. 52. «Emma. HEM... _.. . _, .: 3%., .2 .., w. : Kidd. ..%\.H t fumes .w . z (x . u :4. . ‘1’! ‘ i r”: Tiflt t . «vie?! ‘ mmV KWRW3 #5 .‘Wv 3f ..|: N L3 mnfii Luv... _ N. , .. r. . #4-. . a “ 43$..3 5. , ‘. Rahal“: 41¢ . r »- A . , . V .t} 4 .. . .1... I . : .. , . .V \ . . 4 . .. . 1. . . 1 I ‘ . :1! I 9". . . . . .)P»..:u| xv (ll ‘ 2:! t. . . V . . ‘ .o- 5:03..-“ (a {I . g . : . ,. t ‘ . .. ‘ 34.11.). Jr.£ . D. : . . . , l . . . .. l. ,. lu.’ ». l . . $63.- {I u.‘ " i “by: D-. ._.. 1“ ”u: .‘b ( - n 'X fresmwnu ’2 LT f. . . . .1 xhfiqu 1ft, , . .11 VA: 49‘ M ABSTRACT THE DEVELOPMENT, APPLICATION, AND APPRAISAL OF A TECHNIQUE FOR THE SELF-EVALUATION OF AN INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETIC PROGRAM AS REQUIRED BY TITLE IX By Walter Raymond Schneider In September, 1975, the Department of Health, Educa- tion and Welfare's Office for Civil Rights issued a memorandum pertaining to athletic programs at educational institutions. The memorandum, sent to college and university presidents and leaders of other educational institutions, was entitled "Elimination of Sex Discrimination in Athletic Programs." Its purpose was to provide guidance with respect to the immediate responsibilities of an educational institution to guarantee equal Opportunity in the operation of both its athletic activities and its athletic scholarship programs. Each educational institution was required to complete a self- evaluation of its athletic policies and practices no later than July 21, 1976. The memorandum listed three immediate requirements: (1) determine if equal Opportunity existed in the policies and practices of the athletic program, (2) determine which sports should be offered by the institu- tion based upon the interests of both sexes, and (3) determine the relative abilities of the sexes to decide whether to offer single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. Walter Raymond Schneider This study was the development, application, and appraisal of a technique for the self-evaluation of the ath- letic program of Central Michigan University as mandated by the Department of Health. Education, and Welfare's memorandum of September. 1975. The degree to which the Central Michigan University Athletic Department was in compliance with the Title IX regulations was determined by administering a self-evaluation questionnaire to the head coaches and athletic area special- ists. The self-evaluation questionnaire contained the eleven specific areas. as required by the HEW memorandum, for a university's self-evaluation. Each of the eleven areas was divided into sub-areas to fully explore the various facets of each area. A three-member self-evaluation rating team, chosen from outside the athletic department. then examined each sub-area as it applied to each sport and assigned a discrimination rating to it. Each sport's area discrimination ratings resulted from averaging the respective sub-area discrimination ratings. The university's athletic department sub-area discrimination ratings were obtained by thoroughly examining the total program as applied to the respective sub- areas. and where applicable, by averaging the sub-area discrimi- nation ratings assigned to the individual sports. The athletic department's area discrimination ratings were obtained by averaging its sub-area discrimination ratings. The univer- sity's athletic department discrimination rating was the average of its area discrimination ratings. Walter Raymond Schneider The interests and abilities. as judged by the under- graduate students and faculty. were obtained from a simple random sampling of the undergraduate students, faculty mem- bers. and the entire physical education faculty. The questionnaire listed each of the present men's and women's sports offerings plus several additional sports which were of interest to them. The respondents were asked to indicate their interest for the sports to be offered at the inter- collegiate. club sport, and intramural levels. Each respon- dent was asked to check whether a men's team. a women's team. and/or a co-ed team should be offered for each sport and/or level checked. The Central Michigan Athletic Department Was judged to be not in compliance in the execution of the following policies and practices: (1) the number of varsity sports offered. (2) the total number of athletes served, (3) the awards program, (A) practice uniforms and equipment, (5) game uniforms and equipment, (6) prime-time practice opportunities, (7) the ratio of coaches to athletes, (8) extra compensation for duties performed outside the academic calendar. (9) the amount of released time allocated to coaches. (10) practice facilities, (11) sport brochures, (12) schedule cards, (13) programs. (14) media entertainment, and (15) the provision of athletic scholarships. In the interests survey, each of the present men's sport offerings were rated higher than any others, by the Walter Raymond Schneider respondents. Each of the present women's sport offerings were rated higher than any others. except softball. which received slightly more undergraduate student interest than field hockey. The relative abilities of the sexes. as judged by the undergraduate students and faculty members, favored single-sex teams by a wide margin. In addition, recommendations leading to equal opportunity in the Central Michigan University Athletic Department and an appraisal of the techniques developed for the study were presented. THE DEVELOPMENT. APPLICATION, AND APPRAISAL OF A TECHNIQUE FOR THE SELF-EVALUATION OF AN INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETIC PROGRAM AS REQUIRED BY TITLE IX BY Walter Raymond Schneider A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1976 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to thank the members of his dissertation committee, Dr. William Sweetland, Dr. John Fuzak, Dr. Nell Jackson, Dr. Joseph Kearney, and Dr. James Nelson, for their direction and support. Additional appreciation is given to Theodore Kjolhede, Dr. Fran Koenig, Dr. Raymond Kieft, and the many members of the Central Michigan University's faculty- staff for their assistance and cooperation in the deve10p- ment and application of the instruments used in this study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . Purposes of the Study . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . The Turning Point . . . . . . . . . . Examples of Sexism in Athletics During Early Seventies . . . . . . . . . . Women's athletic budgets compared to men's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The adequacy and accessibility of facilities and equipment . . . . . Competitive Opportunities for women athletes . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lack of qualified coaches for women athletes C O O O O O O O O O I O 0 Athletic scholarship Opportunities . Physiological Implications . . . . . . Anatomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Menstruation and pregnancy . . . . . Effects of strenuous activity . . . iii Page mmO-PWWNH IO 10 11 ll 12 12 12 14 Chapter Page Athletics and social acceptance . . . . . l5 Inferiority of women athletes . . . . . . 16 A Historical Review of Women's Athletics . . 18 1833-1890 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 1890-1900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 1900-1910 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1910-1930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1930-1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 1960-1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 1968-1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 1972-1974 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 The Implications of the First Draft of the Title IX Guidelines 0 I O O O O O I O O O 36 1974-1976 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Required First-Year Actions . . . . . . . . 46 Summary . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . 49 3. THE DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Sampling Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Analysis of the Data of the Study . . . . . 57 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 The Self-Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Hypothesis 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 iv Chapter Hypothesis 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . ._. . . . . . . . . . . . Hypothesis 3 . . . . . . . . . ... . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. RECOMMENDATIONS LEADING TO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY BASIC ASSUMPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . Area I, The Nature and Extent of Sports Programs Offered . . . . . . . . . . . Area II, The Provision of Equipment and supplies I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Area III, The Scheduling of Games and Practice Times . . . . . . . . . . . . Area V, The Nature and Extent of the Opportunities to Receive Coaching and Academic Tutoring ‘0 o o o o o c _0 Area VI, The Assignment and Compensation of Coaches and Tutors . . . . . . . . Area VII, The Provision of Locker Rooms, Practice, and Competitive Facilities . Area X, The Nature and Extent of Publicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Area XI, The Provision of Athletic Scholarships . . . . . . . . . . . . . Additional Recommendations . . . . . . . summary I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6. APPRAISAL OF THE TECHNIQUES DEVELOPED FOR TIE S TUDY I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Self-Evaluation Questionnaire . . . . Page 79 83 87 91 91 93 93 96 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 104 105 105 107 108 Chapter The Interests Questionnaire The Abilities Questionnaire Discussion . Discussion . Discussion . Summary . . . 7. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Purposes . . . Hypotheses . . Limitations . Design . . . . Results . . . Recommendations Leading to Appraisal of the Techniques Compliance Implications for Further Research . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . APPENDICES A. MEMORANDUM . B. INSTITUTIONAL SELF-EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE THE INTERESTS AND ABILITIES QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL SELF-EVALUATION RATING TEAM . THE SELF-EVALUATION RATING TEAM INSTITUTIONAL SELF-EVALUATION COMMITTEE REPORT . vi Page 110 110 111 111 111 112 114 115 115 116 117 119 120 121 122 124 A1 B1 C1 D1 El Fl LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and Extent of the Sports Programs Offered . . 62 2. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Equipment and Supplies . . . . . 64 3. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Scheduling of Games and Practice Time . . . . 65 4. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Travel and Per Diem Allowances . 66 5. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and Extent of the Opportunities to Receive Coaching and Academic Tutoring . . . . . . . 68 6. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Assignment and Compensation of Coaches and Tutors I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 69 7. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Locker Rooms, Practice, and Competitive Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . 71 8. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Medical and Training Facilities and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 9. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Housing and Dining Facilities and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 10. Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and EXtent Of PubliCi-ty I I I I I I I I I I I 74 11. Discrimination.Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Athletic Scholarships . . . . . 77 12. Area Discrimination Ratings . . . . . . . . . . 78 13. Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Undergraduate Students . 80 14. Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Faculty . . . . . . . . 81 vii Table Page 15. Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Physical Education Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 16. Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Undergraduate Students . 84 17. Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Faculty . . . . . . . . 85 18. Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Physical Education Faculty I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 86 19. Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a CO-ed Basis as Judged by the Undergraduate Students I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 88 20. Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a Co-ed Basis as Judged by the Faculty . . . . 89 21. Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a Co-ed Basis as Judged by the Physical Education Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9O viii Chapter 1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Need for the Study On July 21, 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 went into effect. The Act mandated that sex dis- crimination be eliminated in federally assisted education programs. While Title IX has significance for other less publicized, but important, issues including admissions, finan- cial aids, housing rules, student rules and regulations, health care and insurance benefits, student employment, textbooks and curriculum, single-sex courses, and women's studies programs; the provisions of Title IX which apply to competitive athlet- ics were the ones which caused extensive interest and contro- versy throughout the nation. (40 Fed. Reg., 1975)~ In September, 1975, at the direction of President Ford; Peter Holmes, Director of the Health, Education, and Welfare's Office for Civil Rights, issued a memorandum pertaining to athletic programs at educational institutions. This memoran- dum, sent to chief state school officers, superintendents of local educational agencies, and college and university pres- idents, was entitled "Elimination of Sex Discrimination in Athletic Programs." The purpose of the memorandum was to provide guidance with respect to the immediate responsibilities of an educational institution to guarantee equal Opportunity we. 1|- .a‘ 1 air in the operation of both its athletic activities and its athletic scholarship programs. Each educational institution was required to complete a self-evaluation of its athletic policies and practices no later than July 21, 1976. The memorandum addressed such key areas as the sc0pe of the required institutional self-evaluation, the adjustment period for compliance with the provisions in the regulation concern- ing athletics, self-evaluation steps that must be taken, co-ed versus single-sex teams, sources of athletic funds, athletic expenditures, athletic scholarships, and the admin- istrative structures of athletic departments (Appendix A). This study was the development, application, and appraisal of a technique for the self—evaluation of the athletic program of Central Michigan University as mandated by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's memo- randum of September, 1975. Purposes of the Study The purposes this study attempted to achieve were to: 1. Develop an instrument to evaluate the current policies and practices of the Central Michigan University Athletic Department to determine whether equal Opportunity existed in terms of the Title IX regulations. 2. Develop an instrument to determine the interests of both sexes as to which sports undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University preferred their athletic department to offer. 3. Develop an instrument to determine whether the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergrad- uate students and faculty members of Central Michigan Univer- sity, required single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. 4. Develop a plan, using the information gathered above, for the Central Michigan University Athletic Depart- ment, which complies with the Title IX regulations. 5. Appraise the techniques developed for the self- evaluation of this intercollegiate athletic program as required by Title IX. Hypotheses The hypotheses tested in this study were: 1. The Central Michigan University Athletic Depart- ment is in compliance with the Title IX regulations. 2. The interests of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University indicate more support for the present sport offerings of the athletic depart- ment than any other sport. 3. The relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by a majority of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University, favor single-sex teams . Definition of Terms 1. Single-sex teams--athletic teams consisting of students of the same sex. 2. Co-ed teams--ath1etic teams consisting of both men and women students. 3. Intramural sports--competition between students and/or teams from the same institution. 4. Club sports--competition between students and/or teams from one institution and those from another institution. Typically, club sports receive very little institutional funding, and have only minimal eligibility requirements. At Central Michigan University, the intramural department oversees this program. 5. Varsity sports--competition involving students and/or teams from one institution and those from another institution. Athletes are coached by university faculty members and/or employees and strict eligibility rules must be followed. The athletic director and associates supervise this program at Central Michigan University. 6. Men's present varsity sport offerings--the sports now sponsored by Central Michigan University: baseball, basketball, cross country, football, golf, gymnastics, swim- ming, tennis, track and field, and wrestling. 7. Women's present varsity sport offerings--the sports now sponsored by Central Michigan University: basket- ball, cross country, field hockey, golf, gymnastics, swimming, tennis, track and field, and volleyball. Limitations of the Study The following limitations must be considered when interpreting the results of the study: l. The study applied only to the Central Michigan University Athletic Department as it existed during the 1975-76 academic year. 2. The varsity head coaches, athletic director, associate athletic director, athletic business manager and facilities coordinator, sports information director, head trainer, and head equipment manager employed by Central Michigan University participated in the self—evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program. 3. In the self-evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program, men's indoor track was included in the sport of men's track. When comparing the men's and women's programs, men's cross country and track were rated together against women's cross country and track. Men's baseball was rated against women's field hockey, and men's wrestling was rated against women's volleyball. FOotball was included in the over-all ratings but because the men had one more offering, was not compared with a women's Offering. 4. In the self—evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program, no attempt was made to determine the degree of discrimination against the men which may have existed in some areas. 5. As required by the Department of Health, Educa- tion, and Welfare's memorandum, the student and faculty respondents to the interest and abilities questionnaires 0\ were expressing their personal interests and judgments in the selection of which sports to offer and whether to offer each sport as single-sex or co-ed. 6. To determine the interests and abilities of the sexes, a simple random sampling of the undergraduate students and faculty members (with the physical education faculty deleted), and the entire physical education faculty were asked to participate. Overview To place Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 in the proper perSpective, these questions are asked in Chapter 2. 1. To what degree did sex discrimination exist in athletic programs at that time? 2. Was there a physiological basis which warranted sexual discrimination and/or separation in athletic programs? 3. What historical and social patterns have occurred in the United States to cause the Department of Health, Edu- cation, and Welfare to adopt regulations which apply Title IX to athletic programs? In Chapter 3, the design for the study is presented. Population and sampling procedures of the study, construction and content of the instruments used in the study, and the methods of analyzing the data of the study are explained. In Chapter 4, the findings of the study are presented. In Chapter 5, recommendations leading to equal Oppor- tunity in the Central Michigan University athletic department are suggested. In Chapter 6, an appraisal of the techniques developed for the study is given. Chapter 2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY The Turning Point 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 educational program or activity receiving federal assistance. . . . (United States Code, 1972) The preceding paragraph from Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, signaled the start of a revolution in intercollegiate athletics. Initially, few peOple in athletics were aware of the far reaching implications of Title IX. However, in the fall of 1973, a draft of the Guidelines of Title IX of the Higher Education Amendments Act of 1972 was published. The section that startled the athletic community read thus: A Except as provided in this section, no person shall on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person, or otherwise be discriminated against in any athletic program or activity operated by a recipient (one who receives federal aid), and no recipient shall provide any such program or activity separately on such basis. (38 Fed. Reg., 1973) Thus, the first draft specifically mentioned athletics as an area in which individuals may not be discriminated against because of sex. Several questions come to mind upon reading the preceding paragraph: 1. To what degree did sex discrimination exist in athletic programs at that time? 8 2. Was there a physiological basis upon which to warrant sexual discrimination.and/or separation in athletic programs? 3. What historical and social patterns have occurred in the United States to cause the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to adOpt regulations which apply Title IX to athletic programs? Examples of Sexism in Athletics During the Early Seventies Margaret C. Dunkle (1974:15-19), a Research Associate for the Association of American Colleges' Project on the Status of Education of Women, reported that women's athletics during the early 1970's were suffering due to very little funding, limited access to facilities and equipment, a scarcity of competitive Opportunities, lack of qualified coaches, and the absence of athletic scholarship opportunities. Women's athletic budgets compared to men's. The literature of the early 1970's is full of comparisons of the size of women's and men's athletic budgets. The comparisons tend toward the sensational and are not always accurate, since often the men's figures included salaries, building mainte- nance, major equipment replacement and repair, in addition to general operations such as food, travel, game expenses, and uniforms: while the women's figures might represent only general Operations. 