1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Title IX fraud

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by inthesuburbs, Apr 25, 2011.

  1. SockPuppet

    SockPuppet Active Member

    Perhaps Ms. Thomas contorted some facts to fit her agenda. This is the reply from Texas A&M's athletic director:

    The New York Times published a story on Tuesday questioning our compliance with Title IX and specifically referenced our national champion women's basketball team and the male A&M students who practice with the team.

    We are very proud of our Title IX compliance at Texas A&M and feel that we are leaders nationally in this area. In fact, every year we have a third party fully evaluate our Title IX compliance. Such an evaluation is not mandated.

    Unfortunately, facts can get in the way of accurately reporting a story, especially when looking at an easy target like the recent national champion of women's basketball. Misconceptions and misinformation grows on itself. The New York Times writes things and other media regurgitate the information how they see fit.

    Here are the facts.

    Title IX essentially gives female student-athletes the same opportunities as male student-athletes. In order to comply with Title IX, one of the tests is the proportion of male vs. female students enrolled at the institution as compared to the proportion of athletic opportunities offered.

    Title IX regulations require that an institution NOT count male practice players.

    Meanwhile, the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) requires male practice players to be reported as participants on any women's team they practice with. In 2009-10, we had male practice players associated with women's basketball, women's tennis, and volleyball.

    The EADA is a different calculation than that used for compliance with Title IX regulations. The bottom line is we are dealing with two separate laws with two separate definitions of a participant. The fact is we reported accurate numbers in each case, and we are compliant with both.
     
  2. i think it's important to note that the a.d. is not complaining about katie's story, but instead about news media outlets that picked up the story and allegedly drew conclusions that the original article did not make.

    to my knowledge, a&m has not asked for a correction or made a complaint to the NYT.
     
  3. If the AD is correct, Thomas' story is inaccurate and misleading.

    Assuming that Texas A&M only included the male players in the EADA report and not the Title IX proportionality test, then Texas A&M did not "take advantage of a federal loophole" because the EADA report is NOT the report a school would have to submit for a Title IX investigation.

    It's a major error because of the context in which she put the information. It would be understandable but for the major accusation Thomas hurled at Texas A&M. Either she received wrong information from a source or wrongly assumed that the EADA report is the same as a Title IX compliance report.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page