The bcs of title IX compliance "…and the champion for 2004 is "
Download 63.59 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- THE BOWL CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES (BCS) OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE: AVERAGES BY CONFERENCE
- CONFERENCE UNDERGRAD FEMALE NUMBER OF TOTAL BUDGET BUDGET ENROLLMENT ATHLETIC TEAMS MEN WOMEN RANK
- RANKINGS BY CONFERENCE BCS OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE PARTICIPATION SCHOLARSHIP COACHES OPERATING TOTAL AVG
- Note
- 1-Ohio 1-Utah 1-Stanford 1-Georgia
- 1-Connecticut 1-Purdue 1-Maryland 1-Missouri
- NATIONAL CHAMPION OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE = OHIO UNIVERISTY
| THE BCS
OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE “…and the champion for 2004 is ???” Charles L. Kennedy Senior Instructor Political Science Department Penn State York August 2004 The division 1A college football season ended with considerable controversy over the process of determining the national champion. Even though the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) process determined that the champion was Louisiana State University (LSU); the University of Southern California (USC) was voted the national champion in the Associated Press survey. Thus a split decision and plenty of fuel for armchair quarterbacks to continue the debate. Ironically, the BCS process was established to prevent controversies such as this, and establish one national champion. The BCS process has been drastically revised in hopes of eliminating this problem.
Have the same proportion of women on sports teams, as there are female undergraduates Have a history and continuing practice of expanding opportunities for women Prove they are fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of women on its campus Several factors coalesced in the 1990’s to turn the debate over Title IX into a raging controversy. College sports increasingly became big business – football and basketball became major revenue producers. The number of Division I football teams actually increased. This accelerated the problem of complying with the “substantial proportionality” rule. To emphasize this point, there are currently 7.1 million women enrolled in colleges and universities and only 5.6 million men. Thus, 55.9% of the undergraduate population is female. This has steadily increased since 1972. This has produced a major dilemma for athletic directors. They need to increase revenue and the easiest route is successful football and basketball programs. Simultaneously, they need to increase the number of women in sports in order to comply with Title IX. This has led to colleges dropping many minor, non-revenue producing men’s sports – wrestling, tennis, track and field, and swimming. THE STUDY As a lifelong sports fan and a current enthusiast of women’s sports, I have constructed a Bowl Championship Series (BCS) of Title IX Compliance among the major college football schools. This Title IX BCS is an attempt to rank the major football universities according to their compliance with the spirit and intent of Title IX. The variables used in the study are based on the four criteria suggested by the Chronicle of Higher Education in its study on “gender equity” in 2004. This is necessitated since the Department of Education’s “history and continuing practice” and “effectively accommodating” criteria are very subjective, arguable, and difficult to quantify. (Note: All of the statistics were obtained from the Chronicle of Higher Education). 1 Their criteria are participation, scholarship, coaching salaries, and operating expenses. This method was selected in order to give a form of statistical measurement and verification. Participation is one of the three federal guidelines for a college to determine if it has enough opportunities for female athletes. This is the simplest approach and the one most colleges follow. In this test the percentage of female athletes should be proportional to the percentage of women in the student body. For instance, at my school, Penn State, women comprised 46.51% of the total undergraduates and 43.15% of all athletes in 2004 for a difference of -3.36. This earned PSU a rank of 6th in the Big Ten. It was above the conference average of -5.96. The Purdue Boilmakers were +2.42 and the Iowa Hawkeyes ranked last with a score of -8.8. Scholarship is actually the only purely numerical section of guidelines, issued under Title IX regulations, governing scholarship funds allocated to women athletes. The Department’s Office for Civil Rights has specified that colleges must award the same proportions of aid to female athletes as there are women participating in varsity sports. The proportion is to be within one percentage point. Penn State’s proportion of female athletes was 39.65% and the women’s proportion of the scholarship budget was 40.41% for a difference of +0.76. The Nittany Lions rank 4th in the Big Ten and above the conference average of -2.4. Iowa was highest with +2.95 and the Wisconsin Badgers were in the basement with a score of -8.04.
