2004-2005
Dr. Christine H.B. Grant
Title IX
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 educational
program or activity receiving federal
financial assistance.
Title IX requirements
• Financial assistance
• Effective accommodation of students’
interests and abilities
• Benefits, opportunities and treatment
Benefits, opportunities and
treatment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Equipment and supplies
Scheduling of practice and competition
Travel and per diem
Opportunities for coaching and academic tutors
Assignment and compensation of coaches and
academic tutors
Locker room, practice and competitive facilities
Medical and training facilities and services
Housing and dining facilities and services
Publicity
Effective accommodation of
students’ interests and abilities
• Opportunities for males and females substantially
proportionate to their respective enrollments
• Where one sex has been underrepresented, a history and
continuing practice of program expansion responsive to the
developing interests and abilities of that sex.
• Where one sex is underrepresented and cannot show a
continuing practice of program expansion whether it can
be demonstrated that the interests and abilities of that sex
have been fully and effectively accommodated by that
present program.
History
• 1972 • passage of Title IX.
• 1974 • Javits Amendment: HEW must issue Title IX regulations. “…with
respect to intercollegiate athletic activities, reasonable provisions,
considering the nature of particular sports.”
• 1974 • Amendment to exempt revenue-producing sports from Title IX
rejected.
• 1975 • Bills to alter Title IX athletics coverage die in committee
• 1975 • HEW issues final regulations, reviewed by Congress, signed into
law with provisions banning sex discrimination and establishes 3-year time
frame to be compliant.
• 1975 • Congress reviews Title IX regulations and doesn’t disapprove.
• 1975 & 1977 • Senate refuses to act on bills to curtail Title IX
enforcement.
• 1979 • HEW issues final policy interpretations - Rather than relying on
presumption of compliance, final policy focuses on institution’s obligation
to equal opportunity and details factors to assess compliance.
• 1980 • DOE established, OCR given oversight responsibilities.
History
• 1984 • Grove City vs. Bell: only programs/activities receiving
direct Federal assistance held to Title IX.
• 1988 • Civil Rights Restoration Act: mandated all educational
institutions receiving federal aid be bound by Title IX.
• 1990 • Title IX investigational manual published.
• 1992 • Franklin vs. Gwinnett County Public Schools. Supreme
Court ruled unanimously that Title IX plaintiffs are eligible for
punitive damages when intentional action to avoid Title Ix
compliance is established.
• 1992 • Gender Equity Study.
• 1994 • Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA).
Equity in Athletics
Disclosure Act
•
•
•
•
•
Number of male/female participation slots
Total operating expenses for men’s and women’s sports
Number of male/female head coaches
Number of male/female assistants
Amount of athletics scholarship money allocated to
males/females
• Salaries for coaches
• Amount of recruiting dollars for men/women
High School Athletic Participation
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,666,917
Girls
Boys
3,960,517
2,806,998
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
294,015
0
1971
2002 National Federation of State High School Associations
2001-02
NCAA Championship Sports Participation
Women
Men
250000
206385
200000
175539
182836
183675
184732
186939
200030
207685
145873
125250
88206
92473
94922
97978
102994
208481
214186
209890
186607
150000
100000
199391
129289
146617
155698
153601
133445
107605
50000
0
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
(Provisional members included from 1995-96 to present.)
NCAA data
2000-01
2001-02
NCAA Football Team Growth
630
610
590
570
550
530
510
490
470
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
NCAA data
Trends in Men's Sports
Football
Wrestling
Gymnastics
640
600
560
520
480
440
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
NCAA data
NCAA Men's and Women's Gymnastics Team Decline
Men's Gymnastics
Women's Gymnastics
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
NCAA data
T HE NET OUTCOME OF MEN'S SPORTS
ADDED AND ELIMINATED
DURING 1978 - 1996 BY NCAA DIVISION
NCAA
Division
Number of
Sports Added
Number of Sports
Eliminated
Net
Outcome
I-A
22
113
-91
I-AA
68
129
-61
I-AAA
93
56
+37
II
344
286
+58
III
400
269
+131
Total
927
853
+74
Courtesy of Women’s Sports Foundation
T HE NET OUTCOME OF WOMEN'S SPORTS
General
Accounting
A
DDED AND
ELIMINATEDOffice
DURING 1978 - 1996 BY NCAA DIVISION
NCAA
Division
StudyNumber
on NCAA
&
NAIA men’s teams
of
Number of Sports
Net
Sports Added
Eliminated
Outcome
I-A
235
81
I-AA
283
90
I-AAA
161
37
II
653
201
452
III
907
172
735
# of men’s teams
1981-1982
9,113
154
1998-99
Difference
9,149
36 teams
193
124
General Accounting Office
Study on NCAA & NAIA men’s teams
1981-1982
1998-1999
Difference
# of men’s teams
9,113
9,149
+36 teams
# of male
student athletes
220,178
231,866
11,688
(+5%)
GAO 1999
NCAA all divisions
Men’s teams dropped and added 1988-2002
# Added teams
# Dropped teams
Net gain
1,938
1,877
+ 61 teams
NCAA 2003 data
Men’s teams dropped and
added 1988-2002
Division III
# Added
# Dropped
Net gain
1002
790
+ 212 teams
# Added
# Dropped
Net gain:
494
471
+23 teams
# Added
# Dropped
Net Loss
442
616
-174 teams
Division II
Division I
NCAA 2003 data
Summary: Losses/gains in
NCAA men’s teams
Division III
+212 teams
Division II
+23 teams
Division I-AAA
-31 teams
Division I-AA
-38 teams
Division I-A
-109 teams
NCAA 2003 data
NCAA men’s teams (all divisions):
greatest number lost 1988-2002
* Wrestling
Tennis
* Rifle
* Gymnastics
* Fencing
Swimming/diving
-99
-53
-33
-32
-23
-22
* Lost teams in all 3 divisions
NCAA 2003 data
NCAA and High School Female
Participation Levels
3,000,000
2,856,358
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
153,601
0
High School
2002-03
2003 National Federation of State H.S. Associations (for 2002-03)
NCAA Participation Report (for 2001-02)
NCAA
2001-02
Percentage of Women's Teams Coached by
Females
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
90% PLUS
58%
1972
Acosta & Carpenter, 2002
1978
54%
1984
47%
46%
44%
1990
2000
2002
Total Expenses In Men's and Women's Athletic Programs
Division I-A
12
10
Men
Women
Administration
10.9
9.54
6.984
8
Millions
8.262
7.882
6.158
5.917
6
4.308
3.9 4.6
4.691
4.222
3.118
4
2
1.5
0
0.502
0.799
1981
1985
7.7
7.354
1.805
1.806
1989
1993
3.74
2.291
0
1972
1995
1997
1999
2001
Daniel L. Fulks 2001
Nongender-specific items were reported as Administrative Expenses (no further definition was provided).
Men's & Women's Program (Sport) Expenses in
1993-2001
Men
Women
12
$10.90
$9.54
(millions of dollars)
10
$8.26
8
$7.35
$6.98
6
$4.60
$3.74
4
2
$3.12
$1.81
$2.29
0
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
Daniel L. Fulks - 2001
1999
Average Budget for Football and Men's
Basketball
Division I-A
$7
$6.17
$6
$5.26
Millions
$5
$4
$3
$2.39
$1.58
$2
$1
$1.97
Football
Men's Basketball
$0.62
$0
1985
1999
2001
Daniel L. Fulks, 2001
Average Expense Per Athlete in Division I-A
(in thousands)
Men
Women
40
35
30
25
27
24
23
22
20
15
34
31
13
14
15
1989
1993
1995
17
18
1997
1999
20
10
5
0
Daniel L. Fulks - 2001
2001
NOTE: In Divisions I-AA, I-AAA, II w/FB, II w/o FB, the current average expense per
athlete is the same for men and women or within $1,000 .
