TITLE IX PHILOSOPHY
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is a federal statute enacted on June 23rd, 1972. It was created to prohibit sex discrimination in education programs that receive Federal financial assistance. Every educational institution that receives Federal funds, from elementary schools to colleges and universities, is required to comply with Title IX. Relatively few private elementary, middle school, or high schools receive federal funding, but a large majority of colleges and universities, both private and public, receive funding. Title IX is an important federal civil rights act that guarantees equal treatment of males and females with regard to all educational programs and activities, including sports.
The legislation covers all academic activities, despite the popular belief that the legislation only impacts high school and collegiate athletic programs. The law states, “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 education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink wrote the Title IX law after facing adversity while trying to earn her college degrees at the University of Hawai’i, University of Nebraska, and the University of Chicago. When the law was enacted it was sponsored by Senator Birch Bayh and U.S. Representative Edith Green, and it was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. The implications of the law, especially in athletics, were not obvious until about three years later. The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR)is the primary agency charged with enforcing Title IX.
The “Three-Pronged Test” consists of three separate and distinct parts. All that is stipulated under Title IX is that an institution be in compliance with one part of the test. No one part of the test is the “true measure” of compliance.
· Part One is Substantial Proportionality. This part of the test is satisfied when participation opportunities for men and women are “substantially proportionate” to their respective undergraduate enrollments and seeks to answer the question “Is the male to female ratio of the athletes proportional with the male to female ratio of the student body?”. The first test has been described as a “mathematical safe harbor”. The school has to achieve proportionality in the number of individual athlete participation spots (not the number of teams) versus the numbers of males and females in the general student population.
· Part Two, History and Continuing Practice, is satisfied when an institution has a history and a continuing practice of program extension that is responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex. It answers the question, “does the institution have a continuing history of increasing opportunities for the underrepresented gender?”.
· Part Three, Effectively Accomodating Interests and Abilities, is satisfied when an institution is meeting the interests and abilities of its female students even where there are disproportionately fewer females than males participating in sports. Part Three would address the question, “are the interests and abilities of the underrepresented gender fully and effectively accommodated?”
Title IX as a concept is relatively simple, but the rules governing it are not, and the debate about this has caused controversy to continue to swirl around the issue on Title IX compliance. Most of the controversy regarding the law today centers around athletics. Institutions such as law schools and medical schools initially complied and opened their doors to men and women alike. The OCR, which is charged with enforcing Title IX, has received far more complaints regarding issues of sexual harassment in schools, unavailability of spots in academic courses, and different discipline based on gender than for athletics.
For non-compliance to Title IX, the penalty is withdrawal of federal funds. The huge caveat here though is, despite the fact that most estimates are that 80 to 90% of all educational institutions are not in compliance as it applies to athletics, withdrawal of federal funds has never been initiated. When the institution is out of compliance, the OCR gives them compliance based on a condition that they remedy identified problems. Every institution is required to have a Title IX Compliance Coordinator. Overall, the OCR’s enforcement efforts are widely viewed as inadequate. An example of what occurs when an institution does not comply with the first part of the test is that they are given the opportunity to demonstrate expansion of the underrepresented gender over the course of time or they are able to show that the athletic program fully met the interests and abilities of the underrepresented gender.