Unit: Department of Intercollegiate Athletics Date:    August 18, 2004   Section 2: CORE REQUIREMENTS       2.1 The institution has degree-granting authority from the appropriate government agency or agencies.  (Degree-granting Authority)         Not applicable to unit level.            2.2 The institution has a governing board of at least five members that is the legal body with specific authority over the institution. The board is an active policy-making body for the institution and is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the financial resources of the institution are adequate to provide a sound educational program. The board is not controlled by a minority of board members or by organizations or interests separate from it. Neither the presiding officer of the board nor the majority of other voting members of the board have contractual, employment, or personal or familial financial interest in the institution. A military institution authorized and operated by the federal government to award degrees has a public board in which neither the presiding officer nor a majority of the other members are civilian employees of the military or active/retired military. The board has broad and significant influence upon the institution’s programs and operations, plays an active role in policy-making, and ensures that the financial resources of the institution are used to provide a sound educational program. The board is not controlled by a minority of board members or by organizations or interests separate from the board except as specified by the authorizing legislation. Neither the presiding officer of the board nor the majority of other voting board members have contractual, employment, or personal or familial financial interest in the institution.  (Governing Board)           Not applicable to unit level.             2.3 The institution has a chief executive officer whose primary responsibility is to the institution and who is not the presiding officer of the board. (Chief Executive Officer)         Not applicable to unit level.             2.4 The institution has a clearly defined and published mission statement specific to the institution and appropriate to an institution of higher education, addressing teaching and learning and, where applicable, research and public service. (Institutional Mission)         Not applicable to unit level.             2.5 The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. (Institutional Effectiveness)       The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics is in compliance with this requirement.      i. The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics participates in Texas Tech University’s ongoing strategic plan and assessment process. The strategic plan for the department can be located at: http://texastech.ocsn.com/trads/text-mission.html.       ii. The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics participated in the first assessment of the TTU’s strategic planning and assessment process. The assessment for the department can be located at : http://www.irs.ttu.edu/SACS/AssessmentReports/51_0_2003.pdf.     iii. The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics completed the NCAA self-study in 1998-1999. This self-study is to be completed every 10 years, with a five year interim self-study. The department will begin its five year interim self-study in 2003 and complete it in 2004. The self-study is a focused report on all areas, policies and practices within the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics. The study is completed by the department as a requirement of membership with the NCAA. A copy of the 1998-1999 self-study is located with the department’s administration on the South End of Jones-SBC Stadium.             2.6 The institution is in operation and has students enrolled in degree programs.  (Continuous Operation)         Not applicable to unit level.             2.7 The institution   2.7.1   offers one or more degree programs based on at least 60 semester credit hours or the equivalent at the associate level; at least 120 semester credit hours or the equivalent at the baccalaureate level; or at least 30 semester credit hours or the equivalent at the post-baccalaureate, graduate, or professional level. The institution provides a written justification and rationale for program equivalency. (Program Length)            Not applicable to unit level.         2.7.2 offers degree programs that embody a coherent course of study that is compatible with its stated purpose and is based upon fields of study appropriate to higher education. (Program Content)            Not applicable to unit level.         2.7.3 requires in each undergraduate degree program the successful completion of a general education component at the collegiate level that is (1) a substantial component of each undergraduate degree, (2) ensures breadth of knowledge, and (3) is based on a coherent rationale. For degree completion in associate programs, the component constitutes a minimum of 15 semester hours or the equivalent; for baccalaureate programs, a minimum of 30 semester hours or the equivalent. These credit hours are to be drawn from and include at least one course from each of the following areas: humanities/fine arts; social/behavioral sciences; and natural science/mathematics. The courses do not narrowly focus on those skills, techniques, and procedures specific to a particular occupation or profession. The institution provides a written justification and rationale for course equivalency. (General Education)            Not applicable to unit level.         2.7.4 provides instruction for all course work required for at least one degree program at each level at which if awards degree.  If the institution makes arrangements for some instruction to be provided by other accredited institutions or entities through contracts or consortia, or uses some other alternative approach to meeting this requirement, the alternative approach must be approved by the Commission on Colleges.  