portive counselors and the lack of female administrators as role models in the school system is widespread. A 1974 study showed that 84 percent of of elementary school teachers were women, while only 20 percent of the principals were female. In secondary schools, 47 percent of teachers but only 1.4 percent of principals were women (3).

It is not surprising that at the conclusion of secondary school, more boys choose to go to college, despite the fact that girls tend to get better grades in high school (4). Sex discrimination at the college level manifests itself in a variety of ways. In the past, only the most intelligent women were encouraged to attend college. Higher admission standards frequently were applied to women, along with enrollment quotas. Until recently, many graduate schools simply excluded women entirely, except on a token basis (5). Obviously, this discrimination deprived women of options in career choices and foreclosed options and opportunities for entrepreneurship.

At the University of California at Berkeley, 92 percent of the freshmen women found that lack of advanced mathematics prevented them from entering 15 of Berkeley's major fields of study. Across the board, when girls are steered away from math, they lose out on some of the best professional career opportunities, as well as on job opportunities that do not require college (8).

In the same way, social pressure also causes women to aspire to the traditional "women's professions," such as nursing, teaching and home economics. Jobs in these fields pay lower salaries and offer fewer entrepreneurial opportunities than those in which men are dominant.

Legislation and Other Government Action to Reduce Sex Discrimination

Although most of the control of education rests with state and local governments, the federal government plays a crucial role in enhancing educational opportunity for women. Three government efforts in this direction, while not totally adequate, have made major contributions.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 has the greatest potential for impact on the future education of women. It prohibits sex discrimination in education programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. Title IX is a far-reaching civil rights act, both in numbers of people protected and types of activities covered.

Sections 704 and 845 of the Public Health Service Act of 1971 (13) require certain health educational institutions to admit men and women on a nondiscriminatory basis as a prerequisite to receiving federal funds. These institutions also are required to conduct their programs and hire staff without regard to sex.

Executive Order 11246 prohibits federal contractors and subcontractors from discriminating in employment on the basis of sex. They also must determine whether women and minorities are underutilized, in terms of availability, and if so, must develop specific goals and timetables to correct the situation.

While these three laws and regulations have made an important difference in reversing the trend of discrimination, they have not been properly enforced or implemented. A 1976-1977 study by the Project on Equal Education Rights reported, "By all evidence we could find, HEW had failed to fulfill its responsibility to enforce Title IX" (14).

In fact, five organizations sued the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) because of poor enforcement of Title IX and Executive Order 11246. In settling the suit, the Department consented to eliminate the backlog of complaints, to increase staff to handle complaints and to carry out a balanced program of Title IX enforcement.

There is authority, then, in legislation and Executive Order for the federal government

The Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education recently has made significant efforts to foster equity for women and girls in its vocational program; some of these efforts were in response to recommendations made by the Commissioner's Task Force on the Impact of Office of Education Programs on Women (1972).

The Office of Career Education, funded at $10 million, has in the past been charged with the responsibility of addressing the problem of sex stereotyping. However, past legislation did not require that all projects address this problem. Of 81 projects funded in Fiscal Year 1975, only 3 dealt with sex bias. In FY 1976, only about 2.7 percent of the funds devoted to career education were directed toward reducing stereotyping. In FY 1977, 3 projects (constituting 1 percent of the Career Education budget) dealt with this problem. The new Career Education Incentive Act of December 1977 has a much stronger mandate, particularly in career development, and a new instruction booklet has been commissioned to be called "Sex Stereotyping--Career Choices: Promising Approaches Persistent

Problems."

special

and

The Equal Opportunities Program provides funds for minority business opportunity projects, special mathematics projects and minority career awareness projects. It also supports a sex desegregation center in each of 10 federal regions, and desegregation training institutes. It provides grants to local school districts for promoting sex desegregation.

In addition to these seven components, the Task Force looked at HEW programs. A wide variety of programs provide financial aid to postsecondary students. However, these programs do not concern themselves with course content or career guidance. These program outlays comprise 36.8 percent of the Office of Education FY 1978 budget and include privately endowed grants, state assistance programs, federal loan programs and federally insured private loans.

In FY 1975, women received about 48 percent of the assistance from the three major Federal student aid programs, slightly more than their proportional representation in the college population (approximately 42.5 percent of the full college population, according

Essentially, the Task Force found that the shortfall in educational support of entrepreneurship for women was twofold--in support of programs to eliminate sex stereotyping and discrimination in education, and in programs to train for and encourage entrepreneurship. It believes that a number of current programs have a greater potential for assisting in the development of female entrepreneurs than they are currently achieving. More importantly, the Task Force feels that HEW, in its leadership role in the education community, could be more effective in promoting education for entrepreneurship in general,