Women's emerging sports at NCAA

[Boston Pony]

One of the fastest growing college sports is women's lacrosse. You have a number of teams (Miami, Oregon, Robert Morris) that have added or are adding the game. It plays on a field the size of soccer or football. It has 12 scholarships (about 20 players), doesn't cost much to outfit, and has both local and national recruiting opportunities. I was surprised SMU didn't go this route when it took on equestrian (a non NCAA sport). In the middle of the country - Vandy is a top 20 team with Northwestern (currently ranked #1 after just 4 seasons) not too far off. Dallas is a growing area of both youth and high school players and many of SMU's normal applicant areas are either big or becoming big in lacrosse (Chicago and East Coast).

[Water Pony]

If we continue to need more women participants, then Lacrosse is the sport. Vandy was a Final Four team last year with a program less than six years old. Northwestern is leading in the polls now.

The Men's Club Lacrosse Team beat U. of Texas this year for the first time ever. They are almost ranked in the Top 25 USLIA Club teams for LAX.

Plus, it may be the best spectator sport there is! The fastest game on two feet. Hit hard, score often!!!

[Diehard Pony]

We have a really BIG BIG BIG fund raising campaign for the endowment. Now we would have the money every year for additional womens and mens sports.

All the vast majority of us want is to be really good in our current revenue sports, football and men's basketball. Adding non-revenue sports needs to be at the bottom of SMU's priority list. If and when the revenue sports are at last successful again would be a good time to consider adding sports.

[d_pony]

equestrian, softball, lacrosse and field hockey were all discused and considered since they all were in the 15 scholarship area- the least expensive of the sports was equestrian - most expensive was softball - but the main reason why the decsion was equestrian was because of fields-
you are missing the point about the elimination of track - we had to get in compliance which we are now -
we don't have the practice fields now for the sports we have so we can't add sports that require the use of a field

[davidsmu94]

I don't know the recent stats, but I'd venture to guess that there are still plenty of schools not complient. If you must take the stance that you are going to be title 9 complient, it would only make sense that you would adopt a plan where you would have non-revenue sprorts that would compliment your revenue sports. If done correctly (see Tennesee, Florida, ect) you have an advantage in recruiting some skill position players for football in track, as well as Baseball.

Anyway, this subject gives me tired-head since arguing alternative options with Copeland is like talking to a wall. I hope when Copeland is gone that we get someone who cares about the traditions at SMU and can apply some logical, yet creative thought to the matter, instead of throwing their hands up and giving up like a French Soldier.

Hopefully there will be an athletic program to save.

Peace Out, and God bless SMU

[davidsmu94]

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oc ... ional.html

Additional Clarification of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy: Three-Part Test ― Part Three



Resources




User's Guide and Technical Manual

PDF (4.2M)







March 17, 2005

Dear Colleague:

On behalf of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education (Department), and as a follow-up to OCR's commitment to providing schools with technical assistance on Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), I am sending you this "Additional Clarification of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy: Three-Part Test — Part Three" (Additional Clarification). Accompanying the Additional Clarification is a "User's Guide to Student Interest Surveys Under Title IX" (User's Guide) and a related technical report. The Additional Clarification outlines specific factors that guide OCR's analysis of the third option for compliance with the "three-part test," a test used to assess whether institutions are effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of male and female student athletes under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The User's Guide contains a model survey instrument to measure student interest in participating in intercollegiate varsity athletics.

As you know, OCR enforces Title IX, an anti-discrimination statute, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities by recipients of federal financial assistance. Specifically, OCR investigates complaints of such discrimination and may, at its discretion, conduct compliance reviews. The Department's regulation implementing Title IX, published in 1975, in part, requires recipients to provide equal athletic opportunity for members of both sexes and to effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of their male and female students to participate in intercollegiate athletics. In the Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Interpretation published in 1979 (Policy Interpretation), the Department established a three-part test that OCR will apply to determine whether an institution is effectively accommodating student athletic interests and abilities. An institution is in compliance with the three-part test if it has met any one of the following three parts of the test: (1) the percent of male and female athletes is substantially proportionate to the percent of male and female students enrolled at the school; or (2) the school has a history and continuing practice of expanding participation opportunities for the underrepresented sex; or (3) the school is fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.

OCR has pledged to provide further guidance on recipients' obligations under the threepart test, which was described only in very general terms in the Policy Interpretation, and to further help institutions appreciate the flexibility of the test. Based on OCR's experience investigating complaints and conducting compliance reviews involving the three-part test, OCR believes that institutions may benefit from further specific guidance on part three.