In all cases, the institution demonstrates that it controls all aspects of its educational program.  (Contractual Agreements for Instruction)            Not applicable to unit level.             2.8 The number of full-time faculty members is adequate to support the mission of the institution. The institution has adequate faculty resources to ensure the quality and integrity of its academic programs. In addition, upon application for candidacy, an applicant institution demonstrates that it meets the comprehensive standard for faculty qualifications.  (Faculty)         Not applicable to unit level.             2.9 The institution, through ownership or formal arrangements or agreements, provides and supports student and faculty access and user privileges to adequate library collections as well as to other learning/information resources consistent with the degrees offered. These collections and resources are sufficient to support all its educational, research, and public service programs. (Learning Resources and Services)         Not applicable to unit level.             2.10 The institution provides student support programs, services, and activities consistent with its mission that promote student learning and enhance the development of its students. (Student Support Services)         The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics is in compliance with this requirement. The department has the following support services for student-athletes: Academic Services Unit for student-athletes. The Marsha Sharp Student-Athlete Academic Services Center is in the process of being completed. Life-Skills program and IS1200 is geared for incoming student-athletes and their integration into collegiate life. The Student-Athlete Advisory Board.   NCAA graduation rates for 2002-03 recently released indicated that a 56% graduation rate for student-athletes entering TTU in 1996-97.       2.11 The institution has a sound financial base and demonstrated financial stability, and adequate physical resources to support the mission of the institution and the scope of its programs and services. The member institution provides the following financial statements: (a) an institutional audit (or Standard Review Report issued in accordance with Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services issued by the AICPA for those institutions audited as part of a systemwide or statewide audit) and written institutional management letter for the most recent fiscal year prepared by an independent certified public accountant and/or an appropriate governmental auditing agency employing the appropriate audit (or Standard Review Report) guide; (b) a statement of financial position of unrestricted net assets, exclusive of plant assets and plant-related debt, which represents the change in unrestricted net assets attributable to operations for the most recent year; and, (c) an annual budget that is preceded by sound planning, is subject to sound fiscal procedures, and is approved by the governing board. Audit requirements for applicant institutions may be found in the Commission policy entitled "Accreditation Procedures for Applicant Institutions.  (Resources)         Not applicable to unit level.         2.12 The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan and demonstrate that the plan is part of an ongoing planning and evaluation process.  (Quality Enhancement Plan). (Not applicable for the Compliance Certification submitted by institution).               Section 3:  COMPREHENSIVE STANDARDS             Institutional Mission, Governance, And Effectiveness 3.1  Institutional Mission 3.1.1 The institution has a clear and comprehensive mission statement that guides it; is approved by the governing board; is periodically reviewed by the board; and is communicated to the institution’s constituencies.         Not applicable to unit level.       3.2  Governance and Administration 3.2.1 The governing board of the institution is responsible for the selection and the evaluation of the chief executive officer.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.2 The legal authority and operating control of the institution are clearly defined for the following areas within the institution’s governance structure:   3.2.2.1 the institution’s mission;   3.2.2.2 the fiscal stability of the institution;   3.2.2.3 institutional policy, including policies concerning related and affiliated corporate entities and all auxiliary services;   3.2.2.4 related foundations (athletic, research, etc.) and other corporate entities whose primary purpose is to support the institution and/or its programs.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.3 The board has a policy addressing conflict of interest for its members.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.4 The governing board is free from undue influence from political, religious, or other external bodies, and protects the institution from such influence.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.5 Members of the governing board can be dismissed only for cause and by due process.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.6 There is a clear and appropriate distinction, in writing and practice, between the policy-making functions of the governing board and the responsibility of the administration and faculty to administer and implement policy.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.7 The institution has a clearly defined and published organizational structure that delineates responsibility for the administration of policies.       A departmental organizational chart is attached and can be found electronically at: http://texastech.ocsn.com/trads/text-mission.html http://www.fansonly.