The National Women’s Law Center filed federal discrimination complaints today accusing 12 school systems, including Wake County, of failing to provide high school girls with equal opportunities as boys to play sports.
The complaints say the 12 school districts are in violation of Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. The group says that the districts have high schools with double-digit gaps between the percentage of students who are girls and the percentage of athletes who are girls.
"By not providing equal opportunities for its female high school students, the Wake County Public School System is depriving many girls of the significant benefits associated with playing sports," according to the complaint filed against Wake. "Sports participation has dramatic positive effects on young women’s health, academic success, employment prospects, and self-esteem."
The center used school district data from 2004 and 2006.
The other school districts named in the complaints are Chicago; Clark County, Nev.; Columbus, Ohio; Deer Valley (Ariz.); Henry County, Ga.; Houston; Irvine, Calif.; New York City; Oldham County, Ky.; Sioux Falls, S.D. and Worcester, Mass.
Click here to view the complaint filed against Wake with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.

Comments
Department of Education Civil Rights Data Collection
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:05 — RMC10The NWCL group states their data is from D'Ed CRDC. I went to that site, plugged in Wake County and Sioux Falls, SD and viewed the public data there for 2006 (the last year of data available - hence the year used in the Complaint filed). I see nothing there even going to current -unreported 2009 data (where the Title IX data has been collected, I think). Again as with any Fed site it's hard to navigate and hard to find data. The data used for this complaint (2006) does not show anything for sports or extracurricular. Just general data collection of how many schools, how many students, how many with special needs, or receiving additional funding. I don't even see any reported data (well that a "normal" person can see - but maybe NWLC has access to different data points).
If anyone knows or can find the actual data collected on Title IX sports programs on the D'Ed or CRDC - let me know. The NWLC has taken on some pretty far flung civil/rights/women's rights cases, and have some well known names on their Board of Directors like Anita Hill. And again the Title IX case is just one of their new "projects" - they are even doing a webinar on it, all in a "marketing" campaign to get support, press coverage, and of course additional funding.
.
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:54 — willynillyInteresting reading from NCDPI :
TO: NC Public School Teachers
FROM: State Superintendent June Atkinson
DATE: Nov. 10, 2010
This week, the NC Department of Public Instruction submitted to the Office of State Budget and Management a list of possible budget cuts totaling 5 percent and 10 percent to the State Public School Fund and the Department of Public Instruction. This list was required of us and of every other state agency as North Carolina leaders prepare to determine how to deal with a budget shortfall that totals more than $3.2 billion. This shortfall is due to the 2011 end of the federal stabilization money that was provided in 2009, the elimination of temporary tax increases, and the reestablishment of several one-time cuts such as textbooks. I am writing about this not to be alarmist or depressing but because a cut in this range of magnitude will have a significant impact on public schools and on your work and mine. As a point of reference, for 2010-11, $7.1 billion in state funds was appropriated to support public schools. The potential level of the cuts is very large. A 5 percent cut would total $396 million. A 10 percent cut would total $792 million. And, it is important to remember that these cuts, were they to be implemented, would be leveled in addition to the $304 million cut that is already built into the budget as a recurring cut. (That is right – our current public school budget for North Carolina gives a certain amount to your school districts and then requires that your district’s leaders return a total of $304 million to the state, which is a recurring 4 percent cut.)
What would it take to make up a cut at that level ($396 million is a new 5 percent cut plus the cut already included in the budget)? It could mean reducing 4,342 or more teachers, possibly 53 percent of teacher assistants, a reduction of maybe 765 instructional support personnel and $112 million from categorical allotments including Career and Technical Education and Exceptional Children. This does not even include the 5 percent cut of $3.2 million at the state education agency, the agency that has already been cut more over the past two years than any other state agency. It also does not include the $4.4 million reduction to the More at Four program, a $1.5 million reduction which the state education agency must make to the three residential schools for the deaf and blind which are being transferred to the NCDPI on June 1, or a $1.5 million reduction to the funding for dropout prevention grants, the teaching fellows program and other funding that flows through the NCDPI specifically for education support organizations such as Communities In Schools and Teach for America.
