1. chapter
8
Gender Equity

2. Chapter Objectives
After reading this chapter, you will know the
following:
• The various federal gender equity laws and
how they apply to sport
• The history of Title IX, how it has been
interpreted, and how it is applied today
• The definition of sexual harassment and
how it is regulated in sport
• The various types of employment
discrimination laws

3. Underrepresentation
• Women always have been and continue to
be underrepresented in athletics.
– 1971: 16,000 women in college athletics
– 2008: 9,101 women’s teams
– 2005-2006
• High school: 2,953,355 girls, 4,206,549 boys
• College: 168,583 women, 224,926 men
• Yet, there has been substantial growth in
women’s participation since the passage of
Title IX.

4. Title IX of the Educational
Amendments of 1972
• “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.”
• Title IX applies if any department in a school receives
federal funding, the law applies to the entire school
– In response to Grove City ruling, Congress passed the Civil
Rights Restoration Act of 1987
• Today, institutions receiving any form of federal
assistance must be in compliance with Title IX

5. Legal Issues:
Grove City College v. Bell
• 1984 case dealing with the application of
Title IX. One of the biggest setbacks for
women since passage in 1972.
• Court found that Title IX was applicable only
to those parts of the institution that
received federal funding; thus athletics
were excluded.

6. Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987
Legislation reversed the findings in Grove
City College and applied Title IX institution-
wide. Thus, if any part of an institution
received federal funding, the entire
institution was subject to the specifications
in Title IX.

7. Regulation and Enforcement
• Department of Education
– 1975 regulations focus on equal opportunity:
• Program areas (i.e., equipment, locker rooms)
• Effective accommodation of interests and abilities and
selection of sports for both genders
• Equivalency in financial aid
– 1979 Policy Interpretation designed to provide ways
for schools to measure whether they comply with Title
IX and the 1975 regulations
• Part 1: Financial assistance
• Part 2: Equality in program areas
• Part 3: Effective accommodation

8. The Three-Part Test
• Focus of much of Title IX litigation
• Prong 1
– Are participation opportunities for both sexes substantially
proportionate?
– This is a safe harbor if participation of underrepresented sex is
substantially proportionate to other sex. If so, then stop here
because compliance is determined; if not . . .
• Prong 2
– Can the institution show a history and continuing practice of
program expansion? If yes, stop here; if not . . .
• Prong 3
– Have the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex been
fully and effectively accommodated? (continued)

9. The Three-Part Test (continued)
• Do not need to meet each prong
• Any one prong of the three-part test, if met,
demonstrates compliance with Title IX

10. Cohen v. Brown University
• The university, needing to cut its budget,
eliminated university funding for men’s golf
and water polo and women’s gymnastics
and volleyball.
– Challenged the argument that women were
interested enough in sport opportunities to offer a
proportionate number of sport programs
– Regarded as a victory for women because the First
Circuit Court of Appeals took the position that Title
IX meant that equal representation for women in
sports had to be proportionate to the student body
population

11. 1996 Clarification
• Reiterated that three-part test is really three
individual ways to comply with Title IX
Prong 1: Substantial proportionality only an issue if
there are enough athletes to sustain a team
Prong 2: To meet this, school must continuously
expand opportunities in response to women’s
interests
Prong 3: Must effectively accommodate interests and
abilities of admitted and enrolled students

12. Separate Teams
• Schools may sponsor teams for members
of one sex
– if selection is based on athletic skill, or
– if sport is a contact sport.
• However, there is no contact sport
exception. Contact sports, even if
predominantly male, are still taken into
account under prong 1.

13. Cutting Teams
• Cutting men’s is allowed under prong 1 of
the three part test
– Done to bring number of male participants into
substantial proportionality with number of female
participants
– Not favored: 2003 OCR Further Clarification
(continued)

14. Cutting Teams (continued)
• Miami University Wrestling Club v. Miami
University (2002)
– 1997: 55% female students, 47% female student
athletes
– Men sued after university cut four men’s teams
– Court dismissed their complaint because members
of overrepresented sex (men) do not have a claim
under the three-part test

15. Cutting Women’s Teams
• Men from cut teams have never won a lawsuit
against a school
• Cutting of women’s teams is never allowed
because women tend to be the underrepresented
sex
• Existence of women’s team is evidence of interest
and ability
• Roberts v. Colorado State Board of Agriculture
(1993)
– In response to disproportionate numbers of women
participating, university cut women’s and men’s team
– Women sued
– Court ordered school to reinstate women’s team

16. Recent Guidance
• 2005 Additional Clarification
– Allows for Internet surveys to show interests and
abilities and meet third prong of three-part test
– Counts nonresponse as lack of interest, but school
must receive 85% response level to proceed

17. Disclosure of Information
• Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (1998)
– Requires all universities that receive federal student
aid and have athletic programs to disclose
information related to financial aid, athletic
revenues, and other resources
– Information available to the public at
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics

18. Employment Discrimination
• In 1972, 90% of head coaches of women’s
sports were women
• In 2008, that figure was 42.8%

19. Title VII
• Prohibits discrimination against any
employee on the basis of sex in
compensation and other benefits associated
with employment
• Plaintiff merely has to show some negative
job action (for example, termination) that was
taken on the basis of the employee’s sex

20. Equal Pay Act
• Prohibits discrimination in wages between
employees on the basis of sex for equal
work on jobs that require equal skill, effort,
and responsibility under similar working
conditions.
• Equal work: Two jobs do not have to
require identical skill, effort, and
responsibility; instead, the jobs must be
substantially equal except for the fact that
one employee is paid more even though he
performs what is basically the same job.

21. Implications of Risk Management
• Failure to comply with Title IX can be costly
to institution:
– Financial burdens
– Image of institution
– Satisfaction of participants
• Coaches and administrators
– Sexual harassment
– Lawsuits involving EPA and Title VII