Academic Senate faculty will cast mail ballots next month favoring or opposing UC Davis’ possible transition from Division II to Division I-AA athletics. Their vote will be advisory to Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef.
“There’s a wide range of opinion among the faculty with regard to any changes in the athletics program,” said Academic Senate chair Bruce Madewell, professor of veterinary surgical and radiological sciences. “Some faculty believe the current system has wor-ked well for this campus and that it doesn’t need change. Others believe it’s time to make a change toward a different level of competition and perhaps participation with lookalike schools in the UC system.”
But there’s agreement on one issue, Madewell said. “There’s great sentiment among the faculty that we haven’t been properly engaged in the dialogue that has led to where we are now. So we’re now trying to catch up and understand the process and its implications.”
Campus officials announced last spring (see www-dateline.ucdavis.edu/053102/dl_DivI.html) possible interest in joining the Division I-AA Big West athletic conference that includes three other UC campuses — Santa Barbara, Irvine and Riverside — as well as Cal Poly, University of the Pacific, University of Idaho and CSU Ful-lerton, Northridge and Long Beach campuses.
Because the campus’s current conference — the Division II California Collegiate Athletic Association — offers competition for just 13 of the campus’s 25 sports, UC Davis must compete in two divisions and six conferences. Two teams — wrestling and women’s gymnastics — already compete at the Division I level.
The Big West conference would permit competition in 17 sports, but not football. UC Davis’ football team would continue to compete as an independent.
The Big West offers a better academic, philosophical and competitive “fit,” administrators say, than does Division II, where schools average 4,000 students compared to UC Davis’ 22,000 undergrads and where former D-II competitors are dropping sports or moving to Division I.
Although the Senate’s Executive Com-mittee was briefed, and several campus forums were held before last fall’s student referendum to approve funding for a move to Division I-AA, the fuller faculty hasn’t been engaged in dialogue, Madewell said.
To encourage discussion, the Senate has set up a Web site at www.mrak.ucdavis.edu/sen ate/divisionI.htm. A handful of pro, con and neutral statements currently are posted. Additional arguments, up to one page in length, are due in the Senate’s office by 4 p.m. Jan. 27 to be considered for inclusion on the ballot.
Ballots are expected to be delivered to faculty offices by Feb. 12 and are due back in the Senate Office by Feb. 21.
The Senate has also commissioned reports by two of its committees and plans to post their findings on its Web site by Jan. 27. (Additional information can be found on the Intercollegiate Athletics Web site, www.ucdavisaggies.com.)
The Committee on Academic Planning and Budget Review, chaired by pomology professor Ted DeJong, is reviewing the costs of moving to Division I-AA, and the Special Athletics Committee of the Senate, headed by civil and environmental engineering chair Debbie Niemeier, is exploring academic implications of such a move.
Examining financial, academic issues
DeJong said his committee was concerned that campus monies other than student registration fees might be used to fund a switch to Division I-AA. After briefings with Intercollegiate Athletics and Student Affairs administrators, “from what we’ve seen, that’s no longer a major worry or major concern,” he said.
If the campus moves to Division I-AA, the athletics department’s budget would grow from approximately $7.8 million to about $12.9 million, with the majority of the increase to provide grants for student-athletes.
“One of the major concerns, I think, in this whole issue is what an infusion of $4 million in grants in aid will do to our concept of student-athlete,” DeJong said. “We’re going from very minor grants of about $500 to $2,000 per student to basically full rides of about $12,000 to $13,000 per student for a fairly large number of students.”
That philosophical question falls in the domain of Niemeier’s committee.
But third-year student Will Merchad, who competes in track and cross country, said he thought larger grants in aid would free student-athletes from the need to work, “freeing up the chance to focus more intensively on academics and athletics.”
Niemeier said a draft report is circulating among committee members, with a final report expected to be completed by the weekend.
Fostering a teacher-coach approach
Sue Williams, director of the physical education program and cross country coach, said she’s observed in her 30 years on campus that “UC Davis has always been unique in its approach to athletics in that it didn’t just make statements about teacher-coaches and student-athletes. It put processes in place that brought those things about. We tend to do it our way, and we can be who we want in Division I, too.”
Most coaches do not teach at either the Division I or Division II level, Williams said.
Coaches at UC Davis teach for-credit physical activity classes as well as such lecture courses as “Principles of Healthful Living,” “Drugs and Society,” “Principles of Health Education” and other teacher education curriculum.
“Coaches need to be engaged with general students and with faculty and the academic mission of the campus,” Williams said. “That doesn’t have to be at risk, but Division I is a change, so we’ll have to reevaluate how to accomplish what we all want — a strong teacher-coach type.”
The Ivy League is the best model for UC Davis, she said. “We’re like the Ivy League now in Division II and there’s no reason we can’t be like them in Division I.”
Chancellor Vanderhoef indicated last spring that he felt a transition to the Division I-AA Big West conference would best enable the campus to sustain its athletic program while preserving its academic and competitive integrity. Only UC-eligible student-athletes would be admitted, he’d said, and coaches would be sanctioned if their teams’ graduation rates fell below the student body average.
Vanderhoef declined further substantive comment this week, noting that “while I have views about this issue, we now have the opportunity for a broader segment of the campus to comment. It’s only appropriate that I wait until I have the opportunity to evaluate their responses.”
The Big West conference has asked the campus to indicate by March 1 whether it would like to join the conference. The National Collegiate Athletic Association has specified June 1 as the deadline for the campus to declare an intention to move to Division I-AA. If the campus does so, the four-year provisional period would begin in the 2003-04 academic year, with Division I-AA status achieved in 2007-08.