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."
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
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 status.1
the introduction to Report Card on Gender Equity, A Report of the
National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, June 1997.
Title IX's 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
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
The Department 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
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 compliance.
- School 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 IX.
- Grievance procedures
and nondiscrimination policies must be made public.
- Recipient school
systems had to perform a one-time self-evaluation, with obligations
to modify practices that did not comply with Title IX.
- School systems
may take remedial and affirmative steps to increase the participation
of students in programs or activities where bias has occurred.
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
In addition, 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
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.
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 of noncompliance.
Progress to Date
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 1996, girls
constituted 39 percent of high school athletes, compared to 7.5 percent
- Women won 19
Olympic medals in the 1996 summer Olympic Games-more than in any previous
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 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
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
- 17 percent
of math and physical science Ph.D.'s
- 14 percent
of computer science Ph.D.'s
- 7 percent of
- 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.
Making the Grade?
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.
Sameness of 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 equitable outcomes.
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
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
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, 1991).
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, 1991) 325-326.
Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, The AAUW Report:
How Schools Shortchange Girls (Washington D.C.: American Association
of University Women Educational Foundation, 1992).
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
Order WEEA materials
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 $25.00
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 $40.00
the Doctor Should Have Ordered: A Prescription for Sex-Fair School Health
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 $17.00
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.
#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)$13.00
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) $4.00
#2800 (Spanish) $4.00
for Change: A Case Study of Title IX and the Women's Educational Equity
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 $4.00
the Educational Equity Discussion List (EDEQUITY) - a forum to share information
about equity issues in education. EDEQUITY is an international, electronic,
Internet discussion list for educators, researchers, policymakers, parents,
and students. Discussion list members post messages via e-mail to share
information on best practice and innovative resources, explore educational
theory, and consult with practitioners from across the country. Subscribers
can choose between reading each message individually or receiving messages
in a weekly digest.
To see what the
discussion has covered in the past, visit the web site at www.edc.org/WomensEquity/edequity/about.htm.
The WEEA 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.