by Iram Valentin
Research Fellow, Education Development Center
now make up the majority of students in America's colleges and universities
in addition to making up the majority of recipients of master's
degrees. Indeed, the United States has become a world leader in
giving women the opportunity to receive a higher education."
-From the introduction to Title IX: 25 Years of Progress, A
Report of the U.S. Department of Education, June 1997.
many girls and women still confront 'No Trespassing' signs throughout
educational institutions. Women remain underrepresented in critical
areas such as math and science. Colleges and universities continue
to give short shrift to women's athletics, spending the lion's share
of money on men's programming. Scoring gaps persist in standardized
testing, limiting women's access to educational institutions, financial
aid, and careers. Non-traditional job training programs leading
to high-skill, high-wage jobs are still hostile places for women,
where they confront the most severe forms of harassment. Few women,
particularly women of color, have broken the glass ceiling that
keeps the top ranks of positions in colleges and universities primarily
the preserve of men. . . . We owe it to our daughters to improve
our performance on Title IX by removing these obstacles."
The modern women's
movement achieved a historic victory on June 23, 1972, when Title
IX was enacted as part of the Education Amendments. The preamble to
Title IX states: "No person in the United States shall, on
the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the
benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any educational
programs or activity receiving federal financial assistance."
With this act, the role of women and girls in education and the work
force began to change significantly. Title IX ensures legal protection
against discrimination for students and employees, which includes
protection against sexual harassment. Specifically, it prohibits discrimination
on the basis of gender* in educational
institutions receiving federal financial assistance. The act applies
to public and private schools**, from
kindergarten through graduate schools, and covers admissions, recruitment,
educational programs and activities, course offerings and access,
counseling, financial aid, employment assistance, facilities and housing,
health and insurance benefits and services, scholarships, and athletics.
It also protects from discrimination against marital and parental
the introduction to Report Card on Gender Equity, A Report
of the National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education,
origin lies in the 1965 presidential Executive Order 11246 prohibiting
federal contractors from discrimination in employment on the basis
of race, color, religion, or national origin. Executive Order 11246
was amended by President Johnson, effective October 13, 1968, to
include discrimination based on sex and was renamed "Executive
Order 11246 (1965) as amended by Executive Order 11375 (1967)."
Bernice R. Sandler, at the time a part-time lecturer at the University
of Maryland and currently a senior scholar in residence at the National
Association for Women in Education, was the first to use the order
for the benefit of women. "I had made the connection,"
she noted, "that, since most universities and colleges had
federal contracts, they were forbidden from discriminating in employment
on the basis of sex." Ignited by Sandler's efforts, on March
9, 1970, Rep. Martha Griffiths (D-Michigan) gave the first speech
in the U.S. Congress concerning discrimination against women in
education. Three weeks later, the first contract compliance investigation
involving sex discrimination began at Harvard University.
In June and
July 1970, Rep. Edith Green (D-Ohio), who chaired the subcommittee
that dealt with higher education, drafted legislation prohibiting
sex discrimination in education and held the first congressional
hearings on the education and employment of women. The hearings
that Rep. Green held were the first legislative step toward the
enactment of Title IX. The original version of the bill, which was
part of a larger measure on higher education, proposed to amend
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (prohibiting discrimination
in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national
origin) to cover employees in educational institutions. The measure
also proposed to amend Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (prohibiting
discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in
any program receiving federal financial assistance) to cover sex
discrimination, and to extend the Equal Pay Act to cover executives,
administrators, and professionals. When the hearings were finished,
Rep. Green asked Sandler to join the committee staff to put together
the written record of the hearings. Sandler thus became the first
person ever appointed to the staff of a congressional committee
to work specifically in the area of women's rights.
