Students and staff need clarity on sexual harassment policies – Times Higher Education

Framework for Addressing Misconduct in Higher Education: A Sustainable Development Goals Perspective

Introduction: Fostering Safe, Just, and Inclusive Educational Environments

• This report outlines a good practice framework for higher education institutions in responding to reports of harassment and sexual misconduct.
• The framework’s core principles are intrinsically linked to the achievement of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, education, gender equality, and justice.

Core Principles and SDG Alignment

Principle 1: Comprehensive Welfare and Well-being (SDG 3)

Ensuring the health and well-being of all individuals within the academic community is a foundational principle, directly supporting SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

1. Support for All Parties: It is paramount to offer high-quality, compassionate advice and support to both the individuals bringing forward testimony and those being investigated. This approach safeguards the mental health of all students involved.
2. Ongoing Availability: Support mechanisms must be continuously available, not just at predetermined points in a process. This requires a combination of internal resources and external services to meet student needs effectively.
3. Staff Welfare: The well-being of staff in investigatory roles must be supported to minimize the distress associated with such work, contributing to a healthy and sustainable work environment.

Principle 2: Effective Communication for Justice and Inclusion (SDG 16, SDG 5)

Clear and compassionate communication is crucial for building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions, as outlined in SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and for fostering a safe environment conducive to gender equality (SDG 5).

1. Clarity for Reporting Students: Individuals reporting misconduct must receive clear information about the process, its capabilities and limitations, and alternative options like reporting to the police. This transparency is key to ensuring access to justice.
2. Information on Outcomes: To ensure accountability, reporting students must be informed of the outcomes, including when staff disciplinary policies are engaged.
3. Fairness for Accused Students: Those facing accusations require clear information regarding the investigation, the process, and potential consequences, upholding the principles of fair and just proceedings.
4. Compassionate Communication: Employing simple, direct, and iterative communication helps create a supportive process that encourages reporting and contributes to achieving gender equality.

Principle 3: Flexibility in Process for Equitable Outcomes (SDG 4, SDG 16)

A flexible and responsive approach is critical to ensuring fair processes and maintaining a safe learning environment, which is essential for SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 16.

1. Responsive and Adaptive Approach: Institutions must remain flexible and responsive to the specific circumstances of each report, avoiding a rigid, one-size-fits-all methodology to achieve just outcomes.
2. Balancing Complex Needs: The framework must balance the complex and sometimes competing needs of all parties involved to ensure an equitable and fair resolution.
3. Student-Centric Adaptation: Listening to students and adapting the process accordingly is vital for fostering an inclusive and supportive educational environment.

Principle 4: Proactive Risk Assessment for Institutional Safety (SDG 3, SDG 16)

Ongoing risk assessment is a key practice for maintaining safe and resilient institutions, contributing to both well-being (SDG 3) and institutional integrity (SDG 16).

1. Early and Continuous Assessment: Risk assessment should commence as soon as information is received—even from anonymous reports—and be revisited regularly as new information emerges.
2. Dynamic Risk Management: Risk management must be treated as a continuous activity, not a singular event, particularly when processes become protracted.
3. Evaluating Mitigations: It is essential to regularly re-evaluate the effectiveness and impact of risk mitigations to ensure the ongoing safety and security of the institutional environment.

Principle 5: Specialized Training for Effective and Just Institutions (SDG 4, SDG 5, SDG 16)

Proper training for staff is fundamental to building institutional capacity to handle misconduct fairly and effectively, thereby supporting quality education (SDG 4), gender equality (SDG 5), and strong institutions (SDG 16).

1. Preventing Further Trauma: Recognizing that a poorly handled process can compound trauma, it is unreasonable to expect staff to undertake these roles without proper preparation.
2. Mandatory Staff Development: Staff in support, investigative, or decision-making roles must receive appropriate training to understand their function and acquire the necessary skills to perform effectively.
3. Framework as a Training Basis: The framework itself can serve as a foundation for training on what constitutes a fair process, strengthening the institution’s ability to deliver justice and maintain a safe learning environment.

Analysis of SDGs in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article heavily emphasizes the “welfare” of both students and staff. It discusses the profound impact of misconduct investigations on mental health and the need for “high-quality advice and compassionate support” to minimize distress and trauma. This directly connects to promoting mental health and well-being.
2. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • The article is set within the context of higher education providers. It discusses the necessity of creating a safe and supportive environment for students by properly handling reports of harassment and sexual misconduct. The focus on training staff to manage these situations effectively contributes to a safer and more inclusive learning environment.
3. SDG 5: Gender Equality
   • The article’s central theme is responding to “harassment and sexual misconduct,” which are forms of gender-based violence. By outlining a framework for institutions to handle these reports effectively, the article addresses the core issue of eliminating violence and ensuring safety, which is a key component of gender equality.
4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
   • The article calls for educational institutions to develop effective, fair, and transparent processes. It highlights the need for “effective communication,” “flexibility,” and clear procedures for responding to misconduct reports. This aligns with the goal of building accountable and strong institutions that can deliver justice and fairness.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.
   • The article’s focus on providing “ongoing” and “compassionate support” for students and staff involved in misconduct cases is a direct effort to promote mental health and well-being within the higher education community. It mentions minimizing “distress” and preventing the compounding of “trauma,” which are central to this target.
2. Target 4.A: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender-sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.
   • The entire framework discussed in the article is aimed at creating a safer learning environment. By establishing fair and effective processes for handling harassment and sexual misconduct, and by providing “appropriate training” to staff, institutions are working to ensure their environment is non-violent and inclusive.
3. Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
   • The article directly addresses this target by proposing a “Good Practice Framework: Responding to reports of harassment and sexual misconduct.” This framework provides operational guidance for institutions to effectively combat these forms of violence within their communities.
4. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The article advocates for institutions to have clear, flexible, and well-communicated processes. The emphasis on providing “clear information about the process” to all parties, conducting regular risk assessments, and having a structured framework demonstrates a commitment to building effective, accountable, and transparent institutional procedures.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For Target 3.4:
   • Indicator: Availability of comprehensive welfare support. The article implies this can be measured by the provision of “ongoing” support for students through both “internal resource and external services,” and support for staff in investigatory roles.
2. For Target 4.A:
   • Indicator: Implementation of staff training programs. The article explicitly states that it is unreasonable to expect staff to take on roles “without appropriate training.” The existence and content of a “comprehensive training programme” for staff in support, investigative, and decision-making roles serves as a clear indicator.
3. For Target 5.2:
   • Indicator: Existence of a formal framework for responding to misconduct. The article is centered on the OIA’s consultation for a “Good Practice Framework: Responding to reports of harassment and sexual misconduct.” The adoption and implementation of such a framework by institutions is a direct indicator of progress.
4. For Target 16.6:
   • Indicator: Establishment of clear and flexible procedures. Progress can be measured by whether an institution’s process is “flexible and responsive,” provides “clear information” to all parties, and includes a methodology for regularly assessing and mitigating risk, as detailed in the article.

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Source: timeshighereducation.com