1 / 20

Academic Performance Program

Academic Performance Program. Michigan State University February 2005 Department of Intercollegiate Athletics & Office of the Faculty Athletics Representative. Penalty Structure. Contemporaneous Penalties

veta
Download Presentation

Academic Performance Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Academic Performance Program Michigan State University February 2005 Department of Intercollegiate Athletics & Office of the Faculty Athletics Representative

  2. Penalty Structure • Contemporaneous Penalties • Intent is to encourage improved academic performance and serve as a “warning” for poorly performing teams. Help avoid the more serious historical penalties, rehabilitative in nature. • Historical Penalties • More significant punitive measures for teams that habitually under perform academically.

  3. Contemporaneous Penalties • First penalties assessed will be based on a two year APR score (2003-04 and 2004-05). Institutions will be subject to penalties Fall 2005. Official reports will be mailed to institutions December 2005. • Once a four year APR score* is available, it will be used to determine historical penalties. • Contemporaneous Penalties = Restrictions on financial aid (athletic scholarship). * Four Year APR Score will be a compilation of 4 years of data and not an average.

  4. Contemporaneous PenaltyAPR Cut Score 92.5% = 925 cut score APR % = Points earned/Points possible APR Score = APR% x 1000 Projected to roughly equal a 50% graduation rate (Set by Division I Board of Directors January 10, 2005)

  5. Cut Score Application Is the team APR below 925? If no, no contemporaneous penalties assessed. If yes, contemporaneous penalties will be assessed ONLY if a student-athlete with eligibility remaining is NOT retained and is NOT eligible (earned 0/2 points during same semester).

  6. Name ID Fall Spring Points Earned/ Points Possible Elig Ret Elig Ret Student 1 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Grad 4/4 Student 2 1234567 Yes Yes No No 2/4 Student 3 1234567 No Yes Yes Yes 3/4 Student 4* 1234567 No No N/A N/A 0/2 Student 5 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 Student 6 1234567 No Grad N/A N/A 2/2 Student 7 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 Student 8 1234567 Yes Yes Yes No 3/4 Student 9 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 Student 10 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 Student 11 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 Student 12 1234567 Yes Yes Yes Yes 4/4 *Student in final season of eligibility Points Earned: 38/ Possible Points: 44 = APR: 86.4% (.864 x 1000 = 864 APR) Team below 925 cut score = Contemporaneous penalty imposed for Student 2 NOTE: This APR calculation is an example based upon one year.

  7. Penalty Application • The value of the financial aid penalty is based on the following: • The value of total countable aid (including athletics and other countable aid) awarded to the 0/2 SAs; • The equivalency value of the total countable aid, NOT the true dollar value; and • The total amount of the SA’s financial aid that is countable against team limits, not on the actual dollar amount received by the SA. • The value of the penalty is the amount of athletics aid that CANNOT be re-awarded for a period of one year (the year in which the penalty is applied). • Penalty must be applied at the first available opportunity but no later than 2 academic years after the SA’s departure.

  8. Penalty Application Cont’d • Application of Contemporaneous Penalties for SA who has Exhausted His or Her Eligibility • An institution may re-award the countable financial aid of a SA who exhausted his or her eligibility regardless of the team’s APR or the departing SA’s eligibility or retention status in a subsequent academic term or terms. • Although the aid may be re-awarded, the SA must be used in calculating the team’s APR score for each term in which he or she received the aid, including the last term before withdrawal.

  9. Capping of Scholarship Losses • The maximum penalty applicable to a team in any given year would be no more than 10% of the maximum financial aid scholarship limit in the specific sport. • Head count sports will round up to the next whole number.

  10. Case Study #1 2005-06 Full GIA: $20,000 Soccer SA: $5,000 Athletics aid $5,000 Other countable aid $10,000 • SA’s equivalency value is 0.5 ($10,000/$20,000). After Spring 06, the SA is not retained and would not have been academically eligible to compete had he returned. Soccer did not meet the APR cut point. 2006-2007 Full GIA: $25,000

  11. Case Study #1 Cont’d • Assuming the contemporaneous penalty will be applied during the 2006-07 academic year, what is the value of the penalty?

  12. Answer – Case Study #1 • The value of the penalty is equal to the total countable aid awarded to the SA in 05-06 – 0.5 equivalency value. • The value of the penalty is based on the value of a full grant in aid the year in which the penalty is applied - $25,000 for 06-07. • $25,000 X 0.5 = $12,500 • The team would not be able to re-award $12,500 of athletics aid the year the penalty is applied.

  13. Case Study #2 • A field hockey SA is awarded a full athletics scholarship for the 2005-06 year. After the fall 2005 semester, the SA is not retained and would not have been academically eligible to compete had she returned. This SA was awarded a full scholarship, but she used only ½ of that amount since she left after one semester. • Field hockey did not meet the APR cut point for the 2005-06 academic year. • What is the penalty that must be taken by the team at the next available opportunity?

  14. Answer – Case Study #2 • Since the penalty is based on the value of all countable aid a SA is awarded, the team must take an equivalency value of 1.0 as the penalty. • This team would not be able to re-award the value of a full athletics scholarship the year the penalty is applied.

  15. Historical Penalties Penalty structure details to be finalized over the next year • Three-Filter System • National (APR comparison) • Sport (APR comparison) • Local Student Body/Institutional Mission (Graduation Success Rate comparison) • Incremental Penalties • Occasion 1 – Warning (issued Fall 2006) • Occasion 2 – Recruiting/Financial Aid (Fall 2007) • Occasion 3 – Competition Restrictions (Fall 2008) • Occasion 4 – Division I Membership Status (Fall 2009)

  16. Historical Penalties Cont’d • After a team receives a warning letter in a given year, that team will be subject to the next level of penalty until the team meets the required filter system analysis for 3 consecutive years. Each failure of the filter system will result in the next sequence of penalties. • Final determinations regarding the applications (e.g., “cut points”) of the filters and penalties will be made in Fall 2005.

  17. Appealing Contemporaneous & Historical Penalties • The Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) will handle appeals of contemporaneous and historically based penalties.

  18. NCAA 2003-04 Data Suggests: • Approximately 7.4 percent of NCAA Division I sports would fall below the 925 APR score. • 51.2 percent of Division I colleges and universities would have at least one team below the 92.5 APR score. • Sports affected the most by the cut score are baseball, 23.9 percent; men’s basketball, 20.1 percent; and football, 30.7 percent.

  19. Potential Questions? • What is the likely impact on MSU? • What is MSU doing to prepare for implementation of the Academic Performance Program? • Continuing and enhancing programs that are affecting retention, eligibility and graduation • Educating ICA and University staff and coaches • Discussing with coaches changes to policy as it relates to scholarship awards

  20. Your Questions?

More Related