The bill was
managed in the Senate by Senators Birch Bayh (D-Indiana) and George
McGovern (D-South Dakota). The House-Senate conference committee
took several months to settle differences between the House and
Senate education bill. Honoring the requests of African American
leaders and their supporters, who feared that the process of amending
Title VI could weaken its coverage, Rep. Green proposed a separate
and new title, which became the now famous Title IX.
wording of the bill made it difficult to understand at a quick glance
and discussion on the Senate floor included whether the bill would
require educational institutions to allow women to play football.
Not imagining the potential impact of Title IX on athletics, when
their concerns about football were allayed, higher education did
not lobby for or against the bill. Sandler and the bill's other
supporters did not lobby on its behalf either in order to avoid
attracting adverse attention. The elementary and secondary education
community remained for the most part unaware of it because it was
attached to a higher education measure.
The bill also
included the amendment to the Equal Pay Act-enforced by the Department
of Labor-extending protection against sex discrimination to administrators,
professionals, and executives. Although Title IX largely slipped
by its potential detractors, it would significantly expand the jurisdiction
of the Department of Labor-a fact that was not realized until after
passage of the bill. Congress passed the bill on June 8, 1972 and
President Nixon signed Title IX into law on June 23, 1972. Earlier
that same year, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was amended in
a separate action to cover all employees in educational institutions.2
of Health, Education, and Welfare took three years (1972-75) to translate
Title IX into specific regulations.3
President Ford signed the Title IX regulations on May 27, 1975. According
to these regulations:
Although at least
one employee is required to be designated to coordinate compliance
with Title IX, it is the shared responsibility of an entire school
district, from top-level administration to individual staff, to foster
systems or other recipients of federal funds must designate at
least one employee as the Title IX coordinator to oversee compliance
efforts and investigate any complaints of sex discrimination.
- All students
and employees must be notified of the names, office address(es),
and telephone number(s) of the designated coordinator(s) of Title
procedures and nondiscrimination policies must be made public.
school systems had to perform a one-time self-evaluation, with
obligations to modify practices that did not comply with Title
systems may take remedial and affirmative steps to increase the
participation of students in programs or activities where bias
Rights Legislation ^up
Although the actual
development of Title IX was spurred on by the presidential Executive
Order 11246, Title IX grew out of the Civil Rights and feminist movements
of the late 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s. Beginning in the 1950s
with the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education
(1954) outlawing racial segregation in public schools, African American
communities had begun to win concessions in the struggle for equal
rights. In 1964, African Americans achieved another major victory
when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act. Title VII of the act prohibits
employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex,
or national origin. In addition, Title IV provides support to schools
working to comply with the nondiscrimination mandate by providing
federal funding for regional assistance centers and state education
agencies in order to allow these agencies to provide free technical
assistance and materials to elementary and secondary schools to ensure
that students receive equal educational opportunities.4
In the fall of 1996, Congress eliminated state funds for Title IV,
reducing the resources available to local school districts, and federal
funding is currently under debate.
As a civil
rights statute, Title IX is primarily enforced by the Office for
Civil Rights (OCR), which has enforced racial discrimination laws
since 1964. Three other pieces of civil rights legislation followed
Title IX: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, prohibiting
disability discrimination; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; and
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, prohibiting
disability discrimination by public entities.
the Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA) was passed in 1974. The
purpose of the law is to make education more equitable for girls
and women by providing incentives and guidance to schools and community
groups. It was extended in 1978, amended in 1984, and reauthorized
in 1988.5 In contrast to Title IX,
which provides sanctions for noncompliance with the sex equity legislation,
WEEA represents the supportive component: providing funding at all
levels of education for programs of national, statewide, or general
significance to overcome sex stereotyping and achieve educational
equity for girls and women.6 The
key priorities in the early years of the grant program were Title
IX compliance by educational institutions and educational equity
for racial or ethnic minorities and women and girls with disabilities.
WEEA funded grants; the National Advisory Council on Women's Educational
Programs (NACWEP); and the WEEA Publishing Center, now the WEEA
Equity Resource Center.
NACWEP to advise the secretary of education on recommendations concerning
sex equity legislation and to evaluate actual WEEA-funded programs.
