STUDENT TO STUDENT HARASSMENT
Bernice R. Sandler

Georgie Porgie, puddin' and pie
Kissed the girls and made them cry...

The newest and most explosive issue in sexual harassment is that of student-to-student harassment, especially in elementary and secondary schools.

BRIEF HISTORY

1964: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is enacted. It prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion and sex. Educational institutions are largely excluded from its coverage until it is amended in 1972.

1972: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is enacted. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in all federally assisted programs. It covers students, faculty, and other employees. The entire institution is covered in all of its activities if it receives any federal dollars, including financial aid.

1974-1975: The term "sexual harassment" is first used by Lin Farley and others at Cornell University.

Mid-1970's: The first cases involving sexual harassment in the workplace wend their way through the courts, which are asked to decide whether sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination. These cases typically focus on a woman whose supervisor pressures her for sexual activity. Initially, the courts do not consider sexual harassment as sex discrimination.

1976: First federal case (Williams v. Saxbe) holds that sexual harassment in the workplace is a form of sexual discrimination.

Mid-1970's: Faculty harassment of students at the college level begins to emerge as an issue.

1977: First charges of sexual harassment against an educational institution are filed under Title IX when Yale University is sued by five students charging faculty with sexual harassment of students.

1979: First report on campus sexual harassment of students by professors is published by Bernice R. Sandler at the Association of American Colleges and Universities. Student-to-student harassment is not mentioned.

1979: U.S. Supreme Court rules that individuals have a right to sue under Title IX even though the statute did not explicitly provide for such action.

1980-81: First study on peer sexual harassment in high schools is conducted by Nan Stein for the Massachusetts Department of Education.

1980: First federal report on sexual harassment by Frank Till, National Advisory Council on Women's Educational Programs.  Student-to-student harassment is not mentioned.

1988: First national report documenting college student-to-student peer harassment is published by Bernice R. Sandler at the Association of American Colleges and Universities.

1989: Minnesota passes first law requiring every school in the state to develop and post a policy of sexual harassment.

Late-1980's, early 1990's: Early cases of student-to-student harassment begin to emerge in colleges, high schools and elementary schools.

Early 1990's: Computer harassment issues begin to emerge concerning students sending unwanted sexually harassing messages as well as students putting pornography on school computers, sometimes as part of the log-in process. Issues of free speech begin to be raised as a defense against sexual harassment.

1991: Minnesota Human Rights Commission approves a settlement of $15,000 between the Duluth School District and the family of a girl about whom vulgar graffiti had been written on the walls of the boys' bathroom. This may be the first case in which monetary damages are awarded to a student in a hostile environment case involving harassment by other students.

1992: U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously in Franklin v. Gwinnett County Schools that students who experience discrimination, including harassment, can seek monetary damages from their schools and school officials under Title IX.

1993: Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education rules that an Eden Prairie, MN school district violated Title IX when it allowed a hostile environment to continue on a school bus. A first-grade girl filed charges when kindergarten-to-fourth-grade boys continually made lewd and intimidating statements to girls.

1993: Hostile Hallways, the first national survey of sexual harassment in the nation's elementary and secondary schools, is published by the American Association of University Women. The study, conducted by Lou Harris and Associates, found that 85 percent of girls and 75 percent of boys experienced some form of sexual harassment at school. Only 7 percent told a teacher and 23 percent told a parent or family member. One in four girls reported being harassed by a teacher or school employee.

1993: Minnesota State Board of Education becomes the first state to approve a curriculum for students from kindergarten through high school, dealing with harassment, especially peer harassment.

1994: Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education rules that sexual graffiti must be removed because it violates Title IX.

1995-98: Courts disagree as to whether schools are liable under Title IX for student-to-student sexual harassment.

1996: Sexual harassment of female athletes by male athletes begins to emerge. A University of Nebraska committee finds that male athletes often intimidated and harassed female athletes. Three female student athletes sue Temple University, claiming that male athletes regularly engaged in suggestive and sexually offensive and lewd remarks and gestures.

