The Difference a Year Makes

“Harvard, Wake Up and Make Some Changes,” read one of the signs in the sea of posters that were waved at a 200-person rally outside University Hall last May. Organized by Harvard’s Coalition Against Sexual Violence (CASV), the event gave physicality to the sense of betrayal and disgust that many Harvard students felt upon learning of changes to the Administrative Board’s (Ad Board) policies.

“Rape happens at Harvard and what does Harvard do? Harvard buries its head in the sand!” was the cry from the director of the Boston Chapter of the National Organization for Women at that rally. Students, faculty and alumni had joined to protest the proceedings of the May Faculty meeting where professors had been rushed into voting for a measure that was billed as a “minor change to the handbook.” That “minor” change was the now-infamous “corroboration rule,” which required any student bringing a complaint of assault or harassment before the Ad Board to provide “independent corroborating evidence” before a full investigation could be launched. According to statistics extrapolated from a University Health Services report, an estimated 58 rapes occurred on Harvard’s campus last year, yet the Ad Board had investigated only seven incidents, and even these few investigations were conducted by officials who were untrained in sexual assault.

In response to this change in policy, CASV filed a complaint to the U.S. Department of Education alleging that the new rule violated the gender-equity regulations laid out under Title IX. While the complaint itself was not decided in the student’s favor, the move did succeed in forcing Harvard to scale back its evidentiary threshold from “independent corroborating evidence” to “corroborating evidence,” to the current standard of “supporting information” in a series of quiet modifications to the handbook’s webpage guidelines.

Meanwhile, Faculty members were planning their own inquiries. Radcliffe Professor of the History of Science and Chair of the Committee on Women’s Studies Katherine Park called for a review of the campus’ sexual assault services. Professor of International Health Jennifer Leaning led a panel comprised of faculty, students and administrators in a year-long investigation into Harvard’s sexual assault resources. The recommendations, which went into effect last week, present a laudable blueprint for reform.

The most welcome and crucial development is the creation of the Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response. This office, to be staffed with experienced professionals will provide a desperately-needed centralized first-responder for sexual assault survivors—who currently face a confusing alphabet soup of potential resources, each of which sorely lacks the holistic and coordinated response that this new office can provide.

Additionally, the report calls for much-needed training for the College’s resident advisors, tutors and proctors, as well as revamped and expanded education and outreach to students themselves, especially in the crucial first year. The expansion of the sexual assault education—separating it from the generic “safe community night” meeting and following up the class-wide presentation with small group sessions facilitated by professional educators—will go a long way. The Leaning Committee’s recommendation that special efforts should be tailored to reach out to “captains of athletic teams [and] officers of social clubs” is an important recognition of the necessity for culture change among certain teams and final clubs.

And while discipline was specifically omitted from its charge, the Leaning Committee was able to advocate for a “Single Fact-Finder”—a person, independent from the College administration and trained in investigatory techniques—who could bring a higher level of professionalism and expediency to the investigations that the Ad Board conducts.

The report put forth by the Leaning Committee is a bold plan to bring Harvard to terms with the sexual assault that occurs all too often on its campus, but there is still more to be done. The Ad Board still remains an overworked and undertrained group of academic administrators who are poorly equipped to adjudicate sexual assault claims; these claims must be judged by a group of qualified professionals in a separate board.

But the Leaning Committee has succeeded in its most important charge—getting Harvard to confront the reality of sexual assault on campus. It has finally started devoting the resources, time and attention to addressing the issue. As CASV leader Sarah B. Levit-Shore ’04 said, “Once we can stop fighting Harvard we can start fighting the real fight, ” against sexual violence itself.