10 At Central Michigan University, during the 1972-73 year, the women's athletic program received $8,600 compared tc>$152,000 for the men's athletic program. In 1973-74, the vwamen's athletic program received $14,000 compared to $161,000 for the men's athletic program. (The 1972-73 and 1973-74 figures are for general operations only). While these figures show a great disparity between Central Michigan University's men's and women's budgets, the situation was far worse at the other Mid-American Conference universities. While the women's figure of $14,000 placed them fourth among the conference schools, the men's figure of $161,000 placed them last, by a sizeable margin, in the ten-member conference. (Theunissen, 1974) The adequacy and accessibility of facilities and equipment. Dunkle (1974:16) noted that generally women used facilities which were second rate. Often women were required to schedule facilities at odd hours such as early morning, late evening, or during mealtime. Equipment was often borrowed or left over from the men's athletic program. Invariably, says Dunkle, the men practiced in the newest facilities while women were "lucky" to have use of the old structures. Competitive opportunities for women athletes. Although growing in number during the early seventies, opportunities for women were much more limited than for men. In 1971-72 \‘A g-vn ; :2. (1) VA c... 'r. u... 11 only forty-eight thousand (less than one and one-half percent) of the three and one-quarter milliOn college women took part in.intercollegiate and club sports programs. (Kazmaier, l973:3) Lack of qualified coaches for women athletes. Dunkle, (1974:18) found that coaches of women athletes often were less qualified, lower paid, received a heavier teaching load, and often worked with a greater number of athletes than the men coaches. Athletic scholarship Opportunities. In 1973, the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) and the Division for Girls' and Women's Sport (DGWS) repealed their rules prohibiting athletic scholarships for women. They had previously contended that athletic scholarships or other financial assistance specifically designated for ath- letes might lead to a potential for abuses such as have plagued the men's programs for many years. (AIAW Handbook, 1973-74324) Probably the most sensational indictment of sexism in sport was by Sports_Illust;atgg magazine. In a three part series beginning on may 28, 1973, with an article entitled "Sport is Unfair to Women," and followed on June 4, 1973, with a cover banner, "Women are Getting a Raw Deal," and on June 11, 1973, "Women in Sport:" Bill Gilbert and Nancy Williamson exposed the problem of sexism to the general public. 12 Physiological Implications Anatomy. Klafs and Lyon explained the differences :hn physical structure of the male and female athlete and the extent to which these differences affect the athlete's performance. Their findings indicated the anatomical dif- ferences among the sexes generally favor the male over the female. The female matures at a faster rate than the male, and is frequently larger and stronger than her male counter- part until puberty is reached. Since the male experiences a longer, slower growing period, his body tends to become heavier, larger, and more rugged in structure. Not only do the longer and heavier bones add to the body weight, but the longer levers provide a decided mechanical advantage in throwing, hitting, and explosive types of events. However, because of her smaller body prOportions, the female enjoys advantages in balance, stability, and flexibility. Klafs and Lyon concluded that when the activity requires strength and power as the principle factors, the female athlete should compete only against those of her own sex. If the activity requires balance and dexterity, she can compete favorably with the Opposite sex. (Klafs and Lyon, 1973:36) Menstruation and pregnancy. Whether or not a female should participate in athletics during menstruation has received considerable attention for many years. Until recently medical Opinion held that it was not only unwise, 1‘. it \ 13 but also could be physiologically harmful. Recent research ahas shown that when the participant is healthy, training and competition do not materially affect the menarche (onset of menstruation) or the menstrual function itself. (Klafs and Lyon, 1973:53) William Heusner, a professor in the Human Energy Research Laboratory, the Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation at Michigan State University, discussed the effects of menstruation upon a woman's athletic performance. He feels that in general most female athletes are able to achieve their average performances at any time during their menstrual cycle. If any differences were noted, the poorest performances were found during the premenstrum and the first two days of the menstrual period. At that, only one female in three or four was affected. The question of poor performance during menstruation may have been settled by the champions themselves. Six gold medalists at the 1956 Olympics in Melbourne were women who were men- struating. (Heusner, 1965:6) According to Heusner, fewer complications during pregnancy were found.among athletes than among non-athletes. Female athletes tended to have shorter and easier labors than did non-athletes. Caesarean sections needed to be performed fifty percent less frequently in athletic women than in non-athletic women. These facts seem to justify maintaining physical activity during pregnancy, although it 14 would seem "obvious that competitive sports participation during known pregnancy is contraindicated." The athletes, however, do not always agree. In the 1956 Olympics in Melbourne, three of the female participants were pregnant, and a double gold medal winner in the Helsinki Olympics was nearly five months into her pregnancy. (Heusner, 1965:6) Dr. Evalyn S. Gendel (1967a:75l), Assistant Director, Maternal and Child Health Division, State Department of Health, Topeka, Kansas, stated similar results based upon her experi- ence and research. She studied groups of young women eighteen to twenty-three years old during a period of 1% to five years. Each member of the group had a history of chronic, severe low back ache following pregnancy. During the case study a common fact emerged: each of the women had participated in little or no physical exercise in elementary school and did not take any physical education classes in junior Or senior high school. Another significant feature of the study was the modification or relief of symptoms as the result of a slow, gradual conditioning program. Depending upon the efforts expended and the original condition of the subject, noticeable improvement took place in a three-to ten-month period. Effects of strenuous activity. Gendel (l967b:427) pointed out that physical exertion has been considered "un- ladylike" because of mistaken historical and cultural influ- ences. She suggests that since women suffer fewer illnesses 15 and disabilities, and live longer than men, their aptitudes for endurance may well be much higher than anyone previously thought. Concerning the effects of strenuous activity upon a girl's physique, Heusner stated that vigorous exercise is avoided by many girls and women who fear the deve10pment of unsightly, bulging muscles. This premise can be completely refuted by observing some outstanding girl and women athletes. Physical activity does, indeed, deveIOp femininity and grace. Masculinity in a female is due to inherent endocrinological and morphological factors of the individual female, not to physical activity. (Heusner, 1965:6) Clayton L. Thomas, Vice President of Medical Affairs, Tampax Incorporated, said no sport is too strenuous for the healthy woman. The female athlete need only be restricted according to her training and experience, just as is true of the men. While she may be injured in an athletic event, her organs are rather well protected. When her body receives a blow, the force transmitted to the internal organs is minor compared to that experienced by the surface of the body. (Thomas, 1971:39) Athletics and social acceptance. Klafs and Lyon Claimed that there is now substantial evidence available suPporting the contention that "a positive relationship exists between the mastery of motor performance skill and defirable personal and social adjustment." This implies that ~ 16 persons making better than average social adjustments and enjoying much social acceptance are those individuals who have deve10ped superior motor abilities. (Klafs and Lyon, 1973380) Inferiority of women athletes. Dr. Jack H. Wilmore, associate professor of physical education at the University of California at Davis and a member of the Board of Trustees of the American College of Sports Medicine, has been involved in a series of studies concerning women athletes during the last ten years. He listed several 1974 world records which show that women have not performed on a par with men. The men's lOO-yard dash time was 9.1 seconds; for women it was 10.0 seconds. The men's high jump record was 7'6"; the women's record was 6'3%". The lowest eighteen hole golf score for men was 55; the women's record was 62. (Wilmore, 1974:40) NO one can argue that these records show that the best women athletes were, in 1974, inferior to the best men athletes. However, the closeness of the women's records must come as a surprise to many peOple. There are thousands and thousands of men in the world today who consider them- selves to be in excellent physical condition and to be accom- plished athletes in their own rights who have never and will never be able to match the above records for women. Wilmore suggests that women have been inferior because they have learned that they should not be athletic--NOT the 17 reverse. The cultural restrictions against athletics for women has forced women to lead less active lives than most men” Women get neither the opportunity nor the encouragement to participate in athletics, especially after their early teens. Thus, lacking the training and experience of her male counterpart, the average female will naturally perform at a lower level than the average male. (Wilmore, 1974:41) Wilmore states that during the 1924 Olympics the men's 400-meter freestyle swimming winning time was sixteen percent faster than the women's. At the 1972 Olympics, the winning men's time was only 7.3 percent faster than the women's. Today's women are swimming faster than Johnny Weissmuller did in the 1924 Olympic games. "The source of the inferiority of the female athlete lies more in the realm of available Opportunities than in any physiological limita- tions." (Wilmore, 1974:83) A Dr. Tenley E. Albright, a Boston, Massachusetts surgeon and former Olympic figure skating gold medalist, researched the status of sports medicine to determine progress in finding physio-medical answers to the many questions con- cerning athletics for girls. She finds amusing the unfair- ness of worrying about a woman getting too much physical activity by participating in athletics, yet not worrying how hard a woman works keeping house, helping to run a farm, washing laundry in a cold stream, carrying water, protecting and caring for her children, and pioneering across the country. 18 As long as the physical activity is connected to her "role" in the family, there is no need for worry. Why then, should 'there be such a stigma against those women who participate in.sports? If a woman enjoys sport and in some way finds it fulfilling, participation in athletics is wonderful and healthful for her. (Albright, 1971:56) A Historical Review of Women's Athletics 1833-1890. Betty Spears from Wellesley College and the University of Massachusetts, a noted historian, indicated that physical education and athletics played a special role in the founding of women's colleges during the period from 1833 to 1890. Women had been denied the opportunity to attend college for two basic reasons, she said. First, women were considered to be mentally inferior to men. Second, it was felt that women were not physically strong enOugh to withstand the rigors of college level study and daily classes. The accepted life style of women was one of delicacy. This image was not an isolated one, as clergymen, physicians, journalists, and fashion designers all fostered the image. (Spears, 1974:27) The women of this Victorian period were thought of as delicate by design rather than by nature. They wore tightly laced corsets, bustles, hOOps, and yards of trailing skirts which prevented most, if not all, physical activity. Ladies were expected to remain indoors and embroider or paint on 19 glass. According to Spears' research, women accepted ill health and every month were indisposed by 'the vapors'. Sources showed that sixty-five percent of the women suffered from menstrual cramps, and assorted ills. Thus, for physio- logical reasons, over half of the women required an adjustment in the college program. Spears found reports that "over- study would give the girls brain fever": they would become weak and unable to have children. (Spears, 1974:27) Spears indicated that when women began to desire an education equal to that of men, their mental and physical capabilities had to be demonstrated. Courses in anatomy, physiology, and hygiene were taught to women by women, exercises were conducted regularly, and participation in out- door activity was required. (Spears, 1974:27) In 1865, Matthew Vassar planned a special school for the instruction of physical activities suitable for women. In 1875, Wellesley college was founded by Henry Durant who believed that women could perform mentally only if study were balanced with vig- orous physical activity. (Spears, 1974:28) In their book, A Brief History of Physical Education, Rice, Hutchinson, and Lee (1958:227) point out that women's athletics in the United States, exclusive of gymnastics, which dates back to 1859, began when tennis was accepted as a Sport at Mount Holyoke Female Seminary in 1875. Wellesley instituted crew (rowing) for women in 1880. 20 1890-1900. Prior to the 1880's, the accepted mode of dress, long full skirts and numerous petticoats, dictated a leisurely fashion of playing sports. In the middle and late 1880's, women began to wear divided skirts or bloomers and middy blouses, thus allowing for a much greated freedom of movement. (Van Dalen and Bennett, 1971:422) The invention of the safety bicycle with its two lower wheels and the addition of the drOp frame also enabled and encouraged women to partake in healthful outdoor physical activity. Women now enjoyed increased mobility. By 1880, women cyclists were wearing dresses without corsets, as well as blouse and skirt outfits. (Swanson, 1974:44-46) Basketball was enjoyed by women in the early 1890's, while track and field for women was introduced in 1896. In 1899, a Conference of Physical Training was held at Spring- field, Massachusetts, and a committee was appointed to inves- tigate the various rules modifications being used by institu- tions of higher education. Even then, as more and more girls and women flocked to sport, the desirability of organized competition was questioned. As participation, press coverage, and attendance increased, complaints were being heard that there existed a lack of 'wholesome leadership.‘ (Swanson, 1974:48) Margaret Coffey (1965:39) suggests at that time, "the first seed was planted for the ever-present controversy regarding the extent of sports competition for women." 21 1900-1910. According to Gerber (1974:144), American women first participated in the Olympic Games in the sport of golf during the year 1900. Women from other countries competed in tennis also at this time. During the period from 1900 to 1910 girls and women as well as boys and men became sport oriented. By 1910, sport had become a central focus in many college curriculums. Besides health, attributes such as bodily beauty and grace, social and professional success, pure enjoyment, and courage were goals to be derived from athletic endeavors. (Spears, 1974:36-38) 1910-1930. The women's athletic programs grew rap- idly both in number of participants and in scope. However, an increasingly large body of physical educators and laymen sought to gain control of women's competition in the United States. By 1917, the move to halt what were seen as abuses in women's athletics was in full swing. In 1917 the president of the American Physical Education Association (the forerunner of the present American Alliance for Health, Physical Educa- tion, and Recreation; AAHPER) appointed a Committee on Women's Athletics to set standards for activities for girls and women. The Athletic Conference of American College Women (ACACW), originating in 1917, opposed intercollegiate competition for women. The Women's Division of the National Amateur Athletic Federation, headed by Mrs. Herbert Hoover, started in 1923. Its purpose, too, was regulating athletic activities ;or women. (Swanson, 1974:48—49) 22 The three above groups favored play days and sport days as a substitute for women's intercollegiate athletics. Play days and sport days started on the west coast in 1926 and became very pOpular. (Lee, 1931:108) -The concept of the play day was to divide the girls from each school into several groups. The groups representing athletes from various schools then competed against each other. The object was to "play for play's sake" without rewards or desire for competi- tion. (Lockhart and Spears, 1972:438) The American Physical Education Association with its Committee on Women's Athletics, the ACACW, and the Women's Division of the National Amateur Athletic Federation, were extremely successful in their quest to eliminate and/or con- trol intercollegiate athletics for women. Mabel Lee (1931: 122) reported that in 1930 only twelve percent of the colleges still sponsored varsity competition, as compared to twenty- two percent in 1923. In the 1928 Olympics, women were allowed to partici- pate in the track and field competition for the first time. The fact that all eleven of the women entered in the 800- meter run competition collapsed (five during the race, five at the end of the race, and one in the dressing room) added credence to the idea that women were not capable of with- standing the rigors of athletic competition. (Coffey, 1965:41) In 1928, Ethel Perrin, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Women's Division of the National Amateur 23 Athletic Federation, and for ten years head of the Department of Physical Education of the Detroit Public Schools, discussed the inadvisability of women participating in the Olympics: Girls are not suited for the same athletic programs as boys. The biological difference between them cannot be ignored unless we are willing to sacrifice our school girls on the altar of an Olympic spectacle. Under pro- longed and intense physical strain, a girl goes to pieces nervously. She is 'through' mentally before she is de- pleted physically. With boys, doctors experienced in this problem of athletics maintain, the reverse is true. A boy may be physically so weak that he has not strength to 'smash a cream puff,‘ but he still has the 'will' to play. The fact that a girl's nervous resistance cannot hold out under intensive physical strain is nature's warning. A little more strain and she will be in danger both physically and nervously. (Perrin, 1928:10) In 1933. Agnes Wayman, President of the American Physical Education Association, echoed Miss Perrin: External stimuli such as cheering audiences, bands, lights, etc. cause a great response in girls and are apt to upset the endocrine balance. Under emotional stress a girl may easily overdo. There is widespread agreement that girls should not be exposed to extremes of fatigue or strain either emotional or physical. . . . In addition, custom and good taste should always influence in ques— tions of public display, costumes, publicity. (Loggia, 1973:64) 1930-1960. The National Section on Women's Athletics (NSWA) took over the promotion of women's athletics in 1932. The Women's Division of the National Amateur Athletic Feder- ation had previously become affiliated with the American Physical Education Association in 1931 and eventually merged with the NSWA in 1940. The Athletic Conference of American College Women continued its activities under a new name adopted in l933-—Athletic Federation of College Women. 24 (Van Dalen and Bennett, 1971:492) "In 1943, about sixteen percent of the colleges, mainly in the east, had varsity teams. Eighty-one percent had some form of extramural activity, largely as play days or by telegraph. The latter were especially pOpular in the West." (Scott, 1945:70-71) "World War II reopened industry to women and empha- sized the need for every girl and woman to be physically fit. Physical educators accepted this need as their responsibility, but an indoctrinated generation of professional leaders re- fused to accept inter-school sports as a logical vehicle for the task. Intramural Sports developed and flourished, but there still was no avenue open for the highly skilled girl to realize her potential within the educational framework." (Heusner, 1965:1) During the fifties, several changes occurred in the ruling bodies for women's athletics. "The National Section on Women's Athletics became the National Section for Girls' and Women's Sports (NSGWS) in 1953. This was changed to the Division for Girls and Women's Sports (DGWS) four years later." (Van Dalen and Bennett, 1971:553) The DGWS policy statement of 1958 reaffirmed the principles of sport days, play days, and telegraphic meets. DGWS recommended that participation in sports competition be provided for all women regardless of skill level. A well conducted sports program will provide for athletes of every skill level to benefit from the many desirable experiences 25 inherent in athletic activities. The most beneficial types of extramural competition are Sports days, play days, telegraphic meets, and events such as symposiums, jamborees, games, or matches. While intercollegiate or interscholastic levels of competitive activities may be included, they should be offered only if they do not conflict with intramural and extramural programs. The DGWS statement also pointed out that women could take advantage of opportunities to compete in sports sponsored by non-school agencies. (DGWS, 1958:46-51) "The Athletic Federation of College Women broadened its title to the Athletic and Recreation Federation of Col- lege Women (ARFCW) in 1959. It made a major move three years later when it affiliated with the DGWS and opened a permanent office at AAHPER headquarters with a consultant in charge." (Van Dalen and Bennett, 1971:553) 1960-1968. In the 1960 Olympics in Rome an American woman won three gold medals in track and field. When Wilma Rudolph won three gold medals, Americans were shocked, to say the least. As a very attractive woman, she definitely did not fit the image Americans had of the Russian Amazons. Everyone knew that the training necessary to produce an Olympic gold medal winner would create unsightly muscles. Wilma Rudolph was living proof to dispel this long-held Stereotype. During the sixties, television discovered women's athletics and the number of televised women's events began to grow slowly. (Swanson, 1974:51-52) 26 The amazing performance of Wilma Rudolph, the out— standing accomplishments of the entire women's track and swimming teams, coupled with the increased media coverage-- especially television--stimulated tremendous growth in women's athletics. The 1964 Olympics saw a forty-two percent increase from 1960 in the number of American women participating. (Gerber, 1974:45) This period saw other positive developments which were to lead to greater female participation as athletes and marked the beginning of female participation as representatives in the Olympic structure. A Women's Board under the auspices of the United States Olympic Development Committee (USODC) was formed in 1961. At this time the AAHPER, which held one seat on the United States Olympic Committee (USOC), recom- mended, and received approval, that representatives of DGWS be included on the Sports Committees concerned with women's activities. (Gerber, 1974:165) Attitudes toward women competing in athletic contests were changing rapidly. In an effort to get in tune with the times, the 1963 DGWS "Statement of Policies. . ." pointed out that it is desirable for colleges and universities to provide Opportunities for highly skilled women athletes beyond the level of the intramural program. (AIAW, 1973:24) The decade of the