Much heated discussion transpired among students at the Dec. 1, 2011, Student Government Association meeting because of legislation pertaining to priority registration being on the agenda.
The legislation was introduced by the SGA Academic Affairs Committee as a resolution, which stated that the SGA “does not support special group priority registration.”
Priority registration would allow a small group of students, in this case, athletes, to register for classes before the rest of their peers of similar completed class hours. Currently nine of 12 Ohio Valley Conference universities offer, or will offer, priority registration for student athletes.
The only three OVC universities not offering priority registration are Murray State University, Tennessee State University and UTM. The nine OVC universities that currently offer priority registration to its student athletes also include groups such as Honors Scholars, Veterans, ROTC, marching band, and disabled students.
Priority registration is no stranger to UTM. The issue was introduced about three years ago, but, at that time, the proposal included athletes, honor students and various student representatives. The proposal failed because of a lack of student support.
Priority registration was brought up at the Athletics Board meeting on Oct. 29 as a motion that the Athletics Board recommend to Chancellor Tom Rakes that student athletes be given the benefit of priority registration. The motion passed with a vote of 14 in favor and six opposed.
Because the current proposal came from the Athletics Board, priority registration only included student athletes. However, the Athletics Board supported priority registration for other groups of “university ambassadors”.
The proposal failed to obtain the needed votes to pass at the November Registration Committee meeting.Ā Although the proposal did not pass through the Registration Committee, the SGA wanted to introduce a resolution that acknowledged the opinion of the student body on the issue.
Several students showed up to the SGA meeting to show their support or opposition for priority registration.
Phil Dane, UTM athletics director, also made a presentation at the SGA meeting.
“To me, it gets back to an institutional pride thing. I think that ought to matter,” said Dane, who also explained how the National Collegiate Athletic Association, or NCAA, states in the NCAA certification guidelines that “priority registration is encouraged.”
Currently the NCAA requires all Division I Institutions to have an Academic Progress Rate, or APR, of 925 out of 1,000 (or 92.5 percent). This number is being increased to 930 out of 1,000. The APR is a point-based system that allots two points for every student athlete at an institution.
Each student athlete retains one point for retention, which is when that athlete returns the following year, as well as one point for eligibility/graduation, which is based upon that athlete being eligible to play. The multiyear rate is based off the institution’s past four years of APRs.
Each team sport is ranked separately, and, if a team falls below the required APR with a negative trend, then that team will be subject to penalties, which could include limiting the available scholarships offered to that particular team.
The next step for a team that fails to return to a positive APR would be losing its eligibility to participate in post-season competition. If that team still fails to meet the required APR, all of the athletic teams at that institution could be ineligible to compete in post-season competition.
The Athletics Department is encouraging priority registration primarily for the younger athletes. “We’re just trying to make sure that they get off to a good start their first year,” Dane said.
Riley Rich, a freshman Secondary Education major, said, “I feel that if athletes are given priority registration, it could create a snowball effect, and within a few short years it could cause discrimination against the small group of people who don’t participate in anything on campus.”
“The problem is not about recognizing that there is a problem with registration, but with what we should do about it. Priority registration could benefit many students on our campus, but we just need to determine who actually needs it,” said Jamie Arnett, a junior Political Science major.
Mary Clayton, a freshman Management and Psychology major, said, “Just because we aren’t gifted with a jersey out on the field, doesn’t mean we aren’t representing the university. When I get a job one day, I’ll be representing the university.”
Jenna Miller, a senior Political Science major, replied, “We do all represent the university in different ways. You probably had a choice in the job you took, and I did the same.
“I choose to represent the university by playing volleyball. If I couldn’t get in certain classes, I’d be graduating next December,” Miller added.
Miller, along with other athletes who were present at the meeting, explained how practice schedules were limited to afternoon and night hours, so athletes were limited to only being able to enroll in earlier class times. Because of the practice schedules, all athletes are encouraged to be completed with their classes by 2 p.m. each day.Athletes are also encouraged to enroll on Tuesday-Thursday and Monday-Wednesday classes, which would allow them to not have to miss class on the Friday “travel day.”
Many younger athletes can’t make it into those class times, so they are generally forced to miss class on travel days.
It was explained in the meeting that, too often, certain professors would not work with the athletes who miss for reasons relating to athletic events and competitions.
Grant Monroe, a senior Political Science major, said, “To benefit any one group is not what this university is for. It’s a degree-granting institution.
“The most fair way is to register with who has the most completed hours,” Monroe added.
Jo Dunavant, a senior Secondary Education major, said, “There are several misunderstandings when dealing with the priority registration issue, and there needs to be a final resolution to this issue as we move into 2012.
“I feel confident that this can be accomplished as both sides have shown courtesy and respect in the debates, and have kept the best interests of UTM at heart,” Dunavant continued.
Several students said it seemed that the biggest issue was the lack of certain classes that were offered, and they suggested that the university be encouraged to offer more classes at the popular times, especially with upper-division courses.
The SGA Academic Affairs Committee’s resolution, which was against priority registration, passed with 12 in favor and five against.