Originally a bipartisan body, it published key reports such as The
Half Full, Half Empty Glass (1981). By 1982, however, it was
dominated by Reagan appointees, and in 1988 it was eliminated by
the WEEA Reauthorization Act. For over 20 years, the WEEA Equity
Resource Center, which is housed at Education Development Center,
Inc. (EDC), has supported gender equity initiatives through the
marketing and development of gender-fair materials and maintenance
of an on-line resource. The center has also provided technical assistance
to thousands of individuals and has published over 300 titles, thereby
creating a knowledge base that continues to guide the field. Its
support and leadership have helped to frame the current discourse
concerning gender equity. In the last few years, congressional budget
cuts have reduced the resources available to WEEA and have eliminated
most grants. However, in 1996 and 1997, under the direction of Secretary
of Education Richard W. Riley, WEEA and the WEEA Equity Resource
Center received separate funds enabling them to continue operations.
support for Title IX is also derived from the 1976 amendments to
the Vocational Equity Act of 1963, which require states receiving
federal funding for vocational education to develop and carry out
activities and programs to eliminate sex bias, stereotyping, and
discrimination in vocational education. The amendments also permit
the allocation of federal funds to programs for single heads of
households, homemakers, part-time workers seeking full-time jobs,
and persons seeking jobs in areas nontraditional for their sex.7
Further, under the amendments, many states are required to name
state vocational education sex equity coordinators who provide training
and produce materials aimed at making vocational education more
equitable and less gender segregated. The Carl D. Perkins Act of
1984 allows the coordinator to administer funds for projects to
eliminate sex bias and for programs aimed at single parents and
programs according to the discretion of the states.8
In the politically
conservative 1980s, the U.S. Department of Justice challenged the
broad coverage of Title IX, and enforcement weakened within the
Office for Civil Rights.9 The Supreme
Court ruled in Grove City College v. Bell (1984) that Title
IX was program specific, and that, therefore, only those programs
and activities receiving direct federal funds needed to comply.10
However, in 1988, Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act,
which restored the liability for sanctions to an entire school system
or college if it receives federal education funds. The Supreme Court
acknowledged in Franklin v. Gwinnet County Public Schools et
al. (1992) that institutions could be held liable for individuals
in those institutions who participated in discriminatory behavior
toward females. In this landmark case, the Supreme Court also ruled
that plaintiffs could sue for monetary damages. This ruling increased
the willingness of lawyers to take on Title IX suits, as well as
issuing a wake-up call to school districts about the possible consequences
to Date ^up
While there is
much to be accomplished, there is also much to celebrate in this 25th
anniversary year. According to the latest report by the U.S. Department
of Education, Title IX: 25 Years of Progress, in the quarter
century since Title IX came into existence, women have been granted
greater opportunities to reach their full human potential. Much of
the progress in athletics is well known. The report states that since
1971, there has been a fourfold increase in the participation of women
in intercollegiate sports.
Women have made
similarly dramatic advances in academics.
- In 1995,
women made up 37 percent of athletes in college, compared to 15
percent in 1972.
- In 1996,
girls constituted 39 percent of high school athletes, compared
to 7.5 percent in 1971.
- Women won
19 Olympic medals in the 1996 summer Olympic Games-more than in
any previous year's Games.
In recent years,
the number of females taking high school algebra, geometry, and calculus
has increased and is now similar to the percentage of males taking
these courses. In addition, gender differences in mathematics achievement
in most areas have continued to decline. The popularly held belief
that males as a sex are predisposed to achievement in mathematics
is being challenged by research illustrating the negative impact on
females of stereotyping and lack of encouragement by teachers and
parents. Gender differences in areas traditionally perceived as male,
such as spatial relations, have been eliminated by changing teaching
practices, indicating that differences have more to do with socialization
than with genes. Yet women continue to be underrepresented in areas
such as computer science, engineering, mathematics, and physical science
and are less likely than men to earn a degree in these fields. For
example, the Department of Education report11
states that women earn only
- In 1994,
63 percent of female high school graduates aged 16-24 were enrolled
in college, compared to 43 percent in 1973.
