What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

So if you look at Women's Hockey data ranking by Conference 2011-12 you see this relative rank:

WCHA - ave rank #22 score of 985
#9 UW 995
#14 SCSU 992
#18 UM 989
#19 OSU 987
#25 BSU 983
#27 MSU 981
#30 UND 978
#31 UMD 973

Hockey East - ave rank #12 score of 992
#1 BC 1000
#2 BU 1000
#5 NU 1000
#8 PC 997
#11 Maine 994
#20 UNH 987
#23 Vermont 983
#29 UConn 979

ECAC - ave rank #17 score of 990
#3 Brown 1000
#4 Colgate 1000
#7 Princeton 997
#10 Harvard 994
#12 Yale 994
#13 RPI 993
#15 Union 992
#16 Cornell 991
#21 Clarkson 987
#22 SLU 987
#24 Dartmouth 983
#32 Quinnipiac 959

CHA - ave rank #24 score of 984
#17 RMU 991
#26 Mercyhurst 982
#28 Syracuse 979
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

joehockey said:
Hockey East - ave rank #12 score of 992
#1 BC 1000
#2 BU 1000
#5 NU 1000
#8 PC 997
#11 Maine 994
#20 UNH 987
#23 Vermont 983
#29 UConn 979
Click to expand...
Hahahahahaha you can't make this crap up. Even in women's hockey, huh?

Is that why UConn self-imposed a postseason ban in women's hockey by being terrible?
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

Anyone have any idea how significant these gaps are? I don't really know the system so these are just numbers and I have no idea what they actually mean. How big a difference is there between a 1000 and a 979?
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

TonyTheTiger20 said:
I believe it's alphabetical among tied teams -- and those ranks are NCAA-wide, sorted by conference. Brown and Colgate are both alphabetically after BC and BU and before NU, so, there you go.
Click to expand...

Well combine men's and Womens and Brown is on top:

"Brown was the only school to earn a perfect score in the NCAA’s Academic Progress Rates for the 2011-12 academic year in both its men’s and women’s hockey programs."

Another great point to highlight is that hockey is the best in NCAA sports...
""The average score for men’s hockey teams was 983, tops among NCAA sports. The women’s hockey average was 989, tied for the best with field hockey and gymnastics."
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

Blackbeard said:
Exactly what is the NCAA trying to quantify?
Click to expand...

I'm no expert but from this article it would seem this ranking system is designed to promote academic achievement across all NCAA sanctioned athletic programs. Certainly the threat of losing scholarships and post-season bans if they fail to meet the designated minimums provides AD's and coaches with the necessary incentives.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/211146411.html
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

Academic Progress Rate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Academic Progress Rate is a measure introduced by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the nonprofit association organizes the athletic programs of many colleges and universities in the United States and Canada to track student-athletes chances of graduation.
The Academic Progress Rate (APR) is a term-by-term measure of eligibility and retention for Division I student-athletes that was developed as an early indicator of eventual graduation rates.[1]
It was introduced in the wake of concerns that the majority of athletes were in fact not graduating with qualifications to prepare them for life.

Background[edit]

The mandatory publication of graduation rates came into effect in 1990 as a consequence of the "Student Right-to-Know Act," which attempted to create an environment in which universities would become more devoted to academics and hold athletes more accountable for academic success.[2] However, the graduation rates established by the NCAA showed poor results, for example they reported that among students who entered college between 1993 and 1996 only 51 percent of football players graduated within 6 years and 41 percent of basketball players.[3] Feeling pressure to improve these poor rates the NCAA instituted reforms in 2004, including the APR, a new method for gauging the academic progress of student athletes.[3] It was put into place in order to aid in the NCAA's goal for student-athletes to graduate with meaningful degrees preparing them for life.[4] The principle data collector was Thomas Paskus, the Principal Research Scientist for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA).[5]

Functions[edit]

The APR measures how scholarship student-athletes are performing term by term throughout the school year. It is a composite team measurement based upon how individual team members do academically. Teams that don’t make the 925 APR threshold are subject to sanctions. The NCAA works closely with the schools that do not meet the threshold in order to improve them. When a school has APR challenges, it may be encouraged or even required to present an academic improvement plan to the NCAA. In reviewing these plans, the national office staff encourages schools to work with other campus units to achieve a positive outcome. The staff also works with APR-challenged schools to create reasonable timelines for improvement.[4] While eligibility requirements make the individual student-athlete accountable, the Academic Progress Rate creates a level of responsibility for the university.[6]

Measurement[edit]

Teams that fail to achieve an APR score of 925 - equivalent to a 50% graduation rate - may be penalized. A perfect score is 1000. The scores are calculated as follows:
Each student-athlete receiving athletically related financial aid earns one retention point for staying in school and one eligibility point for being academically eligible. A team’s total points are divided by the points possible and then multiplied by one thousand to equal the team’s Academic Progress Rate score. Example: A Division I Football Bowl Subdivision team awards the full complement of 85 grants-in-aid. If 80 student-athletes remain in school and academically eligible, three remain in school but are academically ineligible and two drop out academically ineligible, the team earns 163 of 170 possible points for that term. Divide 163 by 170 and multiply by 1,000 to determine that the team’s Academic Progress Rate for that term is 959.[7]

The NCAA calculates the rate as a rolling, four-year figure that takes into account all the points student-athletes could earn for remaining in school and academically eligible during that period. Teams that do not earn an Academic Progress Rate above specific benchmarks face penalties ranging from scholarship reductions to more severe sanctions like restrictions on scholarships and practice time.[
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

D2D said:
I'm no expert but from this article it would seem this ranking system is designed to promote academic achievement across all NCAA sanctioned athletic programs. Certainly the threat of losing scholarships and post-season bans if they fail to meet the designated minimums provides AD's and coaches with the necessary incentives.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/211146411.html
Click to expand...
I agree that it would appear to be the intent, but I think the waiver system makes it rather meaningless. When Kentucky men's basketball can bring in a bunch of players for a year, win a championship, and then have the starters all turn pro but not impact the team's rating makes it rather pointless to shine the light instead on some other program. And in the case of student athletes who become academically ineligible, that would seem to penalize institutions where it is more difficult to achieve grades than it is at certain others.

