Dignity in study: A survey of higher education institutions

#DignityinStudy

Dignity in study: a survey of higher education institutions 2018

A

equity.org.uk ism.org #DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

theMU.org

Executive summary

Today’s music, drama and dance students are the future artists in our theatres, concert halls and dance productions.

Whether they are preparing for a life on screen, on stage, behind the curtain or in the recording studio, ensuring our students have the very best start to their career in the arts is paramount.

Since November, the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and assault has dominated headlines globally to demonstrate the widespread prevalence of sexual assault and harassment, especially in the workplace. Originating in the film industry, the movement quickly generated traction in the wider creative industries, including the music, theatre and dance sectors, revealing the endemic level of sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, bullying and discrimination that many artists are experiencing.

As a result of these revelations, Equity, the ISM and the Musicians’ Union have been working to improve dignity in the workplace for their members who work in the music and performing arts. During the course of our initial work, we heard from our student members about issues relating to the culture within higher education institutions and a lack of awareness around the policies and procedures in place. This, coupled with evidence of cultural issues within the professional workforce, led to the decision for all three organisations to work together and extend work to the education space to ensure an awareness of the current environment for students attending higher education institutions.

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

To do this, we launched a joint confidential and anonymous survey for students, which was open for responses between 9 April and 21 May 2018. 600 students currently attending specialist drama schools, music colleges, conservatoires, dance colleges and universities submitted responses.

Headline findings Our research has shown students currently studying within higher education institutions are at risk from levels of inappropriate behaviour, bullying, sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of gender, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, race and marriage or civil partnership. Out of the 600 students who responded to the survey, over half of the respondents said they had experienced some sort of incident – many more than one type – in the course of their study.

57% of these respondents reported experiencing inappropriate behaviour (behaviour that is considered socially unacceptable), 42% experienced bullying, 36% experienced gender discrimination and 27% experienced sexual harassment.

Although the majority of students selected more than one type of perpetrator (and over 1000 examples were given as a result) ‘fellow student’ was the highest reported at 58%. However, the breakdown does suggest high levels of incidents also by members of the institution’s permanent teaching staff (e.g. teacher or academic lecturer) at 42%. Notably, 57% of respondents did not report their concerns, with 54% of these respondents stating they felt at risk of not being believed or taken seriously if they did report their concerns. This was mirrored by comments given by respondents, as shown in the results overview.

57% 42% 36% 27%

reported experiencing inappropriate behaviour

experienced bullying

experienced gender discrimination experienced sexual harassment

At the request of our student members, we sought to find out the level of awareness around how to report concerns in their higher education institution. Although the breakdown differs from type of institution to institution, 57% of all respondents knew how to report overall. This is positive. What is concerning however, is the level of respondents who knew how to report but chose not to anyway – 49% – with many again stating they felt at risk of not being believed or taken seriously if they did report their concerns.

The student’s voice matters Although many higher education institutions are doing good work to ensure the safety of their students, it is clear there are several issues that must be addressed and taken seriously.

The high level of non-reporting, as well as an overall culture of fear, needs to be tackled. Although many students are aware of how to report, many still choose not to. The survey results and the comments provided with answers suggests a lack of confidence in their higher education institution’s capability to ‘take concerns seriously’ as the main reason for this. It must also be noted that many students who did go on to report their concerns felt unsafe after doing so and felt unsupported.

This contributes to an overall climate of fear and shame, and risks many incidents going undetected. This is concerning. It is impossible to investigate a case that has not been reported.

One way this could be addressed is to put in place a safeguarding model based on the model currently in place for children aged 18 and under. This would include a designated member of staff – a pastoral officer – for students specifically to report their concerns to. Many respondents also requested anonymous reporting to be considered, which would assist in

eradicating the fear of retribution. Higher education institutions also have a responsibility to ensure their policies and procedures are sufficiently visible and discussed with the students regularly to normalise the idea of reporting. Ensuring that all staff, including those who visit the higher education institution or employed on a freelance or temporary basis, are aware of these policies and procedures, including consequences of inappropriate behaviour, would also be recommended.

