{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Sports+Power+Society+CH+11 - [email protected] m3...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–16. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 6
Image of page 7

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 8
Image of page 9

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 10
Image of page 11

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 12
Image of page 13

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 14
Image of page 15

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 16
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: mvolw @9205 m3 mega? _ijACjOZm >20 wwcpfljflmm > mmamw flog; m_<<mm:3m53 m3 035 5.8: m33 Eng gamma Emmqfimfi m5 mmm . W Kama?“ am awn Human”; moor“ 03mm. Mg Chapter I I WHO’S PLAYING COLLEGE SPORTS? Trends in Participation john Cheslock In this report from the Women’s Sports Foundation, John Cheslock reviews the thirty—fifth anniversary ofTitle IX’S effect on athletics in higher education. Title EX, passed by the U. 3. Congress 1n 1972, stipulates that educational 1nstitutions that receive federal funding cann not discriminate against women. Its major effect has been to provide more opportunities for women to participate in athletics. This report focuses on the types of changes that ocv curred in women’s and men’s athletics during the decade from 1995 to 2005. As you read this selection, consider the types of policies that might lead to a gentlenequitable athletic environment at U.S. colleges and universities. Introduction - The year 2007 marks the 35th anniversary of _- the passage of Title IX, which prohibits dis— , ' crimination by gender in any federally - funded educational institution. Although Title DC applies broadly to all aspects of edu— cation, the focus of this report is its applica— _3_tion to intercollegiate athletic participation. [Since the passage of Title IX in 1972, ath— l‘jiigletic opportunities for female undergradu— I‘iifluiates have expanded considerably. To what extent has women’s athletic par» 'ticipation continued to increase over the last l0 years? Have recent gains addressed the historical gender inequities Within intercolle— giate athletics? Such questions are important but sometimes missing Within the Title IX debate. In contrast, much attention focuses on Whether male athletes continue to enjoy their high participation levels. Some assert that men’s. athletics have been severely rew ducecl, but these claims are rarely based on definitive statistical evidence. When sound data and analyses are utilized, how have men’s participation levels changed over time? In the past, these questions were difficult to anSWer due to a scarcity of data on inter— collegiate athletics participation levels, which has prevented researchers from conducting iii- ]ohn Cheslock, Who’s Playmg College Sports? 73"de in Pamflpamn Copyright © 2007 by the Womens 144 I John Cheslock Table i Women's Participation by Sport, i0-Yearl738 NCAA institutions Sample l 995-96 2001-02 2004-05 Change: 95-04 Swimming Lacrosse 3.038 4,432 4,588 l .550 Golf 1,795 2.749 2,956 l . l 6 l lce Hockey 377 i.222 1,343 97E Water Polo 22l 850 950 729 Equestrian 33] 848 $.04 l 7 l 0 Volleyball 9, i9l 9,669 9,396 705 Field Hockey 3,953 4,307 4,356 403 Basketball i 0,3 E 6 i0,72i l0.626 3 i D Other Sports* 279 590 573 294 Bowling 29 224 289 260 Fencing .506 590 622 i l6 Gymnastics 4,208 l,285 l ,3 l0 FDZ Sailing 36E 428 46! [00 Rifle E H) :23 BS 25 Skiing 69,386 85,738 88,3 29 (Estimated increase of i,426 participants) (Estimated increase of 3,478 participants) Estimated increase of L998 -articiants (Estimated increase of 25,845 participants} Cross Country indoor Track 8: Field Outdoor Track 8: Field * Other Sports include archery, badminton, ice skating. judo. lightweight rowing, pistol, poio, rodeo, rugby, synchronized swimming, track 8: skeet shooting, water skiing, and wrestlin. None of these s-orts have more than it) teams in an nanciai data, the participa— tion data contain relatively few errors, and researchers can identify and adjust for these errors. This report