PRESIDENTIAL TASK FORCE ON THE FUTURE OF DIVISION I INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS

 

(Note:  The Oversight and Monitoring Group is responsible for developing strategies for review of the Presidential Task Force recommendations.  Items below have been referred to the Championships/Competition Cabinet for review and comment.)

Student-Athlete Well-Being

Suggested strategy or referral

 

Progress to date/status

Assigned parties

a.  A review of student-athlete well-being should be ongoing.  The student athlete “experience” is not simply a matter of providing scholarship dollars to meet “educational” costs; rather, it is how institutions support student-athletes’ educational and athletics pursuits so that their experience compares favorably to those of other students.  Assimilation of student-athletes into campus life, an examination of financial aid practices, methods of ensuring student-athlete academic success, a discussion of health and safety issues, and an assessment of competition opportunities and possible enhancements. The appropriate ongoing examination is one that includes what the student-athlete experience looks like when the institution is involved in providing these forms of additional support.

Refer to the A/E/C Cabinet to establish timelines and strategies for evaluation of these various issues.

 

CSMAS should also examine issues regarding health and safety.

CAC has revised the measurable standards for third cycle of athletics certification in area of student-athlete well-being.  (See MS OP 3.3)

 

C/C Cabinet began the review process during February 2008 meeting and will continue their review during the June 2008 meeting. (3/18/08)

 

A/E/C Cabinet liaisons: Julie Cromer/Lynn Holzman

 

CSMAS liaisons: Mary Wilfert /David Klossner

 

C/C Cabinet liaisons:

Joni Comstock/Dave Schnase/ Wayne Burrow/Brad Hostetter (will address “…an assessment of competition opportunities and possible enhancements as part of item k.)

j.   The governance structure should review whether current time limits (the “20-hour rule) allow student-athletes to be integrated into the general student body (for example, opportunities for social activities)? Examples of questions that should be examined are: 

 

·       Institutions should question what role the campus culture plays in enforcing the 20-hour rule?

·       The structure should consider whether time limits for required athletics activities outside the championship season should be adjusted?

Refer discussion to the Championships/Competition Cabinet; specifically, the Playing and Practice Seasons Subcommittee.

Playing and Practice Seasons Subcommittee received an update on SAAC activities related to this issue.  SAAC is contemplating a continuation of its review on the issue.  (3/19/08)

C/C Cabinet liaisons:  Joni Comstock/Dave Schnase/ Wayne Burrow/Brad Hostetter/Carol Reep

 

SAAC liaisons: Curtis Holloman, Matt Stach, Sarah MacInnis

k.  The structure should conduct an assessment of competition opportunities and whether there is a need for possible enhancements. This discussion should focus specifically on the unintended consequences resulting from institutional concerns on maintaining competitive balance.  

Refer discussion to the Championships/Competition Cabinet.

 

Current staff discussion regarding this issue.  (11/1/07)

C/C Cabinet began the review process during February 2008 meeting and will continue their review during the June 2008 meeting. (3/18/08)

C/C Cabinet liaisons:  Joni Comstock/Dave Schnase/Wayne Burrow/Brad Hostetter/Carol Reep