Education and discussion is also vital. Many respondents also felt that training on how to recognise discrimination, sexual harassment, bullying and inappropriate behaviour should be established within their higher education institution. It must be addressed that at least 66% of all respondents – regardless of whether they had experienced something or not – could not recall whether their higher education institution provided any kind of guidance or training on this matter. In response to the higher level of permanent staff members named as alleged perpetrators, respondents suggested that staff, as well as students, needed sufficient knowledge of the Equality Act 2010 and also be aware of what behaviour is expected of them and what the consequences are if they are found to be behaving inappropriately.

Monitoring student perception and welfare is essential in tracking progress in achieving cultural change. This includes monitoring the level of reports and ensuring that those who have reported are kept in contact with.

Finally, it is vital the whole creative sector works together to eradicate these issues from education right into the profession.

We recommend that all higher education institutions publicly sign up to relevant industry codes of conduct, including the UK Theatre and SOLT 10 Principles, the Equity Agenda for Change and the ISM-Musicians’ Union Code of Practice for the Music Sector.

We thank the ISM’s Francesca Treadaway for the analysis of the survey’s data and creation of this report. We would also like to thank all the students who came forward to share their experiences and suggestions, as without your responses, change is not possible.

The full breakdown of the results can be found in the results overview.

Christine Payne, Equity Deborah Annetts, Incorporated Society of Musicians Naomi Pohl, Musicians’ Union | ism.org | theMU.org equity.org.uk

The results: overview

51% of the respondents said they had experienced sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, bullying or discrimination, whilst 49% said they did not.

Out of these respondents, 73% of respondents identified as female, 18% identified as male, 2% identified as non-binary and 7% didn’t specify their gender.

The respondents were able to select more than one option to specify their experiences, and many did. Of those who reported an experience, the top four most reported experiences were inappropriate behaviour (57%) bullying (42%), discrimination on the basis of gender (36%) and sexual harassment (27%).

Types of incident specified

60 60

5 7% Inappropriate behaviour

50 50 40 40 30 30

20 20

10 10

60

40 30 20 10

60

2 7% Sexual harassment 1 3% Age discrimination 1 0% Race discrimination 9 % Sexual orientation discrimination 8 % Disability discrimination 5 % Religion or belief discrimination 2 % Gender reassignment discrimination 1 % Marriage or civil partnership 1% discrimination

60 60

50

50 50

40

40 40

30 30 30

58% Fellow student

42% Member of the permanent teaching staff

(e.g. teacher or academic lecturer) 13% Visiting lecturer, teacher or professor

8 % Non-teaching staff 6% Other

20 20 20 10 10

0

0

10

00

0 2

Respondents who said they had experienced sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, bullying or discrimination also specified who the alleged perpetrator was. Some gave more than one example (and as a result, nearly 1000 examples were given). Notably, 58% of respondents said their experience involved their fellow student and 42% said it involved a member of the permanent teaching staff at the higher education institution.

42% Bullying 36% Gender discrimination

50

Types of incident broken down by alleged perpetrator

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

0

equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

3

Reporting concerns Some respondents provided comment on why did they did not report. Comments included:

Reporting We asked respondents if they had reported their concerns or not to their higher education institution. 57% of respondents who experienced sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, bullying or discrimination did not report their concerns, whilst 13% did report their concerns and 24% reported some but not others. 6% did not say.

44% of the respondents who did not report their concerns identified as female, 10% identified as male, 7% identified as non-binary and 6% did not define their gender.

57% 13% 24%

did not report their concerns

‘Everyone already knew.

He was notorious for it.’

‘Knowledge that prior complaints had not been handled well.’

‘Embarrassment related to low self-esteem.’

did report their concerns reported some but not other concerns

‘I had mentioned it to several members of staff who said “it is just his age, he really does care about his students and sometimes you just need to laugh things off” so not taking it seriously and making excuses for it stopped me from taking it further.’

‘Fear that favouritism/bias towards perpetrator would make head of course turn against me.’

‘The behaviour is culturally acceptable to that member of staff in this institution.’

‘There was no forum to report, especially if it came from the Principal.’

Respondents who did not report their concerns We asked the respondents who did not report their concerns why not, and many of the respondents gave more than one answer.

54% said they felt at risk of not being believed or taken seriously, 47% said they felt at risk of damaging their reputation, 47% felt at risk of their complaint not being handled appropriately and 45% felt the behaviour seems to be culturally acceptable in the higher education institution where it happened.