utilizes available EADA data to provide the most accurate and comprehensive analy— sis of how intercollegiate athletic participation leveis have changed over time. Due to changes in the reporting requirements of the EADA over time, we use two samples of higher education institutions throughout this study. Our “10»year/738 NCAA institution sample” in— cludes the 738 NCAA in» substantial longitudinal analyses. As a result, estimates of participation trends can only be drawn from a limited number of reports, which contain contradictory findings in terms of men’s participation levels and often possess serious shortcomings. A previous Women’s Sports Foundation report (Sabo, 1997) and a 2001 Government Accounting Ofice (GAO) report found that men’s sports have increased over time, yet a recent College Sports Council (CSC) study and a 1999 GAO report produced contradictory results. The passage of the Equity in Addetics Disw closure Act (EADA) in 1994 created the op— portunity for greater clarity and unanimity. This act requires colleges and universities to report detailed data on their athletic program to the general public. While some of the re»« ported data are flawed, most notably the fi— stitutions that reported data for the 1995—95, 2001-02, and 2004—05 academic years. Our “complete fourwycar/ 1,895 institutions sample” contains the 1,895 higher educa— tion institutions that reported data for 2001»02 and 2004—05, a nearly complete roster of all postsecondary institutions that offer athletic departments. We use a smaller sample for the 10—year period, because the EADA did not require institutions to report participation data to the Office of Postscc» ondary Education (OPE) until 2000—01. As a result, a more limited amount of data is available for 1995~96. Findings Women’s Participation As demonstrated by Table 1, female partio ipation in intercollegiate athletics increased by approximately 25,000 athletes over the 1995—96 to 2004—05 period for the lO'year/758 5P0“ Soccer Table 2 Women’s Participation by sport, Complete Four-Year! 1,895 Institutions Sample Chane Who’s Playing College Sports? I 145 w- 2001—02 2004—95 NCAA institutions sample. Softball 253,8 25,397 These gains were concentrated in Swimming 10’73' ”-3“ . Volleyball 20,751 2! .409 the early years of the period as Golf 4,237 4,733 ' Lacrosse 5,385 5,79 l progress towards gender equity Equestrian L467 |,75I slowed consrderably during the Rodeo 337 554 - lce Hockey L427 L638 last three years of the period. AL Rowing 6,530 6.780 most 85% of the increases in Basketbali 24.219 24,381 , . . . Bowling 428 589 womens partrctpation occurred Wat,r p01,, I.6I8 L758 between 199 5—96 and 2001—02. :3: Ho‘keY 5g: 5'33: . . . . . g PartiCtpatron trends varied stg~ Fencing 616 661 - Rifle :73 :93 mficantly across sports. Soccer Skiing 503 523 grew by more than 4,000 particr— Badminton :44 153 11.1 . ft Squash 338 322 PangW 18‘0W1ng(+2:779)>50 ' Gymnastics 1.483 L424 ball (+2,203), swimming (+1,630) Other 590"?“ U41 Elm Tennis 10,2l2 “3,023 and lacrosse (+1550) also experi— enced substantial gains. Our esti— mates also demonstrate similarly sized increases for cross country, indoor track and field, and out— door track and field. In contrast, a number of sports (squash, tennis, skiing, rifle, sailing, gymnastics and fencing) experienced relatively little or no growth for women. The results in Table 2 demonstrate that participation levels for women increased by more than 11,000 athletes between 2001....02 and 2004—05 for the complete four~year/1,895 institutions sample. The trends across sports did not differ from those reported for the 200i—02 to 2004—05 period in Table 1. The number of partici» pants in squash, gymnastics and tennis fell, While the largest increases occurred in soc~ Cer, track and field, cross country, softball, swimming, volleyball and golf. The number of women’s teams also grew Substantially in the late 19908, but this growth slowed in the early 20003. (See Table Field Total Subtotal Cross Country Indoor Track 8: Field Outdoor Track 3-: 143,931 [55,5l6 (Estimated increase of 837 participants) (Estimated increase of 1.8 