |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
60 [2-61] |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Length of Seasons and Contest Limits [Amends
17] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Playing and Practice
Seasons Subcommittee)]. |
To limit the length of an institution's playing
season segment to 18 weeks in fall sports, and 19 weeks in winter and spring
sports; further, to decrease the combined current traditional and
nontraditional segment contest limits by 10 percent and establish combined
maximums for traditional and nontraditional segments as specified, while
retaining the current caps on the maximum number of permissible contests or
dates of competition in each segment. |
This proposal will reduce the length of the overall
playing season and related contest limits by approximately 10 percent. It
treats all sports equitably, and is consistent with the results of the
membership survey, in which a majority of respondents supported an overall
modification of in the length of the playing season as well as the
establishment of reasonable contest limits. The playing season and contest
reductions are linked, so that student-athletes will not face a reduced
season length with current contest limits. The combined (traditional and
nontraditional) contest maximums provide for institutional autonomy and
flexibility in the allocation of contests between the traditional and
nontraditional segments. Finally, the delayed effective date of |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
61 [2-62] (1-8) |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Length of Playing Season [Amends
17] |
College
Conference of |
To specify that the length of the playing season
shall not exceed 18 weeks for fall sports and 19 weeks for winter and spring
sports. |
This
proposal standardizes Bylaw 17, based on the 60 percent model recommended by
the NCAA Division III Management Council Playing and Practice Seasons
Subcommittee at the 2003 NCAA Convention, without reducing the amount of
competition currently permitted. This proposal would codify the current
practice of Division III playing and practice seasons, as most sports are
unable to achieve the current 21-week playing season. Further, the proposal
strives to maintain a balance between the academic and athletics pursuits of
Division III student-athletes. |
|
|
Committee Position: The
NCAA Division III Management Council Playing and Practice Seasons
Subcommittee prefers Presidents Council Proposal No. 60 (Playing and Practice
Seasons -- Length of Seasons and Contests Limits) which gives flexibility to
amount of games played in the nontraditional segment. |
|||||
|
62 [2-64] (1-10) |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Nontraditional Segment -- Elimination of Contests [Amends
17] |
College
Conference of |
In all sports except golf and tennis, to eliminate
all competition in the nontraditional segment. |
This
proposal will further reduce the demands and challenges placed on
institutional personnel, facilities and participating student-athletes while
maintaining the benefit of practice during the nontraditional segment.
Eliminating the ability to compete during the nontraditional segment will
enable student-athletes to participate in other campus activities along with
fellow students. The opportunity for student-athletes to further their athletics
skill and ability will remain as practice opportunities during the
nontraditional segment will not change. The sports of golf and tennis, in
accordance with NCAA Bylaw 17.1.9.3, would retain the ability to compete the
nontraditional segment. |
|
|
Committee Position: The NCAA Division III
Management Council Playing and Practice Seasons Subcommittee prefers
Presidents Council Proposal No. 60 (Playing and Practice Seasons -- Length of
Seasons and Contests Limits) which gives flexibility to amount of games
played in the nontraditional segment. |
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
62-1 |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Nontraditional Segment -- Elimination of Contests [Amends
17.1.9.1] |
College
Conference of |
To add women's rowing to the sports exempt from the
elimination of all competition in the nontraditional segment. |
Women's rowing traditionally conducts competition in
both the fall (nontraditional) and spring (traditional) seasons due to
weather-related issues. On average, women's rowing teams compete in four
competitions in the fall. As such, women's rowing should be treated similarly
golf and tennis and exempt from the elimination of all competition in the
nontraditional segment. |
|
|
63 [2-63] (1-9) |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Nontraditional Segment -- Practice and Contest
Limitations [Amends
17] |
Centennial Conference. |
In baseball, field hockey, football, lacrosse, soccer,
softball and women's volleyball, to limit practice and competition in the
nontraditional segment to 16 days, including one date of competition. |
The
Division III philosophy places the highest priority on the overall quality of
the educational experience and the successful completion of all students'
academic programs. This proposal is consistent with that emphasis by setting
reasonable limits on missed class time, segment length and the number of
contests that may occur during the nontraditional segment. It recognizes that
students want the opportunity to refine their skills during the off season;
yet, this proposal reduces the increasing emphasis on practice and
competition during the nontraditional segment. Current NCAA legislation
permits practice and competition during a five-week nontraditional segment
with one required day off during a calendar week. This results in a maximum
of 30 practice opportunities, with no more than six practice opportunities in
a week. This proposal permits 16 practice opportunities during the
nontraditional segment and one date of competition, which counts towards the
16-opportunity maximum. It also recognizes that permitting one date of
competition enables the students to have a culminating event for the segment. |
|
|
Committee position: The NCAA Division III
Management Council Playing and Practice Seasons Subcommittee prefers
Presidents Council Proposal No. 60 (Playing and Practice Seasons -- Length of
Seasons and Contests Limits). |
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
64 [2-67] |
Playing
and Practice Seasons -- Elimination of Out-of-Season Exception [Amends
17] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Playing and Practice
Seasons Subcommittee)]. |
To further limit voluntary out-of-season workouts
that occur outside the permissible playing and practice seasons in fencing,
gymnastics, rifle, rowing, skiing and swimming and diving. |
The out-of-season exception has been used to extend
the playing and practice season in selected sports. Inasmuch as a
student-athlete's engagement in out-of-season athletically related activities
is discouraged, the existing exception should be eliminated. Institutions
