Executive Summary

Tutoring

A member of the UT faculty should be appointed to provide ongoing academic oversight of tutoring in the Athletics Department. This person should be directly involved in the orientation and training of tutors and should directly observe tutoring sessions on a regular basis. The committee suggests that this position be established under the Provost. However, the amount of time (1/2 to full) required for this position must be determined.

A committee should be established that consists of

the men's and women's NCAA compliance coordinators,

The NCAA faculty representative,

The Athletic Department's Directors of Student Life,

A faculty representative from the Faculty Senate Athletics Committee, and

The faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1, who should serve as the committee chair.

This committee should meet on a periodic basis to review the tutoring system including any identified problems, the tutor manuals, and tutor training.

All tutoring of Student-athletes, including study halls, but excluding other academic department's tutoring labs, should be conducted in the Student Life facility under direct supervision of a tutor coordinator.

The roles and responsibilities of tutors including what is/is not allowable behavior should be clearly stated in the tutor manuals.

The manuals should clearly state that tutors may not write any portion of any assignment for a student.

The manuals should include a copy of applicable NCAA regulations concerning academic support and special benefit prohibitions, in addition to a summary of these regulations.

The Athletics Departments should continue to require all tutors to complete a structured orientation session prior to beginning to tutor. Ongoing training should be required with documented periodic assessment (written and oral) of each tutor's understanding of policies.

Additional guidelines for tutor activity should be established with the following policies:

Tutors should not be allowed to tutor for a course he/she is teaching even if in a different section than the student being tutored.

A tutor should not, under any circumstances, contact a course instructor. The student or the academic adviser must do this. A student's right to privacy must be upheld.

The committee supports continued prohibition against tutors typing anything for a student-athlete.

To the extent possible, tutors for student/athletes as well as all students should be graduate assistants established in the department whose specialty is needed. Tutors required to meet special needs are to be approved by the faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1.

Tutor payment scales should be established with attention to educational level, experience, subject matter, continuing education, supply and demand, and merit.

The Athletics Department should comply with the English Department requirements with regards to 103 and 104.

Grade Changes

The NCAA Faculty Representative needs the resources (qualified staff) and authority to fully monitor grade changes (ability to conduct an independent review of grade changes for grade changes that are used for athlete eligibility). This should include the review of individual grade change records and the periodic assessment of overall trends.

Learning Disability (LD) Program

There needs to be some institutional oversight of the implementation by the Athletic Department of the accommodations that have been approved for the LD student/athlete. The faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1 could conduct this institutional oversight. A regular audit of the SNP program should be implemented. This review should include a monitoring of how accommodations are being provided.

Handle the "at risk" and LD programs independently within the Athletics Department.

The work of the UT Athletics Accommodations Review Committee, chaired by Vice Provost, Mr. Phil Scheurer should continue. This committee provides valuable oversight of the program and is in a good position to identify and correct problems before they become widespread.

The review by the independent psychologist of student-athlete cases should also continue. This review makes it more likely that student-athletes with learning disabilities will be properly identified and that those students will receive suitable accommodations.

University-Wide Programs

Provide mandatory training for faculty on working with student with learning disabilities. Educate the faculty on what the legal requirements are and what accommodations are prescribed for specific disabilities.

Tutoring for students should be centrally coordinated and perhaps internet-based. Hilltopics should include accurate up-to-date information about the type of tutoring, eligibility and costs for all departments. Adequate resources should be allocated to insure that tutors are available in all subject areas.

Tutor payment should be scaled across campus with attention to educational level, experience, subject matter, continuing education, supply and demand and merit.

Peer tutoring programs should be encouraged and developed across campus.

Office of Disability Services needs additional staff, including a testing specialist for testing students in general and evaluating test results for student-athletes to better supervise the documentation process, the prescription of accommodations, and keep up with the increasing work load.

Tutor Program

1. Do athletes have different access to tutors than other students?
   
   
2. Are tutors held to a different standard of conduct within the Athletics Department from other department on campus?
   
   
3. Are tutors adequately trained and supervised within the Athletics Departments? And
   
   
4. How could the academic services for Student-Athletes be improved?

Several different methods were used to collect information on the tutoring program at the University of Tennessee. The committee requested information from both the men's and women's Athletic Departments' Offices of Student Life, a survey was sent to 31 "Tutorial Services" listed on pages 36 & 37 of Hilltopics, tutors were interviewed, and individual faculty and heads of tutoring operations on campus were interviewed. Both the Men's and Women's Athletic Departments provided copies of their tutoring manuals, information on tutors including the hourly pay scale and students tutored, and an opportunity to visit their academic facilities. Other Departments that had tutoring services as identified in Hilltopics were asked to provide information about how a student could obtain tutoring services from that department, how tutors were selected, trained and compensated, and how many students had utilized their service during the previous academic year. Follow-up calls were made to departments who did not respond to the mailed survey.

Interviews with tutors employed by the Athletics Departments and tutors in 3 other departments were conducted. The subcommittee interviewed small groups of tutors. A listing of all tutors that assisted student-athletes was provided from the Athletics Departments. The subcommittee selected tutors from this list as well as several from the English Writing Center. Tutors in other departments were interviewed by phone by one member of the subcommittee.

Interviews were also conducted with Linda Bensel-Meyers, Kristen Benson, Carmen Tegano, Kerry Howland, Judy Jackson, and Lois Privlosky.

The tutor manuals for both the men's and women's UT Athletic Departments (men and women) and those used in other SEC schools were reviewed.

Of the 31 offices listed responses were ultimately received from 30. Five of these departments had some type of training manual or written policy statement: the Educational Advancement Program (EAP), Minority Student Affairs (MSA), Writing Center (WC), philosophy, and mathematics. Four departments held a training session or sessions for tutors: EAP, MSA, WC, and mathematics. Three departments utilized students in their respective honor societies as volunteer peer tutors and the remaining either responded that they had no tutors or that they simply provided space on bulletin boards for graduate students to post information about their availability for tutoring. One respondent stated "I have no idea what I would tell someone who called here asking for a tutor."

Chemistry, the WC, EAP, MSA, and math reported that departmental or institutional funds paid for tutors. In all other departments the student requesting a tutor paid for that service individually.

Both Athletic Departments had written manuals, a mandatory orientation, and funds to pay tutors. Tutors included individuals with a variety of backgrounds including undergraduate students, graduate students, instructors, and individuals with college degrees working 5-10 hours per week as tutors, and nearly full time tutors.

While most departments stated that the student and tutors negotiated payment for tutorial services on an individual basis, those that did have payment scales provided the following data:

Minority Student Affairs

Undergraduate student $7.14/hr
graduate student $8.16/hr
advanced/special up to $10.00/hr

Writing Center

released time from teaching (all are GTAs or instructors)

Mathematics

7.61/hr

Chemistry

10.00/hr for a private tutor

Educational Advancement Program

Undergraduate student 6.76/hr
graduate student 7.28/hr

Athletic Department

range 7.00-16.55/hr (It should be noted that the individual paid at the highest rate has tutored multiple foreign languages for several years)

Tutors were asked to describe their tutoring experiences including the orientation/ training they received prior to beginning to tutor, any additional training, supervision, their concerns and their suggestions for improvement of tutoring within their department. Tutors described their role as "helper, mentor, interpreter, motivator, encourager, and teacher." All perceived themselves as having appropriate background and expertise in specific subjects. Most of them had applied for a position as a tutor and had provided transcripts or recommendations validating their subject expertise. Some were identified by faculty and asked if they were interested in applying for a tutor position.

Most Athletics Department tutors reported participating in an orientation prior to beginning their tutoring position. Exceptions were tutors who had been in their position for several years or those who were hired after the semester had begun. One tutor stated that she was unable to attend an orientation session, was allowed to begin tutoring, and had not gone to an orientation session. Athletics Department tutors reported that they had been given a written manual. Tutors in the MSA department described an orientation session and occasional training sessions during the term. They did not report receiving any written guidelines or manual.