l 5 participants) (Estimated increase of l,8l3 participants) 3.) For the 10«year/738 NCAA institutions sample, 876 teams were added between 1995—96 and 2004—05, an increase of more than one team per school. For the complete four—year/ 1,895 institutions sample, the in— crease was 394 between 2001m02 and 2004—05, suggesting that only a minority of institutions added women’s teams during this period. The differences by sports were similar to those reported for participation levels, except that one sport, golf, became more noticeable as a growth sport. An addi— tional golf team does not create as many extra participants as other sports do because the average roster size for golf is relatively small (7.2). -12] 489 6,579 (Estimated increase of I 3,043 participants) * Other Sports “include archery, ice skating, Eudo, lightweight rowing, pistol, polo, rugby, synchronized swimming, table tennis, team handball, water skiing, weight lifting, and wrestling. None of these sports have more than l0 teams 628 546 406 284 217 2] l 200 l 62 i 6 l 150 l 32 85 45 25 20 -i6 «59 146 l john Chesiock baseball (+1561), lacrosse (+i,09i) and soccer (+758) also rose sharply. Meanwhile, only two Table 3 Changes in Team Offerings, Women 2001-409“ Sport l995~2004* Soccer Golf Softball Track and Field. Indoor Lacrosse Track and Field. Outdoor Swimming Cross Country Bowling Water Poio ice Hockey Rowing Volleybail , Basketbali Field Hockey Equestrian Rodeo Other Sports Sailing Rifle Squash Fencing Skiing Gymnastics Tennis l Total * The first column of results contains the number of teams added, on net. between the “995—96 to 2004-05 period for the l0—yearl738 NCAA institutions sample. The second column contains the same information for the complete four—yearn .895 institutions sample for the 2001—02 to 200% 05 period. Men’s Participation Male participation in intercollegiate athleo ics increased by approximately 7,000 ath— letes over the 1995—96 to 2004—05 period for the 10—year/ M395 NCAA sample. (See Table 4.) This increase was steady over the period, occurring during good economic times for colleges and universities (the late 1990s) as well as relatively bad economic times (the early 20003). The gain in men’s overall participation masked differences across individual sports; increases in the growing sports were substantially larger than the declines in the remaining sports. Four sports accounted for almost all of the increase in men’s participants: football grow by more than 4,000 participants, while sports declined by more than 80 athletes, and these declines were relatively small at —680 (for tennis) and 488 (for wrestling). in gen— eral, the trends by sport were simi~ lar for men and women in that the sports experiencing no growrh for women were those that had dc— clines for men. Although small in terms of total athletes, the reductions in some of the individual men’s sports were relatively large, in percentage terms. For example, rifle fell by only 41 athletes, but that: was a 20% decline from 1995—96 levels. To demonstrate how important scale is, consider the following: in 2004—05, the combined number of participants for men’s water polo, volleyball, skiing, rifle, fenc’ ing, squash, saiiing and gymnastics was 3,693. In contrast, the num— ber of football participants grew by 4,063 between 1995—96 and 2004—05. In other words, if the 4,063 increase in participants occurred in these eight sports rather than football, each of these sports would be more than twice as large in 2004—05. As indicated by Table 5, the growth in men’s sports between 2001—02 and 2004—05 was even larger when one consid— ers all higher education institutions (it. the complete four-year/1,895 institutions sample). During this period, men’s partici— pation levels increased by close to 10,000 for the 1,895 institutions reporting data for both years. This increase is very similar to the i 1,000 participant increase reported for women in Table 2 for the same set of 1 995-86 Football Tennis Subtotal Crass Country , indoor Track 8: Field Outdoor Track 3: Field l26,40l Who’s Playing College Sports? [ 147 Table 4 Men’s Participation by Sport, l0-Yearl738 NCAA institutions Sample 2001-02 Baseball l9,482 20,506 21 ,043 E 56l Lacrosse 4.482 S. l 48 5.573 l09l Soccer l 3.492 l3,847 H.250 758 Swimming 6, E 46 6, l 36 6,274 E28 Other Sports* 536 454 625 90 Water Polo 602 65! 