Leigh Torbin asked that I forward this message to the list.
 
 ----------
>   Suppose that a school,  currently in gender compliance,   with a  50-50
> split in its gender population,  wanted to institute men's hockey and go
D-1
 
        Actually when applyin the three pronged test to se whether a
school complies with Title IX the athletic department as a whole is
examined and not individual programs. OCR will not examine the funding
for men's hockey vs. women's hockey, but rather the bottom line for the
entire male and female genders.
        This was confirmed in a January Supreme court ruling on the
University of Illinois men's swim team, which had filed a reverse
discrimination suit after being cut, while the women's wimming team
remained a varsity sport. The men said that they should receive the same
funding as the women, and the Supreme Court disagreed. The decision was
made without comment, but the Federal Judge who made the origional ruling
said that there is no requirement for parallel teams and noted that
football is not offered for women.
        As for the 50-50 thing, the rules mandate equity NOT equality.
The rule of thumb here is that the percentages should be +/- 5% of the
student body percentage. If a school is 56% male it is reasonably OK with
61% male athletes.
        FYI, when the NCAA's Gender Equity Task Force published its final
report in the August 4, 1993 NCAA News, it listed hockey as one of nine
"emerging sports for women." But, then again bowling and badminton were
also on the list.
 
Leigh
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.