Title IX Enforcement Continues the Cultural Revolution

It's been 41 years since the passage of Title IX—a lifetime in many eyes. Yet women still have not achieved parity as students, athletes, coaches or athletic directors. At the start of the next decade, what should Title IX's priorities be? Four panelists reflected on its past, present and future during a discussion at the National Association of Collegiate Women Athletic Directors (NACWAA) conference held in Kansas City MO in October 2012. On the panel were Dr. Ketra Armstrong, associate dean for graduate and faculty affairs and professor of sports management at the University of Michigan, and co-director of the Michigan Center for Sports Management. Others were Tim Hall, director of athletics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and Amy Wilson, instructor of education at Illinois College, who serves on NACWAA's Title IX and Advocacy committee. Dr. Karen Morrison, director of gender inclusion at the NCAA, is the primary spokesperson on Title IX, gender issues and emerging sports for women. Moderating was Anucha Browne Sanders, the NCAA's VP of women's basketball championships and former senior VP of marketing at the New York Knicks. “I wouldn't be standing here if it weren't for Title IX,” she said. Saunders won a $11.5 million sexual harassment lawsuit against Isiah Thomas, the New York Knicks’ president of basketball operations, and Madison Square Garden. Here we are—four decades later—celebrating the law that led to a cultural revolution and access to education and athletics, said Morrison. Before Title IX women were thought to be incapable of being educated. We've long since proven them wrong. From 7% in 1973, women now comprise 40 to 50% of doctors and lawyers. Over the years, Title IX has focused on how to grow access and provide leadership opportunities for women, while fighting to overcome the still-present myths. If anyone believes that myths about Title IX don't exist, a survey of some 1,000 coaches found that 82% had no training on how to implement Title IX. Some 60% of media also had no training on the rule. Yet because of Title IX, there are more women competing for Olympic medals and winning them. Every country has had at least one woman participating in the Olympics, even Saudi Arabia, whose representative was a student enrolled at Pepperdine University in California. What has the NCAA done to celebrate the anniversary? After the poor showing on knowledge about the topic by coaches and even athletic directors, the association funded a 44-minute documentary called “Sporting Chance: The Lasting Legacy of Title IX” that reviews the rule's history and impact. Schools use the DVD as a teaching tool. Other resources seek to change the culture. Think tanks work on violence prevention and research on the climate for senior women athletic administrators. Organizations such as the Women's Sports Foundation and the National Women's Law Center support women. NACWAA started in the late 1970s, an important group historically and an advocate for women in athletics. ESPNW has a Title IX project. A Title IX blog keeps the issue at the forefront. There's no denying that Title IX is political and a real roller coaster ride. Morrison knows she has to tread carefully. “I've been there at the NCAA for six years,” she said. “I have to be like Switzerland—neutral.” The NCAA's emphasis on neutrality means we need campus leaders and vocal supporters to continue the momentum. There was no Title IX enforcement or education during the Bush years. Under President Obama, there's been more enforcement by the Office for Civil Rights, which is demanding settlements for higher stakes than ever before to push enforcement of gender equity and end sexual violence against women. There's no denying the progress that came with Title IX. But where are we now in women's participation in sports, resource allocation and leadership positions as coaches and athletics directors? Wilson provided a brief recap of the status of women in athletics, based on a report of the 35-year longitudinal national survey by emerita professors Dr. R. Vivian Acosta and Dr. Linda Jean Carpenter, available on their web site. Since the 1970s, female participation in high school athletics has seen extraordinary growth, going from 7% in 1972 to 41% in 2010–2011. At the college level, women's participation has risen from 28% in 1981-1982 to 43% in 2010–2011. Over all NCAA divisions, 43% of athletes are female and 57% male. Women's participation is highest in Division I (46%); Division II is 40% and Division III is 41%. Divisions II and III have halted the growth of women's sports to increase the number of male sports offered to lure men to attend liberal arts colleges. Overall minority participation was 23% in 2000–2001. In Division I it's currently 32.4% compared to Division II at 27.2% and Division III at 16.2%. From 1988 to 2011, men's teams showed a net increase of 522 teams. Division I is the only one that records a net loss. In 2010-2011, there were 69 fewer women's teams than men's teams. The allocation of resources is a direct reflection of the priority schools show toward men's teams. Division I allots 60% of its budget toward male athletes and 40% to female athletes. Males in Division II receive 57% of the resources compared to 43% for female athletes. In Division III the numbers are similar: 58% to men, 42% to women. Football