684 - 82 Volleyball 7 l 9 845 768 49 Rowing 2.388 2,396 2.436 48 Basketball ! £328 i LB42 1 £868 40 Skiing M7 402 405 ~l2 lce Hockey 3.027 3.057 3,003 -24 Rifle 210 2l0 [69 Al Fencing 628 542 586 "42 Squash 4 IS 374 36B -50 Sailing 509 403 436 ~73 . Golf 6,008 6,00l 5.932 —76 Gymnastics 354 280 277 -77 Wrestling 5,089 4,787 4,60! 488 £30,377 ”2,741 (Estimated increase of 48 participants) (Estimated increase of EMS participants) Estimated increase of 202 2 004.05 Change: 95-94 6,340 -artici -ants Total institutions. Almost two—thirds (16 of 25) of men’s sports experienced gains between 2001—02 and 2004—05. Table 5 shows that the declines in individual men’s sports were very slight in relation to the gains in other Sports. Only two men’s Sports experienced 'declines of more than 60 athletes, while 12 men’s sports had increases of at least that amount. As in Table 4, the men’s sports that experienced the largest gains were football, baseball, soccer and lacrosse, Whose gains dwarfed the losses experienced by” volleyball and tennis, the two sports with the largest declines. This overall growth in participation, however, did not translate into growth in the number of men’s teams. As indicated in Table 6, the overall number of men’s teams experienced almost no change over time. The number of teams for some individual sports, however, did increase or decrease (Estimated increase of 7,ll3l participants) * Other Sports include archery, bowling. cricket, equestrian. judo, sprint football, lightweight rowing, pistol, polo, rodeo, rugby, track 3: skeet shooting, and water skiing. None of these sorts have more than 50 teams in an ear. over the period of study. There are two rea— sons Why the overall number of men’s par” ticipants increased but the overall number of men’s teams did not. First, the average roster size increased between 1995—96 and 2004—05 for several men’s sports, most rio— rably football (+7.0), baseball (+2.3), lacrosse (+3.4) and soccer (+1.2). Second, the sport experiencing the largest decline was tennis, which had teams with an aver— age roster size of 9.4 in 2004—05. Mean» while, the average roster sizes in 2004-05 were quite large for growing sports such as lacrosse (32.9), baseball (30.0) and soccer (24.6). “ Female Share of Athletes While women’s participation increased more than men’s participation, females still com~« prise a minority of athletes. For the com— plete founyear sample of 1,895 institutions, Football Tennis Subtotal . Cross Country indoor Track 3c Field Outdoor Track 8: Field Votal 148 I John Cheslock Four-Year“ ,895 Institutions Sample 2001-432 2004-05 Baseball 44,367 46,5 H Soccer 28.542 29,903 Lacrosse 6,964 7,730 Swimming 7,9 E 7 8,349 Basketball 28.235 28,589 Other Sports* 786 2,064 Goif i i,|29 I l,374 Sailing 49.8 581 Water Polo L384 L46! Bowling 232 302 Rodeo I .058 l , I 25 Fencing 568 6,202 Squash 385 380 Wrestling 7,483 7.478 Skiing 578 562 lce Hockey 4,043 4.026 Rowing 2.899 2,876 Rifle 263 232 Gymnastics 353 295 Volleyball 232,54! 240,773 the reported number of men’s participants in 2004—05 was 291,797 while the corre— sponding number for women was 205,492. In combination, these figures demonstrate that as of 2004-05, only 41% of athletic participants were women, and 151,149 fe-« male athletes would need to have been added (assuming no reduction in male par— ticipants) to reach a share of 55%, the fe— male share of full—time undergraduates in the an of2004 (NCES, 2005). As demonstrated in Figure 1, the female participation share changed little (from 41.1% to 41.3%) between 2001—02 and 2004—05 for our complete four-year/1,895 institutions sample. Figure 2 shows similar findings over this period for the 10- year/738 NCAA institutions sample, but it also depicts substantial improvement dut— Tabie 5 Men’s Participation by Sport, Complete Chane: 95-04 (Estimated increase of 84 participants) {Estimated increase of 