Coaching Salaries is not mandated by Title IX regulations. Equity in salaries, however, should strongly indicate that the salary for coaches of women’s teams should be equivalent to the salary of coaches of men’s teams. At Penn State the proportion for coaches of women’s teams of the salary budget was 34.7%. This earned the Lions first place in the Big Ten well above the conference average of 29.5. The Michigan State Spartans finished last with only 21.73%. Operating Expenses is also not included in any specific guidelines. Interestingly, however, the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act does chart how much of athletic departments’ budgets should be allocated to women’s teams. At Penn State the women’s proportion of the operating budget was 28.99%. This earned the Lions a rank of 8th – below the conference average of 30.51%. Michigan was highest with 34.02% and Michigan State was again the cellar dweller with 28.75%. The BCS Title IX champion for the Big Ten was determined by ranking the 11 schools on all four criteria and then computing the average total rank for each school. Thus, Purdue, with an average rank of 3.75 would be #1 and Penn State with an average rank of 4.75 was #3 of the 11 school in the conference. Penn State had finished 1st in 2002 and 2nd in 2003. Purdue jumped from 3rd in 2003 to Conference Champion in 2004. The next point of inquiry is to determine how the Big Ten compares with the other major conferences in the BCS - The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Southeastern, Big East, Big 12, and PAC-10. For purposes of analysis the average score for all the schools in each conference was computed for each of the four variables. The conferences were ranked on each variable and then the average rank was computed to rank the conferences 1 – 8. Note: the Mountain West Conference and the Mid-American Conferences were added in order to set-up an 8 team BCS playoff system. The Mountain West and Mid-American were selected over Conference USA and the Western Athletic Conference (WAC). This decision is based on the belief that the Mountain West and Mid-American Conferences have fared better in football games against the original BCS members over the past three years. THE BOWL CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES (BCS) OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE: AVERAGES BY CONFERENCE CONFERENCE PARTICIPATION SCHOLARSHIP COACHES OPERATING SALARIES EXPENSES ACC -10.6 -1.4 30.7% 25.66% BIG EAST (2) -9.8 1.4 29.5% 27.74% BIG TEN -5.6 -2.4 29.5% 30.51% BIG 12 -11.7 -1.6 28.4% 29.72% MOUNTAIN WEST -4.5 -4.9 34.5% 31.37% MID-AMERICAN -11.3 -1.4 37.0% 36.99% PAC-10 -11.2 0.3 37.1% 29.04% SOUTHEASTERN -18.9 2.8 32.4% 28.62%
2 Only the nine colleges in Division 1-A were considered for the compilation of the BCS rankings. There are several interesting items that literally jump off the page in examining the above data. The first item deals with participation. All of the conferences finished with a negative ratio between percentage of women in the student body and the percentage of student athletes. The Mountain West was highest with a -4.5 differential, followed by the Big Ten with -5.6. Interestingly, the Southeastern Conference finished a very distant last at -18.9. This participation problem is accentuated by the continuing increase in undergraduate female enrollment. It should be noted that the average number of women enrolled is over 50% in six of the conferences. Only the ACC (48%) and the Big 12 (49%) are below 50%. The Mid-American Conference is highest with the 55% female students and the Mountain West second at 53%. On the proportion of scholarships, which is supposed to be within one percent, three of the conferences on average were in compliance (Big East, PAC-10, and Southeastern). Additionally, the Southeastern (2.8) and the Big East (1.4) exceeded the recommended guideline. In dealing with both participation and scholarships it is worth examining the average number of intercollegiate athletic teams in each conference. The Big Ten has an average of 21 teams (10 male and 11 female) followed by the Big East and the Pacific 10 with 19 teams. The Mountain West finished last with an average of 15 teams. All of the conferences average more women’s teams than men’s teams with the exception of the ACC, which has a 50-50 ratio of nine each. The information on undergraduate enrollment, number of teams, as well as the total average budget for men’s and women’s teams per conference is contained in the following