Academic Progress Rate

Last updated

The Academic Progress Rate (APR) is a measure introduced by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the nonprofit association that 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]

National Collegiate Athletic Association American athletic organization

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is an organization that regulates student athletes from 1,268 North American institutions and conferences. It also organizes the athletic programs of many colleges and universities in the United States and Canada, and helps more than 480,000 college student-athletes who compete annually in college sports. The organization is headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana.

A nonprofit organization, also known as a non-business entity, not-for-profit organization, or nonprofit institution, is dedicated to furthering a particular social cause or advocating for a shared point of view. In economic terms, it is an organization that uses its surplus of the revenues to further achieve its ultimate objective, rather than distributing its income to the organization's shareholders, leaders, or members. Nonprofits are tax exempt or charitable, meaning they do not pay income tax on the money that they receive for their organization. They can operate in religious, scientific, research, or educational settings.

College higher education institution

A college is an educational institution or a constituent part of one. A college may be a degree-awarding tertiary educational institution, a part of a collegiate or federal university, an institution offering vocational education, or a secondary school.


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.


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 principal data collector was Thomas Paskus, the principal research scientist for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). [5] Originally, if a program's four-year average APR fell below 925, that would trigger sanctions like scholarship losses, and a four-year APR of 900 or lower triggered "historical penalties" like postseason bans. In 2011, the NCAA voted to raise the maximum APR that triggers penalties to 930. [6]


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 930 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. [7]


Teams that fail to achieve an APR score of 930 - 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. [8]

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. [8]


Teams that score below 930 and have a student-athlete who both failed academically and left school can lose scholarships (up to 10 percent of their scholarships each year) under the immediate penalty structure.

Teams with Academic Progress Rates below 900 face additional sanctions, increasing in severity for each consecutive year the team fails to meet the standard.

Year 1: a public warning letter for poor performance

Year 2: restrictions on scholarships and practice time

Year 3: loss of postseason competition for the team (such as a bowl game or the men's basketball tournament)

Year 4: restricted membership status for an institution. The school's entire athletics program is penalized and will not be considered a part of Division I. [9]

The first penalties under the APR system were scheduled to be announced in December 2005. Starting with the 2008–09 academic year, bans from postseason competition were added to the penalty structure. The most severe penalty available is a one-year suspension of NCAA membership, which has not yet been assessed as of 2010–11. [10]

Prior to 2010–11, only four teams had received postseason bans. The results of the NCAA's APR report for that year, which covered 2006–07 through 2009–10, saw eight teams receive that penalty—five in men's basketball and three in football. Most notably, Southern University became the first school ever to receive APR-related postseason bans in two sports. The highest-profile penalty in that year's cycle was handed down to defending NCAA men's basketball champion Connecticut. The Huskies lost two scholarships for the 2011–12 season due to APR violations. [10] UConn was barred from postseason play in 2012–13 due to APR penalties. [11]

For the 2014 football season, Idaho and UNLV received postseason bans due to low four-year APR averages. [12] However, UNLV submitted "updated" APR score to the NCAA raising the score needed for postseason eligibility. [13]


NCAA college presidents met in Indianapolis in August 2011 to discuss a reform on the APR because of the poor academic performance by student athletes. The NCAA Board of Directors, on Thursday August 11, voted to ban Division I athletic teams from postseason play if their four-year academic progress rate failed to meet 930. [14]

The new policy took effect in the 2012-13 academic year; however institutions will have a period of 3 years to align their APR with the new standard. The postseason restrictions for the next few years are as follows:

2012-13 postseason: 900 four-year average or 930 average over most recent two years

2013-14 postseason: 930 four-year average or 940 average over most recent two years

2015-16 postseason and beyond: 930 four-year average [15]

Currently, the APR benchmark for postseason play is 900 so this is a significant increase and could result in serious consequences for some institutions that fail to improve their APR.

Reform effects

On football

There are many questions regarding how the NCAA will enforce the new policy for football. The Bowl Championship Series is its own entity and decides the college football postseason, thus making them the governing body for college football. President Gary Ransdell said there is uncertainty on how the new standard relates to the BCS. "The BCS is an independently run enterprise, yet it involves NCAA member institutions," he said. "So does this 930 rule also determine eligibility for BCS games? I think that's yet to be ironed out." [14]

Some NCAA institutions participate in football leagues, other than the BCS, which are organized by the NCAA and these reforms would apply to. In the 2011-12 academic year there were 17 teams in the FBS league with APRs below 930 and 37 teams in the FCS league. If these programs do not find a way to improve their APR then they will suffer postseason bans. [15]

Under the new College Playoff system, tiebreaker procedures based on a school's Academic Progress Rate (APR) allow for the possibility of 5-7 teams to play in bowl games if not enough teams qualify to fill all 80 spots with at least a 6-6 record.