sixties ushered in changes and increased awareness concerning women on the political front as well. In 1961, in answer to Official concern about the 27 condition of women, President John F. Kennedy established a Commission on the Status of Women. The commission members were asked to evaluate women's roles in private and federal employment, in addition to their status in politics, educa- tion, law, and the need for expanded child-care facilities. (Komisar, 1971:112) In 1963, Kennedy set up an Interdepartmental Committee on the Status of Women made up of cabinet chiefs and heads of major departments. In addition, a Citizen's Advisory Council on the Status of Women was begun with members coming from business, professional, and voluntary groups. The Committee's charge was to investigate the government's own progress in advancing the status of women, while the Council was to pro- mote action through private institutions. Catherine East, a championship of women's rights, was named the executive director of both groups. By 1967, all fifty states had their own commissions to study the needs of women. (Komisar, 1971:112) In 1963, a "veritable bombshell" arrived upon the social and political scene in the presence of Betty Friedan and her best selling book, The Feminine Mystique. Friedan pointed out that women had been victimized by a set of ideals which She called the "feminine mystique." She pointed out that society was ingrained with the idea that feminine happi- ness was to be achieved through total involvement in the role of wife and mother. Friedan pointed out that the social and cultural conditioning that existed in our society denied , 28 women an Opportunity to develop a sense of herself as a person. To be fulfilled, a woman just might have to say, "I want something more than my husband and my children and my home." (Friedan, 1974:32) During the summer of 1965, Friedan (1974:382), noting that women were not gaining recognition as rapidly as she wished, decided, "What we need is a political movement, a social movement like that of the blacks." Shortly there- after, many prominent women's groups were gathered in Washington as a result of the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which banned sex discrimination along with race discrimination in employment. The sex discrimination section was added to the act without earnest- ness as a delaying measure by Howard Smith, Congressman from Virginia. To the surprise of many, the tactic failed and miraculously the bill passed. However, it soon became obvious to the women gathered in Washington that many of the men had no intentions of enforcing the sex discrimination section of Title VII. The women's leaders were part of a "seething underground of women in the government, the press, and the labor unions who felt powerless to stOp the sabotage of this law that was supposed to break through the sex discrimination that pervaded every industry and profession, every factory, school, and office. (Friedan, 1974:383) The women's leaders met and founded the National Organization for Women (NOW) with Betty Friedan as the first 29 president. The first sentence of the NOW statement of purpose committed the membership to "take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of society now, exercising all the privileges and responsibilities thereof, in truly equal partnership with men." (Friedan, 1974:384) The National Organization for Women soon gained considerable strength as NOW chapters were organized all across the nation. One hundred chapters were established or being organized by the end of 1970. Women thus gained a powerful force in their attempt to counteract discrimination and raise the public's awareness concerning women's problems. (Komisar, 1971:114) Not only were women making progress on the political and social fronts, but also they were demanding increased opportunities in intercollegiate athletics. At this time there existed no collegiate organizational structure to give direction and/or control to women's intercollegiate athletics. (Magnusson, 1974:56) Thus, in the mid-1960's to fill the need for leader- ship in intercollegiate athletics for women, the DGWS estab- lished the Commission for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (CIAW) as a structure within DGWS. The AAHPER Board of Directors approved the structure in the spring of 1966 and it became operational in September, 1967. The initial pur- poses of the Commission were, "(1) to encourage the organization 30 of colleges and universities or organizations of women physical educators to govern intercollegiate competition for women at the local, state, or regional levels, (2) to hold DGWS national championships as the need for them became apparent, and (3) to sanction closed intercollegiate events in which at least five colleges or universities were partic- ipating. A major concern was to foster the establi hment of policy-making bodies at the local or regional levels which would 'adopt' the DGWS Guidelines and 'enforce' them as policy and, in addition, add other necessary policies." (Magnusson, 1974:57) In December, 1967, the CIAW announced that the Commission would sponsor national championships for college women. Beginning with golf, and adding gymnastics and track and field in 1969, badminton, swimming and diving, and volley— ball in 1970, and basketball in 1972, the number Of CIAW- sponsored national championships for women grew to seven in 1972. The need for a more structured governing body to pro- vide leadership and to initiate and maintain standards of excellence in intercollegiate competition for all college women became apparent. The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW), an institutional membership organization, was originated to fill this need. AIAW operation began in July of 1972. (Magnusson, 1974:57) 1968-1972. A very significant event for women-~of being totally accepted as athletes in their own rights—- 31 occurred when a woman, Janice Lee York Romary, was chosen to carry the United States flag in the opening ceremonies of the 1968 Olympics. (Gerber, 1974:146) The late sixties and early seventies gave birth to greater Opportunities for women in intercollegiate athletics. Due to the rapid increase in women demanding intercollegiate athletic programs, increasing numbers of colleges and univer- sities began sponsoring such programs. In the five year period from 1966-67 when 15,727 women took part, to 1971—72 when 31,825 women participated, the number of women partici- pating in intercollegiate athletics doubled. (Daniel, l974b:1) Women's rights groups were growing in number. In 1968, the Women's Equity Action League (WEAL) and Human Rights for Women (HRW) split with NOW and became effective groups in their own rights. Also in 1968, the Organization of Federally Employed Women (FEW) originated. President Nixon appointed a Task Force on Women's Rights and Responsi- bilities in 1969. Outside the federal government, the form- ation of the National Women's Political Caucus (NWPC) would soon exert a powerful hand politically. (Rossi and Calderwood, 1973:25-26) The women's rights groups were active in the sports ‘world as well. One of the first women to gain national attention was Bernice Gera. Beginning in the early sixties, Bernice Gera sought to become employed in baseball in any capacity. In 1967, in an attempt to become an umpire, she 32 filed an application to an umpire's school and was accepted, only to be rejected when it was discovered she was a woman. As a result of lawsuits, she did receive a contract with a minor league in 1969. The president of the National Associa- tion of Professional Baseball Leagues refused to Sign the contract, however. Finally, as a result Of the State Court of Appeals upholding a 1970 Human Rights Commission ruling, Bernice Gera was allowed to umpire in the New York- Pennsylvania League. Gera umpired only one game. The harrassment she received during her approximately ten-year fight, especially during this game, caused her to give up her fight to continue as an umpire. Even though Bernice Gera would appear to have failed in the eyes of many, her accomplishment was to have a colossal impact on the future of women's rights in athletics. Bernice Gera was living proof that legal actions could be used to change women's roles in sport. As the result of court battles, women began winning the right to be jockeys-~Tuesdee Testa, to be in the press-box--Elinor Kaine, and to be professional motorcycle riders--Kerry Kleid. (Felshin, 1974:215-218) 1972-1974. The Citizens Advisory Council on the Status of Women, in its 1973 report, labeled 1972 a "historic year for women" due to the unprecedented political, legal, and economic advances made in their behalf. Examples were the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment in the Senate on March 22, 1972, and the ratification process of this amendment; 33 added political power: election to public office: and federal and state legislation improving the legal and economic status of women. (Felshin, 1974:212) However, the federal legislation which would eventu- ally be most beneficial to the woman athlete was Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. This Act made no men- tion of athletics or athletic programs per se, but referred to sex discrimination in educational programs and activities. 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 educational program or activity receiving federal assistance. . .(20 United States Code, 1972). If anyone had doubts as to how the leaders of the women's rights groups felt about women in sports, their doubts were removed quickly as both WEAL and NOW issued strong state- ments concerning women's participation and opportunity in sports. The Women's Equity Action League pointed out that: In terms of athletic programs. . . the thrust of the efforts to bring about equal Opportunity for women must be two-fold: While outstanding female athletes should not be excluded from competition because their schools provide teams only for males, separate but equal programs should be provided for average female students, who can- not compete equally in athletics with male students. (Dunkle, 1974:17) At its sixth annual conference in February, 1973, the National Organization for Women passed a resolution concerning equality for college women in sport. Briefly it stated: Whereas: Women represent more than half of the pOp— ulation of American college students. Whereas: Whereas: Whereas: Whereas: Whereas: Resolved: Resolved: 34 Women pay the same tuition fees and athletic fees as men. Women have traditionally been required to meet higher standards for admission to many colleges. Women students and academic personnel re- ceive less grant, fellowships, scholarships, and other forms of financial aid. Women have the same right and desire to maintain their physical health, experience the joy of movement, and the challenge of competition. There now exist federal and state laws which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. That women in collegiate sport demand equali- ty and freedom from discrimination, as grant- ed them by the attached Federal Laws and Reg- ulations Concerning Sex Discrimination in Educational Institutions. That women in collegiate sport, both stu- dents and staff, insist upon correcting inequities in the following areas. The areas mentioned in the NOW resolution were admis- sions and appointments, financial aid and scholarships, per- sonnel, organization and administration, finances, facilities and services, and sports programming. NOW also created a task force to implement sports policies. (National Organiza- tion for Women, 1973) The Citizen's Advisory Council on the Status of Women; in its May, 1973, report, Women in 1972, identified the areas in which discrimination was most likely to exist: Physical education, sportsi and other extracurricular activities. This is an area where discrimination is most pervasive and most readily apparent. Per capita expendi— tures on these activities by sex are an objective measure in discrimination. Principals and teachers sometimes 35 discourage an interest in participation in sports by girls. Facilities as swimming pools, tennis and basketball courts are generally far less available, measured on a dollar per capita basis of interested participants, to girls than boys. In addition, coaches of girls' sports are rarely supplied and if available are often not included in policy- making committees. . . . The Opportunity for achievement in sports, scholarships and other recognition for ability in sports and for develOping a competitive spirit within a framework of team OOOperation should be available to girls. (Felshin, 1974:222) Faced with legal challenges as well as the changing social climate, the AIAW and DGWS repealed their rules pro- hibiting athletic scholarships for women on April 2, 1973. The DGWS had previously contended that scholarships or other financial assistance specifically designated for athletes might lead to a potential for abuses, such as have plagued the men's programs for many years. These abuses could prove detrimental to the development of quality programs for women athletes. (Memorandum, 1973) Against this background of social and political con- cern The Guidelines for Title IX of the Higher Education Amendments Act of 1972 were being prepared. The first draft of the Guidelines was published in the fall of 1973. The section that startled the hierarchy of the athletic community read: Except as provided in this section, no person Shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person, or otherwise be discriminated against in any athletic program or activity operated by a recip- ient (one who receives federal aid), and no recipient shall provide any such program or activity separately on such basis. (38 Fed. Reg., 1973) 36 The first draft specifically mentioned athletics! The mention of athletics in the preceding paragraph was a surprise to nearly everyone, especially the male administrators. The Implications of the First Draft of the Title IX Guidelines Interpreting the Guidelines became a difficult task for those peOple interested in athletics. Some felt that each institution would be required to have co—ed teams in each sport. Others interpreted the Guidelines to provide for separate, but equal, teams for the sexes. If an institution provided for a men's basketball team, it must also provide for a women's basketball team. In all cases, women would receive equal use of facilities, equipment, travel, coaching, and financial aid. In any case, whatever interpretations are arrived at, men's intercollegiate athletics would suffer financially. On November 15, 1973, Dr. John A. Fuzak, Michigan State University's faculty representative to the Big Ten Conference, noted that other major conferences were cutting back (due to the financial squeeze) to the Big Ten's scholarship limits. He added that "The immediate problem facing most athletic departments these days is financial." (Staudt, l973:1) 1974-1976. The athletic administrators did not see co-ed athletics as the solution to sexual bias in athletics. Due to inherent physical differences (discussed earlier in this chapter), the majority of the women would not qualify ‘~. 37 for any co—ed team, thus giving women fewer athletic oppor- tunities than they had previously had. In the March 1, 1974, issue of the NCAA News, Robert C. James, chairman of the NCAA Joint Legislative Committee, stated that neither the language nor history of Title IX contain evidence that Congress intended athletics to be in- cluded in the law. However, if athletics must be covered, then a reasonable, practical method should be arrived at, instead of regulations which would severely damage the revenue— producing Sports programs and add greatly to the $49.5 million annual deficit that members of the NCAA are presently incur- ring while conducting their intercollegiate athletic programs. The draft regulations fail to recognize an institution's right to assign revenue produced by a sport to that sport. (Daniel, l974a:2) The threat to the predominantly male intercollegiate sports empire can be seen immediately. From James's statement concerning the present deficit in intercollegiate athletics, one can easily determine that it is impossible, under the present funding system, to fully implement a WOmen's athletic program equal to the men's program. Another possibility would be to equally divide existing revenues between men's and women's athletic programs. However, if this were done it would mean replacing one quality program and one emerging program with two mediocre programs. In the March 15, 1974, issue of the NCAA News, the NCAA asked that the Title IX regulations be withdrawn. The 38 NCAA charged that neither prior to nor during the drafting of the Title IX Guidelines was contact made with any of the athletic administrative bodies. The regulations demand more stringent compliance from competitive athletics than non- competitive athletics. While physical education classes may merely be offered without sexual restriction, competitive athletic programs for women must be offered separately, if women fail on a skill basis to make an Open team. The NCAA questions the legal basis for the striking variance in requirements. (Daniel, l974b:l) In a letter to Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: Don Canham, Athletic Director at the University of Michigan, wrote that he was sure that HEW was aware of the great concern many athletic administrators felt about the proposed regulations implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. He stated that the hundreds of people in intercollegiate athletics he had talked to concerning the regulations were "to the man" upset with them, and he requested Opportunities for more input. Canham pointed out that nis greatest concern was with the provision for equal equipment, facilities, scholarships, and financing of women's athletic programs. He said that at present the interest in women's athletics do not warrant such rules. He asked why athletic programs have been singled out and required to spend equal dollars on women as on men. Are 39 other areas such as the School of Nursing where males definitely have not shown much interest, and the engineering schools where men far outnumber the women, going to be re- quired to spend equal dollars for men and women? What about areas where women have more money spent on them, such as home economics and dormitories? Canham further suggested that for a school to poll the student body annually to determine which sports to offer meant someone was "out of touch with reality." Concerning the point of integrating all teams by sex, he asked how in the world could a football team, a wrestling team, a soccer team, a basketball team, or a track team be integrated? Canham said that many other points must be changed or the "absolute ruination of intercollegiate athletics" would occur for women as well as for men. He pointed out that since women's athletics were, in most instances, financed out of the gate receipts of the men's programs, any reduction in the men's program would adversely affect the women as well. Canham stated that every athletic director he knew believed in equal Opportunity for women in intercollegiate athletics. However, due to the present lack of interest on the part of women, equal funding should not be considered. He concluded by saying, "This proposal, Title IX, would be an absolute disaster for both men's and women's intercolle- giate athletics." (Canham, l974:6) 40 In May, 1974, in an effort to at least save the revenue-producing sports (i.e., football, basketball, and hockey), the United States Senate approved an amendment to an elementary and secondary school-aid bill which would exclude revenue-producing intercollegiate sports from the Title IX regulations. This amendment, later rejected by Congress, was sponsored by Senator John G. Tower, Republican from Texas. University of Toledo Athletic Director, Vern Smith, summed up the attitude of most athletic administrators: "The big problem is money. I don't think there would be any hassle at any school if men's intercollegiate athletics weren't already in deep financial trouble." (Loomis, l974:3) On June 18, 1974, the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) issued a second draft of the Guidelines thoitle IX. HEW claimed the rules would allow 'leeway' and be non-disruptive to existing intercolle- giate athletic programs. As they apply to sports, the rules were designed to provide more Opportunities for women to participate in athletics. Athletics would receive more leeway than most educational programs, and institutions would be asked to comply voluntarily. Educational institutions would be allowed to offer separate teams for males and females or Single-sex teams provided the members were selected on the basis of skill. Equal aggregate expenditures would not be required, however, if separate teams were offered in a sport, the 41 provision of equipment, supplies, facilities, and locker room and shower facilities must be equitable. If schools provided both a varsity and a junior varsity team for males, the women would be entitled to both teams also. If male basketball players received athletic scholarships, women basketball players must receive athletic scholarships. HEW suggested that educational institutions under- take "affirmative efforts" to equalize Opportunity, to publicize the availability of Opportunity for women, and to provide training so that the skills needed for participation could be developed. Other prOposed rules covered unbiased hiring, equal pay for equal work in addition to the requirement that once each year the students must be surveyed to determine in what sports they wanted to take part. In dealing with each institution, HEW would not judge the "comparable opportunities" on a sport—by-sport basis, but rather would weigh the totality of an institution's efforts. HEW has the ultimate weapon, that of cutting off all federal funds, to help enforce the proposed rules. (Wentworth, l974:1) Throughout the nation, people interested in men's athletics heaved a sigh of relief with the publication of the second draft of the Title IX Guidelines. They did not pause too long, however. They knew how close they had come to a catastrophic situation in intercollegiate athletics, 42 and were anxious to learn what the final Guidelines would actually mandate for their athletic programs. Twelve public hearings were scheduled between June 24, 1974, and August 2, 1974. The deadline for changes was set for October 15, 1974. The situation did not improve, however. The discus- sions at the various hearings were often heated. Everyone seemed to have an opinion on how to interpret the Guidelines and/or what the Guidelines should finally say. In an eight- month period following the June, 1974, publishing of the Guidelines, over ninety-seven hundred responses were received at the HEW offices. (Gwaltney, 1975a:10) Representative Edith Green, an original leader in the development of Title IX, was disappointed concerning the latest HEW interpretation. She pointed out that the Congress had not intended for boys' and girls' physical education classes, the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, the Campfire Girls, nor the YWCA and the YMCA to be integrated. She pointed out that the Congress never intended that colleges would be required to submit an unreasonable amount of paperwork to HEW each year, and they did not intend to end intercollegiate sports. The office of HEW, in drawing up the Guidelines, tended to follow the language of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act where the concept of "separate, but equal" was disallowed. Essentially, the concept of "separate, but equal" is what the originators of Title IX had in mind, due to the "basic IL: - .. 