Division I Academic Update

1
Division I Academic Update

• 2009 Regional Rules Seminar

2
Session Outline

• NCAA Division I Academic Cabinet Updates
• Academic reform cycle.
• Cabinet guiding principles.
• Data-driven policy development.
• Cabinet priorities.
• Sport-by-Sport Review
• Baseball, Mens Basketball, Football and Womens
  Basketball.
• Facilitating Learning and Achieving Graduation
  (FLAG)

3
NCAA Division IAcademic Cabinet
4
Academic Cabinet Overview

• Jurisdiction includes
• Overseeing academic research and policies
• Establishing, managing and monitoring eligibility
  standards and
• Serving as the appellate body for academic
  waivers.
• Chair
• Carolyn Callahan,Faculty Athletics
  Representative,University of Virginia.

5
NCAA Academic Reform Cycle
Implementation
6
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• Eligibility requirements shall assure proper
  emphasis on educational objectives, promote
  competitive equity and prevent exploitation.
• Intercollegiate athletics shall be a vital
  component of the educational program, and
  student-athletes shall be an integral part of the
  student-body.

7
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• Support graduation as the primary measure of
  student-athlete success preserve the seamless
  academic eligibility model and promote graduation
  within five years.
• Emphasize research and data-driven decision
  making in the development of legislative and
  policy recommendations.

8
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• Increase student-athletes responsibility for
  academic success.
• Increase institutional responsibility to
  facilitate academic success.
• Commit to student-athlete well-being issues,
  including minimizing missed class time and
  balancing self-identification as students with
  identity as athletes.

9
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• Promote student-athletes options to select from
  a wide range of degree programs and to integrate
  fully into the university and student-body.
• Minimize disparate impact on low-income and
  minority student-athletes and PSAs.

10
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• Remain cognizant of the impact of proposals on
  institutional resources, academic support
  professionals and other institutional staff
  members.
• Ensure legislation is written in a simple, clear
  and direct manner.
• Consider the amount of time legislation has been
  in effect before supporting a legislative change.

11
Academic Cabinet Guiding Principles

• As appropriate, ensure feedback has been
  solicited from external groups.
• Consider whether or not sport-specific
  legislation is warranted or whether a proposed
  legislation can/should be expanded to other
  sports.
• Examine potential unintended consequences when
  reviewing legislation.

12
Data-Driven Policy Development

• Cabinet emphasized the importance of using
  research and data-driven decision making in the
  development and review of legislative and policy
  recommendations.
• Supported the NCAA Division I Committee on
  Academic Performance decision to begin collecting
  information on academic performance of two-year
  college transfers while at the two-year
  institution.

13
Data Collection

• Proposals recently adopted by Division I
  Legislative Council
• Collect final high school transcripts for early
  academic qualifiers.
• Proposal No. 2008-75
• Collect high school academic information
  (courses, grades, test scores) for two-year
  college transfers.
• Proposal No. 2008-77

14
Academic Cabinet Priorities

• Academic success of transfers, particularly
  two-year college transfers.
• Nontraditional courses.
• Impact of academic reform on academic support
  personnel.
• Student-athlete time demands.
• Degree program selection.

15
Overall Transfers Into Division I(Division I APP)
Note Student-athletes may be counted twice if
they participate in more than one sport. These
are instances of transfers, not number of
transfer students.
16
2007-2008 Transfers into Division I(by Sport
Group)
17
Percentages of Transfers Into Division I by Sport
Grouping

• 2-year Transfers

• 4-year Transfers

18
Transfer Student-Athletes

• Research provides better understanding of
  two-year college transfer student-athlete
  behavior and academic performance.
• About 5 of all student-athletes downward trend.
• Baseball and mens basketball over 15 womens
  sports other than basketball over 2.
• Tend to have lower high school academic
  performance.
• Generally perform less well more likely to
  become 0/2.
• Transfer extends time to graduation.

19
Transfer Student-Athletes

• Reviewed final report of Transfer Issues Ad Hoc
  Group.
• More data needed for 2-4 transfers attempt to
  identify academic profile of successful
  transfers.
• High school academic record Proposal No.
  2008-77.
• Performance at two-year college Committee on
  Academic Performance.

