Introduction

Evaluation, an important component of all research, is critical to integrate into interventions addressing sexual harassment, because the targets of such harassment can suffer serious consequences, including physical and emotional harm, lost educational opportunities, and negative effects on their career (Cipriano et al., 2021; NASEM, 2018; Nelson et al., 2017; Rosenthal et al., 2016; Stratton et al., 2005; Stubaus and Harton, 2022). Not only are the consequences potentially severe, but the problem is pervasive across all levels of academia. Studies show that 20–50 percent of undergraduate and graduate students experience sexual harassment from faculty or staff, as well as nearly 50 percent of women faculty and staff in academia (NASEM, 2018). Moreover, despite efforts in recent decades to prevent and respond effectively to sexual harassment, it remains a significant issue with no clear decline in incidence rates.

Even with the high stakes, prevalence, and persistence of sexual harassment in higher education, few studies evaluating prevention efforts, response efforts, or policies and procedures have been undertaken (Bondestam and Lundqvist, 2020; NASEM, 2018, p. 104; Perry, 2020). This makes it challenging to determine whether efforts to address sexual harassment are effective, ineffective, or even harmful in application. Furthermore, when evaluation occurs, the findings may be limited in that they may not be generalizable to a larger population or the effect of the intervention was not measured over long-enough periods of time. For sexual harassment in particular, current evaluation literature does not often assess behavioral or experiential outcomes. For example, bystander intervention education is among the most well-researched of prevention measures, with studies indicating that it is effective in “improving knowledge about sexual violence, reducing endorsement of rape myths, and increasing the likelihood of bystander intervention behavior” (quoted in NASEM, 2018, p. 133). Despite these promising findings, additional study is necessary to determine whether it can actually prevent incidents of harassment and assault from occurring. Bystander intervention education aims to raise awareness of potentially harmful situations and teach participants the skills and strategies needed to intervene in those situations, but a recent systematic review indicated that the influence on intervening behaviors did not persist beyond 6 months post-intervention and did not reduce rates of perpetration (Kettrey et al., 2019). Moreover, most studies (Bush, et al., 2019) of bystander intervention education focus on outcomes related to sexual assault, not sexual harassment. Relatively little is known about the effectiveness of bystander intervention to stop sexual harassment that does not rise to the level of physical violence.

Although the body of research to date lacks evidence that bystander intervention education can reduce rates of harassment, it has become a component of compliance with both the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (P.L. 101-542) and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA) (P.L. 103-322), with colleges and universities across the nation devoting time, resources, and attention to the model.¹ Other methods and models are also being used to prevent and respond to sexual harassment but have not been fully evaluated or assessed for effectiveness, including consensual relationship policies, anti-harassment training, and universal mandatory reporting (NASEM, 2018).

___________________

¹ The Prevention Working Group of the Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education is currently working on a paper that will examine practices and strategies for developing, implementing, and sustaining bystander intervention training programs for faculty, staff, and graduate students.

Therefore, evaluating the various approaches taken by institutions of higher education in the United States can help promote the success of sexual harassment interventions, identify interventions that should be de-implemented, and contribute to the body of research on sexual harassment in academia.

Building on the Efforts of the Action Collaborative and Previous Resources

To provide a framework for addressing sexual harassment in academia as discussed in Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM, 2018) and other research, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine formed the Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education in 2019. The Action Collaborative brings together academic and research institutions and other interested parties to work toward targeted, collective action on addressing and preventing sexual harassment across all disciplines and among all people in higher education and includes four working groups, Prevention, Response, Remediation, and Evaluation. These working groups identify topics in need of research, gather information, and publish resources for the higher education community. Members of the Evaluation Working Group decided to explore the challenges and research areas related to the evaluation of a wide range of efforts to address sexual harassment, which they present in this document.

The Sexual Harassment of Women report states that preventing sexual harassment “requires first having a clear understanding of the existing climate and tracking it over time” (NASEM, 2018, p. 155). The report also notes that collecting such information will enable institutions to adapt their prevention and response efforts to effectively meet the unique needs of their respective campus communities. The report suggests that “academic institutions should work with researchers to evaluate and assess their efforts to create a more diverse, inclusive, and respectful environment, and to create effective policies, procedures, and training programs” (p. 183) and “evaluation should be routinely expected as one of the components of the intervention, not as an additional burden” (p. 154). In addition to helping institutions better understand whether an intervention is worth continuing or expanding, the report suggests that evaluation and climate assessment is a form of self-study (see also Freyd and Birrell, 2013) that can help build community trust in the institution and reduce feelings of institutional betrayal (NASEM, 2018, p. 156).

This exploration of evaluation methods builds not only on the Sexual Harassment of Women report (NASEM, 2018) but also on the Guidance for Measuring Sexual Harassment Prevalence Using Campus Climate Surveys (Merhill et al., 2021) and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Interventions to Prevent and Address Sexual Harassment: Proceedings of a Workshop (NASEM, 2021). The 2018 report established recommendations that higher education institutions should pursue evaluation of their campus climate, prevalence rates, and interventions; the 2021 Guidance for Measuring Sexual Harassment Prevalence paper offered guidance on obtaining prevalence data; and the 2021 Evaluating the Effectiveness of Interventions Workshop explored approaches and strategies for evaluating and measuring the effectiveness of sexual harassment interventions being implemented within higher education in order to assist institutions in transforming promising ideas into evidence-based best practices. This paper offers insight into selecting the appropriate methods for evaluating interventions based on evidence, case studies, and the perspectives and experiences of the authors.