On men's basketball

The APR's flaws are highlighted in men's basketball. "Syracuse's Jim Boeheim suffered the two-scholarship hit last summer, and in doing so publicly upbraided the APR for taking into account the departures of Eric Devendorf, Jonny Flynn and Paul Harris for the NBA draft, all three of whom left campus to prepare for the NBA event without fulfilling their spring semester requirements." [16] Many college basketball players leave before they graduate, and the ones that leave in bad academic standing cause the APR to go down. This issue is seen throughout college basketball.

To exemplify this phenomenon for collegiate basketball, if the 930 postseason ban had been in effect for the 2011-12 season then 99 teams would have received postseason bans. [15]


The NCAA does adjust APR, on a student-by-student basis, in two circumstances. One exception that can be made, is for student-athletes who leave prior to graduation, while in good academic standing, to pursue a professional career. Another is for student-athletes who transfer to another school while meeting minimum academic requirements and student-athletes who return to graduate at a later date. [17] Compiling college athletes’ graduation rates stemmed partly from press coverage that 76 to 92 percent of professional athletes lacked college degrees and from revelations that some were functionally illiterate. [18] In the 2010–11 cycle, the NCAA granted nearly 700 APR adjustments in the latter category, out of a total of over 6,400 Division I teams. (The APR is calculated based only on scholarship players already, not walk-ons) Numerous other sources, from sports conferences to schools themselves, document much lower graduation rates for college football and men's basketball and baseball players than for general students. Compounding matters is that only about 57 percent of all college students complete a bachelor's degree in six years.

Graduation Success Rate

As part of this strategy, the NCAA strives “to ensure the academic commitment of student-athletes and to increase the likelihood that they will earn degrees.”17 Along these lines, in 2005 the NCAA formulated a tool called the Graduation Success Rate (GSR) for Division I schools.18 GSR basically removes athletes who leave an institution in good academic standing from the denominator and adds those who transfer in and eventually graduate to the sample. Thus, GSR recognizes that college athletes (based at least partly on their interests and abilities) may take a different path to graduation than other full-time students and in some aspects is an accurate yardstick. The latest single-year GSR for all NCAA Division I athletes (who began college in 2004) was 82 percent. GSR for Division I FBS football was 67 percent, for men's basketball 66 percent, for women's basketball 84 percent, and for baseball 72 percent. [18] [19]

APR compared to Graduation Standards

Federal Graduation Rate

Another indicator of the academic performance of student athletes is the Federal Graduation Rate, FGR, which is published by the university. In computing the FGR the only data that is relevant is whether the student athlete graduates within six years of enrolling in the institution. This differs from the APR because it makes no distinction of the purpose a student has for leaving and whether or not they leave a university in good academic standing. If a student leaves their enrolled university to pursue a professional athletic career this counts the same under the FGR as someone who leaves because they failed out of school; on the other hand, by the APR standards a student that leaves while still in good academic standing receives one point out of two which distinguishes them from someone that left because of academic failure. [20] With that in mind, FGR rates usually reflect a value lower than the APR at elite athletic institutions that consistently send athletes to the professional leagues prior to graduation.

Graduation Success Rate

The NCAA developed its Graduation Success Rate, GSR, in response to criticism that the FGR understates the academic success of athletes because the FGR method does not take into account two important factors in college athletics:

1. When student-athletes transfer from an institution before graduating and are in good academic standing (perhaps to transfer from an institution for more playing time or a different major).

2. Those student-athletes who transfer to an institution (e.g. from a community college or another 4-year college) and earn a degree.

The FGR treats transfers as nongraduates for the original institution the student-athlete attended, even if that student-athlete later graduates from another institution. Also, the FGR does not include that student-athlete in the graduation rates at the new institution where he/she does graduate. Therefore, once a student-athlete transfers to another school he/she is no longer recognized in the calculated graduation rate. The GSR takes into account both factors and gives credit to institutions for successful transfers, whether they are leaving or entering an institution.[ citation needed ]

Potential misinterpretations

While the numbers represented in the APR have a certain significance, there can be misrepresentations for people unfamiliar with what the APR is showing. For example, the APR only applies to students that receive athletic financial aid, which is by no means all varsity athletes at a university. [21] NCAA's 1,265 member colleges and universities report that they have more than 355,000 student-athletes playing each year. Approximately 36% of these NCAA student-athletes receive a share of the $1 billion earmarked for athletic scholarships. [22] Another common misuse of the data occurs when APR results are compared between universities. This is usually not a valid comparison unless it is viewed alongside the graduation rates for non athletes at the institution. For example, one institution may have an APR representing that only 50% of athletes are on track to graduate which seems like athletes are under performing at the university. However, if the graduation rate for non-athletes is also 50% then the low graduation rate for the athletes is not a student-athlete problem, but a university wide problem. [23] Furthermore, it is not always relevant to compare APR scores across universities because the academic rigors between universities differ. For example, at some high performing academic universities freshman struggle with eligibility because the workload is hard to deal with initially, but in the end, those students find academic success. [20]

Related Research Articles

Patriot League U.S. college athletic conference

The Patriot League is a collegiate athletic conference comprising private institutions of higher education and two United States service academies based in the Northeastern United States. Outside the Ivy League, it is among the most selective group of higher education institutions in NCAA Division I and has a very high student-athlete graduation rate for both the NCAA graduation success rate and the federal graduation rate.

National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics North American college athletics association

The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) is a college athletics association for small colleges and universities in North America. For the 2018–2019 season, it has 251 member institutions, of which two are in British Columbia, one in the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the rest in the conterminous United States. The NAIA, whose headquarters is in Kansas City, Missouri, sponsors 26 national championships. The CBS Sports Network, formerly called CSTV, serves as the national media outlet for the NAIA. In 2014, ESPNU began carrying the NAIA Football National Championship.

NCAA Division III division of the National Collegiate Athletic Association

Division III (D-III) is a division of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the United States. D-III consists of athletic programs at colleges and universities that choose not to offer athletic scholarships to their student-athletes.

College athletics in the United States

College athletics in the United States or college sports in the United States refers primarily to sports and athletic competition organized and funded by institutions of tertiary education.

An athletic scholarship is a form of scholarship to attend a college or university or a private high school awarded to an individual based predominantly on his or her ability to play in a sport. Athletic scholarships are common in the United States, but in many countries they are rare or non-existent.

Redshirt, in United States college athletics, is a delay or suspension of an athlete's participation to lengthen their period of eligibility. Typically, a student's athletic eligibility in a given sport is four seasons, aligning with the four years of academic classes typically required to earn a bachelor's degree at an American college or university. However, in a redshirt year, student athletes may attend classes at the college or university, practice with an athletic team, and "suit up" for play – but they may compete in only a limited number of games,. Using this mechanism, a student athlete has at most five academic years to use the four years of eligibility, thus becoming what is termed a fifth-year senior.

College recruiting

In college athletics in the United States, recruiting is the process in which college coaches add prospective student athletes to their roster each off-season. This process typically culminates in a coach extending an athletic scholarship offer to a player who is about to be a junior in high school or higher. There are instances, mostly at lower division universities, where no athletic scholarship can be awarded and where the player pays for tuition, housing, and textbook costs out of pocket or from financial aid. During this recruiting process, schools must comply with rules that define who may be involved in the recruiting process, when recruiting may occur and the conditions under which recruiting may be conducted. Recruiting rules seek, as much as possible, to control intrusions into the lives of prospective student-athletes. The NCAA defines recruiting as “any solicitation of prospective student-athletes or their parents by an institutional staff member or by a representative of the institution’s athletics interests for the purpose of securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment and ultimate participation in the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program."

The Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, often referred to simply as the Knight Commission, is a panel of members of the American academic, athletic and journalism communities, with an eye toward reform of college athletics, particularly in regard to emphasizing academic values and policies that ensure athletic programs operate within the educational missions of their universities.

Student athlete

A student athlete is a participant in an organized competitive sport sponsored by the educational institution in which the student is enrolled. Student-athletes are full-time students and athletes at the same time. Colleges offer athletic scholarships in many sports. Many student athletes receive scholarships to these institutions, but having a scholarship is not mandatory for a student athlete. In the United States, athletic scholarships are largely regulated—by either the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which sets minimum standards for both the individuals awarded the scholarships and for the institutions that grant them. Also students that are very talented may get scholarships for playing a particular sport. The term student-athlete was coined in 1964 by Walter Byers, the first-ever executive director of the NCAA, to counter attempts to require universities to pay workers' compensation.

Western Washington Vikings

The Western Washington Vikings represent Western Washington University in intercollegiate sports in the Great Northwest Athletic Conference of the NCAA Division II with the exception of the women's rowing team which is a member of the Northwest Collegiate Rowing Conference. WWU has been an official member of NCAA Division II since September 1998.

The Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns men's basketball program represents intercollegiate men's basketball at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. The school competes in the Sun Belt Conference in Division I of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and play home games at the Cajundome in Lafayette, Louisiana. Bob Marlin is in his eighth season as head coach.

In 2011, the University of Miami Hurricanes football and men's basketball programs were investigated for NCAA rules violations alleged to have taken place from 2002 to 2010, centering on improper benefits given by booster Nevin Shapiro, and reported by investigative reporters at Yahoo! Sports.