Respondents who did report their concerns

60 for not reporting Reasons 5054% – Risk of not being believed or taken seriously

60

Risk of damaging your reputation 4047%

50

Risk that your complaint would not be

3047% handled appropriately

2045% The behaviour seems to be culturally acceptable

40

in the higher education institution where it happened

30

10

20

0 Risk of negatively impacting grades 5027%

39% Risk of losing opportunities

10

17% Fear of the perpetrator

We asked respondents who had reported their concerns whether they were satisfied with the outcome. 48% were not satisfied with the outcome. 43% were, 8% selected ‘don’t know’, and 3% did not give an answer.

We also asked respondents who were unsatisfied with the outcome of their reporting whether any action was taken.

79% said that no action was taken, while 16% said yes, 5% said they did not know and 5% did not give an answer.

Of the respondents who said no, some gave reasons.

57% knew how to report incidents These included: 28% did not 11% selected ‘do not know’ 4% did not give an answer

‘The teaching staff did not take it seriously, didn’t understand it and dismissed it.’

40

16% Other

0 4

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

Reasons for not reporting

30

Of those who did not report their concerns

20

49% knew how to report 42% said they did not know how to

‘We had to sort it out ourselves.’

‘My anonymity was not protected and the perpetrators made life harder for me.’

‘My treatment worsened because [the perpetrator] knew had complained about [them].’

‘The person still kept their job and contact with students and no apology was received from them.’

‘The culture of the institution allowed it to persist.’

‘Several lecturers colluded and made my life hell.’

equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

5

Overall awareness of reporting processes

Views on what could be changed for the better

We asked all respondents if they were aware of how to report any incidents of sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, bullying or discrimination in their higher education institution, regardless of whether they had experienced it or not.

60

Finally, we asked respondents if they think, if anything, needs to change in their higher education institution to improve the culture and eradicate sexual harassment,

50 Of 60all the respondents: 57% knew how to 11% selected 60 40

50 report incidents ‘do not know’ 50 30 40 28% did not know 4%

did not give how to report incidents an answer 40 20 30 30 10 20 Most notably, of those who did not report their concerns: 20 0 10 49% knew how 9% selected 10 to report ‘don’t know’ 0 for not reporting 0 Reasons 42% said they did not

know how to being report 54% - Risk of not believed or taken seriously Reasons for not reporting Reasons for not reporting 47% your reputation 54% - Risk of damaging not being believed or taken seriously 54% not being believedwould or taken 47% -- Risk Risk of that your complaint not seriously be handled appropriately 47% - Risk of damaging your reputation 47% of damaging yourtoreputation 45% -- Risk The behaviour seems be 47% Risk that your complaint would not culturally acceptable in the higher be handled appropriately 47% - Riskinstitution that your complaint would not education where it happened be handled appropriately The behaviour seems to be We 45% also -asked respondents if their higher education 39% - Riskacceptable of losing opportunities culturally in the higher 45% - The behaviour seems to on be training and/or guidance institution provided guidance education institution where it happened culturally acceptable in the higher 27% -toRisk of negatively impacting on how recognise and report inappropriate behaviour, education institution where it happened grades 39% - Risk of losing opportunities

bullying or discrimination:

39% losing opportunities 17% -- Risk Fear of the perpetrator 27% Risk of negatively impacting grades 40% said no 27% -- Risk 16% Otherof negatively impacting grades 17% - Fear of the perpetrator

31% said yes - Fear 17% of the perpetrator 16% - Other

26% did not know

4% did not say

16% - Other

60 50 60 60 40 50 50 30 40 40 20 30 30 10 20 20 0 10 50 10 0 40 50 0 50 30 40 40 20 30 30 10 20 20 0 10 40 10 0 35 40 0 30 40 35 25 35 30 20 30 25 15 25 20 10 20 15 5 15 10 0 10 5 5 0