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/text/genrel/auto_pdf/text-flow-chart             3.2.8 The institution has qualified administrative and academic officers with the experience, competence, and capacity to lead the institution.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.9 The institution defines and publishes policies regarding appointment and employment of faculty and staff.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.10 The institution evaluates the effectiveness of its administrators, including the chief executive officer, on a periodic basis.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.11 The institution’s chief executive officer has ultimate responsibility for, and exercises appropriate administrative and fiscal control over, the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program.         The department is in compliance with this area   i. The Texas Tech University’s Chief Executive Officer (TTU President) has ultimate responsibility for all intercollegiate athletics programs. The TTU Director of Athletics reports directly to the president and they meet regularly for exchange of information. The athletic director participates in several university level committees and meetings and is a recognized representative to the Big XII Conference, along with the president.     ii. Texas Tech University has an established Athletic Council which reports directly to the president and charged with recommending changes in policy and procedures relating to the University’s participation in intercollegiate athletics. A description of the Athletic Council, its membership and purpose can be located at : http://www.provost.ttu.edu/athletic_council.htm     iii. As a member institution of the Big XII Conference and the NCAA, TTU must abide by significant regulations that affect the president’s ultimate responsibility for intercollegiate athletics. For instance, if any apparent violations of NCAA regulations occur at TTU, the president is notified in writing.     iv. The president exercises appropriate fiscal control over the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program. The Director of Athletics or his designee provides frequent summary management reports on the department’s fiscal status. The president reviews and approves the department’s budget and fiscal responsibility annually. The president may delegate part of his oversight responsibilities to the Vice-President of Fiscal Affairs.     v. The TTU Red Raider Club raises funds for scholarship support for the athletic program. All disbursements of gifts are in accord with the policies of the TTU Foundation and in compliance with the Big XII Conference and the NCAA regulations.             3.2.12 The institution’s chief executive officer has ultimate control of the institution’s fund-raising activities.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.13 Any institution-related foundation not controlled by the institution has a contractual or other formal agreement that (a) accurately describes the relationship between the institution and the foundation, and (b) describes any liability associated with that relationship. In all cases, the institution ensures that the relationship is consistent with its mission.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.2.14 The institution’s policies are clear concerning ownership of materials, compensation, copyright issues, and the use of revenue derived from the creation and production of all intellectual property. This applies to students, faculty and staff.         Not applicable to unit level.       3.3  Institutional Effectiveness 3.3.1 The institution identifies expected outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; assesses whether it achieves these outcomes; and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results.       The department is in compliance with this area. The following information was obtained from the Annual Report from the TTU Athletic Council’s Standing Committee on Academic Integrity, submitted annually to the chair of the TTU athletic council.  This report is available from the chair of the TTU athletic council, Dr. Herschel Mann, or in the office of the TTU chief of staff, Ron Phillips. Some of this information is also in the TTU Annual assessment report and the TTU Strategic Planning Update from Academic Services.  More detailed information can be obtained from these reports. Expected Outcomes: To create an environment of excellence that fosters the highest standards of integrity, academic support and performance that leads to graduation.   To provide the resources necessary for our student-athletes to achieve their academic potential and prepare them for life after college athletics, both personally and professionally. Assessments include:  Exit Interviews   Student and staff surveys   Course Evaluations   Grade Point Averages   Graduation and Retention Rates   Academic Awards Received   Summary of Assessments 2003-04:  While slightly declined from the previous year, the graduation rate for student athletes continues to be higher than the overall student body. Figures for the class of 1997-1998 demonstrated a graduation rate of 56% for student athletes as compared to 54% for the student body at large. There is still the continuing controversy about the way these rates are calculated because they do not take into account transfers, midyear freshman, student-athletes who receive a scholarship after initial full-time enrollment.  Also if a student-athlete transfers out in good academic standing then that person will count against the rate.  However the graduation rate for student-athletes who exhausted eligibility has increased to 87%.  The NCAA is in the process of figuring a new method to track graduation and retention rates with the new academic reform legislation.  These new calculations are Academic Progress Rate (APR) which will track retention and graduation and the Graduation Success Rate (GSR) will be a more equitable and comprehensive graduation rate.   