In any case, the list of those programs in trouble are all from the South. It probably wouldn't take a rocket scientist and a huge budget to guess that schools like Southern and Arkansas Pine Bluff would have more students struggling when they draw heavily from underprivileged areas where academic achievement across the board trails the national average.
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

It also doesn't consider what the athletes are majoring in. It's easy to see why, since trying to quantify in any way which majors are sheltering athletes at any given university would be a nightmare. But it does reduce the number's ability to tell us anything useful.
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

For the below reason, and for many others, I've found that perhaps the best measure of the academic success of an athletics program (or of an individual team) is not NCAA analyses/rankings, but the general success of each program's graduates. Are student-athletes employed after graduation? How many? Are they getting into graduate programs in their chosen fields? Are these grad. programs strong? These are questions a concerned recruit could certainly ask coaches. Most coaches should know where recent grads are these days. Universities with learning centers for student-athletes should also have some of this data. It would be in the interest of coaches with strong postgrad. placement records to keep track of this. GPA doesn't tell the whole story; postgraduate success gives you a little bit of a better idea, I think.

Eeyore said:
It also doesn't consider what the athletes are majoring in. It's easy to see why, since trying to quantify in any way which majors are sheltering athletes at any given university would be a nightmare. But it does reduce the number's ability to tell us anything useful.
Click to expand...
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

HockeyScholar said:
For the below reason, and for many others, I've found that perhaps the best measure of the academic success of an athletics program (or of an individual team) is not NCAA analyses/rankings, but the general success of each program's graduates. Are student-athletes employed after graduation? How many? Are they getting into graduate programs in their chosen fields? Are these grad. programs strong? These are questions a concerned recruit could certainly ask coaches. Most coaches should know where recent grads are these days. Universities with learning centers for student-athletes should also have some of this data. It would be in the interest of coaches with strong postgrad. placement records to keep track of this. GPA doesn't tell the whole story; postgraduate success gives you a little bit of a better idea, I think.
Click to expand...

Good practical thinking.

I would also add that, in my experience, most coaches don't know jack about the academic side of the equation apart from being able to toss out a few subjective and therefore meaningless comments to you during your conversations, regardless of how well intentioned they and their comments might be.
 
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

TonyTheTiger20 said:
Eeyore must be a UConn grad. :D :D :D
I believe it's alphabetical among tied teams -- and those ranks are NCAA-wide, sorted by conference. Brown and Colgate are both alphabetically after BC and BU and before NU, so, there you go.
Click to expand...

012-13 Hockey East Academic All-Star Team
G: Roxanne Douville, Vermont (3.80)
G: Elaine Chuli, UConn (3.80)
D: Katie Brock, New Hampshire (3.96)
D: Megan Dalbec, Vermont (4.00)
F: Jessica Cohen, Providence (3.93)
F: Sarah MacDonell, Connecticut (3.93)
F: Jessica Vella, Providence (3.93)
F: Kate Massey, Maine (4.00)

HMMMMMMMMM No BC, 2 from UCONN

UCONN - 9 out of 21 - 43%
Blain, Maude (Connecticut, D) ***
Buress, Leah (Connecticut, F)
Campero, Kayla (Connecticut, F)
Chuli, Elaine (Connecticut, G)
Knajdek, Casey (Connecticut, D) **
MacDonnell, Sarah (Connecticut, F) **
Moses, Sarah (Connecticut, G)
Snodgrass, Emily (Connecticut, F) **
Zimmer, Margaret (Connecticut, F)

BC - 7 out of 25 - 28%
Bender, Lexi (Boston College, D)
Bizzari, Melissa (Boston College, F) **
Blake, Taylor (Boston College, G)
Boyles, Corinne (Boston College, G) +
Brown, Kristina (Boston College, F) **
Kickham, Erin (Boston College, F) **
Young, Jackie (Boston College, D) **

Maybe Eyore was a BC grad? :D:D:D
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

UCONN FAN said:
012-13 Hockey East Academic All-Star Team
G: Roxanne Douville, Vermont (3.80)
G: Elaine Chuli, UConn (3.80)
D: Katie Brock, New Hampshire (3.96)
D: Megan Dalbec, Vermont (4.00)
F: Jessica Cohen, Providence (3.93)
F: Sarah MacDonell, Connecticut (3.93)
F: Jessica Vella, Providence (3.93)
F: Kate Massey, Maine (4.00)

HMMMMMMMMM no BC 2 from UCONN
Click to expand...

Correction...Only 1 from UConn according to the list :D :D

More seriously. Congrats to these players. Great accomplishment to combine excellence like this in the Classroom with the commitment of varsity athletics.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA Women's & Men's Academic Rating

My my, we DO like to cherry pick stats, don't we?

Let's be real here, a 4.0 at a school like UConn is not even in the same stratosphere as a 4.0 at a school like BC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top