Today, in response, OCR issues this Additional Clarification to explain some of the factors OCR will consider when investigating a recipient's program in order to make a Title IX compliance determination under the third compliance option of the three-part test. The Additional Clarification reflects OCR's many years of experience and expertise in administering the three-part test, which is grounded in the Department's long-standing legal authority under Title IX and its implementing regulation to eliminate discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Under the third compliance option, an educational institution is in compliance with Title IX's mandate to provide equal athletic participation opportunities if, despite the underrepresentation of one sex in the intercollegiate athletics program, the institution is fully and effectively accommodating the athletic interests and abilities of its students who are underrepresented in its current varsity athletic program offerings. An institution will be found in compliance with part three unless there exists a sport (s) for the underrepresented sex for which all three of the following conditions are met: (1) unmet interest sufficient to sustain a varsity team in the sport(s); (2) sufficient ability to sustain an intercollegiate team in the sport(s); and (3) reasonable expectation of intercollegiate competition for a team in the sport(s) within the school's normal competitive region. Thus, schools are not required to accommodate the interests and abilities of all their students or fulfill every request for the addition or elevation of particular sports, unless all three conditions are present. In this analysis, the burden of proof is on OCR (in the case of an OCR investigation or compliance review), or on students (in the case of a complaint filed with the institution under its Title IX grievance procedures), to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the institution is not in compliance with part three.

Many institutions have used questionnaires or surveys to measure student athletic interest as part of their assessment under part three. To assist institutions, this Additional Clarification is being issued with a User's Guide prepared by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), as well as a detailed technical report prepared by the National Institute of Statistical Sciences (NISS). These documents were prepared after careful analysis of 132 of OCR's cases involving 130 colleges and universities from 1992 to 2002. They evaluate both the effective and problematic aspects of survey instruments. OCR intends this combined document to serve as a guide to facilitate compliance with part three of the three-part test.

Based on the analysis of the OCR cases and other information, the User's Guide provides a web-based prototype survey (the "Model Survey") that, if administered consistent with the recommendations in the User's Guide, institutions can rely on as an acceptable method to measure students' interests in participating in sports. When the Model Survey is properly administered to all full-time undergraduate students, or to all such students of the underrepresented sex, results that show insufficient interest to support an additional varsity team for the underrepresented sex will create a presumption of compliance with part three of the three-part test and the Title IX regulatory requirement to provide nondiscriminatory athletic participation opportunities. The presumption of compliance can only be overcome if OCR finds direct and very persuasive evidence of unmet interest sufficient to sustain a varsity team, such as the recent elimination of a viable team for the underrepresented sex or a recent, broad-based petition from an existing club team for elevation to varsity status. Where the Model Survey shows insufficient interest to field a varsity team, OCR will not exercise its discretion to conduct a compliance review of that institution’s implementation of the three-part test.

Although more than two-thirds of the institutions involved in the 132 cases complied with the three-part test using part three, OCR believes that some institutions may be uncertain about the factors OCR considers under part three, and they may mistakenly believe that part three offers less than a completely safe harbor. Therefore, for colleges and universities seeking to achieve Title IX compliance using part three, OCR intends that the Additional Clarification and User's Guide serve to facilitate an institution's determination of whether it is in compliance with part three of the three-part test. A recipient may choose to use this information to assess its own athletic programs and then take appropriate steps to ensure that its athletic programs will be operated in compliance with the Title IX regulatory requirements.

Despite the focus on part three, OCR strongly reiterates that each part of the three-part test is an equally sufficient and separate method of complying with the Title IX regulatory requirement to provide nondiscriminatory athletic participation opportunities. In essence, each part of the three-part test is a safe harbor. OCR will continue to determine that a school has met its obligations to provide nondiscriminatory participation opportunities in athletics so long as OCR finds that the school has satisfied any one of the three options for compliance under the three-part test. Schools are also reminded that nothing in Title IX or the three-part test requires the cutting or reduction of opportunities for the overrepresented sex, and OCR has pledged to seek remedies that do not involve the elimination of opportunities.

OCR hopes the Additional Clarification and User's Guide will help reinforce the flexibility of the three-part test and will facilitate application of part three for those schools that choose to use it to ensure Title IX compliance. OCR welcomes requests for individualized technical assistance and is prepared to join with institutions in assisting them to address their particular situations.

Thank you for your continuing interest in this subject.

Sincerely,



James F. Manning
Delegated the Authority of the
Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights