The Chronicle of Higher Education has reported on recommendations made by members of the Dept. of Education's Title IX committee. Very interesting stuff, although I notice that Donna Lopiano (who I thought was on the committee) is not included...

Anyway, I'm sure major papers probably have similar stories. The following link should work for you tomorrow (Friday): http://chronicle.com/daily/2002/12/2002120501n.htm

If not, go to http://chronicle.com/index.htm and go to Today's News and look up the News for Thurs, Dec. 5

In the meantime, some excerpts:
Following is a list of the commissioners who offered recommendations, and a summary of their solutions:

Edward A. Leland, athletics director at Stanford University and co-chairman of the commission: Modify the first prong so an institution would count not actual athletes, but instead a set number of athletes per sport, such as 20 athletes each for men's and women's soccer. If the men's soccer coach wanted to keep 30 athletes on the team and the women's soccer coach wanted only 18, they could, but their budgets would be based on having 20 athletes per team. This would allow men's coaches to keep walk-on athletes who now are often cut to meet gender-equity targets. Stanford already does this, Mr. Leland said. He suggested that the number of players per team could be derived by taking averages of current squad sizes among NCAA members or other groups.

Cynthia Cooper, a former professional basketball coach and co-chairwoman of the commission: Call on the Office for Civil Rights to conduct periodic surveys of the interest and abilities of men and women, instead of the undergraduate student population, to use as the basis for the first prong. Also, she said, the office should create programs to encourage girls to participate in high-school sports

Eugene B. DeFilippo Jr., athletics director at Boston College: Publish a new policy statement to clarify exactly what all three prongs mean.

Graham B. Spanier, president of Pennsylvania State University at University Park: Abandon the emphasis on "substantial proportionality" as the "safe harbor" that ensures compliance with Title IX and replace it with a test that puts all prongs on the same footing, and find additional ways of demonstrating equity. A sports department's compliance with Title IX should be evaluated by looking at all of the tests in aggregate. To say that an institution with a 30-percentage-point difference between the proportion of female athletes and female students is in compliance if it adds a women's team would "make me uncomfortable," Mr. Spanier said.

Deborah A. Yow, athletics director at the University of Maryland at College Park: Redefine the first prong to require all colleges to have a 50-50 ratio between male and female athletes, with a certain variance, such as five or seven percentage points. This would provide "wiggle room" in case colleges have nondiscriminatory circumstances that affect the ratio. She also recommended that the second prong be abolished.

Cary Groth, athletics director at Northern Illinois University: Call for consistent education and enforcement by the Office for Civil Rights. Look at the three tests equally, and redesign federal gender-equity reports to account for the second and third part of the test. She also suggested that the commission call for a review of whether NCAA scholarship limitations are hampering Title IX.

Mr. Bowlsby of the University of Iowa: Find ways to add incentives to compliance with Prongs 2 or 3, or add an additional "Prong 1a": Allow a college to comply if its proportion of female athletes is at least three percentage points higher than the proportion of female athletes at high schools in the college's region.

Gerald Reynolds, assistant U.S. secretary of education for civil rights: Reconsider rules regarding private financing of sports teams. Mr. Reynolds did not offer a specific recommendation, but he cited testimony that the commission had heard regarding the wrestling program at Marquette University. Even though alumni had offered to pay for the program, the university decided to drop it anyway, Mr. Reynolds said. He also suggested reconsidering the second prong and finding ways to make it a better option for compliance.