- In 1994,
27 percent of women earned a bachelor's degree, compared to 18
percent in 1971.
- In 1994,
women received 38 percent of medical degrees, compared with 9
percent in 1972; 43 percent of law degrees, compared with 7 percent
in 1972; and 44 percent of all doctoral degrees, compared to 25
percent in 1977.
According to the
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1996 women made up 98.6 percent
of secretaries and 96.9 percent of receptionists, but only 9.2 percent
of all engineers, architects, and surveyors, and only 4.1 percent
of all mechanics and repair technicians.12
Even women who do go on to earn a degree in mathematics or science
still have to deal with inequity in the labor market. For example,
as the Department of Education report states
- 17 percent
of math and physical science Ph.D.'s
- 14 percent
of computer science Ph.D.'s
- 7 percent
of engineering Ph.D.'s
- In 1993,
women who had majored in the natural sciences earned 15 percent
less than male colleagues with the same majors.
- In 1993,
women graduates of four-year colleges earned about 20 percent
less than their male counterparts with the same education.
The national Report
Card on Gender Equity released on June 23, 1997, by the National
Coalition for Women and Girls in Education (NCWGE) further demonstrates
the mixed record of Title IX. The report grades particular areas that
Title IX was meant to address: access to higher education, athletics,
career education, employment, learning environment, math and science,
sexual harassment, standardized testing, and treatment of pregnant
and parenting students. The report gave the nation an overall "C
average," indicating that some progress has been made, but that
more improvement is necessary.13 According
to the report:
- Women earn
more than half of the associate's, bachelor's, and master's degrees
awarded but still lag behind men at the doctoral level, earning
just 39 percent of doctoral degrees.
- The number
of women coaches coaching women's teams has decreased over the
past 25 years-from 90 percent to 48 percent.
- Women make
up 73 percent of elementary and secondary school teachers, but
only 35 percent of principals.
and Equal Treatment
experienced by girls in the elementary through high school years may
contribute to lowering their self-confidence, and consequently to
discouraging them from pursuing certain subjects, such as math and
science, which are required for entry into particular fields. "According
to the National Center for Education Statistics, male students were
more likely to increase their science proficiency level between 8th
and 12th grades, 56 and 51 percent respectively."14
Research indicates that self-confidence is a determinant of career
considerations and influences the path that will lead to the career.15
Therefore, both the factors that affect females' self-confidence and
other systemic barriers to achievement need to be understood.
Versus Equitable Outcomes
A huge difference
exists between providing equal access and equal treatment to males
and females in education and ensuring equitable outcomes for both
genders. Simply providing equal access does not challenge either
the many deep-seated social beliefs about females and males and
their respective abilities or the widespread practices that perpetuate
these stereotypes. Similarly, focusing only on equal treatment may
serve to discount the existence of these prejudices by seeking to
put the onus for change on the victims, thus serving to legitimize
their oppression. A policy of ensuring equitable outcomes, on the
other hand, takes into consideration that victims have different
experiences and accordingly need diverse, innovative, and appropriate
pedagogical approaches. If a young female has been conditioned to
believe that mathematics is inappropriate for her, simply placing
her in a math classroom with boys will not solve the problem. In
fact, it may actually accelerate the process of alienation.
