The National Collegiate Athletic Association, plays an important and valued role as the official regulating body of college sports and sponsor of major tournaments. But as gatekeeper of college athletics, it has taken on a policy of interference which has angered students, parents, and educators. PNS commentator Joe Nathan is a senior fellow at the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.

As the school year begins, parents and educators across the nation are battling an unexpected obstacle in the road to better schools. That barrier is the National Collegiate Athletic Association -- the NCAA -- which has set up itself up as a sort of un-elected "super school board."

The NCAA's astonishing rulings have hurt thousands of outstanding students. They have also frustrated educators trying to improve high schools.

How did the NCAA -- known for running college sports and the "Final Four" basketball tournament -- get in this position? Founded in 1906, the NCAA took in more than $247 million last year -- much of it from TV contracts -- revenue that depends on the NCAA retaining its prestige.

About ten years ago, the NCAA was embarrassed when several professional athletes announced that -- despite attending well-known universities -- they could barely read. Some revealed they were using part of their million dollar salaries to hire reading tutors.

Congress stepped in, threatening to act unless the NCAA took steps. So the NCAA stipulated minimum college entrance test scores and minimum grade point averages for any high school student wishing to participate in college sports or accept an athletic scholarship.

Raising standards is a worthy goal. But then the NCAA departed from concentrating on what students know and can do and decided to try to assess every English, social studies, math and science course offered by every one of the nation's high schools.

As a result, the NCAA has delayed or denied university athletic opportunities for class valedictorians, National Honor Society members, even a National Merit Scholar. For example:

• Amber Hofstad's fantastic test scores made her a National Merit Scholar. But the NCAA prevented her from running cross country at Michigan Tech because it questioned the value of a high school course she took.

• Dan Zien of suburban Milwaukee earned a "B" average and very high test scores. But the NCAA blocked his track scholarship at Indiana University because it questioned a single high school English course he took.

• The Air Force Academy accepted Chris Rohe, who earned a 3.97 grade point average and high test scores. But because the NCAA rejected one third of his required 10th grade English class, he was not allowed to play football during his freshman year.

• Rebecca Burt's mother drove hundreds of miles to pick her up at a Kansas university because the NCAA blocked her track scholarship. Although her grades and test scores were well above the minimum, the NCAA rejected her "tech-prep" chemistry class -- a class which attempts to relate principles of chemistry to the real world.

The NCAA has often rejected this kind of applied, hands-on class -- the sort researchers recommend. The National Association of State Boards of Education calls the NCAA "far behind the curve" in understanding research-based high school reforms.

For example, the NCAA rejected an Elk River, Minnesota course in which students write extensively and interview community members about how they use writing. The NCAA's three-sentence memo rejecting this course had three grammatical mistakes. David Flannery, superintendent of Elk River, calls the NCAA "the most arrogant, obstinate, frustrating group I've ever dealt with." He's not alone.

Ken Gunn, a high school principal in Walnut, California and immediate past president of that state's high school interscholastic organization, says "The NCAA has created a monster." Michael Bonnaci, principal at a suburban Pittsburgh high school, has spent months battling the NCAA over courses developed by a teacher who was named National Council of Social Studies 1997 Secondary Teacher of the Year.

Attorneys General in more than 20 states are encouraging the NCAA to change. But the NCAA continues to overrule recommendations from high schools and states. Recently four National Teachers of the Year, and more than 100 other school reform authorities from across the political spectrum wrote that the "NCAA's goals are worthy. But their methods are wretched."

Why is the NCAA doing these things? It accurately points out that not every high school course challenges students. But it has imposed a highly questionable set of standards -- rejecting, for example, any social studies class that spends more than 25% of its time studying current issues. Ironically, at the college level, the NCAA accepts any course offered so long as it counts toward a degree. As Vermont school counselor Bob Pascoe puts it, "the NCAA is confused. It should try to be rigorous. It has settled for being rigid."