In 2002, the Secretary of Education established a commission to examine ways to strengthen enforcement of the Title IX law and expand opportunities for school sports. This article examined the legitimacy of the commission in terms of realizing deliberative democratic process ideals. Interviews and document analysis revealed that degrees of legitimacy were reached in terms of representation, quality of deliberations, and credibility that led to various tensions felt by citizens. Citizens believed in the importance of participating in Title IX policy discussions but, overall, were suspicious of the government and thus questioned the commission’s legitimacy.
BarnesM.NewmanJ.KnopsA.SullivanH. (2003). Constituting the public for public participation. Public Administration, 81, 379-399.
2.
BeethamD. (1991). The legitimation of power. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
BenhabibS. (1996). Toward a deliberative model of democratic legitimacy. In BenhabibS. (Ed.), Democracy and difference (pp. 67-94). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BonnetteV.Von EulerM. (2003). Commission on Opportunity in Athletics: Title IX briefing book. Good sports Inc.
5.
ChambersS. (2002). Seeking intersubjective insight: Comments on William Rehg’s Insight and Solidarity. Human Studies, 25, 397-405.
6.
ChambersS. (2004). Behind closed doors: Publicity, secrecy, and the quality of deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12, 389-410.
7.
CohenJ. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In GoodinR.PettitP. (Eds.), Contemporary political philosophy: An anthology (pp. 143-155). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
DryzekJ. K. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12.
ElsterJ. (1995). Strategic uses of argument. In ArrowK. J.MnookinR. H.Amos TverskyL. R.WilsonR. (Eds.), Barriers to conflict resolution (pp. 236-257). New York, NY: Norton.
13.
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, 1993, enacted October2, 1972. Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770.
14.
FlathmanR. (1972). Political obligation. New York, NY: Atheneum.
15.
GutmannA.ThompsonD. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
HabermasJ. (1995). Reconciliation through the public use of reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s political liberalism. Journal of Philosophy, 92, 109-131.
17.
HabermasJ. (1996). Between facts and norms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
KadlecA.FriedmanW. (2007). Deliberative democracy and the problem of power. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3, 1-26.
20.
LevineJ. M.RussoE. (1995). Impact of anticipated interaction on information acquisition. Social Cognition, 13, 293-317.
21.
MansbridgeJ. (1983). Beyond adversary democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education. (2007). Report: Title IX athletics policies: Issues and data for education decision makers. Retrieved from http://www.ncwge.org/PDF/TitleIXReport-5-10-07.pdf
23.
OsborneB. (2003). Title IX in the 21st Century Symposium: Title IX at Thirty. Marquette Sports Law Review, 14, 141-162.
ParkinsonJ. (2003). Legitimacy problems in deliberative democracy. Political studies, 51, 180-196.
26.
ParkinsonJ. (2006). Deliberating in the real world: Problems of legitimacy in deliberative democracy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
27.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
28.
PembertonC. L. (2003). Wrestling with Title IX. Marquette Sports Law Review, 14, 163-174.
29.
RosenthalC. S.MorrisM. L.MartinezJ. (2004). Who’s on first and what’s on second? Assessing interest group strategies on Title IX. Women in Sport and Physical Activity Journal, 13, 65-86.
30.
SamuelsJ. (2003). Reviewing the play: How faulty premises affected the work of the Commission on opportunity in athletics and why Title IX protections are still needed to ensure equal opportunity in athletics. Marquette Sports Law Review, 3, 233-256.
31.
SandersL. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25, 347-376.
32.
Scientific Software Development. (2007). ATLAS ti: The knowledge workbench visual qualitative data analysis management model building (Version 5.5). Berlin, DE: Author.
StaurowskyE. J. (2003a). Title IX and college sport: The long painful path to compliance and reform. Marquette Sports Law Review, 14, 95-122.
36.
StaurowskyE. J. (2003b). Title IX in its third decade: The Commission on Opportunity in Athletics. Entertainment Law Journal, 2(3), 70-93.
37.
StaurowskyE. J. (2005). Title IX manifesta: Reflections on the Commission on Opportunity in Athletics. In SimonR. J. (Ed.), Sporting equality: Title IX thirty years later (pp. 165-180). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
38.
StraussA. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
TetlockP. E. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 285-292.
40.
TetlockP. E. (1985). Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution of error. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 227-236.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002d). Press release. Paige creates blue-ribbon panel to examine ways to strengthen enforcement, expand opportunity to ensure fairness for all. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2002/06/06272002f.html
YankelovichD. (1991). Coming to judgment: Making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
55.
YiamouyiannisA. (2003). Title IX Commission-inequities in the process (Briefing paper No. 2 for the National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education). Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.ncwge.org/statements/TitleIXbriefing/pressbriefing2.doc
56.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
YoungI. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
58.
ZdaniukB.LevineJ. M. (1996). Anticipated interaction and thought generation: The role of faction size. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 201-218.