opportunity has not resulted in equity for women. Teachers, it has
been found, give boys more praise, more criticism, and more remediation
and are more apt to accept boys' responses. In addition, they respond
more frequently to boys' requests and talk to boys more about ideas
and concepts. Further, boys usually receive more encouragement from
both teachers and parents. These realities have to be taken into
consideration by those who seek equitable outcomes. Sadker and Sadker
argue that girls in school are subject to "subtle and insidious
gender lessons, micro-inequalities that appear seemingly insignificant
when looked at individually but have a powerful cumulative impact."16
The focus should be on not only ensuring equal access for females
but also on developing policies, practices, and materials to combat
stereotyping, socialization, and other systemic factors that deny
As we move closer
to the twenty-first century, it seems evident that limiting women
and girls also limits the nation as a whole. Gender inequity prevents
females from realizing their full human potential and gives males
free rein over the world. A closer examination of the lives of males,
however, reveals that falling short of educational equity harms men
as well as women. bell hooks states, "Men are not exploited or
oppressed by sexism, but there are ways in which they suffer as a
result of it. This suffering should not be ignored."17
National crime statistics illustrate the damaging effects of rigid
gender boundaries on the lives of males, who disproportionately act
out physically against themselves, women, and other men.18
Yet this realization also brings hope. Since males do control much
of the power in our society, a realization by men of the adverse affects
of gender inequity on them may lead to the yielding of male privilege
and the creation of male-female alliances, on which the achievement
of true gender equity in this modern world depends.
on gender equity must also include multicultural and diverse perspectives.
For too long, women in the United States have been considered a
homogeneous group that benefits uniformly from the struggle for
gender equity. However, often lost in this view are the voices of
African American, Asian American, Latina, Native American, poor
and other marginalized women, including women with disabilities.
In addition, differences in class, culture, and ethnicity cut across
and within these groups. Further, special educators too often forget
that students with disabilities have a gender and are subject to
gender bias, like their non-disabled counterparts. Under Title IX,
females of all races and abilities should have access to the same
schools and instruction as white middle- and upper-class male students.
However, compared to poor females and females of color, white middle-and
upper-class females apparently receive the most benefits. Statistics
often fail to take into consideration the variables of class, culture,
and race that significantly influence access to education and accompanying
support. The American Association
of University Women's 1992 report, How Schools Shortchange
Girls, states that socioeconomic status, more than any other
variable, predicts educational outcomes. However, socioeconomic
status should not be isolated, as the report " . . . suggests
that closer attention should be paid to the combined impact of gender
and social class, as well as race, on educational outcomes."19
and class are interrelated in a complex dynamic. Gender is a concept
that is culturally constructed in a sociohistorical context. "Similarly,
race and class carry with them socially constructed roles, beliefs,
and expectations. Students of color and poor students are often
assigned lower status in schools, and the cultural, social dynamics
of racism and classism play themselves out in the consistent underachievement
of these students."20 How
Schools Shortchange Girls reports that there are differences
in the concentration of women from different racial and ethnic backgrounds
in certain sectors of the work force-a phenomenon that has as much
to do with class as with race and ethnicity. In addition, the report
illustrates differences in levels of self-esteem between girls who
are different racially, ethnically, and physically but are at similar
educational stages, again demonstrating the interrelatedness between
these variables in determining different experiences. However, care
must be taken not to perpetuate the biases that already exist about
women of color and women with disabilities simply by focusing on
the stereotypes. The challenge will be to balance acknowledgment
of differences with a vision for the common goal of gender equity.
Since Title IX
was enacted on June 23, 1972, many women have made substantial progress
in education, employment, and athletics. This 25th anniversary affords
us the opportunity to reflect on what has been done and, more important,
what still needs to be done to secure genuine gender equity for everyone
in our schools and our society. We hope to continue the conversation
surrounding gender equity in education-recognizing that the dialogue
needs to go beyond merely acknowledging the inequalities between females
and males to demanding the implementation of gender-fair educational
and social practices. We also realize that for true equity to exist,
there must be a renewed commitment to the enforcement of Title IX.
The future of Title IX and its supporting sex equity legislation is
both hopeful and uncertain, as federal budget constraints have reduced
the funding for such initiatives.
may be increased as on the anniversary of Title IX President Clinton
ordered all heads of executive departments and agencies that provide
financial assistance to education programs or activities to consult
with the attorney general and "to report . . . within 90 days
on measures to ensure effective enforcement of Title IX."21
In addition, he asked the heads of the departments to "take
appropriate action against discrimination in education programs
or activities conducted by the Federal government." "I
believe," the president stated in his address to celebrate
the anniversary, "and I surely hope that every American would
agree that the national government must hold itself to the same
high standards it expects from everyone else-especially when it
comes to discrimination in education."22
The recommitment by the president to the enforcement of Title IX
may serve to strengthen the support that is needed in the struggle
to eradicate gender discrimination and other types of inequalities
in education and society.