Daniel L. Fulks, 2001
Comparison of Gender Equity Survey
(92) and EADA (97, 02) Division IA
Participation
Scholarships
1992
Male
71%
72%
Female
29%
28%
1997
Male
66%
66%
2002
Female Male
34%
56%
34%
59%
Female
44%
41%
Op. Budget
80%
20%
79%
21%
71%
29%
Recruiting
84%
16%
75%
25%
70%
30%
Female undergraduate population in Division IA: 52%
From the Chronicle of Higher Education
Changes in operating expenses NCAA
gender equity survey results
Men
Women
Division I-A
1992
1997
1,049,000
2,429,000
263,000
663,000
Increase
1,380,000
400,000
Men
Women
Division II
1992
1997
190,470
177,500
73,300
91,500
Increase
-12,970
18,200
Men
Women
Division III
1992
1997
112,400
127,200
56,120
73,400
Increase
14,800
17,280
NCAA data
2001
Percentage of Institutions Reporting Profits and
Deficits
Excluding Institutional Support
(Total Program)
Profit
100%
50%
65%
35%
92%
8%
Deficit
93%
7%
95%
5%
94%
6%
0%
I-A
I-AA
I-AAA
Daniel L. Fulks - 2001
II w/ FB
II w/o FB
2001 Reported Deficits
Excluding Institutional Support
(Total Program)
I-A
I-AA
I-AAA
II w/ FB
II w/o FB
0
Millions of Dollars
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-1.4
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.1
-3.5
-4
-3.8
-3.6
Daniel L. Fulks - 2001
-1.2
Growing deficits in athletic programs
$0.00
I-A
-$0.50
-$1.00
I-AA
-$1.50
-$2.00
IAAA
-$2.50
-$3.00
-$3.50
-$4.00
1993
1999
2001
I-A
I-AA
1993
-$2.10
-$1.91
1999
-$3.30
-$2.69
2001
-$3.80
-$3.60
I-AAA
II with FB
II w/o FB
-$1.44
-$0.91
-$0.55
-$2.61
-$1.24
-$0.98
-$3.10
-$1.40
-$1.20
II
with
FB
II
w/o
FB
Daniel L. Fulks, 2001
Expenses in Football and Men's Basketball - Division I
Football
Men's Basketball
80%
72%
74%
17%
18%
55%
56%
1999
2001
70%
60%
50%
49%
10%
40%
30%
20%
39%
10%
0%
1985
Daniel L. Fulks, 2001
Average NCAA Division 1-A Men's Programs
Expenses
2001
60%
56%
50%
40%
30%
18%
20%
21%
5%
10%
0%
Football
Daniel L. Fulks, 2001
Basketball
Other Men's Sports
Unrelated
NCAA Gender equity report Women’s
percentages 2001-2002
Division
Undergrad
percent
D-I Ave.
percent
Participation
D-I Ave.
percent
Scholarship
D-I Ave.
percent
Recruiting
D-I Ave.
percent
Total Expense
D-I Ave.
percent
IA
52
53.5
43
44
41
44
30
33
30
34
IAA
55
42
43
35
69
34
IAAA
58
50
55
44
48
34
II
56
39
42
36
41
III
56
40
--
34
41
Average
54.5
From Gender Equity report 2001-2002
NCAA Gender equity report
Travel, equipment, uniforms
Division
I-A
I-AA
Men
67
61
Women
33
39
I-AAA
All D-I
II
III
54
64
58
58
46
36
42
42
NCAA Gender Equity report 2001-02
NCAA Gender equity report
Women’s coaching percentages
Division
Head coach
Salaries
Assistant
Salaries
I-A
I-AA
36 (-2%)
43
27
29
I-AAA
II
III
45
47
45
46
30
32
NCAA Gender Equity report 2001-02
Title IX Lawsuits
April 16, 1993
US Court of
Appeals
Cohen, et al
vs. Brown
University
Class action. Effective accommodation of interests/
abilities. Reinstated women’s gymnastics and
volleyball.
July 16, 1993
Settled
Sanders et al
vs. U. Texas at
Austin
Class action. Added softball, soccer, increased
walk-ons, and capped men.
July 19, 1993
Settled
Kiechal et al
vs. Auburn U
Class action followed by Title IX complaint. $140,000
to plaintiffs, started women’s varsity soccer with
$200,000 budget, field and scholarship timetable.
Oct. 21, 1993
Settled
California
NOW vs.
California
State
University
system
Class action. Timetable for progress. Opportunities
and aid within five percent and funding within 10
percent.
Commission on Opportunities
in Athletics 2002-3
IMPACT OF PROPOSED REVISIONS ON FEMALE ATHLETIC PARTICIPATION
Example assumes: (1) institution w ith 53% female enrollment, (2) no loss in opportunities for men and (3) illustrates low est
permissible number of female participants under Prong One
325
300
Number of Female Athletes
300
275
261(-39)
246(-54)
250
227(-73)
225
231(-69)
218(-82)
201(-99)
200
175
Proportionality
Standard
Females = 53%
Proportionality w /
Variance =+/- 3.5%
Range=7%
Females=49.5%
Proportionality w /
Variance = +/- 5%
Range=10%
Females=47%
50%F/50%M
Standard w /
Variance= +/- 3.5%
Range=7%
Females=46.5%
Proportionality w /
Variance= +/- 7%
Range=14%
Females=46%
Reg. Average H.S.
