Keeping Score When It Counts (Part 2)

By BASN Wire Services
Updated: March 24, 2010

ORLANDO, Fla. — The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport (TIDES) at the University of Central Florida released a new study on the Graduation Success Rates and Academic Progress Rates of the teams in the men’s and women’s Sweet 16. It is a follow‐up to its annual study, “Keeping Score When It Counts: Graduation Rates and Academic Progress Rates (APR) for 2010 NCAA Men’s and Women’s Division I Basketball Tournament Teams,” which compared graduation success and academic progress rates for Division I teams that had been selected for the men’s and women’s brackets of the 2010 NCAA Basketball Tournaments. The author of the study is Dr. Richard Lapchick, who is director of The Institute and of the DeVos Sport Business Management Graduate Program at UCF. The study was co‐authored this year by Brian Hoff, Christopher Kaiser, David Benoit, and Jamile M. Kitnurse. Lapchick noted “Five of the Sweet 16 women’s teams had a higher graduation success rate than the men’s team with the highest GSR. In addition, 100 percent of the women’s teams graduated at least 67 percent of its basketball student‐athletes compared to four men’s teams or 27 percent.” “Whether it is all 64 teams or the Sweet 16 teams, the women do better than the men academically.” “There was good news for many of the Sweet 16 men’s and women’s teams with their APR rates. There were nine men’s teams (56 percent) and 15 women’s teams (94 percent) with an APR of 950 or above, eight men’s teams (50 percent) and 13 women’s teams (81 percent) with an APR of 960 or above and six men’s teams (38 percent) and 12 women’s teams (75 percent) with an APR of 970 or above.” In this year’s Sweet 16, Kansas State, Purdue, Ohio State and Tennessee are the men’s teams (25 percent) to have APR scores below 925. Purdue, Ohio State and Tennessee are the men’s teams that will be subject to contemporaneous penalties by the NCAA. All the women’s teams were above the 925 score by more than 20 points. In addition: • 16 women’s teams (100 percent) compared to seven of the men’s teams (47 percent) graduated at least 60 percent of their overall basketball student‐athletes. • 15 women’s teams (94 percent) compared to four of the men’s (27 percent) teams graduated at least 70 percent. • No women’s team graduated less than 40 percent while four of the men’s teams (27 percent) were below that mark. Lapchick emphasized, “Race remains an ongoing academic issue because of the continued gap between graduation rates for white and African‐American student‐athletes including a significant disparity between white and African‐American basketball student‐athletes.” “The good news is that the GSR rates for both whites and African‐Americans are going up and the gap has narrowed slightly.” “Yet it is the disparity that is troublesome. Among the Sweet 16, white male basketball student‐athletes graduate at 76 percent versus only 49 percent of African‐American male basketball student‐athletes.” “White female basketball student‐athletes graduate at 93 percent, while 88 percent of African‐American female basketball student‐athletes graduate. The men’s 27 percent disparity is five percent greater than last year.” “The women’s five percent gap is a whopping nine percent decrease from the 14 percent gap between Sweet 16 teams last year. However, the disparity is still present.” Distressing results on the topic of race and academics for the Sweet 16 teams’ GSR data are: • Three women’s Sweet 16 teams (20 percent) and seven men’s Sweet 16 teams (50 percent) have graduation rates for African‐American basketball student‐athletes that were at least 30 percent lower than their rates for white basketball student‐athletes. • Three women’s teams (20 percent) and ten men’s teams (71 percent) have graduation rates for African‐American basketball student‐athletes that were at least 20 percent lower than their rates for white basketball student‐athletes. Lapchick concluded that, “No matter how many teams we examine, overall women basketball student‐athletes succeed academically better than their male counterparts.” “And no matter whether we look at women’s or men’s college basketball, the gap between the graduation rates of white and African‐American basketball student‐athletes is too big and must be narrowed.”

“I believe that the late NCAA President Myles Brand’s reform package is leading us in the right way but the job is not done. The increasing graduation rates show this.” NCAA statistics were used in the study. The Institute reviewed 2002‐03 graduation (six‐year) rates, with a four‐class average (freshman classes of 1999‐2000, 2000‐01, 2001‐02, and 2003‐04). The APR data in this study does not include data from the 2008‐09 academic performances of the teams in the study, but instead uses the four‐year data from the 2004‐05, 2005‐06, 2006‐07, and 2007‐08 academic years. Note: The men’s and women’s percentages were calculated as follows: 1. All men’s graduation rates were based on 15 teams (Cornell, like other Ivy League Schools, does not report graduation rates). 2. The disparity figures for men’s teams are based on 14 teams. In addition to Cornell not reporting graduation rates, Xavier has no white basketball student‐athletes in the graduating class in the period under review. 3. The disparity figures for women’s teams are based on 15 teams because Iowa State had no African‐American basketball student‐athletes. NOTE: For more information, logo on to www.tidesport.org.