June 13, 2011

Collegiate Water Polo Association Remains on Top of NCAA Women's Water Polo APR Rankings

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. -- The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has released the latest women's water polo Division I Academic Progress Rate report with a familiar name on top of the rankings for the sixth consecutive season: the Collegiate Water Polo Association (CWPA).

The only water polo conference to better the NCAA average each year since the first APR rankings were released following the 2004-05 season, the Collegiate Water Polo Association has accounted for 16 of the 40 perfect scores (1000) since the rankings began.

Leading the way is Princeton University as the Tigers are the only team in the nation to record six consecutive perfect scores (1000) to rate as the nation's best in retention (100%) and graduation rate (100%). 

Brown University (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010), Bucknell University (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) and Harvard University (2010) also recorded perfect seasons as the CWPA ranks as the nation's best water polo conference in terms of graduation and retention rates, in addition to trailing only the Ivy League for all conferences (single or multi-sport) since the NCAA started tracking APR.

Institutions that are not defined as Division I institutions (Gannon University, Mercyhurst College, Salem International University, Slippery Rock University, Queens College, Connecticut College, Washington & Jefferson College, Pennsylvania State University-Behrend, Macalester College, Carthage College, Utica College, Wheaton College, Chatham University, Grove City College) are not factored in the report as they are either Division II or III programs by the NCAA's definition. 

Women's water polo, although sponsored by a number of Division I institiutions, is considered a non-divisional sport due to the lack of a unique NCAA Division II or III championship, and thus the program's that compete in the CWPA span Division I, II and III.

A measuring stick for the NCAA in determining academic succcess, the APR provides a real-time look at a team’s academic success each semester or quarter by tracking the academic progress of each student-athlete. The APR includes eligibility, retention, and graduation in the calculation and provides a clear picture of the academic culture in each sport.

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 points possible and then multiplied by one thousand to equal the team’s Academic Progress Rate score.

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.

Teams that score below 925 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 the NCAA Championship)
  • 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

The Division I Committee on Academic Performance continues to examine data produced by the Academic Progress Rate and has adjusted the calculation over the years in response. Changes have included exceptions for student-athletes in good academic standing who leave school early to pursue a professional career, student-athletes who transfer to another school while meeting minimum academic requirements and student-athletes who return to graduate at a later date.

Teams sometimes can avoid or delay penalties resulting from low Academic Progress Rate scores. In the spirit of fairness, the Committee on Academic Performance instituted an “improvement-plus” model, providing special consideration for teams that show meaningful improvement and succeed in meeting their school’s academic mission. Still, the NCAA believes no matter the quantity of resources available, what counts is how those resources are used. The model helps keep the Academic Progress Rate fair for a membership that has a wide diversity in academic missions and resources while holding all schools accountable for the academic achievement of their student-athletes.

The goal of the Academic Progress Rate and its penalty system is improvement, not punishment. When a school has APR challenges, institutions are encouraged (and, in some cases, required) to present an academic “get-well” plan to the NCAA. The national office staff works with the school to make sure the plan is appropriate for that school’s particular situation and can reasonably be expected to achieve the necessary improvement in an acceptable time frame. Institutions facing the most severe penalties have the opportunity to appeal to the Committee on Academic Performance.

A searchable APR database for all Division I sports, head coaches and institutions is available by clicking here.

 

Women's Water Polo NCAA Academic Progress Rate  
2004-05

Bucknell University
1000
Princeton University
1000
Harvard University
991
Brown University
990
Indiana University
982
CWPA Average
980
NCAA Average
973
University of Maryland
971
University of Michigan
971
George Washington University
958
Hartwick College
958



2005-06

Brown University
1000
Bucknell University
1000
Princeton University
1000
Harvard University
989
Indiana University
988
University of Maryland
986
CWPA Average
984
University of Michigan
980
George Washington University
964
NCAA Average
961
Hartwick College
950



2006-07

Brown University
1000
Bucknell University
1000
Princeton University
1000
Harvard University
991
University of Maryland
990
University of Michigan
984
CWPA Average
983
Indiana University
981
NCAA Average
967
George Washington University
963
Hartwick College
941



2007-08

Brown University
1000
Bucknell University
1000
Princeton University
1000
Harvard University
995
University of Michigan
988
CWPA Average
983
University of Maryland
981
Indiana University
976
NCAA Average
970
George Washington University
970
Hartwick College
939



2008-09

Brown University
1000
Princeton University
1000
University of Michigan
996
Harvard University
995
Bucknell University
983
CWPA Average
983
George Washington University
976
University of Maryland
976
NCAA Average
973
Indiana University
972
Hartwick College
952



2009-10

Brown University
1000
Harvard University
1000
Princeton University
1000
University of Michigan
996
George Washington University
988
CWPA Average
985
Bucknell University
983
NCAA Average
976
Indiana University
976
University of Maryland
970
Hartwick College
952

View: Mobile | Desktop