Participation (current
42%) + 3% Standard
Females= 45%
50-50% Standard
Variance= +/- 7%
Range=14%
Females=43%
Commission on Opportunities in Athletics, 2002-3
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Dec. 1999
8-part special: The Gender Gap
Day 1: More than 27 years after a federal law mandated that school athletic programs
for boys and girls be given comparable support, gender equity is still not the standard
in most Georgia high schools. Not even close.
Day 2: First-class sports amenities are not new to boys sports, thanks to booster clubs
that perpetuate inequities and continue to leave girls with second-class facilities.
Day 3: From coaches’ compensation to sports budgets, football programs get the lion’s
share of everything in high schools across Georgia.
Day 4: Participation in Florida high school athletics has risen sharply since the state
passed laws to ensure equality of sports opportunity.
Day 5: With college scholarships at stake, parents increasingly insist Georgia schools
address disparities in opportunities that girls receive.
Day 6: Oconee County High School has made strides since becoming Georgia’s first
high school with a Title IX complaint filed against it.
Day 7: Padding the participation numbers for girls, the Georgia High School
Association classifies competitive cheerleading as a sport, over the objections of
Title IX watchdogs.
Day 8: A bipartisan pair of legislators is preparing to introduce a bill that would give
Georgia power to monitor and enforce Title IX compliance in the state’s high
schools. Plus: Readers comment on the Gender Gap series and inequities in high
school sports in Georgia.
Georgia High School Sports
Boys
Girls
Salary supplements
75
25
Extended pay
supplements
95
5
Legislative grants
86
14
Executive Committee
of Georgia High
2495 men
5 women
School Association
From Georgia High Schools 1999
Georgia vs. Florida
Georgia
Florida
How many state Education department staff members are
assigned to gender equity in sports?
1
60
How many schools were out of compliance with gender
equity laws last year as determined by the state?
0
42
Is there a state law prohibiting gender discrimination in
schools?
No
Yes
Are there state-imposed penalties for failure to comply?
No
Yes
Are districts required to submit annual self-reviews of
gender equity in athletics?
No
Yes
Was an equity seminar conducted by the State Education
Department this year?
No
Yes
Male Athletes, 98-99
81,960
108,289
Female Athletes, 98-99
45,678
75,760
From Georgia High School Association, Florida and Georgia departments of education
Universities have the right to
reduce number of male athletes
Cal-State Bakersfield
• Preliminary injunction to keep wrestling in
Feb. 1999, Panel of U.S. Court of Appeals did not
uphold.
Illinois State
• Dropped men’s soccer and wrestling and added
women’s soccer. Panel of U.S. Court of Appeals
dismissed lawsuit.
Equal pay and/or wrongful
termination
June 23,
1993 Jury
decision
Sanya Tyler v.
Howard U
Sex discrimination lawsuit, first Title IX
case awarding monetary damage, $1.1
million.
Feb. 8, 1994
Jury
decision
James Huffman v.
California State
University System
1st amendment and breech of contract.
VB coach assisted players settle lawsuit,
awarded $1.35 million and undisclosed
amount of punitive damages.
Pending,
filed Aug. 5,
1993
Marianne Stanley v. Sex discrimination. Earned $70,000,
USC
seeks parity with men’s coach, seeking
$8 million and reinstatement.
Anti-Title IX Websites
•
•
•
•
•
Iowans against quotas (@iaq2000.org)
Americans against quotas (@aaq2000.org)
Independent women’s forum (@iwf.org)
National Coalition for athletic equity
Simply common sense
(scs@the_wrestling_mall.com)
• Citizens against quotas
Percent difference between female undergrads
and female athletes (Big Ten, Pac 10, Big XII)
Institution
47.00
43.07
-3.93
Northwestern
52.47
48.34
-4.13
Kansas
52.13
47.98
-4.15
Colorado
47.00
42.06
-4.94
UCLA
55.00
49.86
-5.14
%
undergrad
% athlete
Michigan
50.47
51.77
1.30
Purdue
41.63
42.10
0.47
Texas A&M
48.77
48.45
-0.32
Texas
50.96
45.80
-5.16
Oklahoma St.