I know that paying attention to financial issues may not be your favorite way to spend time, but this year it is especially important to pay attention to the state’s financial situation and to make sure that the legislators who represent you know what the impact of their choices will be. We will do all that we can to work with you and with our education association leaders in the upcoming year to provide you with information you need to be informed and to communicate with your legislators about what you need to be effective in the classroom.
Regards,
June Atkinson
Teacher cut backs
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:06 — stan_norwalkWillyNilly:
Thanks for posting this. Do you or User have a rough idea of the number of teacher assistants in WCPSS? I estimate that WCPSS will lose over 700 teachers and support personnel based on the above (10% of NC) not counting teacher assistants or More At Four. Agree?
Not noted in Dr. Atkinson's letter was $48M to WCPSS as a Federal stimulus grant. My recollection is that this funding for Title 1 and students with disabilities only went to large urban districts. Tony Gurley said this shouldn't be counted as it was a stimulus for "building capacity". Is this true? How is it being used? Are the teachers in the classrooms? Or are they teaching other teachers? Either way this amounts to another ~900 teachers.
I wonder whether Gurley/Margiotta will now call Dr. Atkinson a liar, a sensationalist, a fearmonger and irresposible? - the charges leveled against me for calling attention to these massive cuts in next years WCPSS budget.
Stan Norwalk
At one time each grades
Fri, 11/12/2010 - 07:21 — willynillyAt one time each grades school teacher (K-5) had a TA. I think that has changed, but that can offer a rough estimate as to where the numbers used to be. I have heard that in some counties (in a few western counties) that number has gone to one TA per 5 teachers, but no first hand knowledge.
most schools now only have
Fri, 11/12/2010 - 07:31 — AngelaWmost schools now only have TA's in k-1. and class sizes in k-3 must be capped @ 24....all others? you can have many more...including 30+ as has been happening prior to this "budget" issue....so sensationalizing as Mr. Norwalk is doing over the sour grapes of the election is moot.
I don't know that detail but
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:49 — user12345I don't know that detail but I will tell you there are a lot of people who are not teachers in schools (20-30%??) .... so, assuming the $100M will fall only on teachers may not be correct . I could see 2000 people being laid off (as you said) and only 80% are teachers (1600) and people saying how wrong you were guessing 2000 teachers.
So...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:59 — Bob_SconceIt would be nice if the BOE published a 5% / 10% cut scenario so officials, parents and taxpayers could understand the impact and suggest alternative (e.g. maybe a tax increase might become acceptable at some level of damage [50-75/class??]).
Problem is that at least a portion of the state funds are "directed" funds -- the state might, for example, cut the amount it gives districts to bus, but not the amount that it gives them to teach. Or it might cut the amount that it gives them for gifted education, but not the amount it gives for special education.
Now, at some point, money is all fungible. But, you can't really say "If we cut 10%, this is what we'd have to do," because the state funding model may not let you do that -- you can't spend busing money on classroom teacher or vice-versa. In the end, you have to wait out the GA, see what they're going to do, and move forward from there.
CC would say this is
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:03 — user12345CC would say this is "alarmist" and shouldn't be sent.
btw ... I think the cuts will be worse than some imagine ... given that some groups of students like ES / class size, Handicap, and Special Ed kid are all protected from budget cuts by law that means the difference will need to absorbed by others.
National Women's Law Center - Leave A Comment On Their Blog
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:04 — RMC10or use their "Contact Us" to click to a comment form at the bottom of their web page. Here's their Blog link to comment on...
http://www.nwlc.org/our-blog/rally-girls-sports-campaign-launches-today#comment-1059
I believe this is one fight WCPSS can and should win.