is the primary reason for much of the disparity. Division I schools with football programs spend $30,000 more per male athlete compared to those without football, which still spend $1,000 more on male athletes than on their female athletes. This gender disparity is carried over in staffing. Women are about 40% of coaches of women's teams, 20% of all athletic directors but 30% at Division III schools. Meanwhile, men are 51% of assistant coaches and 80% of head coaches and athletic directors, numbers that have held steady since the 1980s. According to Title IX, “an athletics program can be considered gender equitable if found to be fair and equitable of the underrepresented sex,” Wilson explained. While these disparities affect all women, they're especially harsh on women of color. Armstrong noted that systemic patterns of gender discrimination correspond to status and power, with a bias against people of color. Some 77% of female athletes are white. Minority women represent 33% of basketball players and 21% of athletes in track and field. Armstrong argues that we need to go beyond ethnicity, gender and color to see real diversity that's found in social class and environmental conditions. Here's why: Competing in sports costs money. For many, public transportation is their only way to get around. Players’ discretionary time is limited. Many minority students grow up with a single parent who holds multiple jobs to keep the family afloat. Students contribute to the family through chores. Their living conditions do not include a safe place for youth to play. The deck is stacked against them before they even think of college. Then there's the interaction of identity and diversity. It's acceptable for minority women to play certain sports such as tennis, swimming and gymnastics. Few minority women choose to participate in sports that are deemed unfeminine. Aspirations and expectations also affect women of color. They believe they must behave in a way to confirm their belonging or they don't “feel whole.” Before Tiger Woods hit the links, golf was seen as only “for white people.” At the coaching level, the situation isn't any better. In 1995, 86% of assistant coaches were white. Only 5% of the interns were black. Sports brings a double jeopardy for women of color; the gender model silences them. Systems operate at the confluence of race and gender. At the confluence lies the power. Still, gender equity has improved. There's more participation among women of color in athletics than before Title IX. Media coverage also has increased. There's now a cultural legitimacy to women's sports. Black women also have entered the ranks as high school football coaches, simply because they love to teach and love football. Three of Tim Hall's senior team members at the University of Missouri are women. He believes that fairness starts from the administration, generally with an edict from the top to hire more women. But Hall doesn't need an edict. When filling a position, he's intentional about hiring a woman for the assets he knows that she will bring to the table: Women use strategy: They're good listeners, they execute well and they're process-oriented. Women are compassionate relationship builders. Women know what other women want. When Hall and his wife toured the Parade of Homes, they discovered that the houses built by men were less practical for daily living. A woman built the one his wife liked best. Women are thorough. They stay to finish the task. Even when they hate it, they strive to make the job work, while men want to move on to new roles or up the career ladder, Hall's attitude toward women comes from his belief that everyone is somebody's daughter or son. Decisions are based on “What would I do if it were someone I cared about?” In allowing the women on his staff to see “around the corner,” Hall admits he's become a better leader. His success and that of the department is based on respecting others. What should be the priorities for Title IX for the next 40 years? We need more women in athletic leadership positions, in the media and as campus leaders. How do we hire, support and analyze progress? Groups like the NCAA and NACWAA can't do it alone. One way is to develop connections with faculty and campus staff. Assess where women are and plan for improvement. Hold people accountable. Engage in politics and teach about Title IX. Promote women through active engagement on your campus. An estimated 80% of schools fail to comply with Title IX. Schools must realize that Title IX is a contract between them and the federal government. And the feds are becoming impatient with non-compliers. Will the NCAA make women a priority and hold schools accountable? Should the NCAA deny access to championships to those who don't comply with Title IX? Morrison pointed out that the NCAA enforces the rules and advocates at various levels. But until we actually hold schools accountable, nothing will change. Armstrong added that it's not possible to legislate a person's conscience. “We once said ‘Unless you change things, we aren't going to play on Sunday,’” she said. Mobilization for change has to come from leaders at colleges and universities. We won't see it unless they want it—or until it affects the NCAA's bottom line. Armstrong: ketra@umich.edu Hall: halltw@umkc.edu or 816.235.1020 Wilson: amy.wilson@mail.ic.edu or 217.245.3892 Morrison: Kmorrison@ncaa.org or 317.917.6222