Title Ix and Sexual Harassment: A Law and Policy Review

Title IX and Sexual Harassment:

A Law and Policy Examination

Andrew F. Roberts

EDU 6203: Education Law, Policy, and Finance

13 December 2015

Title IX and Sexual Harassment: A Policy and Law Examination

Higher education in the 21st century has come to exhibit traits never seen in traditional post-secondary learning. What was once reserved for the wealthy, white, elite males has become a hub for the shaping of minds across the nation. Regardless of class, men and women of every race and ethnicity have permeated the campuses and classrooms of once unattainable institutions of higher education. It is with the ideology that education should be open to all seeking it that the Education Amendments of 1972 were passed. The amendments focused on improving legislation set forth during the mid-1960s, and have opened the door for students across the nation.

Perhaps the most well-known aspect of the legislation is Title IX, which 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 subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” In the past 40+ years, the law has assisted students, administrators, and faculty nationwide to experience an equal and non-discriminatory educational experience. As a result, institutions of higher education have shaped policies to ensure compliance with the law. More importantly, colleges and universities have worked to create an equitable and fair environment for all persons on their campuses. One of the most prevalent aspects of this equal learning environment is the idea of stifling sexual harassment, and allowing for everyone to reap the benefits of opportunities offered by college campuses. Today, Title IX has made a large impact on the field of higher education, with legislation and court cases continuing to shape institutional policy regarding sexual harassment across the nation.

The Laws and Policies

For years, Title IX was known to the masses as the law that allowed men and women to have the same number of athletic opportunities on campus. Outside of those who truly studied the legislation, this was the main focus. In recent years, however, Title IX has risen to the forefront of college policy-making, with stakeholders from students to faculty and administrators to parents focusing on the broad opportunities offered by Title IX. The understanding of the law has expanded to be fully realized as impacting academics, student involvement, public safety, and more. As mentioned, the concept of sexual harassment has become a point of emphasis when considering Title IX. Campuses across the nation have embraced legislative requirements to educate stakeholders on the subject, and continue to pursue better ways to ensure an equal opportunity learning environment.

In recent years, state policymakers have looked to improve upon the practices taking place in their own states. “Statewide reviews of sexual assault policies were initiated last year in Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and Wisconsin. Sweeping changes to state sexual assault policies and protocols were approved in California, Connecticut, Maine and New York” (AASCU, 2015, p. 3). Although this may be only a handful of states, the message is clear; policy reform with regards to sexual harassment is at the top of the list for many legislators.

One key aspect of the legislation that has led to higher education institutional policy reform is the requirement of a Title IX coordinator on campus. As the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ Title IX Resource Guide (2015) discusses, “all recipients of Federal financial assistance must designate at least one employee to coordinate their efforts to comply with and carry out their responsibilities under Title IX” (p. 1). In essence, the coordinator spearheads the compliance of an institution with Title IX directives, in turn helping to better ensure an equal learning and working environment. However, the legislation and policy changes do not always result in the perfect campus environment. Instances of sexual harassment continue to arise on college campuses, requiring institutions to enact fair, yet appropriate responses to said instances. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. For some occurrences, the responses of the university or college has been questioned and appealed. As a result, these cases have been brought beyond the boundaries of the higher education institution and into the court systems at both the state and federal levels. The cases have not only brought justice to the parties involved, but have also shaped the way in which campus policymaking is approached when considering Title IX and sexual harassment in higher education.

The Cases

        When looking at key court cases, it is clear that the handling of cases involving sexual harassment at colleges and universities are not approached in uniform, clear cut ways. In Williams v. Board of Regents of the University of Georgia, 477 F. 3d 1282 (11th Cir. Ga., 2006), a student at UGA was raped by three student athletes on campus. After the act, Williams’ mother contacted the university police, who submitted testimony to the Director of Judicial Review at the institution. It was not until almost a year later that a judiciary hearing was held, with two students and a staff member comprising the panel. By this point two of the accused had already left the institution, while the third left shortly thereafter. Additionally, suspensions of the athletes came only after the basketball and spring football seasons ended (two of the accused were basketball players, and the other a football player). It is also noteworthy that one of the accused, Tony Cole, had also been dismissed from two previous institutions due to incidents of sexual harassment. The court found that UGA failed to effectively respond to the incident and executed “deliberate indifference” when admitting Cole to the university.

        What the Williams case demonstrates is the importance of appropriate and effective response to Title IX allegations. The university’s delayed hearing of almost 12 months undoubtedly minimized the apparent importance of the case in the eyes of administration, and demonstrated a clear lack of leadership amongst the Director of Judicial Affairs, and the upper administration. Furthermore, Williams highlights of guaranteeing student body safety rather than allowing a known offender to enroll due to something such as athletic prowess. However, institutional negligence is not always the case when approaching cases of sexual harassment.