43 biological differences" of the sexes, when they drew up the law. Representative Green further pointed out that she did not feel women should "be given preferential treatment to supposedly redress the grievances of the past." She stated further, "During my life-time, I would only have liked equal treatment. I do not believe that it is just, nor fair, nor indeed wise for this generation to try to design a social system based on mistakes and the injustices practiced by our forefathers." (Green, 1974) A point of view which was expressed often was that physical education and athletic programs should be exempt from the Title IX regulations since they do not receive direct federal aid. Some congressmen felt that co-ed locker room and toilet facilities may be required by the present Title IX guidelines. Thus, while some leaders felt that the Guidelines were inconsistent with the original law and sought to change them, the leading women's groups felt the need to fight changes in the Guidelines for fear that athletics might be entirely exempted from Title IX. (Gwaltney, l975c:7) On April 7, 1975, The Chronicle of Higher Education published the memorandum sent to the President by Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). This memorandum accompanied Weinberger's recommended guide- lines for federal enforcement of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. Weinberger had been at the center of all the controversy and he took this opportunity to place 44 a portion of the blame on the legislature. He said, concern- ing the law, "With little legislative history, debate, or, I'm afraid, thought about difficult problems of application, the Congress enacted a broad prohibition against sex discrim- ination in any educational program or activity receiving federal financial assistance with a few specific exceptions." Weinberger pointed out that the more than ninety-seven hundred comments he received raised seven major issues: physical education classes and sex education, domestic scholarships and financial assistance, foreign scholarships, exemption of private undergraduate schools, pension benefits, discrimination in curricula, and athletics. He said that while athletics was certainly not the most important subject under Title IX, it involves some troublesome policy and legal problems, thus creating the most public controversy. (Gwaltney, l975b:ll-12) Substantial comment was received by HEW OOncerning the issue of single-sex or co-ed teams. The comments general- ly followed the thinking of one of the three large interest groups: The National Organization for Women (NOW), The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW), and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). NOW suggested that all athletic teams should be open to members of both sexes, except for those sports such as tackle football where women would be effectively excluded, in which case a separate women's team must be offered. The AIAW suggested that separate teams for men and women be offered in all cases, 45 and that the women's athletic program should receive prOpor- tionate funding. AIAW was Opposed to recruiting and the "commercialism" of men's athletics and requested that their share of money not be used for those purposes, but be used to provide opportunities for more women to participate in athletics. The NCAA suggested that since athletic programs do not receive federal aid, athletics should be exempt from Title IX. If it is ruled that athletics must be covered, they argued, then the revenue producing sports should be exempt since they, in many cases, support the other sports. (Gwaltney, 1975b:12) John A. Fuzak (l975z8), President of the NCAA, voiced the NCAA's position concerning revenue-producing sports during his June 20, 1975, testimony before a congressional sub- committee. What we have advocated--if Congress ever acts to apply Title IX principles to intercollegiate sports--is that the gross revenues from a revenue-producing sport (whether it be a men's team, a women's team, or a com- bined team) be permitted to apply, first, to covering the expenses of maintaining that sport. If there is then an excess of gross revenue over expense in a particular sport, as there very often is in football and basketball, that excess--that net profit if you wi11--shou1d be used on whatever equal Opportunity basis then represents the law of the land. I repeat: We have never asked HEW or the Congress to exempt revenue-producing sports from Title IX. We have asked only that NCAA members be permitted, if they individually wish, to maintain intercollegiate programs which have proven popular and therefore pro- ductive of revenue. Without a doubt, HEW'S Title IX program is calculated--and I think by some even inten- tionally so--to destroy those popular and successful college sports. 46 More than three years had passed since Congress banned sex bias in federally assisted educational programs when President Ford signed Title IX into Law. Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972 went into effect July 21, 1975. In its September, 1975, memorandum to school and college administrators, the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare/Office for Civil Rights spelled out government regulations barring sex discrimination in athletics. Educational institutions were to conduct a self-evaluation of the current policies and practices of its athletic program by July 21, 1976, and where such policies and practices failed to conform to the regulations they were to develop a plan to achieve compliance to the requirements of the regulations by July 21, 1978. This was not to be construed as a waiting period. Institutions were required to make corrections as rapidly as possible, but no later than July 21, 1978, (Appendix A). Required First-Year Actions In order to comply with the various requirements of the regulation addressed to nondiscrimination in athletic programs, educational institutions operating athletic pro- grams above the elementary level should: (1) Compare the requirements of the regulation addressed to nondiscrimination in athletic programs and equal opportunity in the provision of athletic scholarships with current policies and practices: (2) Determine the interests of both sexes in the sports to be offered by the institution and, 47 where the sport is a contact sport or where participants are selected on the basis of competition, also determine the relative abilites (sic) of members of each sex for each such sport offered, in order to decide whether to have single sex teams or_teams composed of both sexes. (Abilities might be determined through try-outs or by relying upon the know- ledge of athletic teaching staff, administrators and athletic conference and league representa- tives.) (3) Develop a plan to accommodate effectively the interests and abilities of both sexes, which plan must be fully implemented as expeditiously as possible and in no event later than July 21, 1978. Although the plan need not be submitted to the Office for Civil Rights, institutions should consider publicizing such plans so as to gain the assistance of students, faculty, etc. in complying with them. Clearly, the double standard has been prevalent in athletics. While women athletes have often been regarded as "biological misfits", the male athletes were regarded as "real men." The woman's function in athletics has repeatedly been mere decoration for the gymnasium. The men athletes were hailed as the leaders of tomorrow. Myths die hard, but the women's situation in athletics has been improving. Women have found exercise to be enjoyable and beneficial, and "women have found out that rocking the boat is much better exercise than rocking the cradle." (Dunkle, 1974:19) The government has recognized the problems occurring in women's athletics and has made Title IX mandatory for all educational institutions. The women's intercollegiate athletic programs must be upgraded rapidly, not only because the government says so, but also because increasingly large Inh~ 48 numbers of athletically inspired young women are coming out of the high schools seeking colleges which support high quality women's athletic programs. An example of the rapid growth in numbers of young women interested in sports at the high school level is seen in the growth of girl's athletics in the state of Michigan from 1972-73 (MHSAA Bulletin, 1974:427) to l975-76 (MHSAA Bulletin, 1976:488). The number of high schools sponsoring girls' basketball teams increased from 509 to 684, track from 258 to 536, softball from 265 to 464, volleyball from 201 to 456, tennis from 164 to 284, swimming from 115 to 190, gymnastics from 80 to 133, and golf from 50 to 128, while the total number of high schools increased just four schools from 712 to 716 during the same four-year period. The future looks promising for the development of women's athletics. Much planning and cooperation will be needed from all persons involved. Richard W. Kazmaier (l973:3) put the situation in the proper perspective when he wrote, "No one reasonably can expect a totally balanced athletic program to happen over- night. The schools' costs and resulting bond issues would be prohibitive. "But no one reasonably can deny the female students' claim to equal accessibility to athletic department facilities and services. 49 "The need has been recognized, and progress has been made: but current enrollment vs. participation statistics show that we've still a long way to go before a balance is reached." Summary Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 signaled the start of a revolution in intercollegiate ath— letics. The first draft of the Guidelines specifically pro- hibited discrimination in athletic programs or activities operated by federally funded educational institutions under the threat of losing federal aid. Eggmples of sexism. The literature shows that women's athletics, during the early 1970's were suffering due to little or no budget dollars, limited access to facilities and equipment, a scarcity of competitive Opportunities, lack of qualified coaches, and the absence of athletic scholarship opportunities. Physiological implications. The anatomical differen- ces among the sexes generally favor the male over the female in those activities where strength and power are principle factors. His longer slower growing period accounts in part for his heavier, larger, and more rugged structure. When the activity requires balance, stability, dexterity, and flexi- bility, the female can compete favorably. 50 Recent research has shown that when the participant is healthy, training and/or competition do not materially affect the menarche or the menstrual function itself. Women athletes tend to have fewer complications during pregnancy and require Caesarean sections fifty percent less frequently than non-athletic women. Masculine physical appearance in a female is due to inherent endocrinological and morphological factors of the individual female, not to physical activity. Women's athletics in the United States. Prior to the 1830's women had been denied the Opportunity to attend college because they were considered to be mentally inferior to men, and because they were considered not strong enough to withstand the rigors of college level study and daily classes. The accepted life style of women was one of delicacy and ill health. In the second half of the nineteenth century, gymnastics, tennis, and crew were added to the college cur- riculums as a means of improving women's physical and mental health. In the middle and late 1880's women's clothing became less cumbersome, allowing greater freedom of movement for bicycling and participation in sports. In the early 1890's, women enjoyed basketball, and in 1896 track and field was in- troduced. Athletic endeavors were accepted as contributing to bodily grace and beauty, social and professional success, and to pure enjoyment. As more and more women flocked to sport, the desirability of organized competition was questioned. 51 In 1899, a Conference of Physical Training appointed a committee to investigate the various rules being used in institutions of higher education. Shortly after the turn of the century, a large body of physical educators and laymen sought to gain control of women's competition. The president of the American Physical Education Association appointed a committee, in 1917, to set standards for girls' and women's activities. The Athletic Conference of American College Women, originated in 1917, Opposed intercollegiate competition for women. The Women's Division of the National Amateur Athletic Federation was formed in 1923 for the purpose of regulating athletic activities for women. The concept of play days and sport days was fostered by the three organizations mentioned above. The object was to play for play's sake without rewards or desire for compe- tition. Girls, it was felt, should not be subjected to extremes of emotional or physical fatigue. These groups were successful in their quest to eliminate and/or control inter- collegiate athletics for women. During World War 11, women were called to work and the need to be physically fit was re-emphasized. Physical education and intramurals flourished, but due to an indoctri- nated generation of leaders, inter-school athletics were forbidden. The policy of the Division for Girls and Women's Sports, in 1957, reaffirmed the principles of sport days, play days, and telegraphic meets. 52 When Wilma Rudolph won three gold medals in the 1960 Olympics, the long-held stereotype of women athletes with unsightly muscles was dispelled. The amazing performances of the entire women's track and swimming teams, and the increased media coverage of women's sports, stimulated tre- mendous growth in women's athletics. The 1963 DGWS "Statement of Policies. . ." pointed out the desirability of colleges and universities providing Opportunities for highly skilled women athletes beyond the level of the intramural program. To fill the need for leadership in intercollegiate athletics for women, the DGWS established the Commission for Intercollegiate Athletics in 1967. The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) began operations in 1972 to provide leadership and to initiate and maintain standards of excellence in intercollegiate competition. The National Organization for Women and the Women's Equity Action League saw Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 as a means for women to gain an equal share of athletic budget dollars and of the use of equipment and facil- ities: these groups were quick to lend their support to Title IX. Spokesmen for the National Collegiate Athletic Association, pointed out that men's athletic programs were already operating at a considerable loss, and would be caused great harm if re- quired to share their funds with women. The second draft of the Guidelines to implement Title IX, issued in June, 1974, would be non—disruptive to 53 existing intercollegiate athletic programs, according to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. However, "affirmative efforts" to equalize Opportunity and make equit- able provisions for equipment, supplies, facilities, and locker rooms had to be undertaken. Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972 went into effect July 21, 1975. In its September, 1975, memorandum to school and college administrators, the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's Office for Civil Rights spelled out government regulations barring sex discrimination in athletics. Educational insti- tutions were directed to conduct a self-evaluation of the current policies and practices of their athletic programs by July 21, 1976, and where such policies and practices failed to conform to the regulations, they were charged with develOp- ing a plan to achieve compliance with the requirements of the regulations by July 21, 1978. The government has recognized the problems existing in women's athletics and has made Title IX mandatory for all educational institutions. The women's intercollegiate athletic programs must be upgraded rapidly, not only because the government says they must, but also because increasingly large numbers of athletically inspired young women are coming out of the high schools seeking colleges which support high quality women's athletic programs. Chapter 3 THE DESIGN OF THE STUDY Samplinngrocedures To aid in determining whether or not Central Michigan University Athletic Department was in compliance with the Title IX regulations, the male and female head coaches, the athletic director, associate athletic director, athletic business manager and facilities coordinator, sports informa— tion director, head trainer, and head equipment manager were surveyed. To determine the interests of both sexes as to which sports undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University preferred their athletic department to offer, a simple random sampling was used. The Sample included 800 undergraduate students, 143 faculty members (with the physical education faculty deleted), and all 46 members of the physical education faculty. To determine whether the relative abilities of the sexes required single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes, a simple random sampling was used. Once again, the sampling included 800 undergraduate students, 143 faculty members (with the physical education faculty deleted), and all 46 members of the physical education faculty. 54 Measures 1. 55 A questionnaire was develOped to measure the degree of compliance with the Title IX regulations for each intercollegiate sport offered by the Central Michigan Univer- sity Athletic Department (Appendix B). The eleven specific areas suggested by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare which were used in developing the questionnaire to determine whether equal Opportunity existed in the Central Michigan University athletic program were these: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) 2. the nature and extent of the sports programs to be offered (including the levels of com- petition, such as varsity, club, etc.); the provision of equipment and supplies; the scheduling of games and practice time: the provision of travel and per diem allowances; the nature and extent of the Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring: the assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors; the provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; the provision of medical and training facili- ties and services: the provision of housing and dining facilities and services; the nature and extent of publicity; the provision of athletic scholarships (Appendix B). A questionnaire was developed to determine the interests of the undergraduate students and faculty as to 56 which sports they preferred the Central Michigan Athletic Department to offer (Appendix C). 3. A questionnaire was develOped to determine whether, as judged by the undergraduate students and faculty members, the relative abilities of the sexes required single- sex teams or teams composed Of both sexes (Appendix C). 4. The above questionnaires were administered, as a trial run, to a neighboring state supported university to eliminate possible defects in the questionnaires. 5. Based upon the information obtained from the above questionnaires, and in light of the knowledge obtained from related literature, the researcher developed a plan for the Central Michigan University Athletic Department to accommodate effectively the interests and abilities of the undergraduate students and to comply with the Title IX regulations. 6. The appraisal of the techniques developed for the self-evaluation of an intercollegiate athletic program, as required by the Title IX regulations was a continuous process throughout the study. A list of improvements, changes, and clarifications which would improve the techniques developed for and applied to this study was compiled. Design of the Study The descriptive method of research was followed in this study. 57 Analysis of the Data of the Study 1. The questionnaire to measure the degree of com- pliance with the Title IX regulations contained the eleven specific areas as required for a university's self-evaluation by the memorandum. Each of the eleven areas was divided into sub-areas to fully explore the various facets of each area. This questionnaire was constructed to enable different weights to be assigned, depending upon the degree of com- pliance observed, to each sub-area (Appendix B). Each sub- area was rated according to the scale 5 = full compliance, 4 = substantial compliance, 3 = moderate compliance, 2 = minimal compliance, and 1 = non-compliance. Fractions such as 4.3, 2.8, and 3.5 were allowed to be used to rate items more precisely (Appendix D). The data supplied by the athletic personnel were checked for clarity and accuracy. Where needed, personal interviews were conducted allowing clarification and correc- tions to be processed. The data was then presented to a three-member self-evaluation rating team (Appendix E). The self-evaluation rating team examined the data concerning each sub-area, as it applied to each paired sport, in terms of compliance with Title IX, and affixed a sub-area discrimination rating to it (Appendix F). The Central Michigan University Athletic Department sponsored the sports of basketball, golf, gymnastics, swimming, tennis, and track and cross country for both men and women, thus allowing fl» \F. 2‘ 58 natural comparisons in those sports. The researcher chose to compare men's baseball with women's field hockey and men's wrestling with women's volleyball. Football was rated alone due to the unequal number of men's and women's sport offer- ings. The eleven area discrimination ratings for each sport were obtained by averaging the respective sub-area discrim- ination ratings. Each sport's discrimination rating was obtained by averaging the eleven respective sub-area discrim- ination ratings. The athletic department's sub-area discrim- ination ratings were obtained by thoroughly examining the total program as applied to the respective sub-areas, and where applicable, by averaging the sub-area discrimination ratings assigned to the individual sports. The athletic department's area discrimination ratings were obtained by averaging its sub-area discrimination ratings. The athletic department's discrimination rating was obtained by averaging its area discrimination ratings. 2. The questionnaire to determine which sports the undergraduate students and faculty members preferred the Central Michigan University Athletic Department to offer contained a list of the present sport offerings at Central Michigan University plus several additional sports and spaces to add other sports if the respondents wished. The respondents were given the Opportunity to indicate their preferences for the sports to be offered at the intercollegiate, club sport, and intramural levels (Appendix C). 