Student-Athlete GPA Report
Fall 2013
Our student-athletes had a better than average semester in the Fall: based on preliminary figures,
their mean semester GPA exceeded their mean cumulative GPA for the third semester in a row,
and though their mean semester GPA did not match their high score from the Fall of 2012, their
mean cumulative GPA is now at the highest level for the entire period for which we have reliable
data.
Here are the mean student-athlete GPAs for the last eight years:1
mean semester
GPA
2.71
mean cumulative
GPA
2.76
Spring 2006
2.77
2.76
Fall 2006
2.80
2.79
Spring 2007
2.84
2.82
Fall 2007
2.89
2.87
Spring 2008
2.88
2.88
Fall 2008
2.87
2.90
Spring 2009
2.86
2.87
Fall 2009
2.88
2.87
Spring 2010
2.78
2.85
Fall 2010
2.86
2.86
Spring 2011
2.92
2.89
Fall 2011
2.95
2.93
Spring 2012
2.92
2.95
Fall 2012
3.06
3.01
Spring 2013
3.02
3.01
3.0473
3.0424
semester
Fall 2005
Fall 2013
1
A note on methodology: The figures for Fall 2013 are based on grade lists prepared by Student-Athlete
Academic Services on January 15, 2014. They are preliminary because as of that date, the student-athletes
still had 77 credits of Incompletes (see below). Figures for earlier semesters are final, calculated after the
deadline for making up Incompletes, and thus differ slightly from those contained in the reports (like this
one) prepared immediately after the end of the semester. The averages, here and in the table of results by
team, were calculated by weighing each student equally. This is the method we have used in the past, and
we want to be able to compare this year’s results to those of previous years. It also provides the most
meaningful comparison between the students’ average semester GPA and their average cumulative GPA.
The resulting figures differ from those calculated by Student-Athlete Academic Services, who weigh each
credit equally. In their calculation of the cumulative GPA, a senior, with more than a hundred credits, thus
counts far more towards the average than a freshman with fewer than 30. The actual difference in the results between the two methods is typically not large.
2
For comparison, the mean semester GPA for UHM undergraduates in Spring 2013 was 2.97. (We
don’t yet have the undergraduate results for Fall 2013.)
All of the increase in the student-athletes’ semester GPA between Spring 2013 and Fall 2013 can
be attributed to the decline in the number of Fs that they recorded (see below), but the continued
increase in the cumulative GPA is evidence that the overall quality of our student-athletes continues to rise as the coaches recruit students who are better prepared for the academic challenges that
they will face at UHM.
There was, as usual, considerable variation by team. The following table lists the teams in descending order of their semester GPAs. The “F,” “W,” and “S” in the first column indicate the
sports that are most active in the Fall, Winter, and Spring. (Cheerleading, Cross-Country/Track,
the Golf teams, and Sailing are active year-round.) Boldface indicates the teams that had a higher
semester GPA than their own cumulative GPA – in other words, whose grades rose rather than
fell in Fall 2013. Those not in boldface either stayed at the same level or had a lower than average semester by the standard of their own previous grades.
S
Men’s Tennis
10
semester
GPA
3.60
S
Women’s Water Polo
22
3.44
3.32
Women’s Golf
9
3.34
3.26
W
Women’s Swimming and Diving
36
3.24
3.27
F
Women’s Soccer
28
3.19
3.19
Men’s Golf
11
3.18
2.96
S
Women’s Softball
24
3.18
3.17
W
Men’s Swimming and Diving
34
3.13
3.04
Women’s Cross Country/Track
48
3.10
3.10
S
Men’s Baseball
35
3.09
3.09
F
Women’s Volleyball
18
3.07
3.14
W
Women’s Basketball
14
3.04
3.13
S
Women’s Tennis
10
3.03
3.01
Sailing
27
2.92
2.91
W
Men’s Volleyball
20
2.91
2.77
W
Men’s Basketball
17
2.90
2.96
F
Men’s Football
110
2.84
2.90
Cheerleading
16
2.79
2.76
Women’s Sand Volleyball
14
2.78
2.80
ALL STUDENT-ATHLETES
503
3.0473
3.0424
sport
S
size
cumulative
GPA
3.45
Both Men’s and Women’s teams had a better than average semester. The Women’s mean semester GPA was 3.157, compared to their own cumulative GPA of 3.156. The Men had a mean semester GPA of 2.976 compared to their cumulative GPA of 2.970. The gap between the men’s
teams and the women’s teams decreased, from .316 in the Spring of 2013 to .181 in the Fall.
