2024 Title IX Training Modules & Resources

2024 Title IX Training Modules & Resources

Ennis Britton will host a Title IX Workshop on Wednesday, July 24 so that your district and staff are ready to go when needed. We offer both individual sessions and a comprehensive training package available in various formats: live, online via Zoom, on-demand recordings, or custom in-person team training.

Contact EB to develop a customized training program for your district’s specific needs.

We have designed our curriculum in modules with different focus areas for different roles.

Module 1 will provide a brief overview of the changes and how to apply them. (This module is complimentary.)

Module 2 is designed as a professional development opportunity for all staff. It will help your employees understand what the new Title IX regulations require and their role in compliance. The cost of the module is $205 per district and includes access for 1-5 people on the live session and a link to the on-demand version.

Other modules are specifically designed as advanced-level trainings for Title IX Coordinators, Decision Makers, Investigators, Appeal Officers, and Confidential Employees (such as guidance counselors). The cost of these modules is $400 per module, per district, and includes access for 1-5 people on the live session and a link to the on-demand version.

Districts are encouraged to develop an attendance list for those who view the on-demand version of the module(s) at a later date for future reference.

As part of our comprehensive training program, Ennis Britton is pleased to offer a Title IX Resource Kit. This kit includes essential template documents tailored for your district’s use and reference. The cost of the kit is $500.

Training Schedule
8:30 am – 9:00 am: Module 1: Overview – New Standards & New Definitions: What Changed and How Do I Apply It?

9:15 am – 10:00 am: Module 2: All Employee Training – If You See Something, Say Something!

All Other Modules:

10:15 am – 11:15 am: Coordinator Training

11:15 am – 11:45 am Break

11:45 am – 1:30 pm: Decision Maker, Investigator, and Appeal Officer Training

1:45 pm – 2:45 pm: Facilitator and Informal Resolution Training

We look forward to working with you to ensure your team is well-equipped to handle Title IX responsibilities.

Title IX Trainings and Resources: Register Here

2024 Title IX Trainings and Resources (Please use this registration form for both the live and on-demand versions.)
Additional Pricing Information: Purchase all five of the training sessions together for $1,200. Please note that an online seminar link for each module will be sent prior to the scheduled date. You must be registered in advance to receive the link to either the live or recorded event. The associated costs will be included in your district's monthly bill. On-demand versions of each module will be accessible shortly after August 1.

Court Finds in Favor of Professor Who Refuses to Utilize Student’s Preferred Gender Pronouns

This case arose because a philosophy professor at Shawnee State University (Portsmouth, Ohio) refused to abide by the University’s policy requiring that he refer students with pronouns corresponding to their gender identity. The professor is a devout Christian whose religious convictions influence his thoughts on human nature, marriage, gender, sexuality, morality, politics, and social issues.

At the start of the 2016-17 school year, the University informed its faculty that they were required to refer to students by their preferred pronouns. The professor was informed that he would be disciplined if he refused to use a pronoun that reflects a student’s self-asserted gender identity. In his class that semester, a student requested to be referred to utilizing the female pronouns, and the professor would not oblige. The professor then requested accommodations for his religious and personal views.  The student then filed a Title IX complaint against the professor. The professor’s request for religious accommodations were denied by the University, and the Title IX complaint resulted in a conclusion that the professor created a hostile environment for the students in his class; a violation of the University’s nondiscrimination policies, which resulted in discipline. 

Then, the professor filed a lawsuit alleging that the University violated his rights under the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Ohio Constitution, and his contract with the University. 

The Sixth Circuit found that First Amendment free speech rules apply differently when it is government speech. Normally when public employees are speaking pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens with First Amendment protections: therefore, the Constitution does not protect their speech/communications from employer discipline. However, in this case, the Sixth Circuit highlighted its belief that professors at public universities retain First Amendment protection- at least when engaged in core academic functions, such as teaching and scholarship. 

The Court rejected the argument that “…teachers have no First Amendment rights when teaching, or that the government can censor teacher speech without restriction.” Hardy v. Jefferson Cmty. Coll., 260 F.3d 671, 680 (6th Cir. 2001). The Court recognized the professor’s rights to academic freedom and freedom of expression within this case, including within that academic freedom the choice to use of pronouns to shape classroom discussion. At the university level, this professor was able to make choices regarding gender identity for appropriate classroom discussion in his political philosophy courses. 

In summary, the Court remanded the case back to the lower court for the lower court to issue a decision in compliance with the First Amendment rights recognized by the Sixth Circuit. 

What this means for your District

While this case deals with speech from a university professor, and not that of a K-12 educator, it is a good case to be aware of when faced with situations that may arise from staff members who refuse to refer to a transgender student with the student’s preferred pronouns or nicknames. Schools are required to recognize the academic freedoms that exist for educators- but how this will be balanced against the needs of minor students in the future will be one to watch. In this case, the Court was not remotely persuaded by the arguments of the University that a hostile environment was created by the professor’s actions against the transgender students in his class, because the Court was not presented with any evidence or arguments that the student(s) was denied any educational benefits or opportunities. 

Meriwether v. Hartop, (C.A. 6, 2021) 992 F.3d 492