59 3. The questionnaire to determine whether the abili- ties of the sexes, as judged by the undergraduate students and faculty members, required single—sex teams or teams composed of both sexes was included in the above questionnaire. Each respondent was asked to check whether a men's team, a women's team, and/or a co-ed team should be offered for each sport and/or level checked (Appendix C). Summary The degree to which the Central Michigan University Athletic Department was in compliance with the Title IX regulations was determined by administering the self- evaluation questionnaire to the head coaches and athletic area specialists. The self-evaluation questionnaire contained the eleven specific areas, as required by the HEW memorandum (1975:7-8), for a university's self-evaluation., Each of the eleven areas was divided into sub-areas to fully explore the various facets of each area. A three-member self—evaluation rating team chosen from outside the athletic department then examined each sub-area as it applied to each sport and assign- ed a discrimination rating to it. Each sports area discrim- ination rating resulted from averaging the respective sub- area discrimination ratings. The university's athletic department sub-area discrimination ratings were obtained by thoroughly examining the total program as applied to the respective sub-area discrimination ratings assigned to the individual sports. The university's area discrimination 60 ratings were obtained by averaging its sub-area discrimination ratings. The university's athletic department discrimination rating was the average of its area discrimination ratings. The interests and abilities, as-judged by the under- graduate students and faculty, were obtained from a simple random sampling of the undergraduate students, faculty members, and the entire physical education faculty. The questionnaire listed each of the present men's and women's sports offerings plus several additional sports and provided spaces for the respondents to add additional sports which were of interest to them. The respondents were asked to indicate their interest for the sports to be offered at the intercollegiate, club sport, and intramural levels. Finally each respondent was asked to check whether a men's team, a women's team, and/or a co-ed team should be offered for each sport and/or level checked. ( \ Chapter 4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS In this chapter each of the three hypotheses of the study will be reviewed. The data relating to each hypothesis shall be presented and the decision to accept or reject each hypothesis will follow. The Self-Evaluation Hypothesis 1. The Central Michigan University Ath- letic Department is in compliance with the Title IX regulations. The data pertaining to Hypothesis 1 was obtained through the application of the Institutional Self-Evaluation Questionnaire (Appendix B). Area I, The nature and extent of the sports programs offered, received a 3.771 rating (Table 1). Three of the Six sub-areas evaluated were rated 5.00, or full compliance. Sub-area A, The number of varsity sports offered, was rated 4.60. The men's program encompassed ten different sports compared to the women's nine. Sub-area E, The total number of athletes on eligibility lists, was rated 1.00. The men's list contained 360 athletes compared to the women's list of 188. Sub—area F, Prevalance of an lDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 61 m.e II II 62 Table l Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and Extent of the Sports Programs Offered Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. The number of varsity sports offered 4.60 B. Are Regional or Conference post-season 5.00 opportunities for competition available? C. Are post-season Opportunities for National 5.00 competition available? D. Number of junior varsity teams sponsored 5.00 E. Total number of athletes on eligibility 1.00 lists F. Prevalance of an awards program 2.00 AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 3.77 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non—Compliance. 63 awards program, was rated 2.00. Men receive a letterman's jacket the first year they win a letter and $40.00 toward a "C" ring as a senior award. The women receive an eight by ten inch colored team photograph each sport season they compete (Appendix F). Area II, The provision of equipment and supplies, received a 4.31 discrimination rating (Table 2). Sub-area A, Is practice equipment normally provided? was rated 3.25. The women athletes do not receive shoes in any sport: the men receive shoes in all sports. Other equipment and/or practice uniform discriminatory procedures were noted in golf, gymnastics, tennis, and track and cross country. Sub-area B, Are game uniforms provided? was rated 4.50. Women athletes do not receive game shoes in any sport, while the men athletes receive game shoes in all sports. Women golfers receive no game uniforms while men golfers receive shirts and caps. Sub-area 0, Are warm-ups provided? was rated 4.50. Women golfers do not receive warm-ups, but men do. Area III, The scheduling of games and practice time, received a 4.92 discrimination rating. Sub-area B, Do teams have access to prime-time practice Opportunities? was rated 4.75. Women swimmers practice from 2:00 to 4:00 P.M., while men swimmers practice 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. (Table 3). Area IV, The provision of travel and per diem allow- ances, received a 5.00 discrimination rating (Table 4). 64 Table 2 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Equipment and Supplies Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. Is practice equipment normally provided? 3.25 B. Are game uniforms provided? 4.50 C. Are warm—ups provided? 4.50 D. Are coaching aids provided? 5.00 AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.31 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 65 Table 3 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Scheduling of Games and Practice Time Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. Are there institutional restrictions 5.00 with regard to scheduling times of practice or competition, dates of practice or competition, number of contests, and length of season? B. Do teams have access to prime-time 4.75 practice Opportunities? C. Are there institutional restrictions 5.00 on vacation competition and/or practice? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.92 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 66 Table 4 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Travel and Per Diem Allowances Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub—area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrigination Rating Are sports budgeted with a fixed athletic 5.00 department meal per diem allowance? Are Sports budgeted with a fixed athletic 5.00 department room per diem allowance? Are University buses available and 5.00 generally used for large squads? Are University sedans, wagons, and/or 5 5.00 suburbans available and generally used for small squads? Do some squads commonly travel via 5.00 aircraft to away contests? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 5.00 m~e aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 67 Area V, The nature and extent of the Opportunities to receive coaching and academic tutoring, received a 4.78 discrimination rating (Table 5). Sub-area B, What is the ratio of coaches with degrees and fully employed by the institution, to the total number of athletes on athletic squads? was rated 4.33. This rating results from the sport of basketball where the women's ratio is one coach per twenty- two athletes compared to the men's ratio of one coach per eight athletes, and the sport of women's field hockey which has a one to twenty-six coach to athlete ratio compared to the sport of men's baseball which has a two to twenty-seven coach to athlete ratio. Area VI, The assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors, received a 4.26 discrimination rating (Table 6). Sub-area C, What is the ratio of the total number of coaches to those coaches who receive extra compensation for duties performed outside the limits of the academic calendar? was rated 3.14. Women coaches have performed limited duties outside the limits of the academic calendar with no compensa- tion. All men coaches receive such compensation and are expected to perform extensive duties during this time. Sub-area D, Do coaches have reduced teaching loads to permit the recruitment of student athletes? was ruled non- applicable by the rating team. The Association for Intercol- legiate Athletics for Women rules prohibit recruiting. Sub—area E, Do coaches have reduced teaching loads to coach student athletes? was rated 3.89. The rating committee 68 Table 5 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and Extent of the Opportunities to Receive Coaching and Academic Tutoring Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Ratinga A. Is funding provided for the student- 5.00 athlete? B. What is the ratio of coaches with degrees 4.33 and fully employed by the institution, to the total number of athletes on athletic squads? C. What is the ratio of graduate assistants 5.00 and/or part-time institutionally employed coaches to the total number of athletes on athletic squads? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.78 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. nat- II II 69 Table 6 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Assignment and Compensation of Coaches and Tutors Sub—areas to be evaluated Sub-area . (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. What is the ratio of the total number 5.00 of coaches to coaches who are hired via a standard academic departmental policy? B. What is the ratio of the total number 5.00 of coaches to those coaches whose salaries are directly tied to their faculty rank and seniority? C. What is the ratio of the total number 3.14 of coaches to those coaches who receive extra compensation for duties performed outside the limits of the academic calendar? D. Do coaches have reduced teaching loads N.A.b to permit the recruitment of student athletes? E. Do coaches have reduced teaching loads 3.89 to coach student athletes? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.26 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. bRuled non-applicable by the rating team. The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women prohibits recruiting. mwe II II 70 compared the women's ratio of one hour of released time for every three athletes to the men's ratio of one hour for every 2.5 athletes (Appendix F). Area VII, The provision of locker rooms, practice, and competitive facilities, received a 4.96 discrimination rating (Table 7). Sub-area B, Rate practice facilities, was rated 4.88. Comparison of women's volleyball with men's wrestling indicated "noisy" conditions caused by other sports sharing the field house during volleyball practice, while wrestling practice is held in a self-contained wrestling room. Area VIII, The provision of medical and training facilities and services, received a 5.00 discrimination rating (Table 8). Area IX, The provision of housing and dining facili- ties and services, received a 5.00 discrimination rating (Table 9). 5 Area X, The nature and extent of publicity, received a 4.55 discrimination rating (Table 10). Sub-area E, Rate the frequency of arranging interviews between the out—Of-town media, was rated 4.56. This rating is primarily the result of the pre-season publicity days for the sports of men's basketball and football. Sub-area H, Rate the frequency of producing and distributing schedule cards and/or schedule posters, was rated 4.00. Composite schedule cards for the winter and spring seasons contain schedules of both men's and women's 71 Table 7 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Locker Rooms, Practice, and Competitive Facilities Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. Rate locker rooms made available to 5.00 squads (1. Excellent 2. Satisfactory 3. Poor) B. Rate practice facilities (1. Excellent 4.88 2. Satisfactory 3. Poor) C. Rate facilities used for home competition 5.00 (1. Excellent 2. Satisfactory ' 3. Poor) AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.96 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 72 Table 8 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Medical and Training Facilities and Services Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. Are physical examinations provided for 5.00 squad members? B. Are measures taken leading to injury 5.00 prevention on squads? C. Are sound and protective practice 5.00 uniforms and auxiliary practice aids provided? D. Do injured athletes normally have access 5.00 to a Certified Athletic Trainer (CAT)? E. Are injured athletes normally referred 5.00 to the team physician? F. Do teams and individuals normally have 5.00 access to prime sports medicine facilities? G. Are teams in contact sports normally 5.00 covered by a CAT at athletic events? H. Are teams in non-contact sports normally 5.00 covered by a CAT at athletic events? I. Are practices in contact sports normally 5.00 covered by a CAT? J. Are practices in non-contact sports 5.00 normally covered by a CAT? K. Is a medical history file kept for 5.00 athletes in intercollegiate sports? aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 73 Table 8 (continued) Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating L. Are athletes covered by a comprehensive 5.00 medical insurance plan? M. Do injured athletes normally have access 5.00 to and are they normally supervised in a sound rehabilitation program? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 5.00 Table 9 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Housing and Dining Facilities and Services Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. What is the percentage of intercollegiate 5.00 sport athletes who are housed in an athletic dorm? B. What is the percentage of intercollegiate 5.00 sport athletes who are fed at an athletic training table? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 5.00 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 74 Table 10 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Nature and Extent of Publicity Sub—areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. Rate the frequency of written pre-season 5.00 releases and the provision of black and white photos. B. Rate the frequency of the use of colored 5.00 slides and films for publicity purposes. C. Rate the frequency of the use of 5.00 telephonic and taped contact with the media for publicity purposes. D. Rate the frequency of arranging interviews 5.00 between the local media and coaches and/or athletes. E. Rate the frequency of arranging interviews. 4.56 between the out—of-town media and coaches and/or athletes. F. Rate the frequency of producing sport 1.89 brochures and/or facts books. G. Rate the frequency of collecting and 5.00 recording event and season statistics. H. Rate the frequency of producing and 4.00 distributing schedule cards and/or schedule posters. I. Rate the frequency of pre-event releases. 5.00 J. Rate the frequency of post-event releases. 5.00 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non—Compliance. 75 Table 10 (continued) Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating K. Rate the frequency of providing 4.11 programs (with advertising) for events. L. Rate the frequency with which home events 5.00 are covered by sport publicity personnel. M. Rate the frequency with which away events 5.00 are covered by sports publicity personnel. N. Rate the frequency with which funds are 4.11 used for the entertainment of the media. AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 4.55 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 76 teams. The men's sports of baseball, basketball, and foot- ball are provided with individual schedule cards yearly. Sub-area K, Rate the frequency of providing programs (with advertising) for events, was rated 4.11. Men's basket- ball and football are provided with programs, other men's and women's sports are not. Sub—area N, Rate the frequency with which funds are used for the entertainment of the media, was rated 4.11. Men's basketball and football expend funds to entertain the media: others do not. Area XI, The provision of athletic scholarships, received a 1.00 discrimination rating (Table 11). No women athletes receive athletic scholarship aid, while 178 men receive athletic scholarship aid. The Central Michigan University Athletic Department, based on the average of the eleven area discrimination ratings, received a 4.32 discrimination rating. Discussion. The Central Michigan University Athletic Department was judged to be in full compliance with the Title IX regulations in three areas, in nearly full compli- ance in three areas, in more than substantial compliance in three areas, in nearly substantial compliance in one area, and in non-compliance in just one of the eleven areas studied (Table 12). The data indicated that Central Michigan University's Athletic Department was not in compliance with the Title IX 77 Table 11 Discrimination Ratings in Terms of the Provision of Athletic Scholarships Sub-areas to be evaluated Sub-area (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrimination Rating A. What is the ratio of varsity athletes 1.00 receiving athletic scholarships to the total number of varsity athletes? B. What is the total dollar value funded 1.00 for athletic scholarships? AREA DISCRIMINATION RATING 1.00 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, 4 = Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, 2 = Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. 78 Table 12 Area Discrimination Ratings Areas to be evaluated Area . . . (as per HEW Memorandum) Discrigination Rating I. The nature and extent of the sports 3.77 programs offered II. The provision of equipment and supplies 4.31 III. The scheduling of games and practice 4.92 time IV. The provision of travel and per diem 5.00 allowances V. The nature and extent of the opportunities 4.78 to receive coaching and academic tutoring VI. The assignment and compensation of 4.26 coaches and tutors VII. The provision of locker rooms, practice,' 4.96 and competitive facilities VIII. The provision of medical and training 5.00 facilities and services IX. The provision of housing and dining 5.00 facilities and services X. The nature and extent of publicity 4.55 XI. The provision of athletic scholarships 1.00 aDiscrimination Rating Key: 5 = Full Compliance, Substantial Compliance, 3 = Moderate Compliance, Minimal Compliance, 1 = Non-Compliance. NP II II 79 regulations in all areas. Therefore, the researcher rejected Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2. The interests of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University indicate more support for the present sport offerings of the athletic department than any other sport. The data pertaining to Hypothesis 2 was obtained through the application of the Interests Questionnaire (Appendix C). Eighty to 92 percent of the 336 undergraduate student respondents were interested in each of the present men's varsity sport offerings. Ice hockey with 78 percent interest, soccer with 74 percent interest, and volleyball with 58 percent interest were other sports receiving strong support from the undergraduate student respondents (Table 13). Sixty—four to 77 percent of the 53 faculty respon- dents were interested in each of the present men's varsity sport offerings. Soccer with 53 percent interest and ice: hockey with 45 percent interest were other sports receiving support from the faculty respondents (Table 14). Ninety to 100 percent of the 31 physical education faculty respondents were interested in each of the present men's varsity sport offerings. Ice hockey with 74 percent interest, volleyball with 65 percent interest, and soccer with 55 percent interest were other sports receiving support from the physical education faculty respondents (Table 15). 80 Table 13 Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Undergraduate Students Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Football 310 92% 2. Basketball 308 92 3. Baseball 300 89 4. Track & Field 298 89 5. Swimming 295 88 6. Cross Country 291 87 7. Wrestling 285 85 8. Tennis 280 83 9. Gymnastics 277 82 10. Golf 269 80 11. Ice Hockey 262 78 12 Soccer 248 74 13. Volleyball 194 58 14. Field Hockey 138 41 15. Softball 118 33 81 Table 14 Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Football 41 77% 2. Basketball 40 75 3. Baseball 39 74 4. Track & Field 37 7O 5. Swimming 36 70 Wrestling 36 7O 7. Cross Country 35 66 Gymnastics 35 66 Tennis 35 66 10. Golf 34 64 11. Soccer 28 53 12. Ice Hockey 24 45 13. Volleyball 16 3O 14. Softball ll 21 15. Field Hockey 10 19 82 Table 15 Varsity Sport Offerings for Men According to the Interests of the Physical Education Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Baseball 31 100% Basketball 31 100 3. Football 30 97 Tennis 30 97 Track & Field 30 97 6. Cross Country 29 94 Golf 29 94 Swimming 29 94 Wrestling 29 94 10. Gymnastics 28 90 11. Ice Hockey 23 74 12. Volleyball 20 65 13. Soccer 17 55 14. Field Hockey 2 6 15. Softball 1 3 83 Fifty-six to 85 percent of the 336 undergraduate student respondents were interested in each of the present sport offerings. Fifty-nine percent of the undergraduate student respondents supported softball (Table 16). Thirty-six to 64 percent of the 53 faculty respondents were interested in each of the present women's varsity sport offerings. Gymnastics and tennis received the most faculty support with 64 percent interest (Table 17). Eighty-four to 100 percent of the physical education faculty respondents were interested in each of the present women's varsity sport offerings. Sixty-eight percent of the physical education faculty respondents supported softball (Table 18). Discussion. The undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty respondents expressed more interest in each of the present men's sport offerings than in any others. A majority of the undergraduate student and physical education faculty respondents expressed interest in ice hockey, soccer, and volleyball. A majority of the faculty respondents expressed interest in soccer. The undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty respondents expressed more interest in each of the present women's sport offerings than any other sports, except softball, which received slightly more under- graduate student interest than field hockey. 84 Table 16 Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Undergraduate Students Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Swimming 287 85% 2. Gymnastics 279 83 3. Tennis 277 82 4. Track & Field 276 82 5. Basketball 273 81 6. Golf 247 74 7. Cross Country 224 67 8. Volleyball 213 63 9. Softball 198 59 10 Field Hockey 187 56 11. Soccer 123 37 12. Baseball 88 26 13. Ice Hockey 53 16 14. Football 52 15 15. Wrestling 25 7 85 Table 17 Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Gymnastics 34 64% Tennis 34 64 3. Basketball 33 62 Golf 33 62 Swimming 33 62 Track & Field 33 62 7. Field Hockey 27 51 8. Cross Country 24 45 9. Volleyball 19 36 10 Softball 16 30 11. Soccer 14 26 12. Wrestling 9 17 Ice Hockey 9 l7 14. Baseball 6 ll 15. Football 4 8 86 Table 18 Varsity Sport Offerings for Women According to the Interests of the Physical Education Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Interest 1. Basketball 31 100% 2. Tennis 29 94 3. Swimming 28 90 Track & Field 28 9O 5. Field Hockey 27 87 Golf 27 87 7. Cross Country 26 84 Gymnastics 26 84 Volleyball 26 84 10. Softball 21 68 11. Ice Hockey 4 13 12. Soccer 3 10 13. Baseball 2 6 Football 2 6 Wrestling 2 6 87 The data showing the interests of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University did not indicate more support for the present sport offerings of the athletic department than any other sports. Therefore, the researcher rejected Hypothesis 2. Hypothesisg3. The relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by a majority of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan.University, favor single- sex teams. The data pertaining to Hypothesis 3 was Obtained through the application of the Abilities Questionnaire (Appendix C). The 336 undergraduate student respondents favored each varsity sport offering to be on a single-sex basis. Tennis received the most support as a co-ed offering, 45 percent, from the undergraduate student respondents (Table 19). The 53 faculty respondents favored each varsity sport offering to be on a single-sex basis. Gymnastics and tennis received the most support as co-ed offerings, 42 percent, from the faculty respondents (Table 20). The 31 physical education faculty respondents favored each varsity sport offering to be on a single-sex basis. Gymnastics, swimming, and tennis received the most support as a co—ed offering, 16 percent, from the physical education faculty respondents (Table 21). 