3
Percentage of Credits Passed
The rise in semester GPA from the Fall of 2013 was accompanied, and sufficiently accounted for,
by a decline in the number of Fs. Here are the numbers for the last four years, the period during
which we have tracking this data:
semester
pass rate
F09
S10
F10
S11
94.6%
92.27%
94.62%
94.59%
# of SAs
receiving
NC or F
54
73
68
53
F11
S12
F12
S13
96.07%
94.77%
96.16%
95.08%
F13
96.69%
# of NCs
and Fs
# of credits of
NC or F
72
107
87
84
211
325
263
260
54
55
34
40
62
79
48
60
185
245
144
182
42
50
147
One team had a 100% course completion rate, and three others can achieve 100% if its students
successfully complete all of the courses in which they have Incompletes. This table lists the
teams in descending order of percentage of credits passed and separates the number of credits of
NC or F from the number of credits of I. As we have found in the past, there is an observable
though not perfect correlation between a team’s pass rate and their average semester GPA.
sport
size
% of credits
passed
NC and F
credits
I
credits
S
Men’s Tennis
10
100%
0
0
F
Women’s Soccer
28
99.73%
1
0
S
Women’s Softball
24
98.84%
4
0
W
Women’s Swimming and Diving
36
98.62%
0
7
Women’s Golf
9
98.4%
0
2
S
Men’s Baseball
35
98.10%
7
3
S
Women’s Water Polo
22
97.97%
0
6
F
Women’s Volleyball
18
97.52%
6
0
W
Women’s Basketball
14
97.10%
3
3
Women’s Cross Country/Track
48
96.87%
11
11
Sailing
27
96.35%
14
0
Cheerleading
16
95.75%
9
0
W
Men’s Volleyball
20
95.59%
11
0
F
Men’s Football
110
94.92%
42
23
W
Men’s Swimming and Diving
34
94.67%
13
3
Women’s Sand Volleyball
14
94.38%
7
3
Men’s Golf
11
94.0%
3
6
4
sport
size
% of credits
passed
NC and F
credits
I
credits
S
Women’s Tennis
10
92.91%
10
0
W
Men’s Basketball
17
92.73%
6
10
ALL STUDENT-ATHLETES
503
96.69%
147
77
The 50 classes in which student-athletes received NCs or Fs are listed below, in order of course
number. Note that most of them are at the 100 level.
ENG 100
ENG 100
ENG 100
MATH 100
PSY 100
GG 101
GG 101
ICS 101B
SPAN 102
PHYL 103
PHYL 103
BIOL 107
BIOL 107L
HAWST 107
PHIL 110
MICR 130
CHEM 131
CHEM 131
MATH 140
ART 151
ART 151
CHEM 161L
CHEM 161
CHEM 161L
CHEM 162
CHEM 167L
KRS 170
KRS 170
KRS 170
BIOL 171L
ART 175
COM 201
SAM 201
SAM 201
HAWST 207
SOC 218
COMG 251
COMG 251
HIST 281
SPAN 303
WS 304
WS 315
ANTH 323
AMST 339
FAMR 350
AMST 360
POLS 375
COMG 380
COMG 380
WS 437
Scholarship vs. Non-Scholarship
The 336 scholarship athletes did better than the 169 non-scholarship athletes in the Fall, reversing
the trend of the previous three semesters. It is difficult to know what significance to attach to
these figures. We have also been tracking the relationship between scholarship and nonscholarship athletes by team, and every team has semesters in which the scholarship athletes do
better and semesters in which they do worse, in no discernible pattern.
Semester GPA
semester
Scholarship
Spring 2010
Fall 2010
2.856
2.892
Spring 2011
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
2.962
2.996
2.919
3.042
3.009
3.079
NonScholarship
2.695
2.862
2.866
2.906
2.948
3.062
3.047
2.997
In-season and out-of-season
It is usually not possible to establish any direct correlation between grade performance and playing season. In the Fall of 2013, however, none of the three Fall sports (Women’s Soccer, Women’s Volleyball, and Football) managed a semester GPA that was higher than their own cumulative GPA, while all but one of the Spring sports did. The results for the teams that compete in the
Winter (overlapping the two semesters) and year-round were mixed.
5
Freshmen and Transfers
We continue to track the semester GPAs for three separate groups for the teams that have posed
the greatest academic issues in the past:
 students who entered UHM as freshmen
 those who entered UHM as transfers and who were NCAA Qualifiers on graduating
from high school, and
 those who entered UHM as transfers and who were NCAA Non-Qualifiers.
In the past, we generally found that those who entered as freshmen did better than those who
transferred to UHM, and that among the transfers, those who were Qualifiers on leaving high
school did better than those who were Non-Qualifiers.
That pattern continues in both Men’s Basketball and Football, but since the Spring of 2011, the
transfer students in Baseball, both Qualifiers and Non-Qualifiers, have had higher GPAs than
those who entered as freshmen. Perhaps the most significant number, however, is the small number of current SAs who were Non-Qualifiers. For the past three semesters we have had no more
than 15, down from a high of 40 (35 in Football alone) in Spring 2010. The decrease represents
one part of the coaches’ successful effort to recruit academically better qualified student-athletes
to UHM, an effort that we hope will continue.
Entered as
Transfers:
Qualifiers
Entered as
Freshmen
team
Entered as
Transfers:
Non-qualifiers
N
sem. GPA
N
sem. GPA
N
sem. GPA
Baseball
17
2.98
12
3.23
6
3.13
Men’s Basketball
10
2.99
7
2.77
0
-
Football
65
2.96
33
2.77
9
2.32
THREE TEAMS COMBINED
92
2.97
52
2.88
15
2.64
Peter Nicholson
January 21, 2014