Title IX
Title IX is a federal law which, "prohibits sex discrimination against students and employees of educational institutions. Title IX benefits both males and females, and is at the heart of efforts to create gender equitable schools. The law requires educational institutions to maintain policies, practices and programs that do not discriminate against anyone based on sex. Under this law, males and females are expected to receive fair and equal treatment in all arenas of public schooling" (http://www.american.edu/sadker/titleix.htm) and also imposes a duty upon colleges and universities to, "take immediate and appropriate steps to investigate and otherwise determine what occurred when they receive an allegation of sexual harassment. If harassment is found, institutions should take action reasonably calculated to end it and prevent it from occurring again." (http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2091/universe/document?_m=bd45a72d4ad1ead3d232ccd17c316ea5&_docnum=2&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=16847dfd350af090d8bc76ecca811395)
Georgia State University has been found non-compliant with a female student's charge of sexual harassment against her female professor. According to the student, she stayed after class to ask her teacher about an assignment and as the teacher adjusted her pants to adjust a back support, her pants fell down and she exposed herself to the student (seems accidental). The University was found non-compliant with their investigation into the student's claim.
First of all, do you believe that the student was acting as a "reasonable person" in charging her professor with sexual harassment? Do you believe that the "non-traditional" nature of the case (female against female) may have contributed to the University's failure to properly investigate the student's claims?
Georgia State University has been found non-compliant with a female student's charge of sexual harassment against her female professor. According to the student, she stayed after class to ask her teacher about an assignment and as the teacher adjusted her pants to adjust a back support, her pants fell down and she exposed herself to the student (seems accidental). The University was found non-compliant with their investigation into the student's claim.
First of all, do you believe that the student was acting as a "reasonable person" in charging her professor with sexual harassment? Do you believe that the "non-traditional" nature of the case (female against female) may have contributed to the University's failure to properly investigate the student's claims?
posted by Jenny Rubenstein at
2:30 PM
1 Comments:
In this situationa and other similar situations, it is difficult to have an opinion because we were not present. Body language and HOW things happen are so important, yet we don't have access to this knowledge. I think though from the way that the article sounds that the student is not really acting as a reasonable person. It does sound accidental, and while I'm sure incredibly awkward and embarrassing, not really the foundation for a sexual harassment case. I think that the female-female nature of the case as well as the substance of the case both played roles in the school not taking the claim too seriously.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home