Paper Example on Title IX Compliance

Published: 2021-07-21 07:29:04
949 words
4 pages
8 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Harvey Mudd College
Type of paper: 
Term paper
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Title IX is a declaration of Act of 1972 of the federal law courts. It states that no individual regarding sex in the corridors of US shall be excluded or denied the chance of participation in, be subjected to the acts of discrimination or be denied any benefit of any program of activity or education that is funded by federal finances (Stevenson, 2010). The law states the relevance of people respecting the rights of every human being to enjoy any State sponsored education or activity in all the institutions in America that include both private and public.

Title IX was well accepted in the United States in 2012, and yet it was formed early in 1972. The law was made by Senate and signed into law in 1972 by Richard Nixon. The sponsors were a member of the house of representatives Edith Green and Birch Bayh from Senate. Title IX faced harsh amendments trials on May 2o, 1974 by Senator Tower who wanted to exempt revenue from sporting activities. After the efforts of Senator Tower failed, the same 1972 year, Senator Javits came up with another proposal that aimed at derailing the efforts of the Title IX from serving people unconditionally (Anderson, 2012). He proposed HEW to offer some regulations that were to specify the reasons for inclusion of some sports in Title IX. The amendment clarified that similar needs were to be matched in games to have a uniform expenditure in sports with larger crowds.

On the other hand, the reviews and amendment were signed and sent to the congress for consideration. A more destructive proposal was tried out in June 1975 by Rep. OHara who introduced Bill 8394 that wanted the revenues from sports to be put to use in pursuit of clearing the cost of the sport to support other sports. It meant that some sports would be denied a chance to be backed up by the sports funds as a way of offsetting other sports bills. Fortunately, the Bill faced objection while in the committee before it went to the house of congress (Anderson, 2012).

Consequently, the Congress reviewed the amendments of Title IX on July 21, 1975, and after close inquiry and ethically examining the outcomes of the changes, it had to disapprove some of the resolutions regarding athletics regulations. The following rules were disapproved:

The idea that Senator Helms and Rep. Martin to condemn Title IX (June 5, 1975) was rejected.

The idea that Rep. Martin aired out on June 17, 1975, that he disapproved Title IX because it only pertained to College Sports and Athletics.

The disapproval of the application of Title IX in situations that the activities were not part of the activities that the institution offered. It was aired out by Sens. Laxalt, Fannin, and Curtis on July 21, 1975 (Anderson, 2012).

On February 17, 1976, the legality of Title IX was challenged by NCAA. Later in July the same year, Senator Tower still questioned the inclusion of revenue producing sports in Title IX. But the exclusion plan died before going to the senate. On July 21, 1978, deadlines were applied for the Title IX, and athletics requirements were set for strict compliance. It was defined in a new Title Title Ix Intercollegiate Athletics and further outlined the underpinnings that considered the process of assessing actual details of the agreement (Stevenson, 2010). Just after the Department of Education was made and develop a new oversight of the Compliance in 1980, in February 1984, there was a limit of coverage of Athletics and was to cover the ones on scholarships only according to Grove v. Bell. The athletics department faced challenges after the court made it clear that the program was only for specific programs within the Office of Students Financial Aid.

On September 1988, Title IX took another face after a female athlete won hence making the finance to serve both male and female. Later in November 1996, an appeal was made and ruled by Cohen v. Brown University which stated that the institution discriminated women. Brown argued that most women showed no interests in sports. In March 2005, a room for expansion of female participation was opened, and a survey was conducted as a way of asking female students about the sports that they could be able to take part. The sports were therefore added to Title IX compliance list of games.

It was a new dawn for Title IX compliance on April 4, 2011, when the Department of Education clarified the call for protection against any form of sexual violence and harassment on the athletes. It outlined that all schools to follow the same procedures in addressing all gender to resolve complaints and abuse among students (Puzey, 2013).

The implementation of Title IX faces ups and downs since its birth. It has been surviving harsh and unfriendly amendments that some of them were rejected by the court and before reaching the Senate Floor. The good information is that, since the last implementation in 2011, it has not faced other objections. The Bill is now in a stable state showing that it is now a law in the United States of America. It can be concluded that the implementation is now satisfied since there is the inclusion of Baseball and women into the intercollegiate sports (Acosta & Carpenter, 2014).

References

Anderson, P. M. (2012). Title ix at forty: title ix at forty: An introduction and historical review of forty legal developments that shaped gender equity law. Marq. Sports L. Rev., 22, 325-695.

Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2014). A woman in Intercollegiate Sport: A Longitudinal, National Study. Thirty-Seven Year Update, 1977-2014. Acosta-Carpenter.

Puzey, B. K. (2013). Title IX and Baseball: How the Contact Sports Exemption Denies Women Equal Opportunity to America's Pastime. Nev. LJ, 14, 1000.

Stevenson, B. (2010). Beyond the classroom: Using Title IX to measure the return to high school sports. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(2), 284-301.

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the customtermpaperwriting.org website, please click below to request its removal: