Search

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has implemented sweeping legislation for all high school students who desire to participate in Division I or II freshman college athletics. Cutoff scores have been set by the NCAA in two areas: grade-point average (GPA) in 'core' high school courses, and college-bound tests. High schools must obtain approval from the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse when determining core courses. Unfortunately, minimal attention has been given in the professional learning disability literature to the implications of the NCAA's policies, especially with regard to federal antidiscrimination legislation. Issues are raised regarding (a) the use of test score cutoffs, (b) a minimum GPA for core courses, (c) the responsibility of high schools, and (d) the lack of alternative eligibility procedures for accessing the essential elements of the NCAA's program. Options for consideration are provided in the context of meeting the needs of students with learning disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recent landmark settlement between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and the U.S. Department of Justice addressed many crucial issues relating to the eligibility of high school students with learning disabilities (LD) and their participation in college freshman athletics. Although the changes agreed upon in the consent decree should have wide-ranging ramifications generally in favor of students with LD, the more subjective nature of these changes opens the door for inevitable inconsistencies, biases, and possible abuses. In addition, larger issues remain unresolved, including (a) the NCAA's denial that is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, (b) the inconclusive status of whether college athletics is a major life activity, (c) the NCAA acting as a de facto national school board without rigorous research for setting policy on an informed basis, and (d) the lack of serious initiative on the part of the NCAA to take on a more supportive role in educational reform.

According to professional standards and federal legislation, practitioners should provide reasonable test accommodations to eliminate discriminatory practices and to allow for an "even playing field." However, a contrasting view is concerned with the possible effects of deviating from standard administration procedures--meaningless scores and an unfair edge for individuals with disabilities. Particularly regarding the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition, practitioners are lacking guidelines in the following areas: (a) initial selection of tests to administer; (b) modifications in administration, if any; and (c) interpretation and reporting of results. Greater efforts are needed to formulate guidelines based on a synthesis of student needs, professional standards, federal legislation, psychometric theory, and empirical research.