20
Transfer Student-Athletes

• Possible concepts for consideration
• Modify transfer requirements (e.g., credit hours,
  core curriculum, limit physical education
  activity courses).
• Residence requirement/year in readiness.
• Summer coursework at four-year institution.
• Delay of five-year clock or percentage-of-degree
  requirements to allow time for remediation.
• Others identified by NCAA Division I Basketball
  Academic Enhancement Group and Football Academic
  Working Group.

21
Nontraditional Courses

• Post-Enrollment
• Former NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/Comp
  liance Cabinet studied traditional and
  nontraditional courses sponsored proposals
  regarding use of nontraditional courses for
  full-time enrollment and progress-toward-degree
  requirements.
• Attempt to modernize language and provide
  consistency for all forms of nontraditional
  courses.
• Student-athletes should have access to same
  courses as all students.

22
Nontraditional Courses

• Post-Enrollment
• Topic remains a priority despite defeat of
  proposals in the 2008-09 legislative cycle.
• Legislation remains outdated and inconsistent
  among various course formats.
• February 2009 Reviewed document produced by N4A
  to help institutions monitor nontraditional
  course enrollment by student-athletes.
• Posted on Academic Cabinet Web page on NCAA.org.

23
Nontraditional Courses

• Pre-Enrollment/Initial Eligibility
• Enrollment in online courses growing 30 per
  year over one million enrollments in 2008.
• 57 of public secondary schools in the United
  States provide access to students for online
  learning.
• Source International Association for K-12
  Online Learning.

24
Nontraditional Courses

• Pre-Enrollment/Initial Eligibility
• Increased prevalence with increase of core course
  requirements and plus-one legislation.
• Bylaw 14.3.1.2.1.1
• Nontraditional delivery of courses has evolved
  significantly in the past 10 years.
• Diversity of entities and formats.

25
(No Transcript)
26
Nontraditional Courses

• Pre-Enrollment/Initial Eligibility
• Will begin review of nontraditional courses used
  for initial-eligibility purposes at June 2009
  meeting.
• Former Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet
  recommended development of policies to establish
  baseline standards of quality for nontraditional
  courses and secondary school programs.

27
Academic Support Personnel

• Concerned about impact of academic reform on
  academic support personnel.
• Guiding principle Remain cognizant of the impact
  of proposals on institutional resources, academic
  support professionals and other institutional
  staff members.

28
Academic Support Personnel

• Working with representatives from N4A and NACADA
  on a comprehensive study of academic support
  services.
• February 2009 Hosted representatives from N4A
  president and president-elect.
• Reviewed results of 2006 survey on the workload
  and impact of academic reform on academic support
  staff.
• Agreed to repeat survey to update findings.

29
Time Demands

• Guiding principle Commit to student-athlete
  well-being issues, including minimizing missed
  class time and balancing self-identification as
  students with identity as athletes.

30
Time Demands

• Reviewed findings of GOALS and SCORE studies.
• Student-athletes report 30-40 hours per week on
  athletics activities.
• FBS football players report the most hours and
  the highest athletics plus academics time
  commitment.
• Baseball and basketball report the least time on
  class and study.
• Five sports report more time on athletics than
  academics baseball, mens basketball, football,
  mens golf and mens ice hockey.

31
Time Demands

• Competition during final-exam period.
• Many teams continue to compete during final
  exams.
• Baseball 71
• Mens basketball 47
• Softball 58

32
Time Demands

• Teams from low-resource institutions more likely
  to compete and travel greater distances during
  finals.
• No major impact on teams academic performance,
  but impact may be felt more by specific
  student-athletes.

33
Time Demands

• In-season versus out-of-season academic
  performance.
• Student-athletes consistently earn fewer credits
  and achieve lower GPA during season, especially
  in sports with high time demands and students who
  entered less academically prepared.

34
Degree Program Selection

• Interested in the impact of academic reform on
  student-athletes ability to select from the
  institutions array of degree programs.
• Guiding principle Promote student-athletes
  options to select from a wide range of degree
  programs and to integrate fully into the
  university and student-body.

35
Degree Program Selection

• Will review current requirements regarding degree
  designation, double majors, dual degrees, minors,
  etc. during June 2009 meeting.
• Will also review progress-toward-degree waivers
  related to major selection.

