Due to the recent suspensions of three Wisconsin athletes, the UW-Madison Athletic Department is taking another look at the effectiveness of its student-athlete discipline policy.
Responding to calls for review from those within its ranks, especially from Walter Dickey, the chair of the Athletic Board, the Athletic Department began an inquiry into possible improvements to the appeals process.
We set up a work group to look at the policy to see if there are some things that can be done to improve it,\ said Vince Sweeney, the UW Athletic Department's spokesperson.
The Athletic Department instituted the Student-Athlete Discipline Policy in August 2003 and revamped it in June 2004. The policy says that upon discovering a student-athlete has been arrested or charged with a crime, the Athletic Department will indefinitely suspend that athlete from all sports activities.
""Competing at the intercollegiate level is not a right, rather, it's a privilege; so we're revoking a privilege based on misconduct,"" said Bruce Jones, the former chair of the UW-Madison Athletic Board.
If athletes decide to challenge their suspensions, they make appeals to a committee headed by the chair of the Athletic Board. After reviewing official reports and information provided by student-athletes, the committee can decide to either continue the suspension or modify it in some way.
""The modification can be that the person is eligible for practice and competition immediately, or they can sit out some practices, or they can sit out some competitions,"" Jones said.
He also noted the committee could reconsider the case if the Athletic Department receives any new information following its ruling.
UW-Madison law professor Walter Dickey, the leading critic of the policy, headed the committees that revealed the appeals of UW-Madison cross-country runner Bobby Lockhart and Badger football player Booker Stanley.
Dickey questions the logic of relying on student-athletes to provide information for the appeals process.
""We need to take responsibility for getting the facts and not simply leaving that for others to determine what we can find out and what we don't,"" Dickey said.
Dickey was also critical of the limitations on punishments available to the appeals committees.
""We're trying to be fair to the young person, and we're trying to have the consequences be appropriate for what the person did,"" he said. He suggested punishments such as mandatory community service time be available in addition to suspension.
\
