Faculty Perceptions of Consensual Sexual Relationships Between University Faculty and Students

Abstract

Consensual sexual relationships (CSR) between faculty and students at universities are a growing issue for administrators. Often times, administrators view these relationships as potential sexual harassment cases given the power disparities that often exist between the parties involved. Therefore, many universities have written policies essentially equating CSRs to sexual harassment. Despite the recent growth of these policies, how faculty compare CSRs and sexual harassment is often overlooked, particularly as it relates to perceived power differentials. The current study examined responses from 166 faculty members to explore these perceptions. Results indicate faculty had varying opinions, depending on previous experience with CSRs and beliefs around power differentials. These findings contribute to previous literature which indicates there is rampant ambiguity and subjectivity when defining and handling CSRs on campus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In accordance with faculty demographics of the university studied, our sample seems to closely represent the demographic characteristics of our faculty.

  2. 2.

    Since the survey did contain possibly identifying information such as the respondent’s department and demographic information, anonymity could not be guaranteed, hence the guarantee of confidentiality.

  3. 3.

    This item was reverse coded for the scale.

References

  1. Abramson, P. R. (2007). Romance in the ivory tower the rights and liberty of conscience. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bass, C. (2010). University bans faculty-student sex. Yale Alumni Magazine. Retrieved from https://yalealumnimagazine.com/articles/2740-university-bans-faculty-student-sex

  3. Bellas, M. L., & Gossett, J. L. (2001). Love or the “lecherous professor”: CSRs between professors and students. The Sociological Quarterly, 42(4), 529–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2001.tb01779.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bowman, V. E., Hatley, L. D., & Bowman, R. L. (1995). Faculty-student relationships: the dual role controversy. Counselor Education and Supervision, 34(3), 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1995.tb00245.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cantor, D., Fisher, B., Chibnall, S. H., Townsend, R., Lee, H., Thomas, G., & Westat, I. (2015). Report on the AAU campus climate survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct: Association of American Universities Washington, DC.

  6. Carlson, R. R. (2001). Romantic relationships between professors and their students: morality, ethics and law. South Texas Law Review, 42, 493. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2017.1293922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chory, R. M., & Offstein, E. H. (2017). “Your professor will know you as a person” evaluating and rethinking the relational boundaries between faculty and students. Journal of Management Education, 41(1), 9–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chory, R. M., & Offstein, E. H. (2018). Too close for comfort? Faculty–student multiple relationships and their impact on student classroom conduct. Ethics & Behavior, 28(1), 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Commission, E. E. O. (2016). EEOC Regulations. Retrieved from http://eeoc.gov

  10. Cortina, L. M., Swan, S., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Waldo, C. (1998). Sexual harassment and assault: Chilling the climate for women in academia. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22(3), 419–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00166.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dank, B. M. (2008). Out of the campus closet: student professor CSRs. Sexuality and Culture, 12(3), 192–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-007-9016-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DeChiara, P. (1987). The need for universities to have rules on CSRs between faculty members and students. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 21, 137 Retrieved from http://jlsp.law.columbia.edu/.

  13. Ei, S., & Bowen, A. (2002). College students' perceptions of student-instructor relationships. Ethics & Behavior, 12(2), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327019EB1202_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer, R. J. (1993). Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning. Journal of Consumer Reserach, Inc., 20, 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, Y., & Weitzman, L. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32(2), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(88)90012-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Flaherty, C. (2018). “Relationship Restrictions.” Retrieved from: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/05/24/academe-sees-new-wave-faculty-student-relationship-restrictions-era-me-too

  17. Fleming, M. B., Cooley, A. H., & McFadden-Wade, G. (2009). Morals clauses for educators in secondary and postsecondary schools: legal applications and constitutional concerns. BYU Educ. & LJ, 67. Retrieved from: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/elj/

  18. Gerdes, C. (2003). The case for university consensual relationship policies. Wayne Law Review, 49, 1031 Retrieved from: http://waynelawreview.org/.