88 Table 19 Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a Co-ed Basis as Judged by the Undergraduate Students Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Support 1. Tennis 146 43% 2. Gymnastics 114 34 3. Swimming 106 32 4. Volleyball 105 31 5. Golf 101 30 6. Track & Field 75 23 7. Cross Country 58 17 8. Softball 48 14 9. Basketball 39 12 10. Baseball 24 7 11. Field Hockey 22 7 12. Soccer 21 6 13. Football 18 5 14. Ice Hockey 10 3 15. Wrestling 6 2 89 Table 20 Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a Co-ed Basis as Judged by the Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Support 1. Gymnastics 22 42 Tennis 22 42 3. Swimming 20 38 4. Track & Field 16 3O 5. Golf 14 26 6. Volleyball 12 23 7. Cross Country 11 21 8. Basketball 7 13 9. Softball 6 ll 10. Baseball 5 9 11. Soccer 4 8 12. Field Hockey 3 6 13. Football 0 0 Ice Hockey 0 0 Wrestling 0 O 90 Table 21 Varsity Sports Which Should be Offered on a Co-ed Basis as Judged by the Physical Education Faculty Sport Number Percentage of Indicating Respondents Support 1. Gymnastics 5 16% Swimming 5 16 Tennis 5 l6 4. Golf 4 13 Volleyball 4 l3 6. Track & Field 3 10 7. Cross Country 1 3 8. Baseball 0 0 Basketball 0 0 Field Hockey 0 0 Football 0 0 Ice Hockey 0 0 Soccer 0 O Softball 0 0 Wrestling 0 O 91 Discussion. The data show that a majority of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty respondents favor single-sex teams. Therefore, the researcher accepts Hypothesis 3. Summary Hypothesis 1 was rejected because the data indicated that Central Michigan University's athletic department was judged to be not in compliance with the Title IX regulations. The athletic department was in full compliance in three areas, in nearly full compliance in three areas, in more than substantial compliance in three areas, in nearly substantial compliance in one area, and in non-compliance in just one of the eleven areas studied. The areas which the athletic department needs to study carefully and to take steps to conform current policies and practices to the requirements of the Title IX regulations are these: 1. The number of varsity sports offered The total number of athletes served . The awards program . Practice uniforms and equipment 2 3 L, 5. Game uniforms and equipment 6. Prime-time practice Opportunities 7. The ratio of coaches to athletes 8 Extra compensation for duties performed outside the academic calendar 9. The amount of released time allocated to coaches 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 92 Practice facilities Sport brochures Schedule cards Programs Media entertainment The provision of athletic scholarships Hypothesis 2 was rejected because the data revealed that the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty did not indicate more support for the present sport offerings of the athletic department than any other sports. The respondents expressed some interest in the sports of ice hockey, soccer, and volleyball for men and softball for women. Hypothesis 3 was accepted because the data indicated a majority of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty favored, by a large margin, single-sex teams. Chapter 5 RECOMMENDATIONS LEADING TO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY In this chapter, the recommendations leading to equal opportunity in the Central Michigan University athletic program are presented. This plan, submitted as required by Title IX of the Education Amendments Act Of 1972 and the final regulations which took effect July 21, 1975, was developed following the guidelines presented in the September, 1975, memorandum issued by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's Office for Civil Rights. The memorandum, "Elimination of Sex Discrimination in Athletic Programs," listed the steps an educational institution must take to assure equal Opportunity and presented specific criteria that should be evaluated to determine in which areas, if any, sexual discrimination existed (Appendix A). BASIC ASSUMPTIONS The recommendations presented for this plan leading to compliance with the Title IX regulations were based upon several basic assumptions. First, the recommendations were presented for immediate implementation. The memorandum clearly stated that while the deadline for achieving compliance with the 93 94 Title IX regulations is July 21, 1978, "institutions must begin now to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure full compliance as quickly as possible." Second, it was assumed that all areas of the men's athletic program would continue to be supported at a level commensurate with the other universities comprising the Mid-American Conference, in which Central Michigan Univer— sity teams compete. The researcher believes that maintain- ing competitive men's teams aids in providing increased gate receipts, stimulating alumni giving, promoting student, faculty, and community spirit, and maintaining a large student enrollment. Once the women's athletic program is provided with equal Opportunity, these same values may be increased two-fold. Third, this plan was based upon providing equal Opportunities in the eleven specific areas as required by the memorandum. Equal aggregate expenditures were not required by the memorandum. The men's programs and women's programs need not be identical; however, in some cases it would be easier to provide equal Opportunity by duplicating programs than by any other method. Fourth, equal opportunity cannot be achieved unless the number of opportunities to participate in the women's athletic program approximates the number of Opportunities to participate in the men's athletic program: this assumes that the present man to woman ratio is maintained. 95 Fifth, the effect of promotion and publicity on attendance at athletic contests and vice versa was difficult to assess. Some athletic contests interest spectators more than others. Within the men's program itself, great dis- parity existed: football games were attended by up to 20,000 spectators, while many golf matches attracted only a few of the athletes' friends and relatives. No amount of promotion would cause 20,000 peOple to watch Central Michigan University's golf team next year. The researcher believes that outstanding individuals and/or teams attract media and spectator interest. The recommendations for this area were made based upon the spectator attendance reasonably expected for each athletic event or sport involved. Sixth, the recommendations presented herein leading to compliance with the Title IX regulations will require a large amount of increased funding for the women's athletic program. Providing an equal number of full athletic schol- arships for women as men during the l975-76 year would have required an additional $228,069.50. While this study did not involve figuring the anticipated costs leading to compliance, recommendations were made concerning the source of such funds. Seventh, the self-evaluation and the resulting recommendations leading to compliance with the Title IX regulations were based on the l975-76 academic year. It was assumed that changes in the men's athletic program in 96 succeeding years will be matched by respective changes in the women's athletic program. RECOMMENDATIONS Area I, The Nature and Extent of Sports Programs Offered Discrimination was indicated in Sub-areas A, E, and F (Table l, p. 62). Recommendation for Sub-area A. For Sub-area A, The number of varsity sports offered, it is recommended that women's softball be offered at both the varsity and junior varsity levels for the 1976-77 year. Discussion. The results of the interests survey indicated softball as the most popular sport for women not presently being offered (Table 16, p. 84, Table 17, p. 85, and Table 18, p. 86). During the l975—76 year, softball was the third most popular intramural sport for women (Jones, 1976). The number of Michigan high schools sponsoring softball for women ranks third behind basketball and track. The number of high schools sponsoring women's softball during 1975-76 was 464 (MHSAA Bulletin, 1976:488) compared to only 265 in 1972-73 (MHSAA Bulletin, 1974:427). More Michigan high schools presently sponsor girls' softball than sponsor the sports of boy's wrestling, tennis, and swimming (MHSAA Bulletin, 1976:488). Based upon this dramatic increase in participation at the high school level, it is reasonable 97 to assume that the interest in women's softball at the collegiate level will continue to grow. Recommendation for Sub-area E. For Sub-area E, Total number of athletes on eligibility lists, it is recommended that the advisability of adding junior varsity teams to those women's sports presently lacking them be studied. It is recommended that the advisability of in- creasing present sizes of the women's teams be studied. Discussion. The addition of women's softball will result in considerable improvement in increasing the number of athletes on the women's eligibility list. If either or both of the studies mentioned above prove positive, equal opportunity could be realized in this sub-area. Recommendation for Sub—area F. For Sub-area F, Prevalence of awards program, it is recommended that a jacket as the first award and forty dollars toward a "C" ring as the senior award be given to both men and women athletes. Discussion. In terms of school and team spirit, publicity value to the university derived from the athletes' wearing of the letter jackets and "C" rings far outweighs the monetary cost of the items. Are§:IIi The Provision of Equipment and Supplies Discrimination was indicated in Sub-areas A, B, and C (Table 2. p. 64). ._/ nnnnn 98 Recommendatioanor Sub-areasAL B, ang_g. For Sub- area A, Is practice equipment normally provided? Sub-area B, Are game uniforms provided? and Sub-area C, Are warm-ups provided? it is recommended that the athletic office, in consultation with the head coaches, be required to compile and distribute annually a list of necessary equipment and uniforms to be provided the athletes of each sport for practice and games leading to equal Opportunity in these sub—areas. Discussion. Presently the men and women coaches are not aware of what equipment and uniforms are provided for the Opposite sex in their own sports or in comparable sports. Area III, The Scheduling of Gamesggnd Practice Times Discrimination was indicated in Sub-area B (Table 3. p. 65). Recommendations for Sub-area B. For Sub-area B, DO teams have access to prime-time practice Opportunities? it is recommended that the men's and women's swimming teams be required to alternate practice times each semester, or, if both coaches agree, to leave the practice time as it is. Discussion. Presently the women's swim team practices from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. while the men's swim team practices from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. The women's coach stated that 2:00 99 to 4:00 is not prime time for practice because the athletes are not able to schedule 2:00 to 4:00 classes. The men's coach stated that 4:00 to 6:00 is not prime time for practice because athletes have problems getting to dinner by 6:15 p.m. He added that there was the added problem of athletes eating immediately after working out. Area V,yThe Nature and Extent of the Opportunities to Receive anching and Academic TutOEing Discrimination was indicated in Sub-area B (Table 5. P. 68). Recommendation for Sub-area B. For Sub-area B, What is the ratio of coaches with degrees and fully employed by the institution, to the total number of athletes on athletic squads? it is recommended that a fully employed assistant coach be hired for women's basketball, and the graduate assistant position now available for women's basketball be assigned to women's field hockey. Discussion. The present ratio of women coaches to women athletes is one coach per twenty-one athletes compared to the men's coach to athlete ratio of one coach per twenty athletes. The above recommendation would improve the women's coach to athlete ratio to one coach per nineteen athletes and would increase equal opportunity in both basketball and field hockey. lOO Area_VI,the Assignment and Compensation of Coaches and Tutors Discrimination was indicated in Sub-areas C and E, and Sub-area D was ruled non-applicable by the rating team (Table 6, p. 69). Recommendation for Sub-area_g. For Sub-area C, What is the ratio of the total number of coaches who receive extra compensation for duties performed outside the limits of the academic calendar? it is recommended that the athletic office, in consultation with each head coach, should study each year's schedule and determine whether practice outside the academic calendar is warranted. If the season's schedule justifies a team's practicing outside the academic calendar, the coach(es) of that team should be required to conduct such practices and be compensated for the extra time demanded. Recommendation for Sub-area D. For Sub-area D, Do coaches have reduced teaching loads to permit the recruitment of student athletes? it is recommended that a portion of the dollars saved by the women not recruiting, be applied to hiring assistant coaches for women's teams, to adding additional junior varsity teams, and to increasing the size of present squads. Discussion. The women's athletic program follows AIAW guidelines which prohibit recruitment of athletes. The lOl argument that the amount of dollars saved in this area should be applied to some other area deserves consideration. Recommendation for Sub-areaqE. For Sub-area E, Do coaches have reduced teaching loads to coach student athletes? it is recommended that the Dean of the School of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation appoint a committee, representative of the athletic administration, the coaching staff, and the physical education staff: to study the present system of released time. Discussion. At present the men receive released time for coaching and recruiting combined. The percentages for coaching and for recruiting have not been separated. The first task of the committee would be to arrive at a fair allocation of released time to each men's coach for coaching purposes. It is quite possible that if recruiting time were subtracted, the men's released time would be less than the women's in some cases. Area Viil The Provision of Locker Rooms, Practice, and Competitive Facilities Discrimination was indicated in Sub—area B (Table 7: p' 71)- Recommendation for Sub-area . For Sub-area B. Rating of practice facilities, no recommendation is made. Discussion. The discrimination rating resulted from the comparison of women's volleyball with men's wrestling. 102 Wrestling practices are held in a self-contained room, while volleyball practices are held in Finch Field HouSe. The many teams using Finch Field House and Rose Arena will always be plagued with certain amounts of noise and distraction as is common in large areas shared by several groups. In general, the coaches have been cooperative in working under such conditions. Area X, The Nature and Extent of Publicity Discrimination was indicated in Sub-areas E, F, H, K, and N (Table 10, p. 74). Recommendation for Sub-area E. For Sub-area E, Interviews with out-of-town media and coaches and/or athletes, it is recommended that the sports information director, the athletic administration, and the women's athletic staff make increased efforts to improve this Sub-area. Discussion. While it is certain that media personnel cannot be forced to come to campus and interview coaches and/ or athletes, increased efforts to cooperate with, to provide information for, and to be available for interviews with the media are called for. The present advantage held by the men's program in this area has, in part, resulted from the many years of promoting men's athletics. The media show the most interest in the so-called Spectator Sports. The media's interest in women's athletics will increase if outstanding individuals and/or teams are produced as was the case during 103 the l975-76 school year with the interest generated by the women's field hockey team's participation in the national championships. Recommendation for Sub-area F. FOr Sub-area F, Sport brochures and/or fact books, it is recommended that approximately the same quality book be produced in each sport for women as for men. Where interest necessitates, the quantities should be adjusted accordingly. Discussion. If the women continue to avoid recruit- ing, they may find that brochures and/or facts books are a valuable method of publicising the women's athletic program. Recommendation fop_Sub;area H. For Sub-area H, Provision of schedule cards and/or posters, it is recommended that fall, winter, and Spring composite schedule cards be provided. The athletic department in consultation with the sports information office should adopt general rules for providing individual team sport schedules and/or posters based upon the average spectator attendance per year. Discussion. The teams with high spectator interest will have a greater demand for individual schedule cards and/or posters than sports with low spectator interest. Recommendation for Sub-area N. For Sub-area N, The use of funds for entertainment of the media, it is recommend- ed that the athletic department, in consultation with the 104 sports information office adopt general rules relating to the entertainment of the media at athletic events based upon expected spectator attendance and/or the degree of media interest generated by the event. Discussion. Media personnel attend sporting events with high spectator interest and/or those events in which an outstanding individual or team is participating. Area XI, The Provision of Athletic Scholarships Discrimination was indicated in Sub-areas A and B (Table 11, p. 77). Recommendation for Sub-areas A and B. For Sub-area A, The ratio of varsity athletes receiving athletic scholar- ships to the total number of varsity athletes, and Sub-area B, The total dollar value funded for athletic scholarships, it is recommended that the women's athletic program receive athletic scholarship dollars at approximately the same rate per athlete as the men's athletic program. Discussion. It is assumed that the women's Opportunities for participation, Area I, and the interests as indicated by the interests survey have been accommodated. An athlete, for this purpose, is one who practices regularly with the team and whose name appears on the eligibility list. 105 Additional Recommendatipns The implementation of the many recommendations suggested leading to equal Opportunity in the Central Michigan University athletic program, will require the university to increase funding for the athletic department. The costs to the university will be considerable, but the university should not hesitate to provide this funding for women's athletics. The fact that women have not enjoyed equal opportunity in athletics, means that they have been helping to subsidize the entire university program for many years. Therefore, the budget dollars to support the increased women's athletic program should come from the general fund of the university, not from the men's athletic budget. If the costs of equal opportunity in athletics require budget cuts, the cuts should be university wide, that is, shared by every area of the university. SUMMARY The recommendations leading to equal opportunity in the Central Michigan University athletic program were: (1) add the sport of women's softball at the varsity and junior varsity levels, (2) study the advisability of adding junior varsity teams in other women's sports and increasing the number of athletes on the present women's teams, (3) award the letter jacket as a first award and contribute toward the "C" ring as a senior award for all men and women 106 athletes, (4) compile and distribute annually, a list of necessary equipment and uniforms to be provided for both men and women in each sport, (5) require the men's and women's swimming teams to switch practice times at the end of each semester unless both coaches agree to retain the present practice times, (6) hire an assistant basketball coach and assign the present women's basketball graduate assistant to field hockey. (7) require coaches to conduct practice and be compensated for the extra time expended, if the schedule justifies practice outside the academic calendar, (8) determine what percentage of the released time presently assigned the men coaches should be allocated for coaching purposes, (9) increase efforts to promote women's athletics, (10) adopt general rules for the provision of brochures, schedules, and entertainment of media personnel, based upon the expected attendance and/or degree of media interest generated by each individual team, (11) give the women's athletic program athletic scholarship dollars at approximately the same rate per athlete as the men's athletic program, and (12) provide equal opportunity in the athletic program by dividing the costs equally between all areas of the university. Chapter 6 APPRAISAL OF THE TECHNIQUES DEVELOPED FOR THE STUDY In this chapter an appraisal is made of the techniques which were developed and applied to the study. The techniques developed for this study were designed to determine if equal opportunity existed in the Central Michigan University athletic programs. No attempt was made to determine if equal expenditures were made for both sexes, because the HEW memorandum clearly stated that equal aggre- gate expenditures were not required, and because differences in equipment requirements, number of athletes on a team, and level of spectator interest necessitate certain team budgets to be larger than others. Thus, the self-evaluation question- naire was designed not to compare the amount of dollars spent for men and women in each area, but to compare the Opportu— nities available each female athlete with those of each male athlete. The self—evaluation questionnaires were administered to all the head coaches and athletic area specialists to prevent the study from being subject to the bias of the researcher. This also gave the coaches and athletic area specialists an opportunity to provide input to the study, increasing the likelihood that the recommendations would be accepted by them. 107 108 The technique of selecting the three—member rating team from university personnel outside the athletic depart- ment added to the credibility of the study. The administration of the interests and abilities questionnaire to a random sampling of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty, provided a broad base of information, in addition to allowing the entire academic community to participate in the study. The Self:§valuationQuestionnaire The self-evaluation questionnaire encompassed the eleven specific areas as required by the HEW memorandum. The major problem concerning the construction of the self— evaluation questionnaire was to construct sub-areas which would precisely delineate each area. The attempt to make each sub-area of equal importance within each area was sound. However, at times, two simple questions may have been more apprOpriate than one complex question. The questionnaire was written to evaluate the entire athletic program, yet it was administered to persons con- cerned with only one area and only one sport, as well as persons in charge of the total program. At first, minor confusion did exist among the head coaches concerning how they were to answer some of the questions. The explanation that each coach answer each question in terms of his or her own sport quickly cleared up the confusion. 109 To improve the effectiveness of the self-evaluation questionnaire, the researcher recommends changes in the wording of several sub-areas. Area I, sub-area E, Total number of athletes on eligibility lists should be changed to read: Total number of athletes who practice with the team the entire season. Some athletes who are on the eligibility lists quit or are cut, therefore should not be counted. Area I, sub—area F, Prevalance of an awards program, should be replaced by: Briefly describe your awards program. Area 11, sub-area A, Is practice equipment normally provided? should be changed to: Are practice uniforms and equipment normally provided? Area II, sub—area B, Are game uniforms provided? should be changed to: Are game uniforms and equipment normally provided? Each sub-area in Area 11 should require a brief listing of what is actually provided. To improve the application of the self-evaluation questionnaire, the researcher recommends that all question- naires be administered in one place at one time. Many minor problems, especially those of communication between the researcher and respondents and between respondents could be more easily solved. If all respondents cannot be assem- bled at one time, an alternative is to require the head coaches of the sports being directly compared to complete their questionnaires at the same location and time. 110 The technique of assigning discrimination ratings to the sub-areas, and in turn to the areas, provided for easy recognition of the degree of compliance present in the various aspects of the athletic program. The technique of selecting a three-member discrim- ination rating team from outside the athletic department was a sound, beneficial procedure. In addition to being highly respected members of the academic community outside the athletic department, the rating team members were ex- tremely knowledgeable concerning athletics, thus providing considerable credibility to the study. Discussion. The self-evaluation questionnaire was an effective instrument. The minor problems of wording and communication did not detract from the over-all value of the instrument. The success of the self-evaluation instrument was enhanced by the cooperation and enthusiasm exhibited by the respondents and rating team members. The Interests Questionnaire The interests questionnaire was designed to determine the interests of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty concerning the athletic depart- ment's present sport offerings. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identification: undergraduate students, white: faculty, pink: and physical education faculty, green. The interests questionnaire would be improved by including additional sport offerings on the questionnaire. 111 A tendency for respondents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces provided was observed. Appropriate addi- tions to the list, based on the results of this study, are badminton, bowling, skiing, and paddle ball-racquet ball. Discussion. The interests questionnaire was an effective instrument. The respondents did not express any problems with the instrument. The data was collected and recorded with no difficulty. The Abilities Questionnaire The abilities questionnaire was designed to deter- mine whether the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical educa- tion faculty, require single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identification: undergraduate students, white: faculty, pink: and physical education faculty, green. The abilities questionnaire would be improved by including additional sport offerings on the questionnaire. A tendency for respondents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces provided was Observed. Appropriate addi- tions to the list, based on this study, are badminton, bowling, skiing, and paddle ball-racquet ball. Discussion. The abilities questionnaire was an effective instrument. The respondents did not express any 112 problems with the instrument. The data was collected and recorded with no difficulty. Summary The self—evaluation questionnaire encompassed the eleven specific areas as required by the HEW memorandum. The major problem concerning the construction of the self- evaluation questionnaire was to construct sub-areas which would precisely delineate each area. The attempt to make each sub-area of equal importance within each area was sound. However, at times, two simple questions may have been more appropriate than one complex question. Minor problems in communication could be avoided, in the future, by administering the instrument to all respondents at the same place at the same time. The technique of selecting a three—member discrimination rating team from outside the athletic department was a sound, beneficial procedure. The success of the self-evaluation instrument was enhanced by the cooperation and enthusiasm exhibited by the respondents and the rating team members. The interests questionnaire was designed to deter- mine the interests of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty concerning the athletic department's present sport offerings. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identification. A tendency for respondents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces 113 provided, indicated the need for an expanded list in future applications of the instrument. The abilities questionnaire was designed to determine whether the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty, require single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identi- fication. A tendency for respondents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces provided, indicated the need for an expanded list in future applications of the instrument. Chapter 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS In September, 1975, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's Office for Civil Rights issued a memorandum pertaining to athletic programs at educational institutions. Its purpose was to provide guidance with respect to the immediate responsibilities of an educational institution to guarantee equal opportunity in the operation of both its athletic activities and its athletic scholar- ship programs. Each educational institution was required to complete a self-evaluation of its athletic policies and practices no later than July 21, 1976. The memorandum listed three immediate requirements: (1) determine if equal oppor- tunity existed in the policies and practices of the athletic program, (2) determine which sports should be offered by the institution, based upon the interests of both sexes, and (3) determine the relative abilities of the sexes to decide whether to offer single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. This study was the development, application, and appraisal of a technique for the self-evaluation of the athletic program of Central Michigan University as mandated by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's memorandum of September, 1975. 114 115 Purposes The purposes of this study were to: 1. Develop an instrument to evaluate the current policies and practices of the Central Michigan University Athletic Department to determine whether equal Opportunity existed in terms of the Title IX regulations. 2. Develop an instrument to determine the interests of both sexes as to which sports undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University preferred their athletic department to offer. 3. Develop an instrument to determine whether the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergrad- uate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University, required single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. h. Develop a plan, using the informatiOn gathered above, for the Central Michigan University Athletic Depart- ment leading to compliance with the Title IX regulations. 5. Appraise the techniques developed for the self- evaluation of an intercollegiate athletic program as required by Title IX. Hypotheses The hypotheses of this study were: 1. The Central Michigan University Athletic Department is in compliance with the Title IX regulations. 116 2. The interests of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University indicate more support for the present sport offerings of the athletic department than any other sport. 3. The relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by a majority of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University, favor single-sex teams. Limitations The limitations which must be considered when interpreting the results of the study were: 1. The study applies only to the Central Michigan University Athletic Department as it existed during the l975-76 academic year. 2. In the self-evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program, the varsity head coaches, athletic director, associate athletic director, athletic business manager and facilities coordinator, sports informa- tion director, head trainer, and head equipment manager employed by Central Michigan University participated. 3. In the self-evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program, men's indoor track was included in the sport of men's track. When comparing the men's and women's programs, men's cross country and track were rated together against women's cross country and track. Men's baseball was rated against women's field hockey, and men's wrestling was rated against women's volleyball. Football 117 was included in the over—all ratings, but because the men had one more offering, was not compared with a women's offering. 4. In the self-evaluation of the Central Michigan University athletic program, no attempt was made to determine the degree of discrimination against the men which may have existed in some areas. 5. As required by the Department of Health, Educa- tion, and Welfare's memorandum, the student and faculty respondents to the interest and abilities questionnaires expressed their personal interests in which sports to offer, as well as their personal judgment concerning the relative abilities of the sexes in choosing a sport to be offered as single-sex or co-ed. 6. To determine the interests and abilities of the sexes, a simple random sampling of the undergraduate students and faculty members, with the physical education faculty deleted, and the entire physical education faculty were asked to participate. Design The degree to which the Central Michigan University Athletic Department was in compliance with the Title IX regulations was determined by administering the self- evaluation questionnaire to the head coaches and athletic area specialists. The self-evaluation questionnaire contained the eleven specific areas, as required by the HEW memorandum (1975:7-8), for a university's self-evaluation. Each of the 118 eleven areas was divided into sub-areas to fully explore the various facets of each area. A three-member self-evaluation rating team chosen from outside the athletic department then examined each sub-area as it applied to each sport and assign- ed a discrimination rating to it. Each sport's area discrim- ination ratings resulted from averaging the respective sub- area discrimination ratings. The athletic department's sub—area discrimination ratings were obtained by thoroughly examining the total program as applied to the respective sub-area discrimination ratings assigned to the individual sports. The athletic department's area discrimination ratings were obtained by averaging its sub—area discrimination ratings. The athletic department's discrimination rating was the average of its area discrimination ratings. The interests and abilities, as judged by the under- graduate students and faculty, were obtained from a simple random sampling of the undergraduate students, faculty members, and the entire physical education faculty. The questionnaire listed each of the present men's and women's sport offerings plus several additional sports and spaces for the respondents to add additional sports which were of interest to them. The respondents were asked to indicate their interest for the sports to be offered at the inter- collegiate, club sport, and intramural levels. Each respon- dent was asked to check whether a men's team, a women's team, and/or a co-ed team should be offered for each sport and/or level checked. 119 Results Hypothesis 1, the Central Michigan University Athletic Department is in compliance with the Title IX regulations, was rejected because the data indicated that Central Michigan University's athletic department was judged to be not in compliance with the Title IX regulations. The areas which the athletic department needs to study carefully and take steps to conform current policies and practices to the requirements of the Title IX regulations are: (l) the number of varsity sports offered, (2) the total number of athletes served, (3) the awards program, (4) practice uniforms and equipment. (5) game uniforms and equipment, (6) prime- time practice Opportunities, (7) the ratio of coaches to athletes, (8) extra compensation for duties performed outside the academic calendar, (9) the amount of released time allocated to coaches, (lO) practice facilities, (ll) sport brochures, (12) schedule cards, (13) programs, (1“) media entertainment, and (15) the provision of athletic scholarships. Hypothesis 2, the interests of the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University indicate more support for the present Sport offerings of the athletic department than any other sport, was rejected because the data revealed the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty did not indicate more support for the present sport offerings than any other sport. Each of the present men's sport offerings were rated higher 120 than any others, by the respondents. Each of the present women's sport offerings were rated higher than any others, except softball, which received slightly more undergraduate student interest than field hockey. Hypothesis 3, the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergraduate students and faculty members of Central Michigan University, favor single-sex teams, was accepted because the data indicated that a majority of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty favor single—sex teams. Recommendations LeadingAto Compliance The recommendations leading to equal opportunity in the Central Michigan University athletic program were: (1) add the sport of women's softball at the varsity and junior varsity levels, (2) study the advisability of adding junior varsity teams in other women's sports and increasing the number of athletes on the present women's teams, (3) award the letter jacket as a first award and contribute toward the "C" ring as a senior award for all men and women athletes, (h) compile and distribute annually, a list of necessary equipment and uniforms to be provided for both men and women in each sport, (5) require the men's and women's swimming teams to switch practice times at the end of each semester unless both coaches agree to retain the present practice times, (6) hire an assistant basketball coach and assign the present women's basketball graduate assistant to 121 field hockey, (7) require coaches to conduct practice and be compensated for the extra time expended, if the schedule justifies practice outside the academic calendar, (8) deter- mine what percentage of the released time presently assigned the men coaches should be allocated for coaching purposes, (9) increase efforts to promote women's athletics, (lO) adOpt general rules for the provision of brochures, schedules, and entertainment of media personnel, based upon the expected attendance and/or degree of media interest generated by each individual team, (11) give the women's athletic program athletic scholarship dollars at approximately the same rate per athlete as the men's athletic program, and (12) provide equal opportunity in the athletic program by dividing the costs equally between all areas of the university. Appraisal of the Techniques The self-evaluation questionnaire encompassed the eleven specific areas as required by the HEW memorandum. The major problem concerning the construction of the self- evaluation questionnaire was to construct sub-areas which would precisely delineate each area. The attempt to make each sub-area of equal importance within each area was sound. However, at times, two simple questions may have been more appropriate than one complex question. Minor problems in communication could be avoided, in the future, by administering the instrument to all respondents at the same place at the same time. The technique of selecting a 122 three-member discrimination rating team from outside the athletic department was a sound, beneficial procedure. The success of the self-evaluation instrument was enhanced by the COOperation and enthusiasm exhibited by the respondents and the rating team members. The interests questionnaire was designed to determine the interests of the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education faculty concerning the athletic depart- ment's present sport offerings. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identification. A tendency for respond- ents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces pro- vided, indicated the need for an expanded list in future applications of the instrument. The abilities questionnaire was designed to determine whether the relative abilities of the sexes, as judged by the undergraduate students, faculty, and physical education fac- ulty, require single-sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. The questionnaires were color-coded for easy identi- fication. A tendency for respondents to avoid adding sports on their own in the spaces provided, indicated the need for an expanded list in future applications of the instrument. Implications for Further Reseaggh The researcher recommends that future studies be made concerning (1) the total dollars required for a univer- sity to bring its athletic department into compliance with the Title IX regulations, (2) the comparison of the athletic 123 department self-evaluations of two or more universities, and (3) the amount of discrimination against men athletes in a university's athletic program. BIBLIOGRAPHY Albright, Tenley E. "Which Sports for Girls?" DGWS Research Reports: Women in Sports. Washington, D.C.: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1971. Barnes, Mildred (ed.). AIAW Handbook. Washington, D.C. American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1973. Canham, D. "Opposition Forwarded to Title IX Regulations, " NCAA;News. ed. Dave Daniel, Vol. 11, No. 6, May 15, 1974. Coffey. Margaret A. "The Sportswoman: Then and Now," Journal of Health, Physical EducationJ and Recreation. Vol. 3 , No. 2, February, 1965. Daniel, Dave (ed.). "HEW Regulations Threaten College Athletics," NCAA News. 11:3, MarCh 1, 1974. . "Colleges Seek Input to Title IX," NCAA News. 15, March 15, 1974. DGWS. Standards in Sports for Girls and Women. Washington, D. 0.: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1958. Dunkle, Margaret C. "Equal Opportunity for Women in Sports," Women's Athletics: Cgping with Controversy, ed. Barbara J. Hoepner, Washington, D.C.: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 197%. 38 Federal Register. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Federal Register, September 20, 1973, p. 26384-89. 40 Federal Register. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Federal Register, June 4, 1975, p. 24128-45. Felshin, Jan. "The Social View," The American Woman in Sport. eds. Gerber and others, Readin , Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 197 . Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, l97HT Fuzak, John A. "Fuzak Questions Title IX's Consistency with the Law," NCAA News. ed. Dave Daniel, 12:9, August l, 1975- 12h 125 Gerber. Ellen W. and others. The American Woman in Sport. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publ1sh1ng Co., 1974. Gendel, Evalyn. "Pregnancy, Fitness, and Sports," Journal of the American Medical Association. 201:10, September 4, 1967. ' "Women and the Medical Aspects of Sports," Journal of School Health and Physical Education. 37:9, November. 1967. Gilbert, B. and N. Williamson, "Sport is Unfair to Women." Sports Illustrated. 38:21. May 28. 1973. . "Women are Getting a Raw Deal," Sports Illustrated. 38:22. June 4, 1973. . "Women in Sport," Spopts Illustrated. 38:23, June 11, 1973. Green. Edith. "The Future is Now," antfiddress by Represen- tative Edith Green, given at the 48 PACRAO Conference, Portland, Oregon, November 3, 1974. Gwaltney, Corbin. "Anti-Sex-Bias Rules," The Chronicle of Higher Education. 10:3. March 10, 1975. . "With Little History. Debate, or Thought. . .," The Chronicle of HigherEducation. 10:7, April 7, 1975. _________ "Mood in Congress Alarms Women." The Chronicle of Higher Education. 10:10, April 28, 1975. Heusner, W. W. ”Basic Physiological Concepts as They Relate to Girls' Sports," National Institute on Girls' Sports. September 28, 1965. (Mimeographed) Jones, Tommy R., Personal interview. June 11, 1976. Kazmaier, R. W. Kendall Sports Trail, Letter from the Publisher. 28:1, September-October, 1973. Klafs, C. E. and M. Joan Lyon. The Female Athlete. St. Louis: the C. V. Mosby Co., 1973. Komisar, Lucy. The New Feminism. New York: Franklin Watts, 1971. Lee. Mabel. ”The Case For and Against Intercollegiate Athletics for Women and the Situation Since 1923," Research Quarterly. No. 2. May, 1931. 126 Lockhart. Aileene S. and Betty Spears. Chronicle of American Physical Education. Dubuque: William C. Brown Co., 1972. Loggia, Marjorie Sloan. "0n the Playing Fields of History." MS. Vol. II, No. 1, July, 1973. Loomis, T. "Women College Athletes Making Strides in Equality Quest," The Blade (Toledo). February 3. 1974, Sec. D, p. 3, C01. 1.80 Magnusson, Lucille. "The Development of Programs." Women's Athletics: Coping with Controversy. ed. B. J. Hoepner, American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1974. Memorandum. Report of Committee Action, Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women, Division for Girls' and Women's Sports, the American Association for Health. Physical Education, and Recreation, April 2, 1973. Memorandum. "Elimination of Sex Discrimination in Athletic Programs." United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Office for Civil Rights, September, 1975. MHSAA BULLETIN. "Interscholastic Sports Sponsored by Michigan High Schools." L:8, March. 1976. MHSAA BULLETIN. "Interscholastic Sports Sponsored by Michigan High Schools." LII:8. March, 1976. National Organization for Women. "Towards Equality in Sport-- Recommendations.": Resolution passed by NOW at the National Conference, held in Washington. D.C., February, 1973. Perrin, Ethel. "A Crises In Girls' Athletics," Sportsmanship. Vol. 1, No. 3. December. 1928. Rice. Emmett A., John L. Hutchinson, and Mable Lee. A Brief Histgpy of Physical Education. New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1958. Rossi, Alice S. and Ann Calderwood. Academic Women on the Move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973. Scott, M. Gladys. "Competition for Women in American Colleges and Universities," Research Quarterly. No. 16, March, 1945. Spears. Betty. "The Emergence of Women in Sport," Women's Athletics: Copingpwith Controver_y. ed. B. J. Hoepner, American Association for Health. Physical Education, and Recreation, Washington, D.C.: 1974. 127 Staudt, Tim. "'Must Keep Athletics in Proper Educational Perspective--Fuzak'." NCAA News. 10:15, November 15, 1974. Swanson, Richard A. "From Glide to Stride: Significant Events in a Century of American Women's Sport," Women's Athletics: Coping with Controveggy. ed. B. J. Hoepner, American Association for Health. Physical Education, and Recreation. Washington, D.C.. 1974. Theunissen, William. "Surveys of Mid-American Conference Men's and Women's Athletic Budgets," Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant: February, 1974. Thomas, Clayton L. "The Female Sports Participant: Some Physiological Questions," DGWS Research Reports: Women in Sports. Washington, D.C.: American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 1971. 20 United States Code. Education Amendments of 1972. Section 1681(a). Washington, D.C.: United States Printing Office, 1972. Van Dalen, Deobold B. and Bruce L. Bennett. A World Histopy of Physical Education. Englewood. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1971. Wentworth, E. "HEW Offers 'Nondisruptive' Bans on Sex Bias," The Washington Post. June 19, 1974, Sec. A. Col. 8. p. l. Wilmore, Jack H. "They Told You You Couldn't Compete with Men and You, Like a Fool. Believed Them. Here's Hope," WomenSports. 