Statement of the Problem
The problem to be addressed by this study is NCAA
athletic administrators do not understand the three-prong test for Title IX
compliance and incorrectly rely on proportionality as the only means to satisfy
Title IX compliance (Hazelbaker & Martin, 2018; Staurowsky et al. 2017;
Yiamouyiannis & Hawes, 2015). The inaccurate reliance, solely on
proportionality, creates missed opportunities to satisfy Title IX law by adding
varsity sports to an NCAA athletic department’s offering (Yiamouyiannis &
Hawes, 2015). Equally important, only 18% of NCAA athletic administrators
report having any formal Title IX education while training to fulfill their
athletic department duties (Staurowsky, 2011). Many NCAA athletic department
personnel are unaware of the three prongs of the Title IX three-prong test,
which specifies the three options, that can be satisfied, for college athletic
departments to be Title IX compliant (Yiamouyiannis &
Hawes, 2015). Supporters of Title IX suggest that
it has increased female athletic participation exponentially over the last 40
years (Hazelbaker & Martin, 2018), while opponents have stated that Title
IX law has caused a severe reduction in male athletic opportunities on NCAA
college campuses over that same period of time (Paule-Kobe et al., 2013). The
confusion adds to the misunderstanding of Title IX and enhances the
discussions, amongst NCAA athletic department personnel, when trying to
interpret the satisfaction of Title IX’s three-prong test for compliance. Staurowsky
et al. (2017) reported that 83% of all NCAA head and assistant coaches have
never been taught about Title IX and these same coaches stated that they gained
most of their Title IX understanding from mainstream media sources and NCAA
News publications. Also, less than 20% of college coaches have reported
participation in any type of Title IX education class or department-led
workshops on compliance (Staurowsky et al., 2017).
Get Free Quote!
322 Experts Online