These new rates will be the driving measurements to improve the graduation and retention rates of student-athletes for all NCAA institutions.  This is due to the penalties that the NCAA will levy if institutions do not stay above specific APR standards which have yet to be determined because research is still being gathered to set threshold levels. The data provided by Athletic Academic Services has also shown that most student-athletes leave Texas Tech in good academic standing versus those that are academically suspended. Since 1997-98 to the current academic year, 28 of 716 (3.91%) scholarship student-athletes have been academically suspended versus 143 (19.97%) student-athletes who have transferred in good academic standing or who have left to pursue professional opportunities. In the spring semester 2004, 92.65% of the student-athletes had a cumulative GPA above 2.00. The cumulative GPA for student-athletes was 2.869 for spring 2004, compared to the campus GPA of 2.897.  The female athletes received a 3.107 GPA (campus 3.044) and males a 2.729 GPA (campus 2.773). This is the first time in the last five years that the student-athletes have dropped below the campus GPA.  This is largely attributed to the disparity of the academic backgrounds of the student-athletes compared to the student-body.  For example 65 of the 73 (89%) scholarship student-athletes in the fall 2003 term were below the university SAT average.  The university SAT average for the fall 2003 term was 1112 compared with the student-athletes 989 down from 1009 fall 2002.  Unfortunately, this test score disparity is likely to grow with the academic reform legislation.  This is projected because of the NCAA increasing the sliding scale for initial eligibility to include test scores below the 820 SAT and 68 ACT (sum score) which were the old threshold marks for freshman to be initially eligible to compete in athletics and receive a scholarship.  These scores would be compared to the secondary school core course GPA that is established by the NCAA.  The lower the test score, then the prospective student-athlete would need a higher core GPA to be eligible to compete at the NCAA Division one level.  The new sliding scale, which now goes all the way to a 400 SAT and a 37 ACT,  allows for student-athletes to be admitted to Texas Tech far below the University average.   The NCAA changed this measurement largely due to a federal court judgment ruling that the test score measurement was in violation of civil rights.   Academic Awards: William Hadrell was named to the Verizon Academic All American Team for men’s golf and becomes Texas Tech’s 28th Academic All American.  Jolee Ayers-Curry (women’s basketball), Laura Grote (volleyball),  Michael Innerebner (men’s tennis) and Kelly Rhine (softball) were all named Verizon Academic All-District VI.  Additionally, 74 student-athletes were Academic All-Big 12 honorees and 311 were Big 12 Commissioner’s Honor Roll honorees. This past spring term, 20 student athletes were recognized on the President’s list for a 4.0 GPA and 46 were on the Dean’s list. Team academic honors include; Men’s Golf receiving the Academic Excellence Award for graduation and retention of student-athletes; Volleyball and Women’s Cross Country teams, for placing more student-athletes on the Academic All Big 12 Team than any other Big 12 institution; Football with an 89% gradation rate was also recognized as one of the top teams in the country for graduating football student-athletes by the American Football.   Facility The Marsha Sharp Center for Student Athletes (MSC) opened its doors this January to the student-athletes to resounding remarks of praise.  This shows building clearly demonstrates the commitment the Athletics Department has toward the academic success of the student-athletes.  The 15,000 square foot facility includes two computer labs, two classrooms, 28 individual tutor rooms, a career resource room and administrative offices.  The building is showcased by the Wick and Janna Alexander Academic Hall of Honor which will recognize all the academic and community service awards for our student-athletes.  These awards are being recreated to match the MSC’s display cases this summer and are projected to be in place by the fall 2004 semester. The Marsha Sharp Center will also be shared with the campus at large.  Health, Exercise and Sport Sciences will teach four classes in the fall term in the classrooms, Admission and New School Relations has used the space for receptions and special events.  The High Riders have a consistent monthly meeting and other organizations have held meetings or events in the MSC this past spring term.  This is a facility that we want to share with the campus.   On the Horizon  The concern of Academic Services is that even though the NCAA over time will increase the number of core units that a student-athlete must complete in high school, that the new measurement actually makes it easier to become initially eligible, than the old measurement.  Therefore more student-athletes will be recruited by coaches that will be less prepared to handle the rigors of college academics and therefore increasing the amount of learning deficient and academically at risk student-athletes.   Also, this is combined with the academic reform legislation that significantly increases the continuing eligibility standards thereby making it more difficult to retain the academically at-risk student-athletes. Athletic Academic Services has recently received authorization to hire a Learning Specialist to better serve the increased population of learning deficient (at risk) and learning disabled student-athletes.  This decision, which was supported by Athletic Director Gerald Myers and President Whitmore, is a direct result of the impending academic reform legislation and the concern of the increased population of academically at risk student-athletes.  