759 participants) (Estimated increase of 890 participants) (Estimated increase of 9,965 participants) * Other Sports include archery, cricket, judo, sprint football, lightweight rowing, pistol, polo. rugby. table tennis, team handball. and water skiing. None of these s-orts have more than i0 teams in an year. ing the late 19905. Between i995m96 and 2001m02, the fe— male shate of athletes increased from 38.2% to 42.2%. The fe— male share only increased foutw tenths of a percentage point between 2001—02 and 2004—05 245 (from 42.2% to 42.6%). g; The much higher participa» 70 tion levels for men do not imply E: that a larger number of men’s :: teams were offered. Among our -35 complete four—year/ 1,895 insti- g tutions sample, the average in— g; stitution offered 6.3 men’s teams and 6.7 women’s teams in 2004—05. The contrast between the participation and team numbers mainly reflects the large average roster size for foot~ ball, which was 93 for the 823 institutions offering the sport in 2004MB. Compliance with Title lX To demonstrate compliance with Title 1X, higher education institutions must meet re— quirements in three areas: participation, athletic financial assistance and other pro— gram areas. To determine whether colleges and universities are providing equitable parw ticipation opportunities to female athletes, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has de« veloped the following three-«prong test. Prong One: Substantial Proportionality. This part of the test is satisfied when partic— ipation opportunities for men and women are “substantially proportionate” to their re— spective undergraduate enrollments. Prong Two: History and Continuing Pracw rice. This part of the test is satisfied when Who’s Playing College Sports? I 149 an institution has a history and continuing practice of program ex— pansion that is responsive to the de— veloping interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex (typically female). Table 6 Changes in Team Offerings, Men i 995-2004’5‘ ' 2901u2004* ' Sport Track 8: Field, indoor Lacrosse Baseball Soccer Other Sperm Cross Country Track and Field, Outdoor Golf Rodeo Basketball Footbali Sailing ice Hockey Water Polo Skiing Squash Rifle Rowing Fencing Swimming Volleyball Gymnastics Wrestling Tennis Total Prong Three: Effectively Accom— modating Interests and Abilities. This part of the test is satisfied when an institution is meeting the interests and abilities of its female students even Where there are dis- proportionately fewer females than males participating in sports. (US. Department of Education, 1997) An institution fulfills the partici— pation requirement if it adheres to any or just one of the three tests listed above. The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) data allow one to make several broad—brush in» ferences with regard to compliance with the first two prongs of the Title IX athletic participation standards. Table 7 contains detailed information on the extent to which participation opportuw nities were “substantially proportionate” to undergraduate enrollments. For the com— plete four—year/ 1,895 institutions sample in 2004—05, the female share of undergradu— ate enrollments Was 55.8%, while the re male share of athietes was 41.7%. In combination, these figures mean that the average insritution had a proportionality gap of 14.1 percentage points and was far from compliance with the first prong of the test. The figures were only slightly better for the 10—year/738 NCAA institutions sample, ’3‘ The first column of results contains the number of teams added, on net, between the i995w96 to 2004—05 period for the i0—year/738 NCAA institutions sample. The second column contains the same information for the complete four—year] I ,895 institutions sample for the 200 l—{iz to 2604—05 period. In a 1996 policy clarification, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) stated that they would: ' consider opportunities to be substantially proportionate when the number of oppor— tunities that would be required 'to achieve proportionality would not be ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern