knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = F, message = F, warning = F)

Our dataset:

This project is based on the Equity in Athletics Dataset. Each year, as mandated by the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA), the federal government collects data about gender equity and sports from all coed postsecondary institutions that participate in federal student aid programs and have intercollegiate athletics programs. These data are then compiled together. Traditionally they have been used to assess individual schools’ compliance with the equity standards set by Title IX; for the purposes of this project we have combined data about all NCAA schools to tell a wider story.

Key variables:

  • Classification/division: Often used interchangeably, a school’s division refers to their NCAA division (DI, DII, DIII), while classification technically refers more specifically to a school’s division and whether or not it has a football program. DI schools are further divided into DI-FBS (football bowl subdivision), which is the highest division, and DI-FCS (football cup subdivision), which are typically slightly smaller schools that can have fewer players on scholarship.
  • Student athlete ratios: The proportion of a school’s total student athletes that compete in the women’s category.
  • Student aid ratio: The proportion of athletic student aid given to athletes competing in the women’s category.
  • (FTE) Head coach salary: The average annual salary of a full-time head coach at a given institution.
  • Operating expenses: This refers to expenses related specifically to competitions, and can also be called game-day expenses. These expenses include equipment, staff payments, payment of officials, lodging, meals, and transportation.
  • Revenue: Encompasses all the money a program generates through sponsorship, alumni or outside contributions, sport camps, student fees, ticket sales, institutional/governmental support, etc.

Visualizing Inequity

Student aid ratio

  • Schools with football are more likely than schools without football to have fewer female athletes than male athletes, and the majority of schools with football give less of their overall student aid to female athletes.
  • Additionally, more schools without football are above the equity line (give a higher proportion of student aid to female athletes than the participation ratio), while schools with football are more likely to fall below the line.
  • The distribution has stayed roughly the same over time!

Coach’s Salaries

  • Median head coach salary for men’s and women’s teams
  • This is a log scale!
  • Most egregious for upper divisions with football, but the disparity is present across all divisions and across time
  • Much smaller differences between coach salaries at DII and DIII schools without football
  • If anything, the disparity seems to be worsening over time (although we are not accounting for inflation)

Expenses

  • Ratio of operating expenses devoted to women’s teams - the 50% mark would be perfectly equitable, and almost everything falls below that
  • DI schools are spending far more on men’s game days
  • Schools without football are all above 40% and schools with football are all below 45%
  • Not much change over time except for the spike down in 2020 during the pandemic - “necessary” funds were given disproportionately to men’s teams
  • DI schools without football seem to be trending downward

Revenue

  • The dominant narrative is that women’s sports make no money - the data show this isn’t true.
  • Investing in women’s sports can have significant returns if these programs are allowed the time, space, and resources to grow and cultivate an audience.

Conclusion:

Leaps and bounds have been made towards equity in sports since the passage of Title IX. However, we have also shown that there is much more to do if the NCAA truly wants to show that it values the athletes competing on women’s teams. As women’s sports grow in popularity across the United States, there is more investment potential for these programs than ever before - but there’s also more to lose. The NCAA is being presented with a golden chance to capitalize on women’s sports while avoiding yet another round of public outcry. It would be a mistake not to take that chance.

Source: