Title IX Impact on Collegiate Athletics

Title IX and its Impact on Collegiate Athletics

Among the more influential pieces of federal legislation to spring forth from the heady days of America's civil rights movements is Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments. This critical provision, officially found under Section 20 of the United States Code, states unequivocally that "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 20 U.S.C. Sections 1681-1688) and in essence paves the way for the inclusion of women into collegiate athletic programs. Originally enacted as an amendment to Title IX the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which delegitimized systemic discrimination on the basis of race, religion and national origin, the 1972 version sought to address the issue of rampant gender inequality afflicting academia and the professional realm.

An interesting historical footnote is that, although Title IX has been predominately applied to intercollegiate athletics, the original language of the statute never explicitly mentions sports. Nonetheless, the amendment to the Civil Rights Act has been successfully applied to the athletic programs of public universities based on their acceptance of federal financial assistance. Presidential directives issued by Richard Nixon in 1975 and Jimmy Carter in 1979 further clarified how Title IX would be implemented in regards to women's participation in college sports. The ramifications of Title IX's sweeping reforms to bastions of traditionalized discrimination like the locker room are evident in the continued progression towards accepted gender equality we see today.

Any discussion regarding the legacy of Title IX for women in college athletics must begin by acknowledging that its enactment in 1972 has compelled substantial advancements in securing of opportunities for female athletes. The simple fact that "within four years of its implementation, the number of female athletes in the United States increased by 600%, to include over two million participants" (Shook, 1996) is an astounding testament to both the transformative power of Title IX and the determination of those charged with enforcing its mandates. The mental, emotional and physical benefits derived from active participation in athletics, which had long been denied to women based purely on outmoded perceptions and outright bigotry, were now open for pursuit and the opportunity was quickly seized. Since the passing of Title IX and its institution within the fabric of American society, women have made a series of major advances in terms of securing professional parity and civil rights. While an increasingly modernized and interconnected culture has undoubtedly influenced the progress women have made in the last few generations, many experts believe the role played by Title IX should not be overlooked. Research conducted by Betsey Stevenson, who works as an economist at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, demonstrated that "increasing girls' sports participation had a direct effect on women's education and employment & #8230; (and) that the changes set in motion by Title IX explained about 20% of the increase in women's education and about 40% of the rise in employment for 25-to-34-year-old women" (Parker-Pope, 2010). Similar studies have only served to confirm that while Title IX is regarded ostensibly as a victory for women in athletics, its true effects on the nation's social fabric have yet to be adequately measured.

While most scientific and literary analysis of Title IX's impact on women and college athletics is confined to establishing its historical context, the legislation continually undergoes a process of improvement defined by critical challenge, judiciary affirmation and scholarly refinement. One ever present point of contention which is raised relentlessly by detractors of Title IX is the highly controversial three-pronged test which is used to measure a university's compliance. Originally formulated by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), a now-defunct sector of the federal government which published its Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Interpretation in 1979 to amend Title IX, the three-pronged test relies requires collegiate athletic programs to meet one of three conditions. When a university can "provide opportunities that are proportionate to the student enrollment, demonstrate continual expansion of sports opportunities for the under-represented gender" or achieve "full and effective accommodation of the interests and abilities of the under-represented gender" (Roberson, 2011) they are found to be in compliance with the major directives of Title IX. The ability and apparent willingness of major universities to utilize loopholes in the three-pronged test and manipulate the so-called proportionality rule has led to ongoing litigation. An example of this manipulation by college athletic programs is evident when schools seek to allot the equal opportunities assured to women by Title IX purely in mathematical terms. In some cases, scholarships have been awarded to an equal number of male and female athletes but only men have been given access to the preferred, high-profile programs like basketball. This preferential treatment does not violate the letter of the three-pronged test compliance law, but it most assuredly violates Title IX's inherent spirit of gender equality and legal precedent has been consistent in this regard.