Calls for reviews of processes 57% knew how to report incidents 69% of these respondents called for tightened processes in 28% did not dealing with any incidents of sexual harassment, bullying, 11% selected ‘do not know’ inappropriate behaviour and discrimination from their higher 4% did not give anreport answer 57% knew how to incidents 28% did not education institution. This includes employing a designated 57% knew how to report incidents 11% selected ‘do not know’ 28% did not member of staff for students to report concerns to, introducing 4% did not give an answer 11% selectedanonymous ‘do not know’reporting and a zero-tolerance policy (ensuring 4% did not give an answer

repeat offenders are permanently removed), closer monitoring of all staff, ensuring equality of treatment for all students and staff and ensuring staff have the correct training to deal Of those who with did not report their reporting incidents of this nature and ensuring victims concerns have sufficient support. Some respondents also discussed boundaries the ‘student-teacher’ relationship and the need 49% knew how report Of those who didtonot reportintheir 42% said theyfor didprofessionalism not know how to in this relationship to be clarified. concerns Of those who did not report their report concerns 9% ‘don’t know’ 49%selected knew how to report 42% said they did not know how to 49% knew how‘Staff to report needs diversifying report 42% said they did not know how to 9% selected ‘don’t know’ and training on cultural report 9% selected ‘don’t know’ and supporting subjects

students of colour.’

We also asked respondents if their higher education institution provided guidance on training and/or guidance on how to recognise andalso report inappropriate behaviour, bullying or We asked respondents if their higher ‘An institution wide culture change that believes discrimination. education institution provided guidance on We also asked respondents if their higher training and/or guidance on how to recognise the severity of impact these victims, acknowledges education institution provided guidance on 40%report said no and inappropriate behaviour, bullying or can have and respond with harsh consequences for training 31% saidand/or yes guidance on how to recognise discrimination. and report inappropriate behaviour,i.e. bullying or tolerance policy.’

26% did not knowperpetrators a zero discrimination.

4% did notnosay 40% said 31% said yes 40% said no 26% did not know 31% said yes ‘Too many teachers 4% did not say 26% did not know (one-to-one) are not 4% did not say ‘Staff relationships are

close and this means it is hard for students to question staff behaviour.’

0 6

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

‘External staff should not be re-hired after numerous complaints about their conduct.’

7

vetted effectively in line with current safeguarding regulations.’

bullying, inappropriate behaviour and discrimination.

Out of all respondents, 43% gave a suggestion, and some respondents gave more than one.

‘There needs to be a process in place of which complaints can be made anonymously, and dealt with by members of staff who do not have personal relationships with each other.’

‘We need sensitivity training for staff.’

‘There have been [examples] where a student has been suspended or expelled for physical violence or rape, in one instance the victim was promised the aggressor would never be allowed on the grounds again. In all three instances, the aggressor was back in either a matter of months, or in one case weeks.’

‘Ensure ALL teaching staff are up to par, including just visiting/part time teachers not just the main staff.’

‘Have a zero-tolerance policy that is upheld in regards to bullying, gender-discrimination and sexual harassment/ abuse alongside other forms of discrimination.’

‘The relationships and boundaries between ALL staff and ALL students needs to be properly established and maintained with clear guidelines on how to do this available to both parties.’ equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

7

Calls for improved awareness of reporting and training

Calls for a review of current attitudes towards concerns of this nature

Of these respondents who gave a response, 54% called for improved awareness of reporting and training for students to recognise acts of sexual harassment, bullying, inappropriate behaviour and discrimination from their higher education institution, including training specifically on the Equality Act 2010.

Many respondents also suggested that many higher education institutions currently do not take complaints seriously.

‘Above anything, we need to find a way of making people understand that they did not do anything to deserve what happened to them.’

‘Greater visibility in how to get in contact with the college if there has been an issue.’

‘Clear outlines of what constitutes as sexual harassment, bullying and discrimination so that students know what is wrong and feel like they can report it and it will be taken seriously. Also, having a member of staff who is not connected to others so will not have bias.’

‘More information on the equality act and also being able to talk to a higher member of staff about these issues without any concern or worry.’

‘There needs to be an implemented system that is outlined to all student where everybody or anybody who has a complaint goes through a specific system on how to make a complaint and this should be the same for every student regardless of who they are.’

21% of respondents suggested other solutions such as:

‘Rehearsals should be recorded and monitored, conductors, teachers and students should be held accountable for what is said and done in rehearsals.’

‘Continued education about the industry and the correct treatment of all those working in theatre.’