The new NCAA rules are intended to bring about a change in culture on how coaches recruit student-athletes.  Education on rules will be emphasized to all athletic Department Staff and Coaches.  Also the budget of Academic Services will be continually evaluated to ensure the necessary funding for staff and related expenditures and to maintain the excellent academic counseling and tutoring that Tech student-athletes deserve.   Grades  Each term, an academic grade report is compiled for the student-athlete population.  These in-depth reports have been kept consistently since the fall of 1997.  The objective of this report is to compare current student-athletes performance to the performance of student-athletes in past years.  In addition, a comparison of student-athletes to the student body is done in regards to cumulative GPA.  The full report can be obtained from John Anderson in the Academic Services Office (742-0150; Marsha Sharp Center for Student-Athletes). Athletic Academic Services has recently received authorization to hire a Learning Specialist to better serve the increased population of learning deficient (at risk) and learning disabled student-athletes.  This decision is a direct result of the impending academic reform legislation and the concern of the increased population of academically at risk student-athletes.   Marsha Sharp Center  The Marsha Sharp Center for Student Athletes opened its doors this January.  The 15,000 square foot facility includes two computer labs, two classrooms, 28 individual tutor rooms, a career resource room and administrative offices.   The Athletic Academic Services area is a member of the NCAA Life Skills program which emphasizes the five component areas of student-athlete development: athletic, academic, career, service, and personal.  Additionally, the director of the life skills program teaches a two-credit course which is offered to freshman student-athletes.  A peer mentor program is available for student-athletes who are new to Texas Tech.  The main purpose of the program is to provide guidance in the transition from academics at the high school or community college level to academic life at Texas Tech. Additional information regarding academic performance/retention of student-athletes can be obtained from: John Anderson, Associate Athletics Director/Athletic Academic Services; 1998-1999 NCAA Self-Study Report (for certification); available in Judi Henry’s (Sr. Assoc. AD) office in the south end of Jones Stadium (room 119); 2004 annual report by the Athletic Council’s standing committee on academic integrity (available through Ronald Phillips in the President’s office or Herschel Mann, chair and Business Administration professor).       PROGRAMS 3.4  Educational Programs Standards for All Educational Programs: (Includes all on-campus, off-campus and distance learning programs)  3.4.1 The institution demonstrates that each educational program for which academic credit is awarded (a) is approved by the faculty and the administration, and (b) establishes and evaluates program and learning outcomes.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.2 The institution’s continuing education, outreach, and service programs are consistent with the institution’s mission.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.3 The institution publishes admissions policies consistent with its mission.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.4 The institution has a defined and published policy for evaluating, awarding, and accepting credit for transfer, experiential learning, advanced placement, and professional certificates that is consistent with its mission and ensures that course work and learning outcomes are at the collegiate level and comparable to the institution’s own degree programs. The institution assumes responsibility for the academic quality of any course work or credit recorded on the institution’s transcript.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.5 The institution publishes academic policies that adhere to principles of good educational practice. These are disseminated to students, faculty, and other interested parties through publications that accurately represent the programs and services of the institution.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.6 The institution employs sound and acceptable practices for determining the amount and level of credit awarded for courses, regardless of format or mode of delivery.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.7 The institution ensures the quality of educational programs/courses offered through consortia relationships or contractual agreements, ensures ongoing compliance with the comprehensive requirements, and evaluates the consortial relationship and/or agreement against the purpose of the institution.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.8 The institution awards academic credit for course work taken on a noncredit basis only when there is documentation that the noncredit course work is equivalent to a designated credit experience.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.9 The institution provides appropriate academic support services.         Not applicable to unit level.       3.4.10 The institution defines and publishes general education requirements for its undergraduate programs and major program requirements for all its programs. These requirements conform to commonly accepted standards and practices for degree programs.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.11 The institution protects the security, confidentiality, and integrity of its student academic records and maintains special security measures to protect and back up data.         Not applicable to unit level.           3.4.12 The institution places primary responsibility for the content, quality, and effectiveness of its curriculum with its faculty.         Not applicable to unit level.             3.4.13 For each majo