Most tutors reported that they would not and had not ever contacted an instructor for a student they were tutoring. However, in both the Athletic Department and other departments some tutors reported that they had discussed a student's progress in a course with the faculty member teaching the course.

Tutors in both the Athletics Department and other departments were generally positive about their experiences. They described a sense of satisfaction when their tutee grasped a new concept, learned to solve a problem, or was able to clearly articulate a thought. Most described their tutees as ready and willing to work and appreciative of their help. Some expressed concern that on at least one occasion the tutee just seemed to be "putting in his/her time" or was unprepared for a session and that when a student was unprepared for the session or seemed uninterested in learning they found it difficult to motivate the student to work. Several tutors reported that when this occurred they had discussed the concern with a supervisor and that the supervisor resolved the situation.

Some tutors expressed concerns about their own comfort with knowing how much help was "too much." They commented that when a student was passive in the tutorial session there was greater risk of providing excessive assistance, requiring them to be more careful about the type and amount of assistance offered. Tutors in the Athletics Department described working with students with a wide range of ability and motivation. They were frustrated when a tutee did not seem interested or motivated and, in some cases, reported discomfort with their ability to manage such a situation.

The committee recommends ongoing training of tutors to increase their ability to handle difficult situations and to help them develop their abilities as tutors. Clear statements concerning level of and types of assistance that are appropriate and those that are unacceptable should be included in tutor orientation sessions and manuals. Several Athletics Department tutors described a noisy, cramped environment for study halls and tutoring. They noted that it was difficult to create a positive learning environment with the physical facility limitations. A visit to the facilities confirmed this assessment. The new Student Life Center scheduled to open later in 2000 should alleviate this concern.

They also noted that they rarely interacted with a supervisor but felt that they could get in touch with someone if needed.

Tutors' suggestions for improving the programs a UTK included:

Need for better facilities (both Athletics Department and others)

Need for financial support of tutoring (Non Athletics Department)

Need for increased student awareness of tutoring services available (non Athletics Department)

Uniform training of tutors

Increased commitment to academics in the men's Athletics Department

Need for small rooms equipped with computers and chalkboards for tutoring sessions

Need for a clearly structured environment for study halls and tutoring sessions (men's Athletics Department)

An expectation of academic success of athletes. People tend to rise to the level of expectations set for them.

Based on its study the subcommittee finds that all students at UTK have access to tutorial services in English (writing), mathematics, chemistry, and in most areas of study through the MSA dept. The Athletics Department has a more structured program of tutoring and study hall space for student/athletes. It appears that the standard of conduct for tutors is similar across campus. Tutors in the Athletics Department are given a manual and are required to participate in an orientation session. Currently, this is not a uniform expectation of tutors across campus.

It is apparent that the disagreement between the English Department and the Athletics Departments has negatively impacted the academic experience for the student-athlete. The issues causing these disagreements need to be addressed.

The manuals for tutors produced by both the men's and women's Athletics Departments are very good documents for training and a reference for tutors. Review of tutor manuals provided by the other SEC schools found the UTK manuals compared favorably. The committee recommends the following:

Recommendations to the Athletic Departments:

Finding: During the past several years there has been a high level of turnover in the supervisory personnel. In addition, tutoring currently takes place in multiple locations making supervision difficult. While the move to the new Athletic Student Life Center will resolve some concerns, the committee believes that the risk of potential problems will continue to exist and that greater involvement by University faculty would enhance the academic oversight of tutoring. The oversight needs to occur at two levels. There needs to be institutional (academic) as well as direct supervision of the tutors.

Recommendation 1:

A member of the UT faculty should be appointed to provide ongoing academic oversight of tutoring in the Athletics Department. This person should be directly involved in the orientation and training of tutors and should directly observe tutoring sessions on a regular basis. The committee suggests that this position be established under the Provost. However, the amount of time (1/2 to full) required for this position must be determined.

Recommendation 2:

A committee should be established that consists of

the men's and women's NCAA compliance coordinators,

The NCAA faculty representative,

The Athletic Department's Directors of Student Life,

A faculty representative from the Faculty Senate Athletics Committee, and

The faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1, who should serve as the committee chair.

