Rather than waiting to be told, here’s how to do something about online harms

On 23 February the UK’s university regulator, the Office for Students (OfS), announced a consultation on “a new approach to regulating harassment and sexual misconduct in English higher education”. It clearly suggests moving one step closer to regulating institutions in tackling harassment and sexual misconduct on campus. Certainly, the sector response to the OfS’ previously released, voluntary Statement of Expectations has been patchy, as evidenced through its own research and a detailed exploration around online harms we have undertaken and will soon publish.

We welcome the move toward regulation because, sadly, we fear the sector will not invest in the sort of policy, practice and systems needed to support victims of abuse without such regulatory “encouragement”. 

Nevertheless, it is disappointing that the OfS, in its consideration of these issues, still fails to acknowledge the challenges of online harms and how they differ in act, reach and legislation compared with what we might refer to as offline harassment and misconduct. We will certainly be raising this in our response to the consultation.

• Despite positive steps, much remains to be done on sexual misconduct
• Digital citizenship: creating safe and inclusive online learning spaces
• How to prevent cyberbullying from rearing its ugly head in universities

We can see that there is a will in the sector to better support the challenges of online harms, and many in the sector want help and guidance. We recently spoke at a webinar on responding to online harassment and abuse attended by more than 300 participants. Attendees were engaged and very much in agreement that when it comes to tackling online harms among students, institutions should provide help and support (and have some degree of liability).

Yet we can’t help feeling that we have returned to the issues first introduced to the sector with Universities UK’s Changing the Culture report, published in 2016, when we surely should have moved on from this position by now. 

To us, it felt rather like déjà vu in that it was another webinar, another group of professionals in the sector acknowledging the problem and asking what to do about it – but with little to no national guidance and worrying suggestions from the regulator that online harms will not be covered in the proposed new regulations, it is little wonder institutions are still crying out for help.

Adopting the ethos that proactivity is better than reactivity, we wanted to reflect upon the question: what can an institution do to better support its students (and staff) when tackling online harms?

We would propose the following:

• Have policies that consider online harms within codes of conduct, and have transparent statements on routes for disclosure, sanctions and support. Without clear policy there will never be a consistent response across the institution. 
• Provide and publicise routes for disclosure and have more than an anonymous reporting tool. While these tools might have a place for early support, they are no substitute for trained staff who will listen and know how to help. In routes for disclosure make it clear how confidentiality and escalation will be conducted.
• Define thresholds for intervention. The OfS consultation focuses mainly on criminal thresholds for harassment and abuse. We would suggest it is entirely in an institution’s gift (and we would encourage this) to set a lower bar. While a student persistently messaging another student in halls might not interest the police, it should be of concern for the institution in considering whether that is appropriate in terms of student conduct and whether the recipient of this harassment needs support. 
• Do not assume prior knowledge. Students do not arrive on campus educated on these issues. They cannot “deal with this sort of thing on their own”, and you cannot assume they will understand what is, and is not, acceptable regarding online harms.
• With this in mind, embed such education into the curriculum and have it developed by specialists. One thing in the OfS consultation with which we are in extreme agreement is that education and training distilled down to an online video played during induction is insufficient. Education should be delivered by specialists, not enthusiasts, with job roles and remuneration that reflects their expertise. 
• Student disciplinaries must be staffed by knowledgeable, appropriately trained individuals. This is essential to tackle the many biases people bring to issues related to online harms, which often border on victim blaming (reflecting upon our own experiences with senior staff in student disciplinaries over the years). 
• Conversely, ensure student-facing staff are trained to understand and recognise online harms and understand how to support and where to signpost. 
• Make sure the institution works with external organisations that specialise in support around online harms, such as the Revenge Porn Helpline, which supports victims of image-based abuse. 

We should stress that we see the above as the bare minimum. And before doing any of this, there is no need to survey your students to “see if there’s a problem”. Unless the institution is an oasis disconnected from society and normal human interactions, assume there is a problem and put measures in place to support victims. While we are, of course, sympathetic to evidence-based policy, we would argue that the evidence is already out there if folk are minded to look for it. 

We recognise that all this can be daunting, and we have developed an online safeguarding self-review toolkit, updated in 2022, which provides a wealth of information and advice about these issues. We would also recommend Graham Towl and Clarissa Humphreys’ excellent book Stopping Gender-based Violence in Higher Education, which is full of excellent theory and practice, including a contribution from us.

It is clear to us that online harassment and abuse are not going away, regardless of political claims around the Online Safety Bill, and it is about time institutions recognised their role in supporting their students. Safeguarding is best done in a network, and institutions are a big part of that.

Emma Bond is pro vice-chancellor, research, and professor of socio-technical research at the University of Suffolk. She has more than 20 years’ experience of teaching in higher education and researching risk in online environments, and is chair of the NSPCC’s national research ethics committee.

Andy Phippen is professor of digital rights at Bournemouth University and visiting professor at the University of Suffolk. He has specialised in the use of ICT in social contexts and the intersection with legislation for almost 20 years.

If you found this interesting and want advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the THE Campus newsletter.