  19. Hensley, C., Tallichet, S. E., & Dutkiewicz, E. L. (2012). Exploring the age of onset and recurrence of childhood animal cruelty: can animal cruelty be learned from witnessing others commit it? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56(4), 614–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X11405480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hill, C., & Silva, E. (2005). Drawing the Line: Sexual Harassment on Campus. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489850.pdf

  21. Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied logistic regression. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Huerta, M., Cortina, L. M., Pang, J. S., Torges, C. M., & Magley, V. J. (2006). Sex and power in the academy: modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205284281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hutchens, N. (2003). The legal effect of college and university policies prohibiting romantic relationships between students and professors. Journal of Law & Education, 32, 411 Retrieved from: http://www.law.sc.edu/jled/.

  24. Jafar, A. (2003). Consent or coercion? Sexual relationships between college faculty and students. Gender Issues, 21(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-003-0021-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kays, K., Gathercoal, K., & Buhrow, W. (2012). Does survey format influence self-disclosure on sensitive question items? Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 251–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Keller, E. A. (1988). Consensual amorous relationships between faculty and students: The constitutional right to privacy. JC & UL, 15, 21 Retrieved from: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1124&context=lsfp.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Little, D., & Thompson, J. A. (1989). Campus policies, the law and sexual relationships. Thought and Action, 5(1), 17–24 Retrieved from: http://www.nea.org/home/1821.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mack, M. H. (1999). Regulating sexual relationships between faculty and students. Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, 6, 79 Retrieved from: https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1141&context=mjgl.

  29. Mavletova, A., & Couper, M. P. (2013). Sensitive topics in PC web and mobile web surveys: is there a difference? In Survey Research Methods, 7(3), 191–205.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Office of Policy & Efficieny (2018). “Conflict of interest in cases of amorous relationships.” Retreived from: https://www.cu.edu/ope/aps/5015

  31. Paludi, M. A. (1996). Sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power. New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Quatrella, L. A., & Wentworth, D. K. (1995). Students' perceptions of unequal status dating relationships in academia. Ethics & Behavior, 5(3), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb0503_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rhode, D. L. (2006). The Professional Ethics of Professors. Journal of Legal Education, 56(1), 70–85 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42893957.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Richards, T. N., Crittenden, C., Garland, T. S., & McGuffee, K. (2014). An exploration of policies governing faculty-to-student CSRs on university campuses: current strategies and future directions. Journal of College Student Development, 55(4), 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sandvik, E., Diener, E., & Seidlitz, L. (1993). Subjective well-being: the convergence and stability of self-report and non-self-report measures. Journal of Personality, 61(3), 317–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00283.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Secunda, P. M. (2004). Getting to the nexus of the matter: a sliding scale approach to faculty-student consensual relationship policies in higher education. Syracuse Law Review, 55, 55 Retrieved from: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1618&context=facpub.

  37. Secunda, P. M. (2005). Lawrence's Quintessential Millian moment and its impact on the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions. Villanova Law Review, 50, 117 Retrieved from: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1569&context=facpub.

  38. Stanford. (2019). “Guidelines on Consensual Relationships” Retreived from: https://harass.stanford.edu/be-informed/guidelines-consensual-relationships

  39. Stites, M. C. (1993). What's Wrong with Faculty-Student Consensual Sexual Relationsips? In M. A. Paludi (Ed.), Sexual harrassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power. New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Stokes, J. W., & Vinik, D. F. (1994). Consensual sexual relations between faculty and students in higher education. West's Education Law Quarterly, 4(2), 334–348.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sullivan, E. (2004). Perceptions of Consensual Amorous Relationship Policies (CARPs). Journal of College and Character, 5(8). https://doi.org/10.2202/1940-1639.1395.

  42. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press.

  43. Young, S. (1995). Getting to yes: The case against banning consensual relationships in higher education. American Journal of Gender & the Law, 4, 269 Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/jgspl/vol4/iss2/1/.

  44. Zakrzewski, R. F. (2006). A national survey of American Psychological Association student affiliates' involvement and ethical training in psychology educator-student sexual relationships. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37(6), 724. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.37.6.724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to April Carrillo.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carrillo, A., Crittenden, C. & Garland, T. Faculty Perceptions of Consensual Sexual Relationships Between University Faculty and Students. J Acad Ethics 17, 331–343 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09337-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Consensual sexual relationship
  • Dual role relationship
  • Faculty and student sexual relationship
  • Faculty ethics