by Daniel F. Sullivan, President, St. Lawrence University

 

On October 30, the NCAA Division III President's Council forwarded to its full members a proposal that would eliminate the ability, in 2008, of eight very diverse Division III institutions to award grants-in-aid (athletic scholarships) in Division I sports in which we compete.  The full Division III membership will consider this proposal in January.

 

I oppose this proposal based on reasons that speak to St. Lawrence University’s fundamental nature. Grants-in-aid help us achieve what is the Division III ideal of true scholar-athletes. 

 

When the NCAA adopted its three-divisional structure in 1983, St. Lawrence University, a national liberal arts college philosophically Division III to its core, was a long-time very competitive participant in intercollegiate ice hockey at the highest level.

 

The NCAA recognized our history and our tradition, and appreciated our deep commitment to Division III values emphasizing the student-athlete who attends college for a demanding education while also participating in a sport. Our colleague Division III institutions agreed then to grant an exemption allowing us to continue participating at the Division I level in hockey while enjoying full membership in Division III for our other sports.  We had the choice under the exemption of awarding grants-in-aid or not, and we chose not to until 1997, when women's ice hockey became an officially recognized NCAA Division I sport.  You may recall that St. Lawrence's women's team competed in the national championship game in 2001, the first Women's Frozen Four.

 

Seven other universities and colleges – Clarkson University, Colorado College, RPI in hockey; Johns Hopkins University in lacrosse; Hartwick College in men's soccer and women's water polo; and SUNY Oneonta in soccer; and the Newark campus of Rutgers University in volleyball – were also granted exemptions.  For many reasons that we have in common, and for reasons particular to each of us, we protest the unnecessary and harmful proposal of the Division III President's Council.

           

At St. Lawrence intercollegiate athletics is primarily about education and student development.  We believe that there are important things students can learn from organized intercollegiate competition at a high level of performance.  Intercollegiate athletics, done well and irrespective of the level of NCAA competition involved, has to be about the education and development of young people, or it has no place in a demanding liberal arts college.  Excellent teaching, here as in every other part of the university, will bring out the best in students, and coaches selected to be mentors will help students mature and develop as persons.

 

We further believe that it is essential that student-athletes at St. Lawrence be representative of the student body as a whole – in academic ability, academic performance, gender, in their choices of majors, in their participation in non-athletic co-curricular activities, and hopefully also in their willingness to take advantage of St. Lawrence's 14 international programs.  At St. Lawrence student-athletes are more likely than non-athletes to major in science or mathematics, have grade-point averages by their junior year that are higher than those of non-athletes, and are members of Phi Beta Kappa (the national academic honor society) at rates slightly higher than non-athletes.  Female athletes (53% of them) study abroad at exactly the same rate as women non-athletes, and both men and women athletes participate in non-athletic co-curricular activities at the same rates as non-athletes.  This is the NCAA Division III ideal, and we believe our Division I athletes must have the same profile.

 

But we are the smallest university or college participating in Division I hockey.  Where grants-in-aid are important to us is in attracting to St .Lawrence men's and women's hockey players who are truly representative of the student body as a whole.  For us, it's not about improving our chances to win – we were very competitive before giving grants-in-aid – it's about helping us to achieve a critically important Division III ideal in our Division I sports.  Eliminating our ability to award grants-in-aid will be a step backward with regard to an important Division III goal.  We will urge our colleagues to reject this proposal.