BY KAY HAWES
STAFF WRITER

A national trend in higher education, one that has nothing to do with intercollegiate athletics, may complicate the issue of Title IX compliance -- now and in the future.

Women now make up more of the overall student body than they did in previous years. Some institutions have gone from 49 percent female to 55 percent female in only a few years.

The trend began more than a decade ago, but the imbalance is growing every year.

While this trend is of concern to higher education for a variety of reasons, it is of special interest to athletics departments and institutions that are seeking to comply with Title IX by using the proportionality standard.

For Jack E. Kvancz, athletics director at George Washington University, the trend toward higher female enrollment is more than simply an abstract notion.

"We've gone from 45 percent female about four years ago to around 60 percent female now," he said. "We bought a women's college that was down the street from us, but that only added about 110 women. Independent from that, there's been a tremendous increase in female enrollment at the main campus. And I don't know when -- or if -- it's going to stop."

While the women are enrolling at George Washington in higher numbers, so are the men.

"It's not like we've seen a decrease in the number of men we're enrolling," Kvancz said. "As we've made classes bigger, most of those spots have been filled by women. I don't know how we got to where we're at. The admissions office accepts people based on academic criteria. There are programs that we offer that probably appeal to women, but we've done that for years."

George Washington, which does not have football, has made a commitment to increasing women's opportunities to go with the drastic increases in female enrollment.

"We've taken the approach that we should try to increase our women's programs to achieve proportionality instead of dropping our men's programs," Kvancz said. "You can add by subtracting men's opportunities, or you can add opportunities for women. We prefer to add opportunities for women."

The university is adding women's water polo in September 1999, and the athletics department has obtained the university board's clearance to add women's lacrosse and women's softball.

Once those three teams are added for women, George Washington will offer 20 sports: nine for men and 11 for women.

Redefine the standard?

While George Washington is meeting the challenge by expanding its women's program, other institutions are meeting the proportionality standard by cutting men's sports.

Elaine Dreidame, the former senior woman administrator and senior associate athletics director at the University of Dayton, laments the loss of men's sports and is concerned by what the trend toward rapidly increasing female enrollment might mean.

"I'm concerned for those schools where the women's enrollment just keeps going up and up," she said, noting that proportionality becomes a moving target. "We met our target (in providing additional athletics opportunities for women). But in the meantime, women's enrollment has risen, which is something we in athletics have absolutely no control over. So now we're all off again. The bull's eye has changed."

Dreidame, now retired and serving as a consultant, also thinks many institutions are far from the target to begin with.

"There are so many schools that haven't gotten there yet," she said. "Sure, they've had years to get there, but they're still, most of them, 10 to 20 percent away, and it's going to get worse. We need to look at what's happening with the enrollment trends in higher education from the point of fairness and equity."

Dreidame has a suggestion that may surprise some observers.

"I think that the intent of the law was to have fairness," she said. "What's the fair and equitable way to do this that's fair to both genders? Maybe we should ask OCR to say that equity is either proportionate to enrollment or 50 percent, whichever is less."

That would allow a school that has 60 percent female enrollment to "hit the target," so to speak, when it reached 50 percent female participation.

"It's almost like kerosene coming out of my mouth," she said, referring to her longtime history as an advocate for women's athletics, "but I've always been about what's right for student-athletes. I don't think it was envisioned that the women would outnumber the men.

"I'm not saying that you shouldn't have 60 percent of your participation opportunities be for women, but I don't think the law should require it.

"I don't know that (changing the interpretation) is the answer. We do know that there continues to be interest on the part of women, but there also continues to be interest on the part of men. Where are you going to stop? The proportionality prong gives you an opportunity to say, 'We're there.' "

That argument does not persuade Charlotte West, the former senior woman administrator and associate athletics director at the University of Southern Illinois at Carbondale.

"I think a lot of us in higher education and intercollegiate athletics don't want to endanger other sports as women's sports grow, but I wouldn't want to get into the trap of setting some arbitrary limit," said West, who also continues to do consulting in intercollegiate athletics. "That wouldn't be appropriate for some schools."