‘It should be compulsory to ask students if they are comfortable before making physical contact with them, whether that be in a large group, masterclass or 1-1 setting, permission must always be given before physical contact.’

8

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

‘Constant discussions and a language/ process for girls to call out inappropriate things in the moment whilst still feeling professional and equal to their male peers.

‘Have an open conversation upon induction week.

We are introduced to time keeping, sick day procedures but not those that actually help us to feel safe.’

‘There needs to be more time for discussion between students and teachers about all these issues and what we can expect to face in the industry.’

‘This university is so happy to ignore it because they are so focussed on making money. They don’t care how unsafe we feel, or how we feel we are getting different opportunities to more privileged divisions.’

‘I think that the college need to be more understanding and empathetic of people’s issues however irrelevant it might seem to them.’

‘Students need to be reassured that they will be taken seriously and that any reports are dealt with discretion and respect.’

‘At the moment it feels like so much of what happens is just brushed under the carpet. You are told not to make a fuss. And here policies that are meant to protect us don’t exist, they are just tick box exercises so the institution can say ‘aren’t we brilliant we’ve got this document!’ but in reality it is meaningless.’

‘Staff need to be more active in stopping it and not ignoring it.’

‘The way reports are handled by high-up staff. It should be taken more seriously.’

‘The heads of department need to actually deal with issues rather than ignore them. Not dealing with discriminatory and unprofessional behaviour allows people to get away with it and does not show support for the person affected.’

‘Students’ voices [need to] be given credence – even from people working within educational institutions there’s still an opinion if ‘you’re too young to know’, ‘you’re only young you don’t know what you’re talking about’, and ‘I’m sure they didn’t mean it like that’ – as in someone behaving inappropriately and it being dismissed as an accident, or not intentionally bullying/sexualising/ harassing for example.’

‘The culture that allows sexual harassment, sexism and discrimination etc. to be normalised is widespread in the music industry and particularly in conservatoires and this NEEDS to change in order for anything to improve.’

‘I think students could be encouraged more to talk about any experiences with sexual harassment/bullying/inappropriate behaviour/ discrimination with members of staff.’ equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

9

Percentage 42% 20% 15% 14%

About the survey – further information

Type of institution:

Music college

Conservatoire that does music & drama

5% Dance

20%

n s w er

Type of institution Pe Specialist drama school 65 rcent % ag University 26 e % 1% Music college 8 % Conservatoire that does music and drama

In addition to the survey, respondents had the option to complete an equality and diversity monitoring form to help further our analysis.

Typ He es o Dance Bis teros f sex ex ua e Other x u D u l a i d l m l n’t aec r /sp ConservatoPire s ialist e a y G fer n ge (not s ot or dramaay colle A se man to s ay Ga ecxuify Didn’t sp y w al o ma n

We asked respondents what gender they identified as:

/l e s bia n 10

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

2% Didn’t specify Types of sexual orientation Heterosexual Bisexual Didn’t say Prefer not to say Gay man Asexual Gay woman/lesbian

White – White European

9%

Black / African / Caribbean / 1% Black British – African

Any other white background

5%

Mixed / Dual heritage – White & Black African

1%

2%

Other Asian background

Less than 1%

Mixed / Dual heritage – White & Asian

2%

Asian/Asian British – Chinese

1%

White – Irish

2%

Asian/Asian British – Indian

Less than 1%

Asian/Asian British – Mixed / Dual heritage – 2% Pakistani White & Black Caribbean Types of ethnicity Percentage White – Gypsy, Roma / African / Caribbean / White - British, English, Northern Irish, Scottish, WelshBlack 66% 1% or Irish Traveller Black White- White European 9%British – Caribbean Any other white background 5% Didn't say Prefer 1% Any other Mixed/Dual heritage group 2%not to say Mixed / Dual heritage - White & Asian 2% White - Irish 2% Mixed / Dual heritage - White & Black Caribbean 2% Black / African / Caribbean / Black British - Caribbean 1% Prefer not to say 1% Out ethnic of the group 600 responses, these Any other 1% of sexual/ orientation Black /categories African / Caribbean Black British - African 1% Mixed were / Dualidentified: heritage - White & Black African 1% Other Asian background 1% Asian/Asian British - Chinese 1% Asian/Asian British - Indian 1% Asian/Asian British - Pakistani Less than 1% Heterosexual White - Gypsy, Roma or Irish Traveller Less than 1% Didn’t say 7%

