Good policy is specific and direct, leaving no room for misunderstanding.
By that standard, the revised University of California sexual harassment and sexual violence policy is a mixed bag.
On one hand, it provides a comprehensive, specific definition of consent. But the updated policy fails to revise some major shortcomings in existing UC statutes.
The revision brings up to date a policy from 2006. But the section of the original policy dealing with training programs for sexual assault prevention changed very little from the 2006 to the 2014 version. Because the original policy lacked specifics about the type of educational programs required for students, the updated policy continues to enforce a vague standard in teaching students about sexual assault.
The section on educational programs specifies that the promotion of an “environment free from sexual harassment and sexual violence” will be facilitated by “publications, websites, new employee orientations, student orientations and other appropriate channels of communication.”
However, while ideas for distribution of information are outlined in the policy, the document is short on actual details of exactly what training campuses must provide to students.
This in turn could leave elbow room for neglect at some universities. Schools have the potential to cut corners on sexual assault prevention training while still technically adhering to the new policy.
While broad policies can be seen as giving schools freedom to create programs specific to their student bodies, this reading is overly idealistic. In reality, without more narrowly outlined parameters for training, there is large potential for universities to fail in properly supplying students with basic but fundamental information, such as where to access medical resources in the case of assault and what the definition of consent is.
Savannah Badalich, the Undergraduate Students Association Council’s Student Wellness commissioner and founder of 7000 in Solidarity, a campaign against sexual assault, said that if publications count as a way to educate and inform the community of the updated policy, schools can take the easy route and make a pamphlet about the policy.
Throwing the pamphlet in a welcome packet at new student orientation, never to be read, and calling that “training” would still qualify as dissemination of information under the current terms of the policy.
The UC should make it clear that campuses must engage students in interactive programs that get them talking about topics such as consent, the role of drugs and alcohol in sexual assault and the resources available to them.
For employees, the UC system provides consistent, mandatory training that could be used as a model for student training.
The UC requires two hours of sexual assault prevention training for all employees every two years, said Pamela Thomason, UCLA’s Title IX officer. Employees have to attend either an in-person course or take an online course.
Though the UC policy ensures employees are accountable for knowing about the sexual harassment policy, the same cannot be said for students.
Training programs are critical: They educate community members about access to help and prevent alleged assailants from claiming ignorance as their defense. Skimping on the details does a disservice to all community members who can benefit from specifically outlined requirements.
Reporting rates of incidences of sexual assault increases with training programs, Thomason said. More education about rights and resources can promote the policy’s mission of eradicating sexual assault.
Thomason also noted that an important aspect of the training programs is that they also highlight the responsibility community members have to each other. Responsibility and accountability are key when it comes to sexual assault, and the current policy does not provide enough assurance of either.
In order to instill accountability in students, it needs to be apparent within the University’s administration as well.
For a university to say it is accountable and responsible to its community requires more than superficial commitment: It requires investment in a conversation about sexual assault and consent.
Thomason said that many incoming students have limited experience with drugs and alcohol, making the training programs all the more necessary. Students need to be aware of their resources, rights and responsibilities, especially upon entering the exciting – but also potentially dangerous – world that is college.
Properly carrying out training programs and updating the policy to reflect more specific expectations of how training should work create accountability beyond just a pamphlet.