West pointed to institutions that have a disproportionate number of men, such as the service academies, and noted that such a rule would not be fair there.

"I think that the (existing) proportionality rule is good in that you have a proportionate number of student-athletes relative to your student body," West said. "I think that's fair and healthy and something I'd want to continue to support."

West also points to other prongs of the test. "There are two other options as well," she said. "Many schools have the viable option of con-

tinually expanding their women's programs."

West also notes that a school with a huge women's enrollment would simply be remiss to provide more slots to men. "Those 80 percent of the women have every right to have 80 percent of the slots," West said.

Men's sports as a way to attract men?

There is to be one other interesting twist to this issue. Many institutions actually are looking to add programs such as football and wrestling in an effort to attract men.

G. David Pollick, president of Lebanon Valley College, told the Chronicle of Higher Education in 1997 that the school would be adding a men's intercollegiate hockey team as a way of enrolling more men. "That'll add 30 more males, pure and simple," he said.

West has heard several schools consider adding men's sports.

"They've used it very much as a recruiting tool," West said, noting that some Division III schools want to add football to entice male student-athletes.

"So frequently, when we've been talking about numbers, I've heard schools say 'We want football because we can attract the male student-athletes here for little or no financial aid,' " she said. "If you're Division III and you bring in 70 student-athletes who pay full tuition, you're making money on it."

Dreidame also points out that many schools may be unintentionally decreasing their appeal to men because they have been eliminating men's sports or men's slots.

"One of the ways you draw men is through sports," she said. "You compound the problem and deteriorate male enrollment by eliminating walk-on positions."

Searching for solutions

One individual who has been concerned with this trend for a long time is Christine Grant, women's athletics director at the University of Iowa.

Enrollment at Iowa is 54 percent female and 46 percent male.

"We've been increasing (in female enrollment), particularly over the last five years," Grant said, pointing out that she recognized a national trend quite some time ago.

Grant says it is time for the intercollegiate athletics community to address the issue of rising female enrollment and what that might mean for the future.

"I think now is the time to take action so we don't solve the problem by eliminating men's teams. I am very opposed to that," she said. "That ought to be the very last resort instead of the easy way out."

Grant is opposed to addressing OCR and asking for a new "50 percent rule," as Dreidame has suggested.

"I really can't support that," Grant said. "There were all these years when the reality of the time was that women did not have these opportunities. Women should be given fair opportunities, and I think proportionality is a fair way to do that."

Instead, Grant proposes a thorough examination and national discussion on what has become a national issue.

"In my opinion, there ought to be a summit of college presidents. Ideally, I would like to see them deal with the gender-equity issue simultaneously with cost reduction," she said.

"We have got to address reality. More than 80 percent of (athletics) programs are operating in the deficit. We need to address rising costs, especially in the sports of men's and women's basketball, and football."

Grant says what is needed is a collective discussion of the issue, beginning at the top.

"Last year when we saw that there were many issues with basketball, we immediately formed a task force to deal with these problems," she said. "Since we are all in deficit spending and we are all struggling to comply with Title IX, why not do the same thing (on this issue)?

"Collectively, we can solve the problem. If we did it collectively, we would all still be as competitive today as tomorrow. And addressing the costs would free up money for women's sporting opportunities, which (the women) truly want and deserve.

"For almost 100 years, women were denied these sporting opportunities -- it's only fair that they be given their rightful share of opportunities today."

Proportion of women in the overall student body of NCAA Division I schools

1990--1,392,946 out of 2,780,734 (50.09%)

1991--1,383,024 out of 2,757,404 (50.16%)

1992--1,381,924 out of 2,735,784 (50.51%)

1993--1,347,986 out of 2,670,750 (50.47%)

1994--1,371,001 out of 2,693,102 (50.91%)

1995--1,404,813 out of 2,724,761 (51.56%)

1996--1,430,894 out of 2,745,793 (52.11%)

(These statistics reflect the only years for which such information is currently available.)

Source: NCAA research staff