36
Sport-by-sport review Baseball, mens
basketballfootball, womens basketball
37
APR Trends in Baseball, Mens Basketball and
Football (Dotted segments show APR using previous
calculation for transfers)
Notes Analyses based on 280 baseball squads,
325 mens basketball squads and 233 football
squads that sponsored the sport within Division I
during all five years. Overall rates include all
mens and womens sports, including the three
sports displayed. The retention calculation
changed in 2007-08.
38
Eligibility Trends in Baseball, Mens Basketball
and Football
Notes Analyses based on 280 baseball squads,
325 mens basketball squads and 233 football
squads that sponsored the sport within Division I
during all five years. Overall rates include all
mens and womens sports, including the three
sports displayed.
39
Retention Trends in Baseball, Mens Basketball
and Football (Dotted segments show APR using
previous calculation for transfers)
Notes Analyses based on 280 baseball squads,
325 mens basketball squads and 233 football
squads that sponsored the sport within Division I
during all five years. Overall rates include all
mens and womens sports, including the three
sports displayed. The retention calculation
changed in 2007-08.
40
Trends in Number of 0/2s-- Student-Athletes
Leaving School While Academically Ineligible

• Notes
• Analyses based on 280 baseball squads, 325 mens
  basketball squads and 233 football squads that
  sponsored the sport within Division I during all
  four years and had usable data by 4/11/08.
• N Number of student-athletes leaving school
  while ineligible (0/2s) during that academic
  year (includes SAs who left ineligible after
  exhausting their eligibility).
• Percentage of individuals in that sport who
  were 0/2s in that academic year.

41
Yearly 0/2 Rates in Baseball, Mens Basketball
and Football ( of SAs Participating who Became
APR 0/2 in that Year)
Notes Analyses based on 280 baseball squads,
325 mens basketball squads and 233 football
squads that sponsored the sport within Division I
during all five years. Overall rates include all
mens and womens sports, including the three
sports displayed.
42
Trends in 0/2s by Sport for Mens
Teams(Single-Year 0/2 Rates in Sports with 50
or More Teams)
Notes Analyses based on N5,923 squads that
sponsored the sport within Division I during all
five years.
43
Trends in 0/2 Rates by Sport for Womens
Teams(Single-Year 0/2 Rates in Sports with 25
or More Teams)
Notes Analyses based on N5,923 squads that
sponsored the sport within Division I during all
five years.
44
Trends in Proportion of Squads with Single-Year
APRs Below 925 in Selected Sports
Note Analyses based on N5,924 squads that
sponsored the sport within Division I during all
five years (data as of 4/23/09).
45
Trends in Proportion of Squads with Single-Year
APRs Below 900 in Selected Sports
Note Analyses based on N5,924 squads that
sponsored the sport within Division I during all
five years (data as of 4/23/09).
46
Summary Sport Trends

• Large APR increases seen in baseball due to
  changes in both eligibility rates and retention.
• Eligibility rates increased substantially in
  mens basketball, although retention rates
  (adjusted to old metric) remained similarly low.
• Football APRs increased on average but the sport
  now lags far behind baseball and mens basketball
  in eligibility rates.

47
Summary Sport Trends(continued)

• Most mens sports showing increases in academic
  behaviors, although some sports exhibiting
  issues.
• Aggregate five-year changes among womens squads
  are much smaller than among mens.
• Some concerns with 2007-08 numbers in womens
  basketball.

48
Sport-by-sport -- Baseball
49
Trends of Transfers Into Division IBaseball
50
Overall Eligibility Rates in Baseball by Term
(Semester Squads Only)
51
Eligibility Rates in Baseball by Term among SAs
Retained into Next Year (Semester Squads Only)
52
Spring Semester Eligibility Rates in Baseball
among SAs Not Retained into Next Year (Semester
Squads Only)
53
Overall Spring Term Eligibility Rates in Baseball
(Semester Squads Only)
54
Overall Spring Term Eligibility Rates in Baseball
among SAs Retained into Next Year (Semester
Squads Only)
55
Summary

• The increased eligibility rates in baseball are
  due almost exclusively to increases in spring
  term eligibility rates.
• Eligibility rate increases in baseball seem to be
  related to SAs who would have once been 0/2s
  now leaving school academically eligible
  (possibly attributable to new transfer policy)
  and general eligibility improvements among
  sophomores, juniors and seniors (possibly
  attributable to new spring-to-spring eligibility
  policy).