Less than 1%

66%

White – British, English, Northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh

Percentage 60% 17% 7% 6% 5% 3% 2%

ype of institution pecialist drama school niversity usic college onservatoire that does music and drama ance ther onservatoire/specialist music or drama college (not specified) idn’t specify

42%

Percentage 65% 26% 1% 8%

5% 1% 1%

or drama college (not specified)

Gender Female Male Non-binary Specialist Diddrama not give an answer school

Any other ethnic group

1%

1% Other 1% Conservatoire/specialist music

Ge Fem nder Ma ale No le Did n-bin n ot ary gi v e an a

ents if their higher ovided guidanceUniversity on ce on how to recognise e behaviour, bullying or

Percentage 42% 20% 15% 14%

15%

14%

White – British, English, 66% Northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh

26% Male

65%

1%

Non-binary

Female

8%

Did not give an answer

Any other Mixed/Dual heritage group

Less than 1%

Less than 1% 7%

1%

We asked respondents to tell us where they study.

Types of ethnicity

5% 1% 1%

We ed also u tra catio aske an ining n ins d res d p dis rep and/ tituti ond ort on en c or r i m ina inap guid pro ts if 40 t i on prop ance vided their % . h ri 3 o g a 1 t % said n e b n ho uida igher 26 sa nc w e o h i % a vio to re e on 4% di d ye u c r did d no s , bu ognis no t kn lly e t i n say ow go r

This confidential, anonymous survey ran from 9 April to 21 May 2018 and within that time frame the survey received 600 responses.

The following ethnicities were identified:

Types of ethnicity White - British, English, Northern I White- White European Any other white background Any other Mixed/Dual heritage gr Mixed / Dual heritage - White & A White - Irish Mixed / Dual heritage - White & B Black / African / Caribbean / Blac Prefer not to say

Type of institution Specialist drama school University Music college Conservatoire that does music and drama Dance Other Conservatoire/specialist music or drama college (not specified) Didn’t specify

60%

2%

Gay woman/ lesbian

3%

Asexual

5%

Gay man

6%

Prefer not to say

17% 7%

Bisexual

Didn’t say

equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

11

Reasons for not reporting – breakdown by institution type

Reporting – breakdown by institution type We asked respondents experiences Discrimination onif they reported theirDiscrimination on and broke the results basis of religion or down beliefby institution-type. basis of sexual orientation

Discrimination on basis of marriage or civil partnership

We asked respondents why they did not choose to report their experiences and broke the results down by institution-type.

Specialist drama school Music college Conservatoire that does music & drama Dance University

Risk of not being believed seriously Risk or of taken not being believed or taken seriously

Risk of damaging yourofreputation Risk damaging your reputation

Risk that your complaint would not that be handled appropriately Risk your complaint would not be handled appropriately

The behaviour seems to be culturally acceptable The behaviour seemsintothe be higher education institution culturally acceptable in the where it happened higher education institution where it happened

Risk of losing Risk opportunities of losing opportunities

Risk of negatively impacting grades Risk of negatively impacting grades

Fear of the perpetrator Fear of the perpetrator

Other Other

Other Conservatoire/specialist music or drama college (not specified) Didn't say

0

20

40

60

80

Yes, I reported all incidents

No, I did not report any incidents

I reported some, not others

Did not say

100

Type of institution Specialist

drama school

12

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

Music

college

Conservatoire

that does music and drama

University

Dance

Didn’t specify

equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

13

Awareness of how to report – breakdown by institution type We asked respondents if they knew how to report and broke the results down by institution-type.

Type of institution

Yes Yes

Specialist drama

school Type of institution Music college

No No

Specialist drama school

Conservatoire Music college that

does music Conservatoire that does music and drama and drama University

University

Dance

Don'tknow know Don’t

DanceOther

Didn’t specify

Other

Didn’t Didn'tsay say

Didn’t specify

0

20

40

60

80

100

Awareness of how to report – breakdown of respondents who chose not to report We asked respondents who did not report if they knew how to.

