4/29/2016

1

Division I Academic Misconduct

Emily CapehartAndy CardamoneAzure Davey

Outline • History/Legislative Overview.

• Case studies.• Campus implementation.

– Best practices.

• Resources.

4/29/2016

2

History & Legislative Overview

Basis for Legislative Review• 1983 last legislative update to existing national framework.

• Media and congressional attention.

• Student-athletes’ integral role in student body.

• Lack of clarity & consistency to existing approach.

Legislative Process

Targeted review of academic misconduct 

legislation and regulatory structure.

Core principles identified proposed legislation developed.

Academic integrity proposal sponsored.

Continued membership outreach and proposal 

refinement.

Proposal adopted.

Effective, August 1, 2016.

4/29/2016

3

• Potentially subject to two violations. • Any extra assistance could be extra

benefit.• Extra benefit violation could involve

assistance from anyone (e.g., general student).

• Institutional determination only informs academic misconduct finding.

• May not be subject to two violations.• Founded in institutional determination.

• No second-guessing.• Limited “student-on-student” application.• Provides desired clarity and consistency.• Specific and limited definition of impermissible

assistance.• Separate/distinct analyses accounting for different

core tenets academic misconduct versus treating student-athletes like general student body.

.

Current Adopted

Academic Misconduct

Violation

Impermissible Academic

AssistanceViolation

Academic Misconduct

Violation

Extra Benefit Violation

Institutional Policies & Procedures

Current

• Not required.• Not required.

Adopted

• Maintain and follow policies and procedures regarding academic misconduct that are:

• Written;

• Accessible; and

• Apply to general student body.

• Content and scope determined by institution.

• Maintain and follow policies and procedures regarding academic misconduct that are:

• Written;

• Accessible; and

• Apply to general student body.

• Content and scope determined by institution.

Academic Misconduct: Staff Involvement

Current

• Conduct violates institution’s academic misconduct policies and either:

• Results in falsification of student‐athlete’s academic record; or

• Enables  student‐athlete to compete.

• Conduct violates institution’s academic misconduct policies and either:

• Results in falsification of student‐athlete’s academic record; or

• Enables  student‐athlete to compete.

Adopted

• Conduct violates institution’s academic misconduct policies and either:

• Results in falsification of student‐athlete’s academic record;

• Enables student‐athlete to compete or receive athletics aid; or

• Involves an institutional staff member or booster.

• Conduct violates institution’s academic misconduct policies and either:

• Results in falsification of student‐athlete’s academic record;

• Enables student‐athlete to compete or receive athletics aid; or

• Involves an institutional staff member or booster.

4/29/2016

4

Academic Misconduct: Staff InvolvementCurrent: Conduct violates the institution’s 

academic misconduct policies & procedures

Arrangement of Fraudulent Academic 

Credit or False Transcripts?

Yes to either? No to both?‐or‐

Adopted:

Institutional Staff or Booster Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic 

Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Conduct violates the institution’s academic misconduct policies & 

procedures

No NCAA Violations

No NCAA 10.1(b)Violation

NCAA 10.1(b)Violation

Competed Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

Institutional Staff Members

Non‐Student Staff Student Employees

• Performs work for institution.• Regardless of compensation.

• Includes work within the athletics department.

• Responsibilities include the provision of academic services to student‐athletes; OR,

• Engages in academic misconduct or impermissible academic assistance at the direction of nonstudent staff or a booster.

• Institutional staff members shall not be involved in:• Conduct that violates the institution’s written policies & procedures regarding academic 

misconduct;  • Falsification or alteration of the student‐athlete’s academic record;• Knowing submission of erroneous APP data; nor,• Impermissible academic assistance.

Staff Involvement

Must meet all legislated criteria:

1. Assistance/exception does not violate institution’s misconduct policies; however,

2. Assistance/exception provided is not generally available to all students; 

3. Assistance/exception provided is not permitted via NCAA Bylaw 16.3;

4. Assistance/exception was substantial;

5. Institutional staff member/booster was involved; and

6. Leads to eligibility.

Extra Benefit

Impermissible Academic

Assistance

Impermissible Academic Assistance: Reduced Scope

4/29/2016

5

Extra Benefit v. Impermissible Academic Assistance

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA ViolationsNCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

Conduct does not violate institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures

Adopted:Current:

Academic assistance or academic exception provided is not generally 

available to other students on institution’s campus on a basis unrelated to athletics ability.

Yes? No?

NCAA Extra BenefitViolation

No NCAAViolation

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAAAcademic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

Adopted Framework

Case Studies

4/29/2016

6

CASE STUDY NO. 1 – Student‐Athlete

• A student‐athlete cheats with other students on a final exam. 

• Conduct violates the institution’s academic Honor Code.

• The professor fails the student‐athlete, along with all students involved.

• Despite the failed course, student‐athlete remains academically eligible for the subsequent term.

• Has an NCAA violation occurred?

CASE STUDY NO. 1 – Student‐Athlete

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAAAcademic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

CASE STUDY NO. 2 – Student Employee

• During the fall, a student mentor writes a midterm paper for a basketball student‐athlete.

• Student mentors offer academic support to any student on campus.

• The conduct violates the institution’s written misconduct policies.  