Why fight and win? Why not
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:17 — user12345Why fight and win? Why not comply with the law? If we are complying than we are done.
The fact that your
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:56 — danofncThe fact that your daughter's lacrosse team didn't work out doesn't mean we aren't in compliance with Title IX.
Exactly ... provide the
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:04 — user12345Exactly ... provide the proof or make change to comply with the law and we are done
The district shouldn't have
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:13 — danofncThe district shouldn't have to answer a lawsuit that doesn't have any merit in the first place.
Sometimes people just need to slow down and understand that equitable and equal are not the same thing.
Will you feel better if a few boys' sports are eliminated so that there is perfect equality between the sports available for boys and girls? You're OK if the boys who are currently playing golf or soccer have to either try out for football or do nothing, because there aren't enough sports for girls to counterbalance the number of football players?
You never answered my questions about your daughter's lacrosse team, either.
Will you feel better if a
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:39 — user12345Will you feel better if a few boys' sports are eliminated so that there is perfect equality between the sports available for boys and girls? You're OK if the boys who are currently playing golf or soccer have to either try out for football or do nothing, because there aren't enough sports for girls to counterbalance the number of football players?
Boy you sure are a "glass half full, zero-sum " kinda guy ..
The answer is to comply with the law. If we are exceeding what the the law requires, that would be a wonderful thing to highlight. Hopefully, we expand the opportunities for both girls and boys so we don't have to engage in the strange scenarios you propose.
If you read Title IX it does
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 15:34 — willynillyIf you read Title IX it does not guarantee anything. It simply states that girls must be given adequate opportunity to enagage in competitive sports as boys are given. It does not say that there must be a boys and girls football team. Now that would be equal, but that is NOT Title IX. There are many facets to Title IX and it simply requires schools systems to make the effort. For example, a school in Va Beach some years ago was required to either move their band room downstairs for a handicap access or build an elevator for a student confined to a wheelchair. It was not possible to move the bandroom due to the size since there was no room on first floor that that kind of space. So.....in goes the elevator. I know, not exactly Title IX, but the same principal applies. There are choices that school systems must make and Title IX simply creates an expectation that girls can try out for certain sports as well as having a balance of teams for which girls can try out.
OK..so you aren't going to
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:42 — danofncOK..so you aren't going to answer. Got it.
You're turning into Title IX Woodstock.
No...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:45 — Bob_SconceIf only that were true. The district still has to defend itself. More money down the drain.
Is the cost of defending
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 15:00 — CaryCurmudgeonIs the cost of defending against this lawsuit covered by a liability policy, or does it have to be covered out of the expense budget?
So...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 15:34 — Bob_Sconce(1) Not a lawsuit -- it's a complaint to the Department of Education, just like the NAACP complaint. I don't really know the process here, but I suspect they have to investigate (either legally or simply as a political matter), which will mean district time and expense in responding to their questions, getting district lawyers involved, etc....
(2) I don't know about the liability policy -- probably not, since it's not an actual lawsuit. In any case, IIRC, the policy has a $50K per-incident deductible. And remember that every claim on the policy increases our rates for next year.
You can tell that we are a wealthy country by this fact: we can afford to have people whose sole job in life is to count ponytails and crewcuts on athletic fields across the country and then complain when the two numbers don't match up. Heaven help these people if they're forced to go out and get real jobs.
When it is deemed frivolous
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 15:17 — danofncWhen it is deemed frivolous and without merit, can we make the people that filed it pay our attorney fees?
Follow the Money - My Motto Always
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 12:56 — RMC10All one has to do is look on the NWLC website under the tab "who we are" to see there is a connection to NAACP, ACLU, not only on their board of directors, but also on the resources and advocacy lists. And since WCPSS has been maligned recently and too often with those two groups all up in our business, I'm sure our district was not "accidentally" targeted in Women's Law Center list of 12 districts that had this Title IX Complaint bestowed upon them this week.
