DECISIONS ON CORE COURSES TO BE MADE BY HIGH SCHOOLS

In a major change in the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse process, high schools now will be responsible for determining which of their courses meet the NCAA core-course requirements for a student-athlete’s initial eligibility as a freshman at an NCAA Division I institution.

The NCAA Division I Board of Directors, during its meeting January 13 at the NCAA Convention in Atlanta, agreed to return the Clearinghouse to its original function by accepting the basic premise that high school administrators and counselors are in the best position to evaluate their own high school’s course offerings.

The process of determining if courses meet the requirements currently is done by the NCAA’s Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse, which receives course titles sent in by the high school and then determines whether incoming freshmen are academically eligibl e to compete in athletics.

The amount of time that the clearinghouse devoted to the evaluation of high school courses continued to increase, which caused numerous delays in the approval process. In addition, since the Clearinghouse’s primary means of evaluation was based on cour se titles, many courses were rejected based simply on unusual wording.

“Obviously, we are very pleased with this action and are very appreciative that the NCAA has listened to the high school community and chosen to return this process to high school principals and counselors,” said

Robert F. Kanaby, NFHS executive director. “Since the Clearinghouse was started in 1993, high schools across the country have experienced many frustrations with the process. This action by NCAA leaders is an indication that they have listened to the hi gh schools and are willing to change in the best interest of high school student-athletes.”

The signature of the high school principal will attest that the courses submitted satisfy the core-course requirements, which the Clearinghouse will still verify. This change in procedure does not reflect any changes in initial-eligibility standards. All courses submitted by the high school principal for core courses must continue to meet the standard of 75 percent instructional content in the subject area.

At its meeting in Atlanta, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors said the only instances in which additional support for a new course submission would be required are those in which 1) a high school wants to have a course approved retroactively for a student who already has graduated, 2) the course title suggests offerings that do not meet the 75 percent instructional content criteria, or 3) the submission is for a course that has been denied previously.

Since this action affects student-athletes who will be entering NCAA Division I institutions this coming fall, the process will begin this spring. In February, the NCAA will be sending complete details on the new process to every high school in the country.

HIGH SCHOOLS TO RECEIVE THEIR ‘1998 PLAYBOOK’

Core-course process enhanced by new approach

Principals at the nation’s 24,000 high school soon will be receiving a copy of the NCAA’s “1998 Playbook” as a key part of the NCAA’s revised core-course certification process.

The changes place the responsibility for determining whether a course meets the NCAA definition of a core course wtih high-school principals. The NCAA requires that a prospective student-athlete complete 13 high school core courses for initial eligibil ity in Division I or II.

The “1998 Playbook” will be mailed the week of February 16.

Among other things, the packet will provide principals with information on what constitutes a core course and with core-course submission forms for schools to submit the titles of new or revised courses that meet instructional contest requirements.

Robert A. Oliver, NCAA director of membership services, said the NCAA is requesting that the forms be returned by April 1.

Oliver noted that the “1998 Playbook” is being implemented after being field-tested at 20 high schools across the nation. He said the utility of the package has been significantly improved by feedback from those high schools. In addition, changes in the overall process were made after extensive consultation with several high school educational associations.