chart. CONFERENCE UNDERGRAD FEMALE NUMBER OF TOTAL BUDGET BUDGET ENROLLMENT ATHLETIC TEAMS MEN & WOMEN RANK TOTAL (M-F) SPORTS (MILLIONS) ACC 48% 18 (9-9) $19.96 5 BIG EAST 52% 19 (9-10) $18.56 6 BIG TEN 50% 21 (10-11) $25.74 1 BIG 12 49% 16 (7-9) $20.75 4 MOUNTAIN WEST 53% 15 (7-8) $12.98 7 MID-AMERICAN 55% 16 (7-9) $8.65 8 PAC-10 51% 19 (9-10) $23.84 2 SOUTHEASTERN 52% 16 (7-9) $22.22 3 The Big Ten is the biggest spender on men’s and women’s sports – averaging $25.74 million per college. The PAC – 10 is a distant second-spending an average of $23.84 million per college. The Southeastern Conference is 3rd at $22.22 million. It should be emphasized, however, that the Big Ten’s athletic budget of $25.74 covers 21 teams for any average of $1.23 million per team. The Southeastern Conference averages only 16 teams, so they actually spend more per team, $1.39 million, than the Big Ten and the PAC-10 at $1.21 million per team. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the budgets for men’s and women’s sports for the Mountain West and the Mid-American Conferences are the lowest with an average of $12.98 and $8.65 million, respectively. This translates to an average of $865,000 for each of the 15 teams in the Mountain West and only $540,000 for each of the 16 teams in the Mid-American conference. When compared to the average of $1.39 million for the 16 teams in the Southeastern Conference, it certainly begs the question, “How can they possibly compete with the major division 1-A football powers?” But they have and they will. These numbers arguably also underscore the demand of Conferences such as the Mid-American, Mountain West, the WAC, and Conference USA to be included in the Bowl Championship Series and get their slice of the pie. RANKINGS BY CONFERENCE BCS OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE PARTICIPATION SCHOLARSHIP COACHES OPERATING TOTAL AVG SALARIES EXPENSES RANK RANK ACC 4 4.5 5 8 21.5 7 BIG EAST 3 2 6 7 18 5 BIG TEN 2 7 7 3 19 6 BIG 12 7 6 8 4 25 8 MOUNTAIN WEST 1 8 2 2 13 2 MID-AMERICAN 6 4.5 1 1 12.5 1 PAC-10 5 3 4 5 17 3 SOUTHEASTERN 8 1 3 6 18 43
3 Wins tie break for the fourth place due to a #1 finish in scholarship. Interestingly, the two Conferences that spend the least amount of money on sports, the Mid-American and the Mountain West, finished first and second respectively. The Mid-American actually finished first in two categories – coaching salaries and operating expenses. The Mountain West finished first in participation, whereas, the Southeastern Conference finished first in scholarship. The next step would be to determine the individual champions for each conference. They will be determined by the same process as described above – each school will be ranked according to the four criteria of participation, scholarships, coaching salaries, and operating expenses. The scores for each college is listed in the following chart. Note: All conferences were based on 2003-04 alignments. BCS GENDER EQUITY RANKING OF TEAMS PER CONFERENCE 1-MID AMERICAN 2-MOUNTAIN WEST 3-PACIFIC 10 4-SOUTHEASTERN 1-Ohio 1-Utah 1-Stanford 1-Georgia 2-Central Michigan 2-San Diego State 2.5-California 2-Florida 3.5-Ball State 3.5-Brigham Young 2.5-Oregon State 3.5-Louisiana State 3.5-Buffalo 3.5-New Mexico 4.5-Washington 3.5-Arkansas 6-Kent State 5-Colorado State 4.5-UCLA 5-Tennessee 6-Eastern Michigan 6-Wyoming 6-Arizona 6-South Carolina 6-Bowling Green 7-Nevada-Las Vegas 7-Washington State 7.5-Auburn 8-Toledo 8-USC 7.5-Mississippi 9-Northern Illinois *Air Force 4 9-Arizona State 9-Mississippi State 10-Western Michigan 10-Oregon 10-Alabama 11-Akron 11-Vanderbilt 12-Marshall 12-Kentucky 4 Data for Air Force Academy not listed 5-BIG EAST 6-BIG TEN 7-ACC 8-BIG 12 1-Connecticut 1-Purdue 1-Maryland 1-Missouri 2-Notre Dame 2-Michigan 2-North Carolina 2-Iowa State 3-Rutgers 3-Penn State 3-North Carolina St 3-Kansas 4-Syracuse 4-Northwestern 4-Florida State 4-Nebraska 5-Virgina Tech 5-Ohio State 5-Duke 5-Kansas State 6-West Virginia 6-Indiana 6-Virginia 6.5-Texas A&M 7-Miami 7-Illinois 7.5-Wake Forest 6.5-Texas Tech 8-Boston College 8-Wisconsin 7.5-Georgia Tech 8-Oklahoma 9-Pitt 9-Minnesota 9-Clemson 9-Texas 10-Iowa 10-Baylor 11-Michigan St 11.5-Colorado 11.5-Oklahoma St Ohio University is the runaway champion in the Mid-American Conference, placing far ahead of 2nd place Central Michigan. The Bobcats ranked first in both salary (40.9%) and operating expenses (41.7). The Marshall Thundering Herd finished a distant last with two 12th place finishes and one eleventh position.