should be committed to the established playing and practice season; there
should not be coaching given to student-athletes outside the season. Further,
elimination of the exception is consistent with the Division III philosophy,
in that each sport should be treated in a consistent manner with regard to
the total playing season. Should student-athletes engage in voluntary
workouts at institutional facilities outside the playing season, they would
be subject to the same facilities access and supervision policies applicable
to all students. |
|
|
65 [2-69]- |
Multidivision
Classification -- Awarding of Athletics Aid [Amends
20.7.1] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on
the Future of Division III)]. |
To eliminate the waiver that permits a Division III
institution that conducted a sport classified in Division I during 1982-83 to
award athletically related financial aid in that sport, as well as a sport
for the opposite gender later reclassified to Division I. |
This proposal would eliminate the waiver that
permits eight Division III schools to provide athletics aid in programs that
were classified in Division I during 1982-83 and in a sport for the opposite
gender. The current waiver is a one-time waiver created and granted
approximately 20 years ago under circumstances unique to that moment in time,
including the relatively recent creation of the Association's three
membership divisions. When it was adopted, the waiver's sponsors noted that
new legislation would be necessary to alter or revoke the waiver. As part of
the on-going discussions regarding the future of Division III, the Presidents
Council believes the time is right to question whether the privilege of
athletics aid should be permitted to exist indefinitely. The prohibition
against athletics aid is the defining philosophical tenet of Division III,
the one tie that truly binds the diverse Division III membership. It should
apply consistently to all Division III members. Finally, the delayed
effective date is intended to provide affected schools with a reasonable time
period in which to begin to plan for the implementation of this legislation
and explore all membership options. |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
65-1 |
Membership -- Multidivision
Classification -- Awarding of Athletics Aid -- Waiver [Amends 20.7.1] |
Clarkson
University, Colorado College; Hartwick College; Johns Hopkins University;
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, Newark; State University College at Oneonta; and St. Lawrence
University. |
To permit an institution that conducts a men's or
women's sport that was classified in Division I during the 1982-83 academic
year and was granted a waiver of the application of the Division III
regulations to that sport prior to January 1, 2004, and used it during the
2002-03 academic year to continue using that waiver; further, to specify that
an institution that obtained the waiver for a sport for one gender prior to
January 1, 2004, may later request the waiver be applied to a sport for the
other gender, under specified conditions. |
Retaining the waiver provision but limiting the
expansion of its use permits those institutions that have competed in a
Division I sport for many years and provided financial aid to
student-athletes in that sport, without compromising their philosophical
commitment to Division III, to maintain programs that are traditionally and
historically significant. This amendment limits the pool of institutions
eligible to receive the waiver to eight institutions by precluding any
institution that did not use the waiver in 2002-03 (including those who may
have sponsored a Division I sport in 1982-83 and even those that may have used
the waiver at some time between 1982 and 2002) from using the waiver in the
future. The amendment further clarifies the provision that allows an
institution currently using the waiver to also request that waiver be applied
to a sport for the opposite gender. Application of this provision could only
be used for gender equity purposes. It should be noted that student-athletes
receiving athletically related financial aid in a Division I sport are
prohibited from competing in Division III athletics. |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |
|
66 [2-71] |
Resolution -- Strategic
Planning and Membership Growth |
NCAA Division III
Presidents Council [Management Council (Joint Subcommittee on the Future of
Division III)]. |
|
|
|
|
67 [2-72] (1-14) |
Executive Regulations --
Selection of Teams and Individuals for Championships Participation --
Automatic Qualification [Amends 31.3.4.3] |
Empire 8. |
To
expand the team sports groupings for automatic qualification to include
tennis, golf and cross country. |
Granting
automatic qualification in these sports would result in a more representative
field of competitors and provide a greater number of member institutions with
the opportunity to participate in the NCAA championship tournament. The
current selection format results in several teams from the same conference
earning berths, while a majority of conferences do not receive any berths.
This proposal seeks to make selection for the tennis, golf and cross country
championships more equitable across conferences while still maintaining the
individual portion of these championships. This proposal also allows the
Championships Committee the time and flexibility it needs to implement the
championships according to automatic qualification policies. |
|
|
Committee Position: The NCAA Division III
Championships Committee prefers a delayed effective date until at least
2006-07 to understand format and costs. |
|||||
|
68 [2-54] |
Membership
-- Conditions and Obligations of Active Membership -- Certification of
Insurance Coverage [Amends
3.2.4] |
NCAA
Division III Presidents Council (Management Council). |
To require as a condition and obligation of NCAA
membership that an institution certify on an annual basis insurance coverage
for athletically related injuries sustained by specified participants in
covered events. |
This proposal is the result of analysis and study by
an NCAA task force charged with reviewing student-athlete insurance programs,
the Association's portfolio or business insurance policies and contingency
planning for Association events. Based on the task force's findings, the
health and welfare of student-athletes will be greatly enhanced if all active
members of the NCAA are required certify each year that insurance is in place
to cover any medical expenses that may result from athletically related
injuries sustained by student-athletes and prospective student-athletes while
participating in athletics activities. This proposal does not require an
institution to finance such insurance. Rather, if adopted, the proposal
requires member institutions to certify that the affected participants
present proof of insurance coverage. |
|
|
# [SPOPL] (IPOPL) |
Title |
Sponsor(s)
or Originating Committee |
Intent Statement |
Rationale Statement |
Effective
Date |