Introduction

To address the persistent problem of sexual harassment within higher education, research suggests that environments need to convey that sexual harassment is not a norm and actively discourage it when it does occur. One approach that researchers have identified as helping to create such environments is bystander intervention programs, which prepare and equip individuals to interrupt and intervene when harassing behavior occurs (Banyard, 2015; Holland et al., 2016; NASEM, 2018).

Historically, much of the research on bystander intervention in academia has focused on improving bystander behaviors in undergraduate populations.¹ Only recently have organizations’ interest in and attention to bystander intervention trainings that focus on workplace environments affecting faculty, staff, and graduate students increased (Griffith et al., 2022), even though these populations also experience and witness sexual harassment (NASEM, 2018).

The lack of bystander intervention resources specifically catered to faculty, staff, and graduate students may be attributed to the complex work environments that make it hard for individuals to intervene. For instance, research shows that individuals’ relative power can vary in different situations in the academic workplace. Differences in social identities (career, gender, race, etc.) can affect how an individual’s relative power changes in one situation compared with another (Banyard, 2015; Kleinman and Thomas, 2023), which can make it challenging for individuals to determine how and when to intervene (Haynes-Baratz et al., 2021). The ever-changing roles of power, such as a university administrator returning to a faculty role, also create an environment that makes individuals less willing to intervene because of fear of retaliation, inconsistency of social norms or policies, and so forth (Haynes-Baratz et al., 2021). Additionally, the isolated academic environments typically experienced by faculty, staff, and graduate students can make it challenging to identify, recognize, and feel compelled to intervene when sexual harassment, incivility, bullying, and microaggressions occur—the latter of which is particularly hard to identify because they can present as subtle, indistinct biases (Haynes-Baratz et al., 2021).

The 2018 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine noted that, despite these complexities, institutions would benefit from engaging all levels of their organization to endorse a culture that promotes the prevention of sexual harassment and enforces relevant policies and procedures. Building on this recommendation and hoping to close the research gap in bystander intervention trainings in higher education, the Prevention Working Group in the National Academies’ Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education sought to provide a review of past literature, highlight a set of current programs, and point to areas of research needed to advance this topic; all of which could guide institutions that are exploring, developing, and implementing bystander intervention programs for faculty, staff, and graduate students. The Action Collaborative is a group of more than 50 academic research institutions that are working toward targeted, collective action on addressing and preventing sexual harassment across all disciplines and among all people in higher education. The collaborative includes four

__________________

working groups (Prevention, Response, Remediation, and Evaluation) that identify topics in need of research, gather information, and publish resources for the higher education community.

This Issue Paper focuses on bystander intervention for faculty, staff (including postdoctoral trainees), and graduate students, and specifically for sexually harassing behaviors more frequently found in higher education workplaces (i.e., gender harassment), and other bias and discriminating behaviors. This paper also explores bystander intervention training approaches that are designed for the complex work environments within higher education, and considers how to apply the principles of bystander intervention to the experiences and environments of faculty, staff, and graduate students. To understand how institutions are addressing the gap in bystander intervention training for this population, institutions within the Action Collaborative were identified as having bystander intervention programs that focused on the experiences of faculty, staff, and graduate students. We asked these institutions a standard set of questions to learn about their experiences with commitment and buy-in from leadership, details on how the trainings were developed and what audience it was targeted to, and how the training programs were evaluated (see Box 1-1). The paper summarizes responses from seven of these institutions and ends with a call for additional research and action in several areas, including evaluation of the effectiveness of bystander intervention programs, with the aim of compelling readers and funders to prioritize work on these topics.

Some aspects of the statement of task were not fully addressed. For example, one of the original goals of this paper was to provide a tool for those who are interested in creating and implementing prevention programs. Another was to identify factors that made the programs effective or successful. The information collected and analyzed from the literature review and the information from the seven programs showed that programs were created for specific needs (i.e., there is no one-size-fits-all approach) and the measures of effectiveness and success are still being developed. As a result, this paper does not provide “how to” guides or tools for creating and evaluating a bystander intervention program. Nonetheless, the shared experiences (see Boxes 1-2 through 1-8) provide a potentially valuable “lessons learned” resource. Finally, in our Call for Research section, we focus academics and funders toward specific areas of research such as the evaluation and sustainability of the trainings.

We hope this paper provides faculty, staff, advocates, and those in higher education who implement prevention programs with resources, information, and important questions to consider when developing, implementing, adapting, or improving bystander intervention efforts for faculty, staff, and graduate students. Moreover, we hope it serves to build awareness of how some institutions are creating, maintaining, and evaluating bystander intervention training programs for faculty, staff, and graduate students and to understand what is needed for implementing a program similar to the institutional examples.