Thus, the “elite eight” finalists for the Bowl Championship Series of Title IX Compliance are: Ohio University, Utah, Stanford, Georgia, Connecticut, Purdue, Maryland, and Missouri. The teams will be seeded in the tournament according to the BCS ranking of their conference. Thus, the pairings will be:
In the battles between the number one (Ohio), and the number eight (Missouri), the winner is determined in the head to head competition in the four variables of measurement: Participation = P Scholarships = S Coaching Salaries = CS Operating Expenses = OE ( Indicates win) The format would be as follows: P S CS OE Total Wins 1-Ohio -10.7 2.55 40.9 41.7 3 8-Missouri -13.0 6.14 35.9 36.8 1
4-Georgia -10.9 2.85 41.0 34.65 2 5-UCONN -2.05 -0.27 40.1 40.2 2
The other two contests were both decided by 3-1 margins P S CS OE Total Wins 1-Utah -2.04 -1.2 33.6 33.2 1 7-Maryland -1.86 2.3 33.9 30.2 3
3-Stanford 0.0 1.96 38.0 39.2 3 6-Purdue 2.42 -1.67 32.4 30.67 1
Thus, the match-ups for the semi-finals are: P S CS OE Total Wins 1-Ohio -10.7 2.55 40.9 41.7 3 5-UCONN -2.05 -0.27 40.1 40.2 1
3-Stanford 0.0 1.96 38.0 39.2 3 The finalists for the Bowl Championship Series of Title IX Compliance are the #1 seed Ohio University Bobcats from the Mid-American Conference and the Stanford Cardinal from the PAC-10. Ohio earned its spot by edging UCONN and eliminating last year’s runner-up in these variables for a 3-1 win. Stanford advanced 3-1 over Maryland with decisive victories again in coaching salaries and operating expenses. The Cardinals, a perennial contender and last year’s 3rd place finisher, enter the championship match as heavy favorites. FINALS In the showdown for the national championship Ohio prevails over Stanford 3-1 with even higher scores in coaching salaries and operating expenses. P S CS OE Total Wins 1-Ohio -10.7 2.55 40.9 41.7 3 3-Stanford 0.0 1.96 38.0 39.2 1 NATIONAL CHAMPION OF TITLE IX COMPLIANCE = OHIO UNIVERISTY It should be emphasized that this study does not attempt to pass judgment, beyond the obvious implication that the four variables of proportionality, scholarship, coaching, salaries, and operating expenses are valid, reliable, and measurable indicators of Title IX compliance. The decisions on the actual standards need to be addressed by the participants and the policy makers. As a strong sports fan of both men and women’s sports, I sincerely hope that this study will enlighten, increase, and intensify the debate on this vitally important issue Directory: ~clk8 -> docs docs -> The athletic directors’ dilemma: "$$$ & Women’s Sports" docs -> The gender equity scorecard IV docs -> The gender equity scorecard V docs -> March madness and gender equity docs -> Our Women as Coaches now "The Glass Ceiling Report Card" Download 63.59 Kb. Share with your friends:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||