Higher Education Policy Issue

Introduction
The campus sexual assault prevention, reporting and adjudication is a higher education policy issue developed in 2014. The aim of this policy is to prevent sexual assault, take appropriate actions on reported cases of sexual assault and guarantee compliance with the federal law. Sexual violence has become a growing concern in higher education environments affecting students. It involves psychological or physical violence conducted through sexual means such as sexual harassment, rape, assault and abuse. Sexual assault is often tolerated in the larger society and on campuses and this has raised a lot of concern. Though sexual assault is experienced by both genders, it is common among women while men are the most perpetuators. Sexual assault has adverse consequences on victims for example it can affect their mental and physical well-being; hamper their academic achievement as well as their ability to access education. The root causes of sexual assault in campuses include; the identities and marginalization of women and other groups of people within the broader society that results in high risks of victimization. Additionally, alcohol and drug abuse have been identified as major contributors to campus sexual assault. In most instances, perpetuators and victims of sexual assault always claim to have been drunk when the incident happened. Most victims fail to report their experiences of sexual abuse to relevant authorities. Studies indicate that only one out of ten cases of sexual violence are reported to the police. Therefore, establishment of an effective campus sexual assault policy would promote creation of an environment in higher education systems where everybody has awareness that sexual assault is not tolerated, victims are able to get the services they require and appropriate action is taken against perpetuators (American Association of University Professors, 2013).

Critique of Policy Options
The current approach to campus sexual assault is failing because they do not provide adequate measures to address the effects of sexual assault on victims and to deter perpetrators. These approaches do not have essential practices that promote reporting, investigation and adjudication of sexual assault cases. They lack online or confidential reporting alternatives and thus discourage student victims from reporting cases to the police. Similarly, they do not offer intervening measures to defend and support the victims. These approaches as well provide a requirement that all complaints must take part in the adjudication process and this discourages students to report sexual assault incidents. Therefore, the current policies need to be reviewed to incorporate reporting, investigation and adjudication procedures and practice to curb campus sexual assault (American Association of University Professors, 2013).
The current approaches are failing because most higher education institutions lack comprehensive policies to address sexual abuse. Most policies that have been reviewed recently are not specific to sexual violence and they do not provide a full meaning of sexual abuse.  Therefore, all-inclusive policies need to be developed and should be specific to sexual assault in order to be effective. Additionally, the current approaches to sexual assault do not have clear details of the rights of the complainant neither does it state that individuals working on follow up of sexual assault must be trained to enhance effectiveness. It is evident that often, the rights of the complainant are not articulated. Instead, the authorities focus more on the rights of respondents to a complaint of sexual abuse. Therefore, the failure to provide parallel rights to both the defendant and the victim, compromises with the ability of the students to make informed choices of reporting sexual abuse. This has contributed to reduction rates of reporting sexual assault cases and also affects the healing process of the victim. It is important to enact campus sexual assault policies that ensure provision of equal rights to both the defendant and the victim (Krishovey, Hayes, Klein, Nemeth & Adkins, 2013).
The current approaches lack trained personnel to respond to cases of sexual assault in campuses. Examples of the required personnel to respond and advocate for campus sexual assault incidences include sexual assaults advocates, health care providers and law enforcement found both on-campus and off-campus. These individuals play a significant role in assisting victims to file reports, establish safety plans for victims and create access services and accommodations that would help them in their healing process. Therefore, it is important for higher education institutions to ensure they have trained personnel to effectively address campus sexual assault (American Association of University Professors, 2013).
The current approaches to campus sexual abuses are not properly implemented thus fail to achieve its goal of ending sexual violence. They lack effective monitoring and evaluating mechanisms to ensure implementation of the established practices and policies. These approaches tend to focus more on the process of addressing sexual abuse instead of concentrating on their impacts on students. Therefore, it is important for higher education institutions to create effective monitoring and evolution programs to ensure the sexual assault policies and practices are fully implemented in order to effectively address the problem (Krishovey, Hayes, Klein, Nemeth & Adkins, 2013).
Lack of a standardized campus sexual abuse policy has contributed to failure of the current approaches to violence. The American States have standards for implementation of campus sexual assault and thus have created gaps due to the different policies established in higher education institutions. This gap has compromised the safety of students from sexual assault as well as their willingness to make reports to authorities. Also, it is observed that policies and procedures established in various higher education institutions in the United States fail to apply to sexual assault incidences because of lack of standard policies. This has resulted in intersections and overlap that has impacted negatively on the consistency and clarity of those policies in addressing campus sexual assault. Therefore, it is important for higher education institution in various states in America to formulate and implement standard policies to enhance consistency in addressing sexual assault in these institutions (Edwards, Moynihan, Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, Demers & Banyard, 2015).