• Student‐athlete is failed in the course and mentor is put on academic probation.

• Despite the failed course, the student‐athlete maintained his academic eligibility for the spring term, during which he had continued to compete.

• Has an NCAA violation occurred?

4/29/2016

7

CASE STUDY NO. 2 – Student Employee

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

CASE STUDY NO. 3 – Staff Member

• An assistant coach completes an online math course  for an incoming junior college transfer.

• The student‐athlete needed the math course to meet the 2‐4 transfer requirements.

• Compliance learns of the incident after the start of football season and withholds the student‐athlete from the remainder of the football season.

• At the end of the fall term, the institution determines that the assistant coach’s conduct violated its institutional misconduct policies and the coach is released.

• Has an NCAA violation occurred?

CASE STUDY NO. 3 – Staff Member

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

4/29/2016

8

Current:Conduct violates the institution’s academic misconduct policies & 

procedures

Arrangement of Fraudulent Academic 

Credit or False Transcripts?

Yes to either? No to both?‐or‐

Adopted:

Institutional Staff or Booster Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic 

Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Conduct violates the institution’s academic misconduct policies & 

procedures

No NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

No NCAA 10.1(b)Violation

NCAA 10.1(b)Violation

Competed Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

CASE STUDY NO. 3 – Staff Member

CASE STUDY NO. 3 – Staff Member

CurrentExtra Benefit:

Academic assistance or academic exception provided is not generally available to other students on institution’s campus on a basis unrelated to athletics ability.

Yes? No?

Extra BenefitViolation

No NCAAViolation

CASE STUDY NO. 4 – Grade Change

• A student‐athlete is ineligible due to her failure to achieve a 2.000 GPA by the start of her senior year.

• A sympathetic professor agrees to convert the student‐athlete’s grade of ‘F’ to an ‘Incomplete’ for the fall term.

• The professor has provided similar flexibility to other students in the past.

• The student‐athlete’s GPA improves to a 2.050 . 

• The institution’s grade change policy does not prohibit this type of decision.

• Has an NCAA violation occurred?

4/29/2016

9

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

NCAA Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

CASE STUDY NO. 4 – Grade Change

CASE STUDY NO. 5 – Extra Credit

• Student‐athlete fails to turn in a final assignment, which is the majority of his grade in a course.

• The professor, who knows the student‐athlete well, awards the student‐athlete a passing grade under the assumption that the student‐athlete would have passed the course he had turned in the final assignment.

• The professor has not awarded hypothetical credit to other students in the past.

• The student‐athlete needs this course to maintain his eligibility.

• The institution’s grading policies do not address this type of conduct.

• Has an NCAA violation occurred?

Institutional Staff or Booster 

Involvement?

Competed or Received Aid Based on Erroneous 

Declaration of Eligibility?

Academic Misconduct Violation

Alteration or Falsification of Transcript or Academic Record?

Yes to any? No to all?‐or‐

Did conduct violate the institution’s academic misconduct policies & procedures?

No NCAA Violations

NCAA Impermissible Academic Assistance 

Violation

1. Substantial academic assistance or exception; 

2. Not generally available to institution’s students;

3. Not permissible under Bylaw 16.3;4. Provided by current or former 

institutional staff or representative of athletics interests; and

5. Results in certification of eligibility.

Yes to all? No to any?

No NCAA Violations

If NoIf Yes

CASE STUDY NO. 5 – Extra Credit

4/29/2016

10

Campus Implementation & Best Practices

In the absence of existing institutional policies & procedures regarding academic integrity, establish written policies by August 1, 2016.

Ensure written policies & procedures are accessible to students and staff.

Establish expedited review process for student‐athletes, if desirable.

Campus Implementation

Review existing institutional policies & procedures regarding academic misconduct.

• Does content and scope provide an appropriate and desirable framework for your campus and its academic culture?

• Should differences across programs and/or schools be reflected in written 

policies & procedures?

Campus Implementation

4/29/2016

11

Identify appropriate entities involved in operationalization of institutional misconduct policies & procedures. 

Establish necessary communication protocol and intra‐campus communication lines/channels.

Establish athletics department protocol regarding impact on student‐athlete’s ongoing athletics eligibility.

Educate staff and external audiences (e.g., boosters) appropriately.

Campus Implementation (cont’d)

• The adopted legislation defers to institutions to determine the content of their institutional policies & procedures regarding academic misconduct.• Possible areas to consider addressing via institutional policy & procedures 

include (but are not limited to):• Testing procedures & protocol;• Extra credit protocol;• Tutoring/mentoring protocol;• Waiver of course requirements protocol;• Grade change control & protocol;• Independent decision making authority by academic departments and/or 

schools; etc.

Best Practices

Resources

4/29/2016

12

NCAA Division I Proposal No. 2015‐66: https://web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/propSearch

Questions & Answer Document: http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Feb2016_DIProposalNo2015‐66QuestionandAnswerDocument_20160226.pdf

National Association of Academic Advisors for Athletics (N4A) Best Practices:http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/nacda/sports/nfoura/auto_pdf/2013‐14/misc_non_event/N4AAcademicIntegrity.pdf

Questions?

We Want Your Feedback

Your input is important.

Rate this session using the survey on the Regional Rules Seminar app.