Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The New Sexual Assault Climate Survey Recommendation

by

In April 2014, the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault issued a series of recommendations for college and university campuses related to responding to and preventing sexual assault. Given that one in five college-aged women endure a sexual assault, the White House is to be applauded for prioritizing this issue and for organizing the task force. But of course, it should be so simple to recommend that campuses do the right thing.

One of the first recommendations, and one that the group is pushing to become a legal mandate in 2016, is that schools undertake a campus-wide climate survey. The goal is to assess the true degree to which attempted and actual sexual assaults are occurring, given that this remains among the most under-reported crimes, as well as to better understand students’ experiences with reporting and receiving services. It would seem as though there would be little opposition to such a recommendation, as clearly understanding the scope of this huge problem and identifying gaps in services would be a good idea for college or university administrators. Yet immediately many campus officials responded negatively. Why, one wonders?

The primary concern that campus administrators levied was that this would be an unfunded mandate that would require additional staff. That is, in my assessment, a very weak point, but one that reflects a growing problem on campuses: the need to bureaucratize everything. For instance, in an interview for the Huffington Post, Kevin Kruger, president of NASPA-Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education, stated “We get very concerned about legislation that requires additional staffing.” Nowhere in the recommendation does it actually state that new personnel would be required, however.

Kruger’s comment is indicative of the administrative bloat that characterizes higher education today. The first instinct of so many campuses is to hire new administrators to oversee required or even recommended programs. A report by the Delta Cost Project titled “Labor Intensive or Labor Expensive: Changing Staffing and Compensation Patterns in Higher Education” found that, between 2000 and 2012, new administrative positions, largely in student services, was the reason for a 28 percent increase in the higher education workforce. Administrative bloat has been cited as one of the primary reasons that the cost of obtaining a college education has outpaced the increases in healthcare and housing costs. A 2010 study by the Goldwater Institute found that administrative ranks grew twice as much as did the number of faculty between 1993 and 2007. It’s not just new staff, either. Colleges and universities love to hire consultants to study every possible thing, often at huge expense and little return.

Instead of hiring new staff or consultants, campuses could look to utilize their faculty who have expertise on sexual assault to coordinate climate assessment surveys. This would be beneficial for many reasons, not just for the bottom line. First, it is likely that most campuses have a number of faculty members who really know this issue well and who would be eager to be involved in bettering their campuses’ understanding of and response to sexual assault. Second, faculty could involve student researchers, who not only would have valuable insights about the issue but would gain important research, advocacy, and leadership skills through their involvement in the process. Third, using knowledgeable faculty and student researchers would ensure that the tools created and recommendations made were most appropriate for that specific campus, not simply a generic effort. Finally, keeping the research in house would demonstrate a real commitment to understanding sexual assault and developing unique and progressive responses and prevention efforts. In contrast, hiring another person or consultant to collect this important information suggests that administrators merely want to do what is required, rather than what is, as Vice President Joe Biden called it, a moral responsibility.

Laura Finley, Ph.D., teaches in the Barry University Department of Sociology & Criminology. Her column is syndicated by Peace Voice.

Laura Finley, Ph.D., teaches in the Barry University Department of Sociology & Criminology and is syndicated by PeaceVoice.

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
September 30, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Henry Giroux
Thinking Dangerously in the Age of Normalized Ignorance
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel and Academic Freedom: a Closed Book
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? 
Andrew Levine
A Putrid Election: the Horserace as Farce
Mike Whitney
The Biggest Heist in Human History
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Sick Blue Line
Vijay Prashad
In a Hall of Mirrors: Fear and Dislike at the Polls
Alexander Cockburn
The Man Who Built Clinton World
John Wight
Who Will Save Us From America?
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Jeremy Brecher
Dakota Access Pipeline and the Future of American Labor
Binoy Kampmark
Pictures Left Incomplete: MH17 and the Joint Investigation Team
Andrew Kahn
Nader Gave Us Bush? Hillary Could Give Us Trump
Steve Horn
Obama Weakens Endangered Species Act
Dave Lindorff
US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing
John W. Whitehead
Uncomfortable Truths You Won’t Hear From the Presidential Candidates
Ramzy Baroud
Shimon Peres: Israel’s Nuclear Man
Brandon Jordan
The Battle for Mercosur
Murray Dobbin
A Globalization Wake-Up Call
Jesse Ventura
Corrupted Science: the DEA and Marijuana
Andrew Sullivan
The Democratic Plot to Privatize Social Security
Daniel Borgstrom
On the Streets of Oakland, Expressing Solidarity with Charlotte
Marjorie Cohn
President Obama: ‘Patron’ of the Israeli Occupation
Norman Pollack
The “Self-Hating” Jew: A Critique
David Rosen
The Living Body & the Ecological Crisis
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Richard W. Behan
Hillary Clinton and Our Moribund Democracy
Joseph Natoli
Thoughtcrimes and Stupidspeak: Our Assault Against Words
Ron Jacobs
A Cycle of Death Underscored by Greed and a Lust for Power
Kim Nicolini
Long Drive Home
Art Martin
The Matrix Around the Next Bend: Facebook, Augmented Reality and the Podification of the Populace
Andre Vltchek
Failures of the Western Left
Laura Finley
Presidential Debate Recommendations
José Negroni
Mass Firings on Broadway Lead Singers to Push Back
Leticia Cortez
Entering the Historical Dissonance Surrounding Desafinados
Robert J. Burrowes
Gandhi: ‘My Life is My Message’
Charles R. Larson
Queen Lear? Deborah Levy’s “Hot Milk”
September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]