56
Sport-by-sport mens basketball
57
Trends of Transfers Into Division IMens
Basketball
58
Overall Eligibility Rates in Mens Basketball by
Term (Semester Squads Only)
59
Eligibility Rates in Mens Basketball by Term
among SAs Retained into Next Year (Semester
Squads Only)
60
Spring Semester Eligibility Rates in Mens
Basketball among SAs Not Retained into Next Year
(Semester Squads Only)
61
Summary

• Increased eligibility rates in mens basketball
  are due primarily to changes in academic
  behaviors among SAs who will not be retained into
  the next year (possibly attributable to the new
  transfer policy).

62
BAEG Update

• Membership review of revised recommendations to
  occur in preparation for Board review in August.
• Key Items
• Summer Bridge Program
• Incoming assessment to determine benefit.
• Enroll in six hours plus learning skills
  instruction.
• Must pass three hours to be eligible in the fall.
• Summer Athletic Development
• Eight weeks identified by institution.
• Enroll in six hours.
• Must pass six hours to be eligible in the fall.
• Maximum of eight hours per week, no more than two
  hours of skill-related instruction.

63
BAEG Update

• Key Items (continued)
• Referred examination of 2-4 transfer requirements
  to Academic Cabinet.
• Asked Academic Cabinet to consider the
  elimination of nontraditional courses to meet
• 2-4 transfer requirements.
• Limit physical education activity courses to no
  more than two credits
• Exception for physical education majors.
• Best practices recommended by N4A.

64
BAEG Update

• Key Items (continued)
• Noncounter status for former players who remain
  enrolled after a coaching change.
• Remove barriers to receiving financial aid after
  professional career.
• Examine tryout practices with NBA and FIBA.

65
BAEG Update

• Key Items (continued)
• Staggered start to playing season.
• Reduction of regular season games to 28.
• Reduction of window for return from competition
  from 36 to 24 hours after competition.
• Permit parents/legal guardians to receive travel
  expenses to attend official visit.

66
Sport-by-sport Football
67
Trends of Transfers Into Division IFootball
68
Trends in Proportion of Football Teams Below 900
(Multi-Year) FBS vs. FCS
Notes Based on multiyear APRs in each year.
Retention calculation changed in Year 5.
69
Trends in Proportion of Football Teams Below 925
(Multi-Year) FBS vs. FCS
Notes Based on multiyear APR in each year.
Retention calculation changed in Year 5.
70
Trends in Proportion of Squads Receiving
Historical Penalties in Selected Sports
71
FAWG update

• Working Groups report expected late summer or
  fall.
• Key Items
• Fall eligibility requirement for future
  competition (i.e., first two games of next
  season).
• Freshmen six hours.
• Continuing students all applicable
  progress-toward-degree requirements.
• Exhausted eligibility departures no longer exempt
  from contemporaneous penalties.
• Best practices, including FLAG.

72
Sport-by-sport womens basketball
73
Trends of Transfers Into Division IWomens
Basketball
74
Trends in Proportion of Squads in Selected Sports
Receiving Contemporaneous Penalties
75
Future Research Topics

• Now that five years of APR data are available,
  can we determine whether trends in increasing APR
  will translate into increases in graduation
  rates?
• If there are increases in the number of
  graduates, can we statistically determine the
  relative contribution of changes in initial
  eligibility standards, progress-toward-degree
  standards and the APR program to that increase
  and are these findings consistent across sport
  groups?

76
Future Research Topics(continued)

• Are there specific academic support practices
  that seem to assist institutions with increasing
  APRs and graduation rates?
• Sport-by-sport examinations should continue, with
  additional emphasis on womens basketball, at
  least until more conclusions can be drawn.

77
Facilitating learning and achieving graduation
(FLAG)
78
Brief History and Process Overview

• The Presidential Task Force on the Future of
  Division I Intercollegiate Athletics noted the
  need to focus on support for "at-risk"
  student-athletes.
• In response, a working group was formed to
  examine issues pertaining to the academic risk of
  student-athletes.
• The working group's report has been approved by
  the NCAA Division I Board of Directors and the
  Academic Cabinet.

79
Working Group Charge

• Identify factors and characteristics that may
  cause a student-athlete to be at risk of not
  graduating from his or her institution.
• Establish a data-based definition of at risk
  that allows for local differences among the
  diverse Division I membership.

80
Working Group Charge

• Develop a tool for campuses to use to examine
  special admissions of scholarship
  student-athletes and to measure whether campus
  systems can adequately support the number of
  student-athletes admitted via special admissions
  review each year.

