Recent analysis from the Office for Students has laid bare a troubling reality in England's higher education landscape: sexual harassment is significantly more prevalent at the country's most prestigious universities. According to expanded data from the 2025 Sexual Misconduct Survey, 35 percent of students at high-tariff institutions—those demanding the highest entry grades like A-level AAA or above—reported experiencing sexual harassment since starting their degrees. This starkly contrasts with 26 percent at medium-tariff universities and just 17 percent at low-tariff ones, painting a picture of heightened vulnerability precisely where academic excellence is prized most.

The survey, which polled over 50,000 final-year undergraduates across English providers, underscores that sexual misconduct remains a pervasive issue, affecting 24.5 percent overall for harassment and 14.1 percent for sexual assault or violence. High-tariff establishments, often synonymous with the Russell Group of research-intensive universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College London, and University College London, show elevated rates of 34.9 percent for harassment and 20.7 percent for assault or violence. These figures challenge the notion that elite environments inherently foster safer spaces, prompting urgent questions about cultural, social, and structural factors at play.

Decoding the Office for Students Survey Methodology

The OfS Sexual Misconduct Survey 2025 was conducted as an optional module appended to the National Student Survey, targeting final-year undergraduates aged 18 and over at registered English higher education providers. With 51,920 responses from an eligible pool of 428,800 students, it achieved a 12.1 percent response rate. To mitigate non-response bias, results were weighted using logistic regression based on key demographics including age, ethnicity, disability, deprivation index, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and subject area.

Respondents were asked about experiences of specific unwanted behaviors since becoming a student, categorized into sexual harassment (e.g., suggestive looks, unwanted comments, images, or pestering) and sexual assault or violence (e.g., non-consensual touching, kissing, or penetration). Questions also covered the last 12 months, formal reporting, confidence in support services, and staff-student relationships. While the survey's focus on final-year students provides cumulative insights, limitations include potential underrepresentation of severe cases and variability in response rates among higher-risk groups.

This rigorous approach marks the first major national effort to quantify sexual misconduct in English higher education, building on pilots and informing regulatory condition B3, which mandates providers to address harassment and sexual misconduct effectively. The expanded analysis released in early May 2026 delves deeper into variations by institution type, student characteristics, and study contexts, available for download here.

Prestige Paradox: Why Elite Universities Face Higher Rates

High-tariff providers, defined by the OfS as those with the highest average entry qualifications (typically requiring top A-level grades or UCAS tariff points above 152), encompass many Russell Group members. These institutions reported 34.9 percent harassment prevalence, far exceeding the sector average. Medium-tariff (around 26.5 percent) and low-tariff or unknown (17.6 percent) lag behind, suggesting that factors beyond mere institutional quality contribute to the disparity.

Experts speculate several reasons. First, high-tariff universities attract a larger proportion of young, residential undergraduates living away from home for the first time—29.2 percent harassment rate for non-local students versus lower for locals or distance learners. The transition to independent living in vibrant, social campus environments may amplify exposure to risky situations like parties or nightlife. Second, competitive cultures and high-pressure academics could intersect with social dynamics, fostering entitlement or poor boundary awareness among peers.

Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union, highlighted the danger: perpetrators from these elite circles often ascend to influential roles, perpetuating toxic norms. Yet, the OfS cautions against causal assumptions, emphasizing the data's observational nature. For full survey details, see the main analysis report.

Demographic Disparities: Who Bears the Brunt?

Certain student groups face disproportionately higher risks, amplifying concerns at elite institutions. Women reported markedly elevated rates—one in three experienced harassment overall, nearly three times the male rate. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) students encountered 47 percent prevalence, compared to 22 percent for heterosexuals, with bisexual women hit hardest.

• Mental health condition: 42.2 percent harassment, 27.5 percent assault/violence
• Multiple or other impairments: 38.4 percent harassment
• EU-domiciled students: 31.1 percent harassment
• Distance learners reported higher formal complaints (22.5 percent), possibly due to clearer boundaries

These patterns hold across tariff groups, but the absolute numbers swell at high-tariff sites. Students with disabilities, particularly mental health, and those from less deprived backgrounds (IMD quintile 5) also show elevated exposure, underscoring intersectional vulnerabilities.

High-Entry Courses as Hotspots

Beyond institutions, specific subjects emerge as concern areas, many aligned with elite university strengths:

• Language and area studies: 42.4 percent harassment, 25 percent assault/violence
• Veterinary sciences: 41.3 percent harassment, 29 percent assault/violence (31.1 percent for females)
• Medicine and dentistry: 40.3 percent harassment, 23.3 percent assault/violence
• Physical sciences: High for females at 26.3 percent assault/violence

These fields, often at high-tariff providers with medical schools, demand intense collaboration and social integration, potentially heightening risks. In medicine, perpetrators were less likely fellow students (43.4 percent) and more 'someone else,' hinting at external influences.

The Reporting Gap: Barriers to Justice

Despite prevalence, formal reporting remains dismal: only 13.2 percent of recent harassment victims and 16.2 percent of assault survivors complained to their university. Among reporters, experiences mixed—46.7 percent rated processes good for harassment, 57.3 percent for assault, but many found them poor, especially females and disabled students.

Barriers include fear of disbelief, retaliation, or academic repercussions, compounded by unclear policies or unsupportive cultures. Confidence in institutional support stands at 67.5 percent overall, lower among vulnerable groups. Over half of incidents (59.1 percent harassment) occurred in the last year for victims, yet most go unreported, perpetuating cycles of silence.

Perpetrators and Incident Contexts

Fellow students dominate as perpetrators—up to 88.8 percent at some providers for harassment. At elite medical/vet courses, 'someone else' rises, possibly partners or locals. Most incidents link to university settings or connected individuals, even off-campus (58.4 percent for external harassment).

Non-local study correlates with higher rates, as freshers navigate new freedoms. Age matters: younger students face more student-perpetrated acts, older more staff or others.

Institutional and Regulatory Responses

The Russell Group, representing many high-tariff members, asserts zero tolerance, citing enhanced support, reporting processes, and collaborations with regulators, government, and charities. Chief Executive Libby Hackett called the data troubling, pledging prevention for vulnerable students. OfS urges reflection on prevention strategies, planning a 2027 repeat survey with institutional data publication.

Under condition B3, providers must tackle misconduct proactively. Universities UK and student unions advocate culturally embedded training and bystander interventions. Coverage in The Guardian amplifies calls for action.

Expert Insights and Long-Term Implications

Stakeholders like NUS President Amira Campbell decry the enabling culture, urging collective fightback. UCU's Grady warns of toxic reproduction into professions like medicine. Impacts extend to mental health, academic performance, and retention—victims report distress, isolation, and dropout risks.

Broader context: Earlier studies like Revolt Sexual Assault's found 62 percent lifetime exposure; global parallels in US/aus highlight universal challenges. Elite status may attract scrutiny but also resources for change.

Pathways to Safer Campuses: Proven Strategies

• Mandatory, interactive consent education from orientation
• Bystander training programs like Green Dot
• Anonymous reporting apps and 24/7 support hotlines
• Staff training on recognition and response
• Partnerships with local police and charities

Success stories: Some Russell Group unis boosted reports via streamlined processes. Data dashboards empower targeted interventions.

Looking Ahead: 2027 Survey and Beyond

OfS's forthcoming survey will benchmark progress, publishing provider-level data for accountability. With student safety integral to quality education, elite universities must lead—transforming prestige into protection. Prospective students, weigh safety alongside rankings; institutions, prioritize people over pedigrees.

Photo by ALEXANDRE DINAUT on Unsplash