The 2014 SWAC Men's Basketball Tournament took place March 11–15 at the Toyota Center in Houston, Texas.

University of Minnesota basketball scandal

The University of Minnesota basketball scandal involved National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules violations, most notably academic dishonesty, committed by the University of Minnesota men's basketball program. The story broke the day before the 1999 NCAA Tournament, when the St. Paul Pioneer Press reported that Minnesota academic counseling office manager Jan Gangelhoff had done coursework for at least 20 Minnesota basketball players since 1993.

The 2015 Southwestern Athletic Conference Baseball Tournament was held at Wesley Barrow Stadium in New Orleans, Louisiana from May 13 through May 17. Texas Southern won their third conference title, and first since 2008, to earn the conference's automatic bid to the 2015 NCAA Division I Baseball Tournament.

2015 SWAC Mens Basketball Tournament

The 2015 SWAC Men's Basketball Tournament took place March 10–14 at the Toyota Center in Houston, Texas.

The Syracuse University athletics scandal involved violations of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules by the Syracuse University men's basketball and football programs.

The 2019 Missouri Tigers baseball team represented the University of Missouri in the 2019 NCAA Division I baseball season. The Tigers played their home games at Taylor Stadium.

The 2019 Missouri Tigers football team represents the University of Missouri in the 2019 NCAA Division I FBS football season. The Tigers play their home games at Faurot Field. They play as members of the Eastern Division of the Southeastern Conference. They are led by fourth-year head coach Barry Odom.


  1. "Academic Progress Rate". NCAA. Retrieved December 7, 2015.
  2. Ferris, Eric (2004). "Academic Fit of Student-Athletes: An Analysis of NCAA Division 1-A Graduation Rates". Research in Higher Education: 555–575. JSTOR   40197361.
  3. 1 2 Beland, Justin (September 2004). "NCAA Board Approves athletic Reforms". Academe. 90: 13.
  4. 1 2 "Behind the Blue Disk: Division I Academic Reform". NCAA. Retrieved 13 March 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  5. Paskus, Thomas. "An interesting career in psychological science: NCAA researcher". APA. Retrieved 13 March 2012.
  6. O'Neil, Dana (August 12, 2011). "Increase in academic cutline approved". ESPN. Retrieved May 19, 2015.
  7. "How is the Academic Progress Rate calculated?". NCAA. Retrieved 14 March 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  8. 1 2 "How is the Academic Progress Rate Calculated". NCAA. Retrieved 14 March 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  9. "APR Penalties List". NCAA. Retrieved 14 March 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  10. 1 2 "NCAA slaps UConn, Southern on APR". May 24, 2011. Retrieved May 25, 2011.
  11. "UConn loses final appeal". April 5, 2012. Retrieved May 6, 2012.
  12. Tom Fornelli (April 26, 2014). "Low APR scores cost Idaho its postseason eligibility". Retrieved April 28, 2014.
  13. Chip Patterson (June 26, 2014). "NCAA reconsiders UNLV APR ban, Rebels eligible for bow". Retrieved June 26, 2014.
  14. 1 2 Claybourn, Cole. "UPDATED: Ransdell weighs in on NCAA's APR reform WKU". WKUHERALD. Retrieved 27 March 2012.
  15. 1 2 3 Hosick, Michelle. "D1 Board adopts improvements in academic standards and student support". Archived from the original on 2013-12-28. Retrieved 2017-08-23.
  16. Brennan, Eamonn. "The Latest APR Figures Are Here". ESPN. Retrieved 17 April 2012.
  17. Hosick, Michelle Brutlag (May 14, 2014). "Student-athletes continue to achieve academically". NCAA. Retrieved April 21, 2015.
  18. 1 2 Southall, R. M. (2012). "Taking the measure of graduation rates in big-time college sports." Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 92(3), 18-20.
  19. "APR scorecards show improvement" (Press release). NCAA. May 24, 2011. Archived from the original on September 21, 2012. Retrieved May 25, 2011.
  20. 1 2 LaForge, Hodge (2011). "NCAA Academic Performance Metrics: Implications for Institutional Policy and Practice". Journal of Higher Education. 82: 217–235.
  21. LaForge, Larry; Janie Hodge (March 2011). "NCAA Academic Performance Metrics:Implications for Institutional Policy and Practice". Journal of Higher Education: 217–218.
  22. "Are There Really Athletic Scholarships Available?". Recruit- Me. Retrieved 18 April 2012.
  23. LaForge, Larry; Janie Hodge (March 2011). "NCAA Academic Performance Metrics:Implications for Institutional Policy and Practice". Journal of Higher Education: 227.