1996: California Court awards $500,000 to a female student (Tianna Ugarte) after finding that she had endured months of sexual harassment from a sixth-grade classmate, including sexually obscene gestures, name calling and violent threats. The Antioch (CA) Unified school district had ignored her complaints. The case is later settled for $450,000.

1996: Petaluma School District in northern California agrees to pay $250,000 to a former student who had endured taunts and sexual references from other students while she attended junior high school from 1990-1992.

1996: U.S. Supreme Court refuses to review Rowinsky v. Bryant Independent School District. An appellate court had ruled that the school was not liable for student-to-student harassment in which eighth-grade boys had touched the breasts and genitals of two sisters. The appellate court said that schools would be liable only if they handled claims of sexual harassment differently for boys and girls.

1997: The Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education issues (March 13, 1997) its "Sexual Harassment Guidance" on campus and school policies on sexual harassment. The "Guidance" makes it clear that institutions are responsible for student-to-student harassment and details the standards that OCR will use and that institutions should use as they investigate and resolve allegations of sexual harassment of students engaged in by school employees, other students or third parties.

1998: In Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, the U.S. Supreme Court rules in a Title IX case involving a teacher (who seduced and harassed a student) that a student may not sue a school district for a teacher's sexual harassment unless someone with authority to intervene knew about the acts and the school acted with "deliberate indifference" by failing to take effective steps to stop the harassment. (This is a higher standard than that used in employment discrimination law.) The case applies to colleges as well as to school districts.

1998: Shortly after the above decision Richard W. Riley, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education issues a statement noting that the Court's decision in Gebser explicitly recognized that the Department can do the following:

enforce administratively its Title IX regulation that requires schools and school systems to have well publicized policies against discrimination based on sex, including sexual harassment discrimination; to have effective and well publicized procedures for students and their families to raise and resolve issues; and to take prompt and effective action to equitably resolve sexual harassment complaints. (Press release, July 1,1998.)

1999: In Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court rules on May 24, 1999 that under Title IX schools are obligated to take steps to address complaints about student-to-student harassment. The case involved a fifth-grade girl who was harassed by a boy in her classroom. He repeatedly tried to grab her breasts and other parts of her body and made vulgar comments to her. The classroom teacher took no action, even refusing for three months to allow the girl to change her seat. The principal also took no action even though the child's mother complained after each incident, the girl's grades dropped and she threatened suicide.

Under the Court's decision, schools that are "deliberately indifferent" when they have actual notice of sexual harassment can be held liable. The majority decision makes it clear that mere teasing or bullying would not subject schools to liability under Title IX, and holds that harassment must be severe, pervasive and objectively offensive, such that it deprives the victims of access to the benefits of education.

The decision puts colleges as well as school districts on notice to take student-to-student harassment seriously and to intervene when students' learning environment is affected. Educational institutions should establish guidelines, inform their school community about them and respond to students' calls for help.

*  *  *  *  *

For a report on student-to-student harassment in colleges and universities, see Peer Harassment: Hassles for Women on Campus by Jean O'Gorman Hughes and Bernice Resnick Sandler. The report documents and examines situations in which female students are often harassed and mistreated by male students. It offers more than 60 recommendations for institutional programs and policies to effect change on campus.

*  *  *  *  *





Bernice R. Sandler, Senior Scholar in Residence at the Women's Research and Education Institute, consults extensively with institutions and others about women's equity, including sexual harassment, discrimination, and the chilly climate. She has given over 2000 presentations, written many articles, and serves as an expert witness in discrimination cases. Sandler can be contacted at:

Bernice R. Sandler
Senior Scholar, Women's Research and Education Institute
1350 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 850, Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202 833 3331   Fax: 202 785 5605
E-mail: sandler@bernicesandler.com
Website: bernicesandler.com