The campus sexual assault prevention, reporting and adjudication policy consist of proposed alternatives to the existing practices that are effective in addressing incidences of sexual violence. The aim of providing these options is to eradicate incidences of sexual assault in higher education institutions and its adverse consequences. One of the options provided is to encourage close coordination between institutions and trained law-enforcement officials. Similarly, it advocates for coordination of efforts among administrators, students, staff members and faculty members. It states that all members of the campus community should share responsibility of handling sexual assault within their institutions and also take part in the development process of the campus sexual assault policy (Edwards, Moynihan, Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, Demers & Banyard, 2015).
Furthermore, the policy suggests that the perpetuators of campus sexual assault should be convicted and punished by the criminal justice systems. Most reports on sexual violence in higher education institutions are tackled administratively and perpetrators are usually punished through suspension or expulsion. The administration is usually reluctant to refer reported cases to the criminal justice and this hampers effectiveness of addressing campus sexual assault. In most instances, the school administration does not consider sexual assault as a crime, thus encourages the perpetrator to continue with the actions of sexually harassing other students. A criminal justice system would be able to determine whether the sexual violence act was a crime and impose necessary punishment against the perpetrator (DeMatteo, Galloway, Arnold & Patel, 2015).
The policy as well requires higher education institutions to encourage students to report cases of sexual abuse and monitor patterns of sexual misconduct among students. Additionally, the policy suggests that other behaviors which create an environment that supports sexual violence should be tracked. Moreover, the policy advocates for higher education institutions to take prompt action to eradicate sexual abuse, stop its recurrence and tackle its impacts. This can be achieved through developing clear, readable and accurate policies and procedures that should be made accessible to people within the campus community (DeMatteo, Galloway, Arnold, & Patel, 2015).
Consequently, the policy also provides an option of defining sexual assault. It broadly defines sexual violence to include sexual assault, stalking and sexual harassment. The definition and punishment of sexual assault differ in institutions, states and jurisdiction. The definition helps to eliminate confusion among higher education institutions in various states. It creates differences and inconsistencies in reporting, holding perpetuators’ accountable, investigation and record keeping. It would allow higher education institutions to develop effective disciplinary process against those who violate the sexual misconduct policy (DeMatteo, Galloway, Arnold, & Patel, 2015).
My position on the campus sexual assault prevention, reporting and adjudication policy is that it is effective in addressing sexual violence. It is comprehensive, clearly defines sexual violence, provides alternatives to existing approaches to sexual violence and it is a standard policy that applies across all higher education institutions in the United States.
Policy Recommendations
The current policy approach needs to be changed by implementing specific practical measures that are provided below. Many of the current policies are not specific to campus sexual assault. Most of those policies categorize sexual assault behaviors under misconduct, discrimination and harassment policies thus affecting their effectiveness. Therefore, it is crucial that higher education institutions to handle sexual assault separate from other types of misconduct. This is because, sexual violence consists of gendered power dynamics and also the victims of sexual abuse experiences unique challenges. Thus, creation of a specific policy to address sexual violence assault would contribute significantly towards preventing; encourage reporting and adjudication of sexual abuse (Richards, 2016).
The current policy approach should include a clear definition of “consent”, “incapacity” and “force.” Additionally, it should cover a wide range of behaviors that are sexually violent such as sharing out sexual videos or images without consent. Moreover, the policies should deal with sexual assaults that occur off campus, those conducted against campus visitors as well as those groups in campuses that engage in activities that encourage sexual abuse. The policies should also be designed to incorporate the students’ voices against sexual assault (Richards, 2016).
It is also recommended that the current policy approach should recognize the importance of providing equal rights to both the victim and defendant of sexual assault. Through this, students will be encouraged to report sexual assault incidences. Similarly, the policy should contain details on the responses of the higher education institutions to the victims of sexual assault. This would enhance consistency in provision of services, treatment, and referrals (Richards, 2016).
Furthermore, the current policy approach should develop mechanisms for raising awareness. For instance, special orientation training can be established to facilitate familiarity with the policies and practices of sexual assault. Having adequate understanding and accessibility of the sexual violence policies by members of the campus community would promote their application. The policies should be clear and be distributed in languages that meet the needs of the students (Bennett, 2015).
It is also recommended for current policy approach to develop robust process for adjudicating, investigating and reporting of sexual assault cases. The policy should provide specific information on the actions that are taken when a report is made, the available recourse for the victims to report the matter to law enforcement and those for pursuing legal options besides the campus system. Moreover, the policy should present processes that would enhance successful coordination of services and law enforcement between those working on- and off-campus (Bennett, 2015).
In addition, the policy should develop effective mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation to ensure policy implementation. Effective implementation would contribute significantly towards reducing and preventing cases of campus sexual abuse and build safety. Similarly, it would ensure that the sexual protocols focus more on addressing the impacts of sexual assault on students. Policy implementation is essential because it would facilitate identification of groups of people within the campus community that are exposed to high risk of sexual exploitations and abuse. Examples of students who are at high risks of sexual violence include international students, Aboriginal students, those with disabilities and the transgender (Bennett, 2015).
