Good News and Bad News for Title IX

[BrklynLiberal]

March 31, 2005

By Katy Litwak, Communications Intern

Women and girls received both good news and bad news this month on Title IX, the 1972 federal law advancing equal educational and athletic opportunities for female students. The Supreme Court's recent 5-4 decision in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education marked a huge victory for Title IX. The Court ruled that individuals who protest sex discrimination are protected from retaliation when their schools punish them for speaking out or taking action. As for the bad news, the Department of Education issued a new guidance that significantly weakens Title IX, making it easier for a school to claim that it is in compliance with the law.
"Feminists are thrilled about this very big victory for Title IX," said NOW Membership Vice President Terry O'Neill. "But with the Bush administration doing whatever it can to undermine this law, it's never completely safe."

Supreme Court Rules for Women and Girls

On March 29 the Supreme Court ruled that Title IX's "private right of action" includes claims of retaliation against individuals who make complaints about sex discrimination.
Roderick Jackson, a public high school physical education teacher and girls' basketball coach, was fired from his coaching position after complaining that his team was not receiving equal funding and equal access to athletic equipment and facilities. After Jackson brought this complaint to his supervisors, he began receiving bad evaluations and was eventually removed from his coaching duties, resulting in a loss of part of his income.
<snip>

Bush Administration Undermines Equal Opportunity

The right wing has been after Title IX since its inception more than 30 years ago. In 2002 the Bush administration's Commission on Opportunity in Athletics made several recommendations that would have significantly damaged Title IX, but most of their suggestions were withdrawn amidst much public protest. Now the Department of Education is following up by implementing one of the remaining recommendations, which may seem benign, but will ultimately disadvantage women and girls.

On March 18, the Department of Education (DOE) released an "Additional Clarification" that greatly weakens Title IX. Under the law, federally-funded schools must provide equal educational opportunities to female students, including equal opportunities to play sports. The education department's regulations give schools a "safe harbor," allowing a school to be deemed in compliance with Title IX if it meets any one part of a three-part test. With the DOE's new policy guidance, schools will now find it much easier to comply, while at the same time restricting athletic opportunities for young women.
<snip>

more...

http://www.now.org/issues/title_ix/033105titleix.html

[The Doctor.]

1. Say... what is that 'three-part test'?

I'm for more fluid and flexible funding of curricula.

Title IX needs some revamping.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

2. Parts 2 and 3 are the problem.

Demanding that a school maintain a sports team if no-one wants to play on it strikes me as foolish, but allowing them to refrain from providing one just because the people who want to play on it aren't talented enough, or there is no-one else in the area worth playing against, is a very slippery slope, I think.

Students who want to take part in sports but aren't talented enough to do so generally are precisely the people who need most support.