1

00

Don't know

Yes

08

No 06

14

equity.org.uk | ism.org | theMU.org

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

15

Y se

0

About the organisations

Make the future happen today It is vital the whole creative sector works together to enforce good behaviours, right from the beginning of a career. We recommend that all organisations, including higher education institutions support and adopt all relevant industry codes of conduct, including: The ISM-Musicians’ Union Code of Practice for the Music Sector which are a set of principles that aims to eradicate bullying, harassment, discrimination and other forms of inappropriate behaviour within the sector: ism.org/dignityatwork | musiciansunion.org.uk Equity's Agenda for Change which offers a string of action points for the people, organisations and venues within the sector, and aims to empower members affected by bullying, harassment or sexual harassment to come forward: equity.org.uk/getting-involved/campaigns/safe-spaces The UK Theatre and SOLT 10 Principles which encourage safer and even more supportive working practices in theatre: uktheatre.org/theatre-industry/guidance-reports-andresources/safe-and-supportive-working-practices The British Film Institute’s 8 Principles which aim to eradicate abuse and also help employers meet legal requirements and offer a shared vision to promote and maintain a safer, more inclusive workplace environment for everyone working within the screen industries: bfi.org.uk/about-bfi/policystrategy/set-principles-screen-industry

Help and advice If you have been a victim of sexual abuse, we would encourage you to speak to one of the following organisations.

They can provide support such as counselling and signposting of specific services to assist you in recovery and advise on reporting the incident to the police should you choose to: 16

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions

Sexual Assault Referral Centre – dial 111 to find the nearest Sexual Assault Referral Centre. They can provide immediate support and advice, including medical examinations and tests, and will not go to the police until you decide if you want to or not.

• Rape Crisis – rapecrisis.org.uk • Victim Support – 08 08 16 89 111 www.victimsupport.org.uk • Galop (LGBT+) – 0207 704 2040 www.galop.org.uk • Survivors UK (men) – www.survivorsuk.org • Samaritans – 08457 909090 Equity members can contact the union’s Bullying and Harassment Helpline on 020 7670 0268 or harassment@equity.org.uk There are a range of materials available to members at www.equity.org.uk/membersarea/member-resources/bullying If you are an ISM member, you have access to confidential advice from our experienced in-house employment lawyers by contacting the ISM legal team at legal@ism.org You can access their 24-hour advice line on 01275 376 038.

The ISM also runs a counselling helpline on 0800 042 0136.

If you are a member of the MU, you have access to confidential legal advice and assistance from their team of specialist officials and solicitors. See theMU.org for more info and contact details. The MU has a dedicated email account – safespace@theMU.org – to provide a safe space for members and non-members to share instances of sexism, sexual harassment and sexual abuse. All emails are treated in the strictest confidence.

About Equity Equity is the UK trade union for professional performers and creative practitioners. As a leading industry organisation, Equity is known and respected nationally and internationally for the work we do with, and on behalf of, our members working across all areas of the entertainment industry.

We are a campaigning and organising union and proud of our strong record of taking the things that matter to our members to parliament and other centres of influence. Being part of Equity gives members a voice in these places. Members are at the heart of all the union’s activities and by getting involved they drive forward the work of the union.

About the ISM The Incorporated Society of Musicians is the UK’s professional body for musicians and a nationally-recognised subject association for music.

We were set up in 1882 to promote the art of music and to protect the interests of all musicians. Today we support over 8,500 members with specialist and tailored services and expert advice, from study up until retirement and beyond.

About the Musicians’ Union Established in 1893, the MU represents over 30,000 musicians working in all sectors and genres of music. As well as negotiating on behalf of its members with all the major employers of musicians in the UK, the MU offers a range of services tailored for the self-employed such as legal advice and assistance, unpaid fee recovery, template contracts and specialist insurances.

equity.org.uk/members-area/member-resources/bullying harassment@equity.org.uk /EquityUK /equityUK @equityuk /company/equity-uk @EquityUK

ism.org/dignityatwork membership@ism.org /ismusicians /ISM_music @ism_music /company/incorporated-society-of-musicians @ism_music

theMU.org safespace@theMU.org /Musicians.Union /wearethemu @wearethemu /company/musicians’-union @TheMusiciansUnion

R

#DignityinStudy: a survey of higher education institutions