In the last decade, the NCAA has undertaken a variety of efforts designed to enhance the collegiate athletics experience for participants and ensure that student-athletes graduate.

Academic reform has been the centerpiece of those efforts, but earlier this year, the Association also began an examination of “at risk” student-athletes. The NCAA Division I Working Group to Review “At-Risk” Student-Athlete Issues, chaired by Middle Tennessee State President Sidney McPhee, had its initial meeting earlier this year.

The Presidential Task Force on the Future of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics expressed the need for such a group in its groundbreaking report two years ago. The subsequent Oversight and Monitoring Group charged with overseeing Task Force recommendations appointed the new working group that will:

Members draw from a variety of constituencies, including academic support staff members, members of the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet’s initial-eligibility subcommittee, faculty athletics representatives, athletics directors, senior woman administrators and conference representatives.

One of the first goals of the group is creating a definition of “at risk” that takes into account the diversity of the Association, its members and the student-athletes themselves.

“All students, whether athletes or non-athletes, are at risk to a certain degree when they enter an institution,” McPhee said. “We don’t want a one-size-fits-all approach. We want to allow for local differences among the different Division I schools – bowl subdivision, championship subdivision, non-football. We need to look at the differences among our own institutions. But the main focus of this initiative is to create tools for campuses to ensure they have systems in place to support student-athletes so they can be successful. The whole goal is to enhance the probability that student-athletes will be successful once they arrive on campus.”

At its first meeting in February, the group examined research on at-risk student-athletes. The group’s discussions were not limited to academics, although a deficient academic profile can be a significant barrier to graduation. Other factors include institutional environments, the demands of various sports and the student-athlete’s overall background.

In discussing the definition, the group determined that to account for the diversity of Division I members and individual student-athletes, any definition must be based in data and allow for differences at several levels.

The working group reviewed data used in developing other NCAA policies such as initial-eligibility standards and Academic Progress Rate principles. Members also examined the academic success of student-athletes based on high school academic performance, the impact of transferring on a student-athlete’s ultimate success, perceptions of academic success and effort, and the effect of a coaching change.

In his 30 years in higher education, McPhee said he’s seen students with exceptional academic records struggle with the transition to college simply because of social issues and environmental factors. McPhee called the creation of tools and best practices to assist student-athletes with their adjustment to college life “critical.”

“All students are at risk,” he said. “All students need help with life skills and academic support; it just might be at a different level.”

The trick, he said, is to identify the students who need the extra help and get it to them without stigmatizing them.

The panel expects to wrap up its discussions by the end of 2008, with recommendations to be reviewed by the new Division I Academics Cabinet and the Oversight and Monitoring Group.