I do not see the disparity in WCPSS at the sports level, and I believe there are way bigger fights for women they could address than a Lacrosse game, I do think WCPSS was targeted unfairly but purposefully by foes we know. Just something else to keep Wake County looking bad and in the news and not by accident nor is there a story or the truth in it. Data for this complaint is from 2006 - lots of changes in women's sports since then, right?
Beside the National Women's Law Center is a non-profit agency and announced it new initiative (fundraising) yesterday also...
(Source Article NWLC Press Releases on Website) Rally for Girls' Sports Campaign Launches Today
http://www.indusbusinessjourn
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:08 — AngelaWhttp://www.indusbusinessjournal.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=982924D7C87B4A2D8487FA9C23BB9E5B
Only 32, Neena Chaudhry has already worked on several landmark legal cases. Chaudhry is a senior counsel at the National Women's Law Center in Washington, D.C. Started in 1972, the women's law center is a non-profit organization focused on the advancement and protection of women's legal rights. The center's areas of specialty include health, education, employment and economic security. Chaudhry joined the center in 1997 and has already worked on several cases of national prominence including one that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The latter case, "Davis vs. Monroe County Board of Education," involved a fifth grade girl in Georgia who sued her school after it failed to stop sexual harassment against her by another student. In a 1999 ruling, the Supreme Court held that schools may be liable under Title IX, the federal statute that prohibits sex discrimination in schools that accept federal funding, for knowingly failing to address sexual harassment of one student by another. Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 is the landmark legislation that bans sex discrimination in schools, either in academics or athletics. Title IX has perhaps created the most controversy in regards to athletics - in requiring equal opportunity at schools for men and women - and, as such, Chaudhry is no stranger to such legal proceedings. Cases she has been involved with include "National Wrestling Coaches Association vs. United States Department of Education" and "Communities for Equity vs. Michigan High School Athletic Association." Chaudhry has also participated in an online chat forum about Title IX on sports television giant ESPN's Web site. Born in Baltimore, Chaudhry graduated from the University of Maryland at College Park in 1993 with a bachelor's degree in economics. She graduated from Yale Law School in 1996
Angela - Neena Chaudry
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:40 — RMC10Not at all questioning her credentials - questioning the merit of the complaint as it relates to WCPSS. Also questioning NMLC's selection of Wake County out of all the thousands of Districts in the US - where the 12 that were selected (WCPSS for one), have some non-sports related connection to NAACP complaints and ACLU complaints current or pending. If you look at many/most/all the other 12 - those two groups have been in those districts filing complaints also. I'd say it was "selected" targeting.
sorry, didn't mean to imply
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:53 — AngelaWsorry, didn't mean to imply that you were...just actually putting her info out there, because like you, I am questioning the merits of the complaint, and thought, perhaps some background on her might help.....that was it....apologies....
You know, maybe we should
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 09:48 — willynillyYou know, maybe we should look at Vermont and the other state that told the FEDS to take a hike, we don't need you to take our money and then require us to jump through hoops the get it back (ie Race to the Top). If we do thius then we avoid all this FED mess and make our own call.
For years, I agree, females were slighted in sports. However, they have a sport to balance out each season. They have been allowed to try out for football and wrestling. I have watched wrestling matches in which females wrestled. I'm not sure what more has to be done.
Next year get ready......we will be LUCKY if there are sports, electives or anything else considered "extra." The core subjects will be it and things will be much worse for many reasons in response to the cuts.......I wonder which governor will deal with this? Everyone seems to be so optimistic about the mid-terms.......hmmmmm, we'll see.
Take a Hike
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 10:52 — HereWeGoIf we tell the Fed's to take a hike and they take their 80 million with them then sports will not be an issuse with 180 million short falls next year. I wonder what that class size would look like.
