 |
DyeStat Scholar
The Recruiting Game, Part 3
Title IX - Gender Equity
What do these things have to do with track and field scholarships?
by Donna Dye
Title IX is part of the Federal Education Amendments of 1972. All education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance must follow this law. Title IX states that:
"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."
Title IX covers state and local agencies that receive Department of Education (DOE) funds. These agencies include approximately 16,000 local school districts, 3,200 colleges and universities, and 5,000 for-profit schools as well as libraries and museums. Also included are vocational rehabilitation agencies and education agencies of 50 states, the District of Columbia, and territories and possessions of the United States.
Title IX affects more than athletics. It covers all programs and activities including but not limited to: admissions, recruitment, financial aid, academic programs, student treatment and services, counseling and guidance, discipline, classroom assignment, grading vocational education, recreation, physical education, athletics, housing and employment.
The DOE has an Office for Civil Rights, with 12 enforcement offices throughout the nation and a headquarters office in Washington, D.C. to enforce Title IX.
Since DyeStat is primarily concerned with athletics and track & field, we will stick to discussing Title IX in athletics.
The Purpose of Title IX: Equal Opportunity
Title IX was enacted to help level the field for both boys and girls. It was enacted to "allow all Americans-men and women-an equal opportunity to be their best." (DOE). As a Circuit Court of Appeals noted "interest and ability rarely develop in a vacuum; they evolve as a function of opportunity and experience." (DOE)
Title IX was passed in 1972. Since then girls and women have been are achieving on the playing field again and again. In the 1996 Summer Olympic Games women won a record 10 Olympic medals.
Sports have made a difference for girls. As of 1998 according to a DOE report, "80 percent of female managers of Fortune 500 companies have a sports background. Also, high school girls who participate in team sports are less likely to drop out of school, smoke, drink or become pregnant. It is no surprise, then that 87 percent of parents now accept the idea that sports are equally important for boys and girls."
However, as many know, achieving equal opportunity in sports is not easy. Budget constraints and traditions often play a significant role.
Implementing Title IX Is Not Easy
Title IX does not mandate colleges to eliminate men's teams or that men should lose opportunities so that women can gain. The purpose of Title IX is to provide opportunity to both men and women.
The problem with Title IX may not be Title IX itself but the way in which colleges choose to implement it..
A 1979 Policy Interpretation provides a three part test to assess whether a college is providing non-discriminatory equal opportunity for both sexes.
The Three-Part Test
- Are the opportunities for men and women about the same as their enrollment in the college? or
- When one sex has not been participating in college sports, is there a history and continuing practice of program expansion for that group that responds to the interest and ability? or
- When one sex has not been participating and there is no history of expansion, can it be documented that the present program has met the interests and abilities of that sex?
An institution can choose which of the three parts it wants to use to meet the requirements of Title IX. If an institution has met any part of the three-part test, it could be considered in compliance with Title IX. Note that this three-part test is one of the main factors and not the only one that is used to determine if an institution is meeting the requirements.
While the three-part test exists, it seems that only the first part of the test is used. Court rulings have said that Parts 2 and 3 are too vague. (We're trying to learn if anything is being done to improve Parts 2 and 3 so that these can be used to assess compliance. We'll keep you updated.)
There is some controversy around the first part of the test. At this time the basis of decisions in Part 1 is the number of students enrolled in the college vs. the number of students participating in sports. Some maintain that instead of looking at the total number of women enrolled, what should count is the number of students interested in participating in college sports during the recruitment period. In other words the number of graduating high school students interested in participating in college sports should be the basis of comparison. The reasoning behind this point of view is that the decision to participate in college sports is made prior to enrollment in a college not after the student enrolls.
So the reasoning continues, counting the number of high school students seeking to participate would be counting only those interested and would be a fairer way of approaching equal opportunity.
Balancing the Budget
When colleges are faced with an imbalance of the numbers, that is when women don't have the same number of opportunities including scholarships as the number of women enrolled in the college, colleges are expected to take action so that the numbers even out. However, when the budget doesn't support adding more opportunity, the college must make some changes that will satisfy both the opportunity issue and the budget. In some colleges that has meant dropping men's sports or reducing the number of participants and scholarships for men.
In sports as in other areas, there is the usual problem in balancing the budget: not enough money, regardless of Title IX. But the sports budget also has another problem: the importance and popularity level of the various sports. Football is a very popular sport. It is also a moneymaking sport for colleges from ticket sales, TV revenue and contributions of all sorts from alumni and others in the name of football. Basketball is probably next in line of popularity and moneymaking. Other sports don't generally create revenue and if they have a following it's not too large. Budgets and scholarship numbers are affected by this importance/popularity factor. We don't know an average budget for a football team but we know that football is expensive. So some say, it stands to reason to give priority to the moneymaking sports. As for scholarships, football has 85 scholarships while track and field has 18 for women and 12.6 for men.
Some argue that football should be taken out of the counting for Title IX since women don't participate and the statistics are therefore imbalanced.
Others argue that the football budget should be cut to prevent the elimination of teams and other sports. This argument supports perhaps less football budget and scholarships-just how many backups does football need for 22 positions?
And, if the Part 1 test was done by using the graduating high school students instead of total college enrollment, determining compliance could be fairer and more realistic.
Regardless of which argument is the best, there is a need to revisit implementation of Title IX in general and specifically to examine what constitutes compliance and how it should be measured.
An Editorial about Title IX
Some recent messages on the DyeStat message boards:
"Girls are just not as interested or dedicated to sports as boys are."
"It's just not as much fun to watch girls play."
While this can be argued many ways, it is important to recognize that interest and ability are developed through experience and custom; it's not just "natural" ability that has boys more interested in sports than girls. Boys and sports have gone together for a long time. Fathers have shared sports with their sons on the playing field and in the stadiums. Boy's sports have a long history in schools. As a result, many boys have an interest in sports. And, as a result of their interest, they have participated, practiced and developed their abilities. For their effort and developed ability, they have been rewarded with praise, recognition, scholarships and often jobs in professional sports from the field of play to the broadcaster's box or newspaper. So it's not surprising that boys have a serious interest and "passion" for sports.
My husband and I raised a boy and a girl; we tried to provide equal opportunity for both of them. Our children were raised around sports on the TV, radio and live. They were encouraged and supported to participate in sports.
Today we have two children competing at the college level. And, while they have different styles, they are both very interested and have a very competitive attitude about their sport. They have had the advantage of exposure, experience and positive reinforcement that has at least in part resulted in their interest and ability in sports.
Our daughter was involved in dance for several years before participating in track. When Maryland opened up pole vault for high school girls, she found her best college scholarship opportunity in track. We attribute some of her competitive spirit, interest and ability in all aspects of her life to having an equal opportunity to participate in sports. But while we are pleased about her development, we don't want any less opportunity for our son.
So we believe in Title IX but would like to see some change in the way it is implemented.
return to The Recruiting Game home page