The recommended policy on the campus sexual assault problem has taken into account various ethical considerations. For instance, the policy recognizes that the freedom to teach and learn is not separate from providing a safe environment for learning. The Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms points out that the freedom of students to learn depends on the proper conditions and opportunities provided in classrooms, in the institutions and within the broader community (Bennett, 2015).
In addition, the recommended policy has incorporated the elements of the existing policies in higher education institutions that govern professional ethics of addressing campus sexual violence. Integration of such policies ensures that the professional ethics within campus institutions are not violated, but rather align with them to enhance effectiveness in addressing campus sexual assault problem. The elements of professional ethics include, the campus community have the duty to develop and adopt suitable policies and procedures that address sexual assault such as establishing prevention and education programs. Similarly, the professional ethics elements include conducting investigation on claims of sexual violence and take immediate corrective action to stop sexual abuse and prevent its repetition. Moreover, the elements of professional ethics requires relevant authorities within the institution to take suitable disciplinary actions against perpetrators including revocations of privileges within the institutions, dismissal, termination of contract or employment, expulsion and suspension among others (Bennett, 2015).
The policy as well has outlined measures that promote maintenance of confidentiality of information. It is important for relevant authorities, individuals and media to handle reported cases of campus sexual assault with sensitivity in order to maintain confidentiality of the victim. This is because, the victims of sexual assault always experience high level of distress and trauma and failure to maintain confidentiality of information can have long-term impacts on the victim and the campus community in general. Therefore, the policy has addressed the ethical considerations of maintaining confidentiality of information to protect the affected individuals (Bennett, 2015).
The anticipated arguments against my position on the campus sexual assault prevention, reporting and adjudication policy include: it is argued that although this policy addresses sexual assault in higher education institution, it does not cover all areas regarding sexual violence. The recommended policy contains comprehensive details covering all areas of campus sexual assault such as its major causes, its effects, and remedies. Furthermore, it outlines measures of how to create effective mechanisms for tackling campus sexual assault. Moreover, the policy provides explicit reporting and service options for students to encourage reporting and thus reduce incidences of sexual violence within and outside campus. The policy is also standard because it has been designed to apply to all higher education institutions in different states in America. The provisions, guidelines and recommendations of the policy are consistent and similar in all higher education institutions in the different states in the U.S (Richards, 2016).
Additionally, it is also argued that the policy provides a broad definition of sexual assault and this causes more confusion of identifying sexual assault. The recommended policy has outlined a clear meaning and provides proper description of sexual assault and other terms associated with it. Although the sexual assault has been broadly defined, it only includes the relevant information that is important in enhancing widespread understanding. The definition is also specific to campus sexual assault thus efficient. Examples of these terms include sexual harassment, stalking, sexual exploitation, sexual violence, force and consent (Richards, 2016).
Conclusion
The campus sexual assault prevention, reporting and adjudication is a policy issue in higher education institutions in the United States. The policy was developed to prevent sexual assault, provide appropriate actions for reporting sexual assault cases and ensure compliance with the federal law. Sexual assault affects mental and physical wellbeing of individuals. The current approaches have failed to adequately address campus sexual assault because they lack essential practices that promote reporting, investigation and adjudication of sexual assault cases. They lack confidential reporting options and discourage student victims from reporting cases to the police. Also, they fail to offer intervening measures to defend and support the victims of sexual assault. In addition, most of the policies are not specific to campus sexual violence and lack clear details of the rights of complaints. Various recommendations have been provided to improve the existing policy approach towards addressing campus sexual assault. The current policy should be designed specifically to address sexual assault by treating it as distinct. It is also recommended that the current policy approach can be improved by incorporating a clear definition of “consent”, “incapacity” and “force” and cover a wide range of behaviors that are sexually violent such as sharing out sexual videos or images without consent. Therefore, the campus sexual assault policy would be effective in addressing sexual violence in higher education institutions.
 
 References
American Association of University Professors. (2013). Campus sexual assault: suggested policies and procedures. Academe, 99(4), 92-100.
Bennett, L. (2015). Review best practices for sexual assault prevention, response. Dean and Provost, 16(9), 7-7.
DeMatteo, D., Galloway, M., Arnold, S., & Patel, U. (2015). Sexual assault on college campuses: A 50-state survey of criminal sexual assault statutes and their relevance to campus sexual assault. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21(3), 227.
Edwards, K. M., Moynihan, M. M., Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, K. A., Demers, J. M., & Banyard, V. L. (2015). Campus Community Readiness to Engage Measure: Its Utility for Campus Violence Prevention Initiatives—Preliminary Psychometrics. Violence and gender, 2(4), 214-224.
Krishovey, M.S., Hayes, R., Klein, E.G., Nemeth, J.M., & Adkins, R. (2013). Sexual assault reporting procedures at Ohio colleges. Journal of American College Health, 61(3), 142-147.
Richards, T. N. (2016). An Updated Review of Institutions of Higher Education’s Responses to Sexual Assault Results From a Nationally Representative Sample. Journal of interpersonal violence, 0886260516658757.