I use the biological term sex only when distinguishing from
the socially constructed concept of gender. Where the literature
has used sex, however, I have used the term in order to keep
the language in its context.
** Most private
elementary and secondary schools do not receive federal funds although
most private postsecondary institutions do.
- Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA) Publishing
Center, Gender Equity for Educators, Parents, and Community
(Newton, Mass.: Education Development Center, 1995).
- B. R. Sandler, "Too Strong for a Woman,"
About Women on Campus (Spring 1997): 6, No. 2.
- N. P. Stromquist, "Sex-Equity Legislation
in Education: The State as Promoter of Women's Rights." Review
of Educational Research (Winter 1993): 63, No. 4: 379-407.
- P. A. Schmuck et al. "Administrative Strategies
for Institutionalizing Sex Equity in Education and the Role of Government,"
in Handbook for Achieving Sex Equity Through Education, ed.
by S. S. Klein (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985).
- S. Flansburg and K. Hanson, Legislation for Change: A Case
Study of Title IX and the Women's Educational Equity Act Program
(Newton, Mass.: WEEA Publishing Center/EDC, 1993).
- Flansburg and Hanson.
- U.S. Department of Education, Title IX: 25
Years of Progress (Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research
and Improvement, 1997).
- U.S. Department of Labor Statistics, Economic
Analysis and Information Unit, Boston Regional Office. The use of
these data is explained well by this passage: "Since national
data on enrollments by sex, race, or ethnicity are not complied
[sic] nationally (only state by state), we have to look at national
employment figures to help assess the impact of what is (or is not)
happening at the local school district level. In doing so, we recognize
the limitations of the data collection documenting vocational education
and training and labor market outcomes for women and men in traditional
occupations. We also know that the proportion of students enrolled
in nontraditional vocational programs is likely to increase more
rapidly than their representation in related occupations."
Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc., and Network, Inc., Beyond
Title IX: Gender Equity Issues in Schools (Report No. SO 024
862). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 387 367, 1993).
- National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education,
Title IX at 25: Report Card on Gender Equity (Washington,
D.C.: National Women's Law Center, 1997).
- U.S. Department of Education.
- S. Flansburg, Building Self: Adolescent Girls
and Issues of Self-Esteem (Newton, Mass.: WEEA Publishing Center/EDC,
- M. Sadker and D. Sadker, Failing at Fairness:
How America's Schools Cheat Girls (New York: Charles Scribner
and Sons, 1994).
- b. hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center
(Boston: South End Press, 1984).
- M. Miedzian, Boys Will Be Boys: Breaking the
Link Between Masculinity and Violence (New York: Doubleday,
- Wellesley College Center for Research on Women,
The AAUW Report: How Schools Shortchange Girls (Washington
D.C.: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation,
- K. Hanson, Gender, Discourse, and Technology
(Newton, Mass.: WEEA Equity Resource Center/EDC, 1997).
- President Clinton, Memorandum for the Heads
of Executive Departments and Agencies, June 17, 1997.
- Remarks by
President Clinton at Title IX Event, June 17, 1997.
Materials to Support Title IX Mandates
or call our distribution center at 800-793-5076.
A Gender Equity Curriculum for Grades 6-12
An exciting multicultural curriculum, A-Gay-Yah emphasizes critical
thinking and cooperative learning. For Native American students,
A-Gay-Yah affirms a long and vital cultural history while helping
students discuss gender issues relating to traditional and modern
culture. This curriculum is an outstanding addition to social studies
and history classrooms. (178 pp.) 1992 #2735 $30.00
Places: An Enrichment Program to Empower Students
Going Places, based on a project conducted in the San Diego City
Schools, targets those middle school students most at risk of dropping
out. Focuses on enrichment and hands-on, cooperative, group learning.