This committee should meet on a periodic basis to review the tutoring system including any identified problems, the tutor manuals, and tutor training.

Recommendation 3:

All tutoring of Student-athletes, including study halls, but excluding other academic department's tutoring labs, should be conducted in the Student Life facility under direct supervision of a tutor coordinator.

Finding: Current training provided for tutors needs strengthening and the manuals used by tutors need to more clearly state the roles and responsibilities of tutors. A review of tutor manuals provided by the other SEC schools found the UT manuals compared favorably.

Recommendation 4:

The roles and responsibilities of tutors including what is/is not allowable behavior should be clearly stated in the tutor manuals.

Recommendation 5:

The manuals should clearly state that tutors may not write any portion of any assignment for a student.

Recommendation 6:

The manuals should include a copy of applicable NCAA regulations concerning academic support and special benefit prohibitions, in addition to a summary of these regulations.

Recommendation 7:

The Athletics Departments should continue to require all tutors to complete a structured orientation session prior to beginning to tutor. Ongoing training should be required with documented periodic assessment (written and oral) of each tutor's understanding of policies.

Recommendation 8:

Additional guidelines for tutor activity should be established with the following policies:

Tutors should not be allowed to tutor for a course he/she is teaching even if in a different section than the student being tutored.

A tutor should not, under any circumstances, contact a course instructor. The student or the academic adviser must do this. A student's right to privacy must be upheld.

The committee supports continued prohibition against tutors typing anything for a student-athlete.

Finding: Potential problems can be avoided through structured and appropriate screening and selection of tutors, and through an institutionally developed system for the compensation of tutors.

Recommendation 9:

To the extent possible, tutors for student/athletes as well as all students should be graduate assistants established in the department whose specialty is needed. Tutors required to meet special needs are to be approved by the faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1.

Recommendation 10:

Tutor payment scales should be established with attention to educational level, experience, subject matter, continuing education, supply and demand, and merit.

Finding: With regards to English 103 and 104, a problem exists between the English Department Writing Center and the Athletics Department.

Recommendation 11:

The Athletics Department should comply with the English Department requirements with regards to 103 and 104.

Grade Changes and Incompletes

We requested data from Campus Operations Officer Peters regarding grade change for the student body as a whole and comparison grade changes for athletes. The categories were:

Total grade change hours,

Total hours of I changed to a grade

Total hours of F changed to Grades A to D,

Other grade change hours, i.e.(from one grade to another).

In addition, the subcommittee reviewed the process used by the NCAA facultyrepresentative to evaluate grade changes for student-athletes. This review was conducted in Carl Asp's office and one file was reviewed in a subcommittee meeting.

However, in the process of inquiry we did encounter some facts that are worthy of note. Athletes have an established structure (Student Life) that councils, advises and is aware of the rules that govern incompletes and grade changes. It would not be unusual for the athlete who for reasons of scheduling, travel, injury, etc. might fall behind in their studies and at the same time be more aware of the avenues open to them regarding grades than the general student population. The subcommittee did not evaluate this aspect. However, if the analysis were to be carried further, two comparison groups should be separated out. The first group might include students who have large time commitments and travel schedules, such as cheerleaders, band members and theater group members. The second is students who have established institutional structures, which assist them in maintaining passing grades and making progress toward a degree, i.e. fraternities and the Black Culture Center. A comparison as to the use of incomplete might be conducted evaluating the use of I, GPA, and the three categories of students established above.

Another observation is that the NCAA Faculty Rep has very broad responsibility to monitor and investigate a diverse array of complaints or potential violations. This office is staffed with a half time faculty member and a few graduate students. While grade change information for student-athletes are automatically forwarded to the NCAA faculty representative, information required to examine the grade change are not automatically sent.

It is our opinion that adequate protection measures, safeguards and oversight are in place; therefore, grade changes are not an academic integrity concern. Faculty rights are protected, student rights are protected and NCAA rules are in place and monitored to ensure that undue pressures on faculty are not allowed and eligibility is not maintained by manipulating the grading system.

Finding: There is relatively little difference between the frequencies with which grades are changed for student-athletes and for students generally. The system currently in place adequately protects student and faculty rights and also reasonably ensures that a faculty member is not unduly pressured to change the grade of a student-athlete to maintain his/her eligibility or for other reasons. The system can be improved to assure that the NCAA Faculty representative can promptly review all grade changes affecting eligibility.

Recommendation 12:

The NCAA Faculty Representative needs the resources (qualified staff) and authority to fully monitor grade changes (ability to conduct an independent review of grade changes for grade changes that are used for athlete eligibility). This should include the review of individual grade change records and the periodic assessment of overall trends.

Review of Athletics Department Programs for Student-Athletes with Learning Disabilities

The subcommittee interviewed Lois Privlosky and Jan Howard. In addition, the subcommittee sat through meetings of the UT Athletics Accommodations Review Committee and the Academic Integrity Committee. There were several areas identified that require discussion. These areas include identifying students with learning disabilities and potential problem areas. While the subcommittee identifies potential problem areas, it is important to emphasize that the subcommittee did not identify problems existing.

ODS makes a presentation during Orientation encouraging all students that have been previously diagnosed with a learning disability to identify themselves to ODS and allow the staff to work with them on identifying specific accommodations that may increase their chances of academic success. Student-athletes with previously diagnosed learning disabilities are similarly encouraged by Athletics Department Office of Student Life staff to self-identify when they first arrive on campus. All students that have been previously diagnosed as learning disabled and wish to receive special accommodations must fill out some forms to register with the ODS. Academic advisors or course instructors, often only after serious academic problems develop, may refer students that have not been previously diagnosed. ODS checks the documentation for the learning disability for students that have been previously diagnosed. ODS provides for limited testing by ODS staff or by graduate students in the College of Education for students that have not been previously diagnosed. ODS must approve the documentation before a student is registered and eligible to receive special accommodations.

Ms. Lois Privlosky supervises the Athletics Department program for student-athletes with learning disabilities (Special Needs Program). Student-athletes that have been previously diagnosed as learning disabled are encouraged to register with ODS. The documentation on individual student-athletes is reviewed by ODS staff and reviewed by an independent (non-UT employee hired by Athletics) psychologist specializing in diagnosis of learning disabilities. Additional testing is conducted by the psychologist in cases where the documentation is questionable or where documentation was conducted more than 3 years prior to enrollment at UT. If the documentation is accepted, the psychologist recommends specific accommodations for the student-athlete. ODS reviews these listed accommodations for consistency with their overall program. Athletics provides the specific assistance and oversees where, when and how these accommodations are provided to the student. Federal law stipulates that UT must provide accommodations for learning disabilities but there is considerable leeway in terms of how the services are provided and which accommodations are acceptable for individual disabilities.

In cases where student-athletes have not been previously tested and Lois Privlosky sees signs of academic difficulties that suggest potential learning disabilities, student-athletes are referred to ODS and the psychologist for testing and evaluation. If these student-athletes are diagnosed as learning disabled, they are then registered with ODS and specific accommodations are prescribed as above. There currently are 35 student-athletes registered with learning disabilities. Of 19 student-athletes that were registered with learning disabilities in 1995-1996, 5 have graduated, 4 have pursued professional athletics without graduating to date, 7 dropped out of the athletic program, and 3 are still active student-athletes. We do not have comparable data for comparison with the student body at large.

Students with diagnosed learning disabilities are eligible to receive accommodations designed to address the specific disability and increase their chance of academic success. These accommodations are prescribed for specific courses and may include time and one half for taking exams, alternative testing environment (ODS testing center), reader, scribe, note takers, use of speller/grammar checker, use of calculator, foreign language substitution, and books on tape. UT (ODS) is required by federal law to provide these services for all students with learning disabilities registered with ODS. Tutors from the Educational Advancement Program are provided for students needing tutoring. Given the increasing number of students eligible for services, the ability of ODS to provide these services is being strained.

