|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 22, 2024 11:49:10 GMT -5
If the passage of Title IX was the victory, then why are so many institutions out of compliance in terms of expenditures and participation/opportunity? That definition doesn't make sense. It's no different that the actual impact the passage of the 14th Amendment had on slavery. The true victories occurred through civil rights litigation that was favorably disposed in the courts. Huh? I didn't say anything about simply the passage of the law being the victory itself. The victory, as it was clear, was the explosion of opportunities for females to participate in athletics, at all levels. Sure, that's fine to champion various cases that were fought or settled. Never said anything otherwise
Okay, so if the victory is the difference between women's athletic before and after Title IX, why are so many institutions out of compliance in terms of expenditures and participation/opportunity?
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 22, 2024 11:52:12 GMT -5
Huh? I didn't say anything about simply the passage of the law being the victory itself. The victory, as it was clear, was the explosion of opportunities for females to participate in athletics, at all levels. Sure, that's fine to champion various cases that were fought or settled. Never said anything otherwise
Okay, so if the victory is the difference between women's athletic before and after Title IX, why are so many institutions out of compliance in terms of expenditures and participation/opportunity? "Out of compliance" meaning female varsity roster spots versus male are like, 47% to 53% when the full-time undergrad enrollment at the school is say 52% female.
Whoopty doo, frankly.
Expenditures being unequal is very largely due to the lack of money in women's sports in general. IE, the women's rowing coach gets paid $100k while the football coach gets paid $5M. Nothing having anything to do with Title IX.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 22, 2024 11:55:20 GMT -5
Okay, so if the victory is the difference between women's athletic before and after Title IX, why are so many institutions out of compliance in terms of expenditures and participation/opportunity? "Out of compliance" meaning female varsity roster spots versus male are like, 47% to 53% when the full-time undergrad enrollment at the school is say 52% female. Whoopty doo, frankly. Expenditures being unequal is very largely due to the lack of money in women's sports in general. IE, the women's rowing coach gets paid $100k while the football coach gets paid $5M. Nothing having anything to do with Title IX.
Those are not remotely the enrollment/participation figures at most institutions, especially public ones. Expenditures is one of the fundamental aspects of Title IX. The level of arrogance and ignorance is astounding.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 22, 2024 12:02:47 GMT -5
Those are not remotely the enrollment/participation figures at most institutions, especially public ones. Really? Let's do the U of Minnesota (-Twin Cities, officially). ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details (you have to select the school, it won't let me link to a specific school's results) Number of Full-time Undergraduates: 28,458 Men: 12,956 (46%) Women: 15,502 (54%) Unduplicated Count of Participants Men: 299 Women: 295 Only in very narrow elements, like recruiting and travel. Title IX has never required the salary of coaches, or professors for that matter, to be equal between genders.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 22, 2024 12:09:15 GMT -5
Those are not remotely the enrollment/participation figures at most institutions, especially public ones. Really? Let's do the U of Minnesota (-Twin Cities, officially). ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details (you have to select the school, it won't let me link to a specific school's results) Number of Full-time Undergraduates: 28,458 Men: 12,956 (46%) Women: 15,502 (54%) Unduplicated Count of Participants Men: 299 Women: 295 Only in very narrow elements, like recruiting and travel. Title IX has never required the salary of coaches, or professors for that matter, to be equal between genders. The current enrollment data for many public institutions reflect closer to 60% female enrollment. The Equity in Athletics Act data you reference is significantly behind, and was also delayed due to Covid.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 22, 2024 12:56:23 GMT -5
Really? Let's do the U of Minnesota (-Twin Cities, officially). ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details (you have to select the school, it won't let me link to a specific school's results) Number of Full-time Undergraduates: 28,458 Men: 12,956 (46%) Women: 15,502 (54%) Unduplicated Count of Participants Men: 299 Women: 295 Only in very narrow elements, like recruiting and travel. Title IX has never required the salary of coaches, or professors for that matter, to be equal between genders. The current enrollment data for many public institutions reflect closer to 60% female enrollment. The Equity in Athletics Act data you reference is significantly behind, and was also delayed due to Covid. That data for Minnesota is what they publicly reported to the Department of Education for the 2022-23 academic year. You think they lied to the DOE?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jul 22, 2024 12:59:07 GMT -5
I can't speak to Minnesota but I have seen some very strange numbers come out of EADA reports.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 22, 2024 13:06:30 GMT -5
The current enrollment data for many public institutions reflect closer to 60% female enrollment. The Equity in Athletics Act data you reference is significantly behind, and was also delayed due to Covid. That data for Minnesota is what they publicly reported to the Department of Education for the 2022-23 academic year. You think they lied to the DOE? I can't speak directly to those specific numbers, but I think the total enrollment figure isn't necessarily an accurate reflection of what the discussion was. These data are often an aggregate of all enrollment data, and different institutions use different means to aggregate the data involving full-time, part-time and other types of enrollees (for example, staff members or their dependents, people who take a class or more and drop them, etc.). My point was that the current admission and enrollment data reflect a significant increase in the percentage of incoming female students vs male students, especially in public institutions, where the cutoffs and yields are not as carefully curated (my original post wasn't as clear about what data was reflecting that percentage).