Develops and builds self-esteem, improves problem-solving and decision-making
skills, and develops leadership skills. (433 pp.) 1991 #2713
What the Doctor Should Have Ordered: A Prescription for Sex-Fair
School Health Services
Provides the first civil rights view of sex discrimination in health
services. Includes a step-by-step, easy-to-manage method for evaluating
student health services. This vital guide clearly defines the legal
responsibilities as required by Title IX and helps schools negotiate
ethical dilemmas. (158 pp.) 1989 #2698 $21.25
An innovative urban program designed to develop an awareness of
gender-role stereotyping. Equity Lessons for Elementary School is
a wonderful supplement to any social studies curriculum. Activities
help students to identify gender-role stereotyping on toy packaging,
in advertising, and in fairy tales. (38 pp.) Equity Lessons for
Secondary School presents activities based on personal assumptions
and meaning in the lives of activist women. (60 pp.)1982
#2432 Elementary $8.00
#2433 Secondary $8.50
in Education Series
The Equity in Education Series offers various approaches to meet
the needs of all students in today's diverse classrooms. The series
helps educators, parents, and community members understand their
crucial roles in furthering equity in the schools and in society.
Also helps users identify bias and respond to it with activities
and other hands-on tools for use in K-12 classrooms. Set includes:
Gender Equity for Educators, Parents, and Community (26 pp.); Gender
Stereotypes: The Links to Violence (25 pp.); School-to-Work: Equitable
Outcomes (26 pp.); Gender-Fair Math (22 pp.) 1995 #2761
(set of 4)$16.00
Equity for Educators, Parents, and Community and La Igualdad
de Género para Educadores, Padres, y la Comunidad
Challenge the thinking that limits your expectations for girls and
boys. This booklet will help you recognize the limits of assumptions
you didn't know you had and offers new options to teachers, parents,
and community organizations. This bestselling booklet, just released
in Spanish, is soon to be available in Vietnamese. Call the center
at 800-225-3088 for more information. (26 pp.) 1995
#2762 (English) $5.00 order
#2800 (Spanish) $5.00 order
for Change: A Case Study of Title IX and the Women's Educational
Equity Act Program
This working paper uses Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972 as a case study to explore the education field and the impact
of civil rights legislation dealing with gender. Discusses what
Title IX is, its origins, and its context, and examines some successes
and failures of Title IX, closing with some points to consider when
legislating for equity. (22 pp.) 1993 #2749 $6.00
is an online discussion forum designed to link educators, adminisitrators,
equity practitioners, advocates, parents, policymakers, counselors,
and others interested in ongoing peer exchanges and professional
development. Our online panel discussions offer opportunities to
talk with international experts in different education areas.
EdEquity gives people an opportunity to ask questions and exchange
information about teaching strategies, useful texts and films, innovative
programs, current research, and funding sources.
You can read through the
most recent discussions without joining the list
by accessing our archived messages. www.edc.org/WomensEquity/edequity/about.htm.
to EdEquity, send an e-mail to <Majordomo@mail.edc.org>.
Leave the subject heading blank, and in the body of the message
type the following: subscribe edequity. If you are under the age
of 13, please contact us at WEEActr@edc.org
for special instructions.
Digest is published by the WEEA Publishing Center, a project
at Education Development Center, Inc., under contract with the U.S.
Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position
of the U.S. Department of Education and no official endorsement
should be inferred.
Us | Our Services | Resources
to Infuse Equity
Publications | Women
of Achievement | News
Links | Contact
Us | Calendar of Events | Recursos
Equity Works for All
Equity Resource Center
55 Chapel Street
Newton, MA 02458-1060
Telephone: 800-225-3088 / 617-969-7100
©2002 Education Development Center,