Student-athletes with learning disabilities are provided the same type of accommodations that are prescribed for students in general, as outlined above. The most apparent difference is in the quality of the services provided. Because the Athletics Department has a much larger budget and considerable investment in maintaining student-athlete eligibility, student-athletes appear to receive much higher quality assistance. For example, tutors and note-takers for student-athletes with learning disabilities are usually highly trained graduate students in the discipline of interest. In the case of students in general, tutors and note-takes are undergraduates that may or may not have even taken the course in question.

Below are several potential problem areas (described in bold face) that the committee identified along with a discussion of these potential problem areas.

1. Documentation for students that have been misdiagnosed prior to arrival at UT is accepted at UT and students receive inappropriate assistance. Because an independent psychologist reviews all student-athletes cases, the potential for this problem is very limited as long as the psychologist conducts a thorough evaluation of each individual case.
2. Tutors for learning disabled students are also tutors for regular students. Student-athletes that are not eligible may receive inappropriate assistance if tutors are not careful to distinguish between the different assistance allowable to these different types of students. One potential solution would be to have tutors that work exclusively with learning disabled students.
3. Accommodations that have been specified for a given course are provided for other courses. There was general agreement from ODS and Athletics that closer supervision of this potential problem needed to occur. Again, tutors have control over what type of assistance is provided and which courses receive such assistance.
4. Abuse of note-taking assistance is possible because student-athletes with learning disabilities can readily share notes with other student-athletes in the class. This potential problem exists for virtually all students (athlete or non-athlete alike) when note-taking accommodations are involved. Students must attend class to receive note-taking accommodations but one learning disabled student with note-taking accommodations could provide high-quality notes for virtually any other student. There was no indication of how widespread this problem might be among student-athletes or non-athletes.
5. Testing by graduate students in the College of Education for students that have not been previously diagnosed. Adequate supervision of this process is essential. An evaluation of the current oversight provided these graduate students is needed, as the perception among some faculty is that this oversight is inadequate.

There needs to be some institutional oversight of the implementation by the Athletic Department of the accommodations that have been approved for the LD student/athlete. The faculty member mentioned in recommendation 1 could conduct this institutional oversight. A regular audit of the SNP program should be implemented. This review should include a monitoring of how accommodations are being provided.

Handle the "at risk" and LD programs independently within the Athletics Department.

The work of the UT Athletics Accommodations Review Committee, chaired by Vice Provost, Mr. Phil Scheurer should continue. This committee provides valuable oversight of the program and is in a good position to identify and correct problems before they become widespread.

The review by the independent psychologist of student-athlete cases should also continue. This review makes it more likely that student-athletes with learning disabilities will be properly identified and that those students will receive suitable accommodations.

General Findings

Provide mandatory training for faculty on working with student with learning disabilities. Educate the faculty on what the legal requirements are and what accommodations are prescribed for specific disabilities.

Office of Disability Services needs additional staff, including a testing specialist for testing students in general and evaluating test results for student-athletes to better supervise the documentation process, the prescription of accommodations, and keep up with the increasing work load.

Tutoring for students should be centrally coordinated and perhaps internet-based. Hilltopics should include accurate up-to-date information about the type of tutoring, eligibility and costs for all departments. Adequate resources should be allocated to insure that tutors are available in all subject areas.

Tutor payment should be scaled across campus with attention to educational level, experience, subject matter, continuing education, supply and demand and merit.

Peer tutoring programs should be encouraged and developed across campus.

Future Analysis

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
KNOXVILLE

Office of the Provost and
Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
505 Andy Holt Tower
Knoxville 37996-0154
(423) 974-3265
FAX (423) 974-3536

February 10, 2000

MEMORANDUM

1. The total number of grade change hours, excluding I to F and NR (no report) to a grade of any sort;
2. The total hours of I (incomplete) later changed to grades A through D. Grades of I changed to F were excluded, as these happen automatically if the incomplete grade is not removed in a year;
3. Total hours of F changed to grades A through D; and
4. Other grade change hours, such as C changed to B, excluding changes from F, IW, and SI.

Chart 1 -- UT GPA DISTRIBUTION

Chart 2 -- GRADE CHANGE HOURS