81
Working Group Charge

• Identify model practices in academic and
  life-skills programs to support at-risk
  student-athletes in their academic endeavors.
• Develop mechanisms to assist institutions in
  evaluating the level of academic and life-skills
  support provided to at-risk student-athletes and
  in determining if enhancements or changes are
  necessary.

82
Defining "At Risk"

• Determined to be at risk of not graduating from a
  four-year institution.
• The working group was mindful of negative
  connotations of the at-risk label, as well as
  traditional view of at-risk students as those who
  are academically underprepared as they enter
  college.
• At the urging of the Board of Directors and the
  Oversight and Monitoring Group, a new paradigm
  was developed.

83
Nature of "Risk"

• Any student-athlete can be at risk of not
  graduating.
• Risk can take a variety of forms, including
  nonacademic factors (e.g., first-generation
  status, financial hardship, time demands of
  sport).

84
Nature of "Risk"

• Risk factors can be specific to the
  student-athlete or can be presented by team
  culture or campus environment.
• A student-athlete's level of risk may fluctuate
  throughout the course of his or her collegiate
  enrollment.

85
Nature of "Risk"

• As a result, risk assessments should not be
  limited to the point of student-athlete entry.
  Rather, they should continue throughout a
  student-athlete's career.
• In order to best support student-athlete success,
  institutions need a management system to identify
  and mitigate each student-athletes risk of not
  graduating.

86
FLAG ProgramFacilitating Learning and Achieving
Graduation

• Program's purposes
• To optimize each campus environment to leverage
  opportunities for graduation success.
• To increase the efficiency of current services,
  including academic support and life-skills
  programs.
• To inform decision making regarding recruiting,
  admissions and program resources (e.g., staffing
  and budget).

87
FLAG ProgramFacilitating Learning and
Achieving Graduation

• Primary components will
• Determine an individual student-athletes hurdles
  to graduation.
• Match support services for an individual
  student-athlete to mitigate hurdles.
• Evaluate the level and effectiveness of services
  provided.

88
FLAG Modules
GRO
FLAG
Support Services
89
FLAG Modules
Graduation Risk Overview (GRO) Scoring model by
which each student-athlete can be evaluated,
based on data-driven risk factors.
GRO
90
FLAG Modules
Support Services Activities designed to counter
the risk factors presented by each
student-athlete.
Support Services
91
FLAG Modules
Evaluation of Support Services and
Programs Determines the effectiveness of campus
units in mitigating risk factors presented
collectively by student-athletes.
Evaluation
92
FLAG StructureFacilitating Learning and
Achieving Graduation

• A current NCAA Web-based program (i.e., NCAA
  Division I Academic Performance Program) will be
  expanded to include FLAG.

93
FLAG StructureFacilitating Learning and
Achieving Graduation

• The FLAG system will be programmed to
• Compute a GRO score for each student-athlete.
• Match suggested services to factors identified
  for each student-athlete.
• Provide summary reports regarding the
  effectiveness of programs and services and the
  potential impact of recruiting and admissions
  decisions on service provision.

94
GRO First Term/Entering

95
GRO First Term/Entering (contd)
96
GRO Second Term and Beyond
97
GRO Second Term and Beyond
98
Next Steps

• FLAG development is underway at the NCAA national
  office.
• Advisory and pilot groups are being formed to
  complete module designs and to test new program.
• If you would like to participate, please contact
  Matt Burgemeister at the NCAA
  national office (mburgemeister_at_ncaa.org).

99
Next Steps

• Targeted Project Time Line
• GRO module available to the membership fall 2009.
• Support Services module available
• spring 2010.
• Evaluation module available in 2010.

100
FLAG Summary

• Student-athletes fall along a continuum of risk
  that is based on multiple factors -- not all of
  which are academic.
• Institutional units must collaborate to identify
  student-athlete support needs and to provide
  quality services and programs to foster
  student-athlete graduation success.

101
FLAG Summary

• Informed decision making is essential to
  optimizing campus resources to mitigate
  student-athlete hurdles to graduation.
• To this end, FLAG is designed to support
  institutional endeavors to ensure graduation for
  every student-athlete.

102
Session Summary

• Division I Academic Cabinet.
• Sport-by-Sport Review.
• Facilitating Learning and Achieving Graduation
  (FLAG).