A qualitative analysis of a United States Supreme Court case related to Title IX.

详细信息   

• 作者：Chamberlin ; Jeffrey R.
• 学历：Doctor
• 年：2011
• 关键词：Constructivism ; Hermeneutic Circle ; Hermeneutics
• 导师：Esposito, Enrico,eadvisor
• 毕业院校：United States Sports Academy
• ISBN：9781124819358
• CBH：3468034
• Country：USA
• 语种：English
• FileSize：25777810
• Pages：503

文摘

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 reads: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance" 20 U.S.C. sec. 1681). The United States Supreme Court held in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education 2005) that Title IXs private right of action included a claim of retaliation by a male high school basketball coach because he complained about sex discrimination committed against his female players. The Courts holding was celebrated by many advocates of Title IX because whistleblowers were now protected for "speaking-out about sex discrimination. However, the Court may have knowingly maybe unwittingly) expanded the rights of males under Title IX through its interpretation of the law. The Court found that retaliation was intentional discrimination "on the basis of sex" and identified Jackson as a "victim" or primary beneficiary under the law not as an indirect victim or secondary-rights holder). Moreover, the Court strayed from the phrase "no person" and replaced it with the phrase "any person" in the laws general prohibition. In the Courts own words: "Title IX...broadly prohibits a funding recipient from subjecting any person to discrimination on the basis of sex" p. 173, Section II A, para. 2, lines 1--5) and "Title IXs beneficiaries plainly include all those who are subjected to discrimination on the basis of sex" p. 179, Section II C, footnote, lines 1--15). The Chief Investigator used hermeneutics as a method of scientific inquiry under the qualitative research paradigm in order to analyze the text and interpret any meanings found within Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education 2005). The Chief Investigator maintained scientific rigor through trustworthiness - the equivalent of validity and reliability in quantitative research.