1:1, June. 1974. APPENDIX A MEMORANDUM TO Chief State School Officers. Superintendents of Local Educational Agencies and College and University Presidents SUBJECT: ELIMINATION OF SEX DISCRIMINATION IN ATHLETIC PROGRAMS September, 1975 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE/ Office for Civil Rights A1 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON. D.C. 20201 September 1975 TO: Chief State School Officers, Superintendents of Local Educational Agencies and College and University Presidents FROM: Director, Office for Civil Rights SUBJECT: Elimination of Sex Discrimination in Athletic Programs Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Departmental Regulation (45 CFR Part 86) promulgated there- under prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in the Operation of most federally-assisted education programs. The regulation became effective on July 21, 1975. During the forty-five day period immediately following approval by the President and publication of the regulation on June 4, 1975, concerns were raised about the immediate obligations of educational institutions to comply with certain sections of the Departmental Regulation as they relate to athletic programs. These concerns, in part. focus on the application of the adjustment period provision (86.41(d)) to the various non-discrimination requirements, and addition- ally, on how educational institutions can carry out the self- evaluation requirement (86.3(c)). This memorandum provides guidance with respect to the major first year reSponsibilities of an educational institution to ensure equal Opportunity in the Operation of both its athletic activities and its athletic scholarship programs. Practical experience derived from actual on-site compliance reviews and the concomitant deve10pment of greater govern— mental expertise on the application of the Regulation to athletic activities may, of course. result in further or revised guidance being issued in the future. Thus, as affected institutions proceed to conform their prOgrams with the Department's regulation, they and other interested persons are encouraged to review carefully the operation of these guidelines and to provide the Department with the benefit of their views. A2 A3 Basic Requirements There are two major substantive provisions of the regulation which define the basic responsibility of educational institutions to provide equal Opportunity to members of both sexes interested in participating in the athletics programs institutions offer. ' Section 86.41 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in the Operation of any interscholastic, intercolleg- iate, club or intramural athletic program Offered by an educational institution. Section 86.37(c) sets forth require— ments for ensuring equal Opportunity in the provision of athletic scholarships. These sections apply to each segment of the athletic program of a federally assisted educational institution whether or not that segment is the subject of direct financial support through the Department. Thus, the fact that a particular segment of an athletic program is supported by funds received from various other sources (such as student fees, general revenues, gate receipts, alumni donations, booster clubs. and non-profit foundations) does not remove it from the reach of the statute and hence of the regulatory requirements. However. drill teams, cheerleaders and the like, which are covered more generally as extracurricular activities under section 86.31. and instructional offerings such as physical education and health classes, which are covered under section 86.34, are not a part of the institution's "athletic program" within the meaning of the regulation. . Section 86.41 does not address the administrative structure(s) which are used by educational institutions for athletic programs. Accordingly, institutions are not precluded from employing separate administrative structures for men's and women's sports (if separate teams exist) or a unitary structure. However, when educational institutions evaluate whether they are in compliance with the provisions of the regulation relating to non-discrimination in employment, they must carefully assess the effects on employees of both sexes of current and any proposed administrative structure and related coachin assignments. Changes in current admin— istrative structure 8) or coaching assignments which have a disproportionately adverse effect on the employment Opportuni- ties Of employees of one sex are prohibited by the regulation. Self-Evaluation and Adjustment Periods Section 86.3(c) generally requires that by July 21. 1976, educational institutions (1) carefully evaluate current policies and practices (including those related to the Opera— tion of athletic programs) in terms of compliance with those A4 provisions and (2) where such policies or practices are inconsistent with the regulation, conform current policies and practices to the requirements of the regulation. An institution's evaluation of its athletic program must include every area of the program covered by the regula- tion. All sports are to be included in this overall assess- ment, whether they are contact or non—contact sports. With respect to athletic programs, section 86.4l(d) sets specific time limitations on the attainment of total conformity of institutional policies and practices with the requirements of the regulation--up to one year for elementary schools and up to three years for all other educational insti- tutions. Because of the integral relationship of the provision relating to athletic scholarships and the provision relating to the Operation of athletic programs, the adjustment periods for both are the same. The adjustment period is p33 a waiting period. Insti— tutions must begin now to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure full compliance as quickly as possible. Schools may design an approach for achieving full compliance tailored to their own circumstances; however. self-evaluation, as required by section 86.3(c) is a very important step for every institution to assure compliance with the entire Title IX regulation, as well as with the athletics provisions. Required First Year Actions School districts, as well as colleges and universities, are obligated to perform a self-evaluation of their entire education program, including the athletics program, prior to July 21. 1976. School districts which offer interscholastic or intramural athletics at the elementary school level must immediately take significant steps to accommodate the inter- ests and abilities of elementary school pupils of both sexes. including steps to eliminate Obstacles to compliance such as inequities in the provision of equipment, scheduling and the assignment Of coaches and other supervisory personnel. As indicated earlier, school districts must conform their total athletic program at the elementary level to the requirements of section 86.41 no later than July 21, 1976. In order to comply with the various requirements of the regulation addressed to nondiscrimination in athletic programs, educational institutions Operating athletic programs above the elementary level should: A5 (1) Compare the requirements of the regulation addressed to nondis- crimination in athletic programs and equal opportunity in the pro- vision of athletic scholarships with current policies and practices; (2) Determine the interests of both sexes in the sports to be Offered by the institution and, where the Sport is a contact sport or where participants are selected on the basis of competition, also determine the relative abilities of members of each sex for each such sport Offered, in order to decide whether to have single sex teams or teams composed of both sexes. (Abilities might be determined through try-outs or by relying upon the know— ledge of athletic teaching staff, administrators and athletic conference and league representatives.) (3) Develop a plan to accommodate effect- ively the interests and abilities of both sexes, which plan must be fully implemented as expeditiously as possible and in no event later than July 21. 1978. Although the plan need not be submitted to the Office for Civil Rights, insti- tutions should consider publicizing such plans so as to gain the assistance of students. faculty, etc. in complying with them. Assessment of Interests and Abilities In determining student interests and abilities as described in (2) above, educational institutions as part of the self-evaluation process should draw the broadest possible base of information. An effort should be made to obtain the participation of all segments of the educational community affected by the athletics program, and any reasonable method adOpted by an institution to Obtain such participation will be acceptable. Separate Teams The second type of determination discussed in (2) above relates to the manner in which a given sports activity is to be Offered. Contact sports and sports for which teams A6 are chosen by competition may be offered either separately or on a unitary basis. Contact sports are defined as football, basketball. boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey and any other sport the purpose or major activity of which involves bodily contact. Such sports may be Offered separately. If by opening a team to both sexes in a contact sport an educational institution does not effectively accommodate the abilities of members of both sexes (see 86.4l(c) (1)), separate teams in that sport will be required if both men and women express interest in the sport and the interests of both sexes are not otherwise accommodated. For example, an institution would not be effectively accommodating the inter- ests and abilities of women if it abolished all its women's teams and opened up its men's teams to women. but only a few women were able to qualify for the men's team. Equal Opportunity In the deve10pment of the total athletic program referred to in (3) above. educational institutions. in order to accommodate effectively the interests and abilities of both sexes, must ensure that equal Opportunity exists in both the conduct of athletic programs and the provision of athletic scholarships. Section 86.4l(c) requires equal Opportunity in athletic programs for men and women. Specific factors which should be used by an educational institution during its self-evaluative planning to determine whether equal Opportunity exists in its plan for its total athletic program are: --the nature and extent of the sports programs to be offered (including the levels of competition. such as varsity, club, etc.): -—the provision of equipment and supplies; --the scheduling of games and practice time; --the provision of travel and per diem allowances; --the nature and extent of the Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring; --the assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors; --the provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; A7 --the provision of medical and training facilities and services; —-the provision of housing and dining facilities and services; --the nature and extent of publicity. Overall Objective The point of the regulation is not to be so inflexi- ble as to require identical treatment in each of the matters listed under section 86.4l(c). During the process of self- evaluation, institutions should examine all of the athletic opportunities for men and women and make a determination as to whether each has an equal Opportunity to compete in athle- tics in a meaningful way. The equal opportunity emphasis in the regulation addresses the totality of the athletic program of the institution rather than each sport offered. Educational institutions are not required to duplicate their men's program for women. The thrust of the effort should be on the contribution of each of the categories to the overall goal of equal Opportunity in athletics rather than on the de- tails related to each of the categories. While the impact of expenditures for sex identifiable sports programs should be carefully considered in determining whether equal Opportunity in athletics exists for both sexes, equal aggregate expenditures for male and female teams are not required. Rather, the pattern of expenditures should not result in a disparate effect on opportunity. Recipients must not discriminate on the basis of sex in the provision of nec- essary equipment, supplies, facilities, and publicity for sports programs. The fact that differences in expenditures may occur because of varying costs attributable to differences in equipment requirements and levels of spectator interest does not obviate in any way the responsibility of educational institutions to provide equal Opportunity. Athletic Scholarships As part of the self-evaluation and planning process discussed above, educational institutions must also ensure that equal opportunity exists in the provision of athletic scholarships. Section 86.37(c) provides that "reasonable Opportunities" for athletic scholarships should be "in prOportion to the number of students of each sex participating in interscholastic or intercollegiate athletics." A8 Following the approach of permitting separate teams, section 86.37(c) of the regulation permits the overall allo- cation of athletic scholarships on the basis of sex. No such separate treatment is permitted for non-athletic scholarships. The thrust of the athletic scholarship section is the concept of reasonableness. not strict proportionality in the allocation of scholarships. The degree of interest and par- ticipation of male and female students in athletics is the critical factor in determining whether the allocation of athletic scholarships conforms to the requirements of the regulation. . Neither quotas nor fixed percentages of any type are required under the regulation. Rather, the institution is required to take a reasonable approach in its award of athletic scholarships. considering the participation and relative inter— ests and athletic proficiency of its students of both sexes. Institutions should assess whether male and female athletes in sports at comparable levels Of competition are afforded approximately the same Opportunities to obtain scholarships. Where the sports offered or the levels Of competition differ for male and female students. the institu- tion should assess its athletic scholarship program to deter- mine whether overall opportunities to receive athletic scho- larships are roughly prOportionate to the number of students of each sex participating in intercollegiate athletics. If an educational institution decides not to make an overall prOportionate allocation of athletic scholarships on the basis of sex, and thus, decides to award such scholarships by other means such as applying general standards to applicants of both sexes. institutions should determine whether the standards used to award scholarships are neutral, i.e. based on criteria which do not inherently disadvantage members of either sex. There are a number of "neutral" standards which might be used including financial need, athletic proficiency or a combination of both. For example, an institution may wish to award its athletic scholarships to all applicants on the basis Of need after a determination of a certain level of athletic proficiency. This would be permissable even if it results in a pattern of award which differs from the relative levels of interests or participation Of men and women students so long as the initial determination of athletic proficiency is based on neutral standards. However. if such standards are not neutral in substance or in application then different standards would have to be develOped and the use of the discriminatory standard discontinued. For example, when "ability" is used as a basis for scholarship award and the range Of ability in a particular sport, at the time, differs widely between the sexes, separate norms must be develOped for each sex. A9 Availability of Assistance We in the Office for Civil Rights will be pleased to do everything possible to assist school officials to meet their Title IX responsibilities. Peter E. HOlmes. Director Office for Civil Rights APPENDIX B INSTITUTIONAL SELF-EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE Dear Athletic Staff Member: Central Michigan University, as required by the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) memoradum of September, 1975. is conducting a self-evaluation of its athletic and sports programs. The attached questionnaire is a most significant part of your University's self-evaluation program. The HEW memorandum requires that we: "Compare the requirements of the regulation addressed to non-discrimination in athletic programs and equal Opportunity in the pro- vision of athletic scholarships with current policies and practices," and further that "during the process of self-evaluation, institutions should examine all of the athletic Opportunities for men and women and make a determination as to whether each has an equal Opportunity to compete in athletics in a mean- ingful way." The HEW memorandum lists eleven "specific factors" (hereafter referred to as areas) which an educational institution should examine during its self-evaluation process to determine whether equal opportunity exists in its athletic program. Directions: Each of the eleven areas suggested in the HEW memorandum has been divided into sub-areas on the attached questionnaire. You are requested to answer only those questions which pertain to your Position/Sport. Women place their answers in the column indicated by a capital W: (W ). Men place their answers in the column indicated by a capital M: (M ). You are encouraged to make comments on the back of the sheet if you feel further elaboration is needed to properly answer any item. Please number all such comments for easy identifi- cation. A three member committee (chosen from persons outside the athletic department) will be responsible for computing the sub-area discrimination ratings based upon the combined answers of the respondents. Each of the area discrimination rating will be computed by averaging the sub-area discrimination ratings which pertain to it. A B1 B2 Ahaco mm: moaumo homv msflpmm soapms nflsfluomfio «ms¢un:m wpmpfl>ohm mpwm msanomOo mn< .Q wpopw>opn manuspmz On¢ .o wpmpa>ohm mspowfls: 68mm mp< .m wpmcw>opm haamsuos PCmsmflsvm moapoMpm mH .< .mmwammsm Una pcOsQszm mo soamfl>opm ope .HH .emnmopm mpnmsm Cm Mo mocmam>msm .m .mpmfla zpflaflnfiwflam so mOVOHSPm Mo hopes: HMPOB .m .pmpomcomm msmmp hpflmpm> Means“ mo nmpssz .Q meanwm>m soapflpmmsoo HmCOflpmz pom moapadepommo Commomnpmog 69¢ .o moanmaflm>m Cowpflpomsoo pom mmflpfissphommo sommmmnpmom mosmpmmsoo no HOQOMwOm mp< .m .pmummwo mpnoam zpfimpm> Mo popes: one .< .pmpmwmo newswosg mppomm map mo pampxm psm chaps: one .H ~SDQzm mm 09 mmnmamm Am mcmnusnsm 3 so\pcm .mcowms .mcmcmm hpwmhm>w£p mh< «mpmsdm mmpma pom pom: haaMpchm 3 Usm mammafim>m woman zpwmnm>flsa op¢ Apcsoem Pwfia :: mm» 3P1 wmocmzoaam swap Dog 8009 pcmsppmamp 3 owpmasvm omxwm m Spa; ompmmBSD mvhomm mp< APCSOEM mea I: wok MHV wooOMSOHHm Ewan 9mg Hams pawspmmgoo 3 oapmagpm emxfiu a spa; empmmesn mpuomm mp< .mmocmzoaam Soap pom Una Hm>mnp Mo soflmw>ong wmowgompm no\dsm SoapfipmmsOo sowvmom> BB 3 so mQOHPowppmop HMGOHPSPHpmcfi muons mn¢ wmmfipwsspuongo moapompn 3 osapuoswgm op mmooom m>mz msmmp on «Common mo spmcma cam .mpmmpsoo mo popes: .QOMp :wwwmsoo no mowpomnm mo mmpmp .COAPMPOQEOO no mowpowgg mo mmsflp wswasomnom op whammy haso mm: OOflmmo pomv wcflpmm soapmc :flsfihomflm ampH .HHH QmBm mm 08 m¢mm< Atho mm: OOHmwo somv wcflpmm QOflvms :Hsfipomfia mmu< B4 m “haze mm: mafimmo Aomv wcflpmm scape: Iflsflpomfim mmu Boga: ohm 0:3 monomoo op monomoo mo popes: Hmpop may mo oapmh map ma Pmn3 .mnopsp monomoo mo soapmchmeOo can Pumsswflmmm .mpmsvm Ofipmanpm no mmpmasvm mo Mensa: Hmpop msv op monomoo cohOHQeO SHHMGOHpSPHmew mEaPIppmm po\psm mpcwpmwmmm mpmscmpw mo oapdp may ma Pmn3 wmpmsvm prmanpm Co mmpwanpm mo amass: prop map op .GOflPspwpmcfi 639 hp cohoamsm haasm paw mmmnmmc swag monomoo Mo oapdh map ma 98:3 Apcsosm pmfla II wok MHV mepOHQPMIpsmczpm mo wQHHOPSP OQP pom copfi>osm waspssm wH .¢ ccm One .¢ .wswpopsp Oflsmpmom UGO masomoo m>amomg op mmwpflsspmommo may mo POOme paw magpwc mmpmmvsoo mass op Pwmhopwm mfl> Hm>mup hasoEEOo mowsvm mEom on One .m .H> QmBm mm OB mopm mCOflpmcflmem HMOHmznm mh¢ .< .mmoa>smm Una mmwpflaflomm mcflcflmap psm HMOHUOE mo COflmfl>ohm ope .HHH> Aaoom .m ShopommmHPMm .N PGOHHOOxm .HV .sowpfipmmsoo 3 OHPOHQPO mac: 90% cows mmflpflaflomm mpmm .o “poem .m Shopommmflpmm .N 3 PQOHHmoxm .Hv .mmflpflaflomm weapomnm mpmm .m Asoom .m Shopommmflpmm .N pamaamoxm .Hv 3 .mpmswm OP mammaflm>m mpme mEoon nmxooa 09mm .< .mmwpwaflomw m>wpflpmmsoo ocm .mowpomhm .msoop gmxooa mo Coamfl>ohm one .HH> Apcsoem mmmum>m Pmfla II mom MHV .mmpmaspw pCOUSPm nomoo 3 OP momOH mcfinowmp cmozcmn m>m3 monomoo on .m APGSOEM mwwhm>m pmHH II mm» MHV wmmpmanpm PCmpspm mo Pamspfishomp mzv washom 3 OP mpmoa mcfl:ommw woodpmp m>mn monomoo on .Q OMMUCOHNO Ofismpmom 639 Mo mPHEHH wnp mofimpso cospomumg mowpfip pom CoflpmchQEoo mapxm m>flmomh on? monomoo mmonp ov monomoo mo o amaze mm: OOflmmo pomv mcfipmm sowpms Ifiswpomflm amhm mm 09 mpchgmhmEoo m an pwum>oo mopmazpm mpg mmphomm mpMpmeHooumpsp :p s 3 mmpwanpm pop pdmg map“ snowman HEOAems m mH weoo Spam 3 Igpos mpnomm poOono:Cos CH mwoppompn op< wego m an Umpm>oo 3 haadfipo: mppon pompcOO cw mmoppomum mp4 wmpcm>m Oppmazpm pm eoo 3 Spamspos mphomm poMpsOOIso: :p mEMOp mp< «mpsm>m Oppmanpm pm eoo 3 haawsho: mphomm pompsoo Sp mswmp mp< wmmpppapomm OspOHpms mppomm mappm op mmmoom 2 3 o>mn zHHMEMo: mamzpp>pUCH Usm msmmp on «sprHmzam smmp opp E 3 op poppmpmm hHHmEho: mmpmanpm Bonanza 69¢ Awems SHAMEHoc mmpwaspm ompswsp on wpmcp>ohm mppm moppomnm hpmpapxsw pcm Ahaco mm: OOHmMO pomv mcppmm Cowpms Ipsppompm amh¢Ipsm E 3 menopps: mowpomhm m>ppompoum cam Ussom 69¢ wmvmsvm so Soapsm>mhm 2 3 zpsmcp op memeH COpr wouSmmmE mh¢ .Q .0 .m omespa<>m mm as mammp Ahaso mm: mowpmo pomv mepwm Soapw: IpSppopr amh< 0 B7 .mmmompsm szOHHnsm hop appms Spa; pompcoo pmmmp and E 3 Opconmmamp mo mm: map Mo mosmsumgm mgp mpmm .o .mmmomhsm thOpHQSQ pom mEpr pcm mmcpam 2 3 pmpoaoo mo om: mnp po mocmsvmpp mnp mpmm .m .moponm mppnz paw xoman mo Cowmp>oum map and momdmamp E 3 CommOmImpm smppppz mo zosmsvmnp mnp mpmm .¢ Azahmasmmm .m hapCOSUOMm .: SHHNCOpmmOoo .m hamhmm .N pm>mz .H .msoaaom mm mpmmv .zppopapsm mo pcmpxo psm mpspms one .x meQMp mapspmhp oppmanpm am pm cop mum on; mmpoanpm ppomm 2 3 mpmpwwaaoonmpsp mo mepcOohmm opp mp pm£3 .m sauce oppmaspm cm Cw condo: 6pm on; mopmazpm ppomm ahaco mm: moampo pomv mappmm soppms IpSpuome mmppwm paw moappppopp wcHspp cam mcpmsos mo Cowmp>onm one .xH wsmmeuQ Soapmppappmgmp p250m m Ca comp>hOQ5m Adamsuos hmnp ohm paw op E 3 mmmoow o>mn SHHmEhOs mmpmanpm copswsp on .2 QmBm mm 09 moo mum mpsm>m Adam :Opnz app: hozmsvohp map mpmm .aossomhmm thOpHnsm puomm an pmmm>oo ohm mpcm>m macs gown; app; hosmswmpp map opmm .mpsm>m pop Mmspmpppm>ww appzv msmnmohm mspop>opm mo osmsvmup map mpmm .mmmmmaoh pcm>mIpmoQ mo hocmsvmhp map mpmm .momMmHmh pCm>OImnm mo accosvmap map mpmm .mpmpmom mascmnom uo\psm mphdo manpmnom mappsppppmpu paw wcpospoum mo hocmsvmpp map mpmm .moapmppMpm nonwom psw pam>m mappnoomu cam mappomaaoo p0 hosmsdmnm mnp mpmm .mxoon mpomp no\dcm mopsco Iona phomm map05pohm mo hosmswmnp Ocp mpmm .mmpmazpm po\osm monomoo cam mppms czopIMOIpSO mgp somzpon w3¢p>hmp£p wcpwsmnpm mo Scamsumpp mnp mpmm .mmpmHSpm po\psm monopoo pew «acme Hmooa map smmspmn m3mw>hmpsp mCstmuum mo zoswswmpp map mpmm .Q .3 .h .m .m .D mmem mm as n¢wm¢ Mano mm: oowpmo pomv mappmm soaps: Ipsppowpo won¢ pnomm\:0pppmom B9 z Amaco mm: OOpppo pomv mappmm soapms Ipsppompo wop nwaaoc Hapop mnp mp pms3 .m «mmpmaspm appmpw> mo nmpsss Hapop map op mnpnmpwaonom Oppmaspw wcp>pmoon mopmanp< hppmnm> mo Oppmn map mp pwn3 .< mmpnmumaozom Oppmanpm mo sepwp>osm one .Hx .mfiome ng Mo psmsspmpnmpSO map pom pom: mum mGQSM gowns npps hosmsvmpp opp opmm .z QmB¢DQ<>m mm 09 m