Showing posts with label publicity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label publicity. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Softball facility improvement forthcoming in NC

It does not appear that we blogged about the complaint filed with OCR in 2009 out of Richmond County in North Carolina. But the allegations of disparities in the treatment of women's athletics, specifically softball, are currently being investigated. And Richmond Senior High School has promised to improve the facilities--to make them comparable to baseball's facilities.
This is not especially ground-breaking (well except when they actually break new ground on the new facility!). We have been blogging about softball facilities pretty much since we started this blog. And there has been great success in proving disparity by comparing the treatment of softball teams to baseball teams even though Title IX does not mandate such a one-to-one comparison. [Part of the complaint though alleges that the football team gets priority on the practice field.]
But I liked this particular article for a few reasons.
First, we got the list of facility issues: lights (which every other school has apparently), dugouts, locker room facilities, and concession stands.
Also we are reminded of another Title IX compliance issue that does not get a lot of attention: publicity. It appears that boys' games are advertised on a local radio station.
And finally, the Richmond County Daily Journal has filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking copies of the complaints from the school district and the Department of Education. Nice to see a newspaper making a concerted effort to get all the facts.

Friday, October 17, 2008

WIU using survey data

Cited for not providing opportunities to meet the needs and interests of its female students and not providing equitable amounts of publicity to its current male and female teams, Western Illinois University will be submitting evidence to explain these alleged disparities to the Office of Civil Rights next month. The report is required as part of the resolution agreement between OCR and WIU that resulted after a complaint was filed with OCR. It doesn't sound like much of a resolution really. After all WIU is not admitting any wrongdoing. It seems that the submission of evidence is normally part of an investigation that might lead to some kind of resolution agreement. One of the interesting aspects of the report, though, is that WIU will be using recent survey data to support its claim that it is meeting the needs and interests of its female students. (Though for some reason this data will not be submitted until April of 2009.) The survey, according to above link, asked students about their interest in sports the NCAA has deemed "core" or "emerging." We have noted the issues with surveys that ask current students about their interests in sports that do not exist at their institution--along with other problems in assessing interest via a survey. No mention of how the survey was administered or what the return rate was. According to this article, though, WIU does such surveys every few years.
WIU maintains that it is in compliance with Title IX. The evidence of this is due to OCR by November 1.

Saturday, April 12, 2008

Confusion in Bucks County

The Superintendent of the Central Bucks County School District doesn't quite understand what exactly OCR is seeking in its investigation of the district's athletic departments*.
An anonymous complaint was filed and OCR is collecting information. A representative will be meeting with the superintendent next week in an effort to resolve the complaint which centers on publicity, equipment, and scheduling.
The superintendent, who only recently found out there was a complaint filed thinking instead that the district was undergoing a routine audit process, does not seem to have a great awareness of Title IX which is disappointing given he is a high-level administrator. His confusion over the process is understandable but this statement indicates that he does not even know what Title IX is all about:
“I got the sense that a lot of it had to do with gender equity, because a lot of the questions they asked us were related to how many girls sports, how many boys sports.”
It's also unfortunate that a superintendent does not know what is happening in his own district. Asked for the publicity material he said: "They wanted all our publicity of programs. We don’t even control (game day) programs. Our parent/booster clubs do all that. They asked me how much is spent on publicity, and I said zero. … This has been very strange.”
I find it a little strange as well but for very different reasons.

*Note that this article contains a large mistake about the three-prong test at the very end. The author--who has written extensively about the Title IX issues in Pennsylvania--writes that the third prong contains 11 components.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Specifics of Adrian College complaint

A couple of weeks ago investigators from OCR showed up at Adrian College to look into the gender equity complaints that have been filed against the college's athletic program.

Since then more details about the complaint's allegations that there has been different treatment of women's and men's coaches, access to facilities and equipment and, in general, greater attention to men's athletics have come out.

But the college's executive vice president* Rick Creehan, who has been the spokesperson on this issue, has said that the complaints have been over exaggerated.

For example, the fact that the new Multisport Performance Stadium does not even have a women's locker room let alone one with lounge furniture and a plasma television as the men's does was simply an "oversight" according to Creehan. They must have just forgotten that women play sports for the entire time the project was being planned and executed. Forgetting to order a chair for the ticket booth is an oversight; forgetting to build a women's locker room is discrimination.

Creehan attempted to diffuse that particular complaint by noting that the Merillat Sport & Fitness Center right next door has a women's locker room. Such a rationale only makes the absence of one in the new building all the more egregious. That a university could build, in the past, a facility that women could use but forgets that women may want--actually are required to have--access to the new facility is not earning points for the administration.

Also at issue are: updates planned to the baseball stadium that are more extensive than those planned for the softball complex; male athletes' greater access to athletic trainers; more publicity for men's sports.

No word on when OCR will issue its report.


* I know the American university is becoming progressively corporatized but an executive VP!?