Actually, the FEDS have
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:46 — willynillyActually, the FEDS have already taken a hike, a gret deal of money is going away as of next year. It is very unclear if the Race to the Top grant will even come close to making up the difference. This shortfall is going to happen and at best, a recovery (economic) is not seen for at least 5 years. The news is now full of news about how the FEDS are going to save money. July and Aug of 2011 will be an extremely tough time for schools.
OH good LORD!!! I have
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 22:48 — aquaman4life68OH good LORD!!! I have never seen so much whining and complaining in our society! Everything has to be EQUAL?!?!? It has never been and will never be! No wonder our world is in the shape it is in. Granted, this issue here, isn't a GLOBAL issue, but it's just one of the many factors in what's wrong with the world. Instead of being THANKFUL for what you have, people just have to look at what they don't have instead of looking at how fortunate they are to have the things that everyone has and able to enjoy.
Garbage
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 20:19 — danofncThis is a big, big waste of time and it will probably end up being a waste of money, too.
Do they count spots available or individual students? If a girl plays volleyball in the fall and softball in the spring does she count once or twice?
Do they count girls who try out but don't make the team?
Thank you ... as the father
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 15:26 — user12345Thank you ... as the father of four daughters I welcome more opportunity for them to participate.
What sports are you looking for????
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 16:30 — tabdjbI have a daughter also and there are many sports available for girls. Exactly what other sports are you and the others looking for? Wake County has done a good job trying to keep the sports equal at the schools. They can not control how many girls decide they want to participate. Football and wrestling are not a girls sport, but they can play, there are not any boys volleyball teams in the county, and most gymnastic teams are for girls. For all other sports there are both girls and boys including golf and lacross.
Be careful....
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 15:55 — Bob_SconceThe national trend has been just to take away opportunities for boys to participate. It's unlikely that your daughter's school will start offering a new girl's sport, especially with today's financial situation.
I don't see what the problem is -- sports offerings appear to be comparable, except that boys have Football and Wrestling while girls have Cheerleading and Volleyball. Plus, it seems like most WCPSS high schools are already offering all the NCHSAA sports (with indoor track a possible exception).
They're using raw numbers of girls involved in sports as evidence of a problem. But, that ignores the possibility that just fewer girls are interested in sports than boys.
They're using raw numbers of
Wed, 11/10/2010 - 22:43 — user12345They're using raw numbers of girls involved in sports as evidence of a problem. But, that ignores the possibility that just fewer girls are interested in sports than boys.
I think you are right they are using the % of participation not a raw count of sports teams
When I read your second sentence above I was thinking how it would work for the Algebra disparity too.
But, that ignores the possibility that just fewer minorities are interested in algebra than whites.
Well...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 01:36 — Bob_SconceThe probelm is that we have direct evidence of the district keeping African-American kids out of Algebra -- there, it's not a question of whether they go, but of whether they're recommended. Plus, there's a big difference between the importance of academics and extracurricular activities.
On a side note, doesn't it seem strange that it takes some Washington DC outfit to sue the district -- according to their complaint, there are thousands of Wake County girls who are denied the opportunity to participate in sports, yet somehow none of them have found the need to complain? These people are even worse interlopers than Rev. Barber -- at least he knows some WCPSS students who aren't happy with the district; these folks just assume they exist.
there are thousands of Wake
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 09:14 — user12345there are thousands of Wake County girls who are denied the opportunity to participate in sports, yet somehow none of them have found the need to complain?
But Bob, I don't think any minorities or NED complained about being denied Algebra either ... we need to move past who is complaining / who they complain to and be thankful that people have found an inequity and reported that some kids are being denying a chance to excel whether in sports or math.
So...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:11 — Bob_SconceI agree that there are some similarities, but the situations are factually different enough that your analogy doesn't really fly. Please re-read the first paragraph of my previous post. We don't label classes as being "for minority students" or for being "not for minority students," as we do with sex in sports. If we did that with 8th grade Alegebra (and, ignoring all the constitutional and moral questions with drawing those sorts of lines), then said "We're not going to offer any minority Algebra classes," I think you'd see a huge outcry.
User, Trying to compare this
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 09:39 — danofncUser,
Trying to compare this with the algebra situation is borderline insane.
The only possible similarity is that in both cases someone looked at data and decided, based solely on that data, that there was a problem.
Wake County high schools offer more than enough opportunities for girls to play sports. The only thing this will do (if anything) is cause schools to drop boys' sports. The participation rate is most likely just a function of the size of the schools here and the vast selection of extracurricular activities available. Sports require talent and dedication, and the only thing the district can do is offer the opportunity to play. The can't demand that a certain percentage of girls in a school participate.
Should we drop a few advanced math classes so the kids who don't take algebra in 8th grade don't end up falling as far behind?
Replay
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 09:51 — user12345Danofnc,
Wake County high schools offer more than enough opportunities for <minorities> to take math. The only thing this will do (if anything) is cause schools to drop math for <affluent white kids>. The participation rate <in Algebra> is most likely just a function of the size of the schools here and the vast selection of extracurricular activities available. <Math> requires talent and dedication, and the only thing the district can do is offer the opportunity to play. They cannot demand that a certain percentage of <minorities> in a school participate.
If 40 girls try out for
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 10:51 — danofncIf 40 girls try out for soccer, the coach becomes "Soccer EVAAS" and eliminates those who aren't as capable until he gets the team down to the proper size.
Now, we could just buy 20 extra pairs of shorts and 20 extra t-shirts, and have "no cut" girls' sports. That wouldn't do anything real, it would just keep those 20 girls from finding something else to do with their time other than watching their teammates play in games. But, the "participation rate" would be great.
I have a daughter in 2nd grade. When she's older, she will probably try to play basketball, soccer, and/or softball. If she doesn't make the team(s), I'm not going to file a lawsuit. I'm also not going to complain because they didn't offer a frisbee golf team.
Your attempts to change these quotes about sports and turn them into the algebra situation are laughable. Especially this one, since you didn't change "extracurricular activites" to anything math-related. I don't think anyone has been denied alegbra in 8th grade and directed into a sport or club instead.
When your daughters get
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:10 — user12345When your daughters get older and you get more real world experience you will understand how thing really work. There are many subtle ways schools, teachers, counselors, and parents sabotage minorities and girls activities.
For me is was my daughter trying to form the first girls lacrosse team at her school ... there were on uniforms the first year, no coach the second year, not playing field the third year ... boys sports were not at all accepting, accommodating or encouraging ... but you will learn those lesson when you get older.
So...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:47 — Bob_SconceIn fairness, I understand that principals have been really pushing back against Lacrosse, both boys' and girls'. I know some folks who were trying to start up fencing as a club sport (i.e. no school $), but HS principals were opposed, largely because that's how Lacrosse got started in Wake County and they didn't like Lacrosse. I don't know exactly why they feel that way, but think it had to do with limited time, money, fieldspace, and it ended up being a headache.
Not trying to diminish your main point, just think that Lacrosse might be a special case.
Wasn't there a to-do a few
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:33 — jenmanWasn't there a to-do a few years ago when a parent complained that new high schools weren't being funded for LaCrosse at all? Her son wasn't going to be able to play because he got assigned to a new school and the school system wasn't giving any money for teams to be started up? I think the mother may have been the Pres of the Wake PTA but I don't remember for sure. Maybe somebody else will remember this.
I understand how things
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:35 — danofncI understand how things really work.
There are limits to facilities, coaching availability, and uniform funds. Were there enough girls interested in lacrosse at your daughter's school to have a team? Was there a field available for practice and games? Was there a coach available? Did the school have money for uniforms? Travel?
When you're the athletic director of a school "xxxx wants to play" isn't as convincing an argument as you're making it out to be.
If she wasn't given a fair shot at making the boys' team, maybe you've got an argument. But, "accomodating" isn't a word I'd use. If she wanted to make the boys' team, she'd need to be better than the last boy that made the team. I wouldn't expect him to be "accomodating" of anyone trying to take his spot on the team.
There are always scarce
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:42 — user12345There are always scarce resources - money, fields, etc. What we are talking about is priority ... do the decisions favor one group over another ... sometimes in the case of race, gender, and special education the school system has to be equitable by law ... my daughters did not want to play boys sports they just wanted to play sports with girls like the boys play sports with boys ...
We'll never agree on
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 11:52 — danofncWe'll never agree on this.
You're picking one sport at one school that wasn't available, and turning that into some example of district-wide discrimination.
You haven't even stated for the record that there were any girls at the school other than yours who wanted to play lacrosse. You certainly haven't come close to establishing that there were enough girls who wanted to play to warrant creating a team.
We just have a different
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 12:20 — user12345We just have a different outlook on life .... I appreciate other (outsiders as Bob would say) pointing out how we can do better or how we are not getting the full potential from certain groups .... are you a lawyer too? ... all the you have not proved, and sufficient evidence, blah blah ... absorb the information, process it and do something is what we should be doing ... so much fear of blame ... I am waiting for some one to blame Patty Head ...
BTW, the first year there were a lot of girls who came out and they enthusiastically made their own uniforms out of TShirt / gym shorts, the second year without a coach was a little trying since none knew how to play and they got beaten badly, by the third year without a field to practice on the "system" had reduced the number of girl interested quite a bit. That is how girls participate gets reduced.
So...
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 12:42 — Bob_SconceRecognize that these people did absolutely the minimal amount of effort that they possibly could. Their complaint shows absolutely no indication that they even talked with anybody in the district and gets some facts plain wrong -- WF-R HS, for example, HAS an indoor track team (well, at least *had* an indoor track team. The entire NCHSAA season might be cancelled because there aren't any facilities capable of hosting an indoor track meet). So, they have NO IDEA what's actually going on and have NO suggestions about how we can do better. This was a cookie-cutter complaint, apparently designed for fundraising purposes. Unfortunately, they're fundraising by throwing hand-grenades around.
Out of curiousity, did the boys' team at your kids' high school have uniforms, a coach and a practice field in their first three years? How many boys wanted to play? How organized were the parents of the boys teams?
Out of curiosity, did the
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 13:04 — user12345Out of curiosity, did the boys' team at your kids' high school have uniforms, a coach and a practice field in their first three years? How many boys wanted to play? How organized were the parents of the boys teams?
yes, yes .. probably more girls the first year .. did not pay attention to the boys except to notice they had always had uniforms, a coach and a field to practice ... I was naive and thought the school treated everyone fairly ... I think that is why girls and minorities don't complain like you asked is because 1) they don't know they are being screwed and 2) they don't feel they deserve equal treatment for various historical and cultural reasons.
I don't have any animosity toward the school or WCPSS ... my daughter got a good dose of reality of playing in a boys world and what she will face as a woman, a sense of accomplishment for overcoming the obstacles thrown at the team and a sense of be self reliance making their own uniforms, rotating who would be "coach" and finding other field alternative or playing in the parking lot.
Well, if you're going to
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 12:36 — danofncWell, if you're going to claim access to sports is unfair, you have to come up with a better reason than "My daughter wanted to start a team and they didn't let her". That's just not good enough.
How were they playing without a coach? Who did they play against? Where did they play? How many is "a lot"? Did they buy their own equipment to play?
You're throwing out a lot of information and a lot of accusations, but you aren't doing a good job of showing how the information proves the accusations.
i'm interested to hear as
Thu, 11/11/2010 - 14:45 — loriaci'm interested to hear as well. I'd love to see more HS lacrosse team. Right now we are pursuing as a club team - ie, we pay everything and get our own fields. But - would be nice to have a HS level team where the kids could play. Some HSs have teams, but not all. Fair? No, but we move forward.