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Jul 22, 2024 13:15:02 GMT -5
Those are not remotely the enrollment/participation figures at most institutions, especially public ones. Really? Let's do the U of Minnesota (-Twin Cities, officially). ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details (you have to select the school, it won't let me link to a specific school's results) Number of Full-time Undergraduates: 28,458 Men: 12,956 (46%) Women: 15,502 (54%) Unduplicated Count of Participants Men: 299 Women: 295 Only in very narrow elements, like recruiting and travel. Title IX has never required the salary of coaches, or professors for that matter, to be equal between genders. True Title IX doesn’t effect salaries of coaches: but Title VII does: you can not discriminate by gender salaries for the same work: thus the reason womens basketball salaries inflated faster then other womens coaches: the direct comparison of “work done as similar”! Please keep your titles straight.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 22, 2024 13:27:44 GMT -5
Really? Let's do the U of Minnesota (-Twin Cities, officially). ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details (you have to select the school, it won't let me link to a specific school's results) Number of Full-time Undergraduates: 28,458 Men: 12,956 (46%) Women: 15,502 (54%) Unduplicated Count of Participants Men: 299 Women: 295 Only in very narrow elements, like recruiting and travel. Title IX has never required the salary of coaches, or professors for that matter, to be equal between genders. True Title IX doesn’t effect salaries of coaches: but Title VII does: you can not discriminate by gender salaries for the same work: thus the reason womens basketball salaries inflated faster then other womens coaches: the direct comparison of “work done as similar”! Please keep your titles straight. Coaching men's basketball and coaching women's basketball isn't the same work. And the women's basketball coach being paid 20% of the men's coach instead of 5% wouldn't mean Title VII compliance anyway.
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Jul 22, 2024 14:28:55 GMT -5
True Title IX doesn’t effect salaries of coaches: but Title VII does: you can not discriminate by gender salaries for the same work: thus the reason womens basketball salaries inflated faster then other womens coaches: the direct comparison of “work done as similar”! Please keep your titles straight. Coaching men's basketball and coaching women's basketball isn't the same work. And the women's basketball coach being paid 20% of the men's coach instead of 5% wouldn't mean Title VII compliance anyway. I would like to get our “tomato’s and tamaro’s in order: i am not suggesting we discuss if men’s and women’s basketball is or isn’t the same work. And i am not suggesting compliance with Title VII in my post. I was referring to a sentence in the previous post about salaries and title IX and only pointed out that salaries for coaches is not a Title IX issue, but a title VII issue between litigant's and defendants. “Claims brought under the EPA involve a two-step process. First, a women’s coach bringing a claim must show that the School employing her pays her less than a male counterpart performing substantially the same job. If a women’s coach successfully makes this initial showing, the second step provides the School an opportunity to justify its actions based on non-discriminatory factors. If the School is unable to justify the unequal pay, the women’s coach is entitled to receive compensation equivalent to that of her male counterpart. Schools found liable under the EPA must compensate the plaintiff for the full difference between the plaintiff’s actual wages and that of the comparator. If the court determines that the School acted in bad faith, this amount may be doubled. Reasonable attorneys fees and court costs may also be awarded under the EPA.” Title VII not title IX and lets not get into who does more work. Lets let that be s different of the net subject please. Lastly i heard Terry Petit say in a presentation once that he had it in his contract as it relates to salary the he only wanted to be paid $1.00 more than the womens basketball coach. I believe he realized he had no direct comparison for his salary with a mens team so he uses the womens coaches title VII battle as a way to ensure a fair value for his contracted salary. I dont know the veracity of his stated claim but at the time it seemed to be a brilliant move by him!
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jul 22, 2024 15:33:27 GMT -5
"Out of compliance" meaning female varsity roster spots versus male are like, 47% to 53% when the full-time undergrad enrollment at the school is say 52% female. Whoopty doo, frankly. Expenditures being unequal is very largely due to the lack of money in women's sports in general. IE, the women's rowing coach gets paid $100k while the football coach gets paid $5M. Nothing having anything to do with Title IX.
Those are not remotely the enrollment/participation figures at most institutions, especially public ones. Expenditures is one of the fundamental aspects of Title IX. The level of arrogance and ignorance is astounding. There's a lot on this board that is fantasy, but this is not. Nationally colleges are 57/43 female to male. UCLA is 38% male and 60% female (https://www.ucla.edu/about/facts-and-figures). Alabama is 57/42. www.ua.edu/about/quickfactsUGA is 58/42. www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-georgia-1598/student-life#:~:text=University%20of%20Georgia%20has%20a,students%20and%2058%25%20female%20students. Ohio States 2023 freshman class was 53/47. Miami is 52/48. admissions.miami.edu/undergraduate/about/class-profile/index.htmlStanford 52/48. Every school in Michigan... www.bridgemi.com/talent-education/where-are-michigan-men-college-increasingly-female-dominated-pursuitSome of these schools, if they gave 50% of their scholarships to men they'd still have a problem, while others, that's a reasonable goal. It depends. Virginia Tech is 43/57 the other way, so they can scholarship more men than women and be fine.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 22, 2024 19:13:29 GMT -5
The current enrollment data for many public institutions reflect closer to 60% female enrollment. I don't believe you, frankly. Granted, your weasel word "many" can be as flimsy as you need it to be.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 22, 2024 19:15:15 GMT -5
I have seen some very strange numbers come out of EADA reports. Is there any evidence of this?
I believe it is just a form that each school's athletic department fills out and submits to the DOE. I wouldn't think they would lie on the form.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jul 22, 2024 19:24:06 GMT -5
These data are often an aggregate of all enrollment data, and different institutions use different means to aggregate the data involving full-time, part-time and other types of enrollees (for example, staff members or their dependents, people who take a class or more and drop them, etc.). Huh? It literally said "full-time undergraduate". That is crystal clear and unambiguous. I can all but guarantee that the female full-time undergraduate percentage at the U of Minn didn't jump up from 54% to 60% in one year.
|
|