48.17
47.00
-1.17
Texas Tech
46.34
40.95
-5.39
Michigan St.
53.72
52.41
-1.31
Arizona
52.68
46.93
-5.75
Minnesota
52.04
50.66
-1.38
Indiana
52.91
46.73
-6.18
California
53.02
45.84
-7.18
Kansas St.
47.49
46.06
-1.43
Missouri
52.24
43.73
-8.51
Penn St.
47.07
45.62
-1.45
Oklahoma
49.18
40.29
-8.89
Iowa St.
44.66
43.18
-1.48
Iowa
54.61
44.67
-9.94
USC
49.81
47.89
-1.92
Oregon State
46.12
35.32
-10.80
Wisconsin
53.27
51.03
-2.24
Arizona St.
52.15
40.57
-11.58
Washington
51.29
48.80
-2.49
Nebraska
47.08
34.66
-12.42
Oregon
53.39
40.30
-13.09
Baylor
57.79
40.10
-17.69
2001-02
Difference
Illinois
Chronicle of Higher Education
SEC numbers 2001-02
Institution
Undergrads
Athletes Difference
Mississippi
51.31
32.72
-18.59
Georgia
56.47
40.39
-16.08
LSU
52.66
37.97
-14.69
Alabama
52.77
38.35
-14.42
Kentucky
51.66
37.66
-14.00
South Carolina
54.27
44.17
-10.10
Arkansas
48.89
39.62
-9.27
Mississippi St.
45.72
36.58
-9.14
Florida
53.28
44.85
-8.43
Tennessee
51.69
45.60
-6.09
Auburn
47.99
42.11
-5.88
Vanderbilt
52.29
48.93
-3.36
Percentage difference between female
undergrads and female athletes 2001-02
1. 13 or 29 percent in compliance or within 3 percent
a. Big Ten – 6
b. Big 12 – 4
c. Pac 10 – 3
d. SEC – 0
2. 20 or 44 percent in compliance or within five % points
a. Big Ten – 9
b. Big 12 – 6
c. Pac 10 – 4
d. SEC – 1
3. 27 or 60 percent in compliance or within 7 % points
a. Big Ten – 10
b. Big 12 – 8
c. Pac 10 – 6
d. SEC – 3
4. 18 or 40 percent greater difference than 7 points
a. Big Ten – 1
b. Big 12 – 4
c. Pac 10 – 4
d. SEC – 9
Title IX websites
• http://bailiwick.lib.uiowa.edu/ge
• www.ncwge.org
Title IX athletic policies, Aug. 2002
• www.womenssportsfoundation.org
June 2003 Poll
By Wall Street Journal and NBC News
(from Chronicle of Higher Education, January 2003)
Approve
Disapprove
1. Approve/Disapprove of Title IX
68%
20%
2. “Cutting back on men’s
athletics to ensure equivalent
athletic opportunities for women”
66%
27%
3. Attitudes toward changing Title IX:
20% Strengthen the law
50% No changes to law
21% Weaken the law
i.e. 7 of 10 adults familiar with the law want Title IX strengthened or left
alone.
Title IX “does not require colleges to give the same amount of money to men’s
and women’s sports programs or to have equal numbers of male and female
athletes; it does require colleges to provide equitable resources and
opportunities in a non-discriminatory manner.”
The Bottom Line
NCAA Division I-A EADA Data 1999-2000
MEN
WOMEN
Participation
57
43
Scholarships
59
41
Operating budget
70
30
Recruiting budget
70
30
Female and college participation
High school: 2.9 million or 42 percent
College: 153,601 or 42 percent
Gender Equity
“Gender equity is an atmosphere and a reality where fair
distribution of overall athletic opportunity and resources
are proportionate to women and men and where no
student-athlete, coach or athletic administrator is
discriminated against in any way in the athletic program
on the basis of gender.”
“That is to say, an athletic program is gender equitable
when the men’s sports program would be pleased to
accept for its own the overall participation,
opportunities and resources currently allocated to the
women’s program and vice versa.”
NCAA Gender Equity Task Force