That implies that the rights that are propagated by desire should not be subjected to any barrier whatsoever. The U.S. Department of Education (2011), explains the feature as one projected in a three dimensional strategy. In the first instance, it is meant to ensure that percentage of female participants in a sporting activity should be commensurate to the percentage of females admitted in the educational facility. Secondly, it was meant to instigate the expansion of the participation of females in sporting activities (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2010). In the instance, every educational institution was supposed to exhibit positive signs of an increased enrollment of female participants in every sporting activity. Lastly, it was meant to guarantee the consideration of the interests of the female participants in sporting activities (Mitchell & Ennis, 2007).
The second definitive feature if Title IX was the compulsion of the financial administrators to ensure that there was proportionality in the disbursement of federal financial aid. Essentially, the compulsion was also targeted at practice of wavering tuition fees for athletes, a practice that had been normalized in private schools. Therefore, by ensuring that there was equity in the selection of participants, there was also a subsequent equity in the provision of such privileges.
Lastly, there was the feature that was targeted at the equity and balance in the provision of other opportunities and benefits. Such included playing time and the access to facilities and resources. Others included the competition levels and considerable game scheduling. The feature also noted the parities in the budgeting allocation for the sporting facilities and resources. Therefore, it created a compensatory clause that that bridged the differences by ensuring that the all the factors that may ensure an equitable appeal are implemented (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2010).
Title IX served as a significant