The Dangers of Opportunity - How Leaders in U.S. Higher Education Articulated Policy After“Unite the Right” in Charlottesville

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by nayy☆

By many accounts, the August 11–12, 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia—organized by white nationalists—triggered violent events that injured dozens and caused three deaths. In response, dozens of college and university leaders issued official statements. This study analyzes 99 institutional statements to assess whether they communicated hate and bias policies and engagement guidance. Results show only 8% provided directives, though over 75% had such policies in place.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages20

Reading Time50 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

| | The Dangers of Opportunity: How Leaders in U.S. | | --- | --- | | | Higher Education Articulated Policy After“Unite the Right” in Charlottesville | Zachary W. Taylor, Danielle Zaragoza, & Catherine Hartman, University of Texas at Austin Abstract By many accounts—on August 11th and 12th, 2017—a “Unite the Right” rally organized by white nationalists in Charlottesville, Virginia, catalyzed a series of violent events culminating in the injury of dozens of people and the death of three people (Alvarez, 2017; Astor, Caron, & Victor, 2017; Heim, 2017; McKelway, 2017). Subsequently, dozens of college and university leaders across the country released official statements condemning the violence. This study examines 99 of these institutional statements released during or immediately after the crisis in Charlottesville to learn whether these statements informed campus community members of institutional hate and bias policies meant to protect members against acts of hate, bias, and violence, such as the ones witnessed in Charlottesville. Findings reveal only 8% of statements included a directive on how to engage with institutional hate and bias policies, yet over 75% of institutions had hate and bias policies in place. Implications for executive leadership communication and future research are addressed. Keywords: higher education; policy; official statements; educational leadership; hate and bias Introduction Charlottesville, Virginia is home to the state’s public flagship university, the University of Virginia (UVA), whose leadership canceled conservative and self-defined White supremacist Richard Spencer’s speaking engagement in May 2017 on the UVA campus (Wood, 2017) . Spencer—a UVA alumnus and self-proclaimed advocate for a white “ethno-state”(Wood, 2017, para. 40)—was credited as being an influential factor in the decision of white nationalists to host the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville over the weekend of August 11th and 12th, 2017 (McLaughlin, 2017) . By numerous accounts, a removal of a statue of Confederate Army Commander Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville’s Emancipation Park had catalyzed many of the “Unite the Right” protesters, in addition to the cancellation of Spencer’s speaking engagement (McKelway, 2017; McLaughlin, 2017) . As many of Spencer’s supporters, including “Unite the Right” organizer Jason Kessler and other White nationalists, arrived in Charlottesville and on the UVA campus, bouts of violence and hatred began to erupt, as those on Spencer’s side were met by counter protesters on the night of August 11th (McKelway, 2017) . Over the course of the weekend, protesters and counter protesters clashed, ultimately culminating in the injury of dozens of people and the death of three people (Alvarez, 2017; Astor, Caron, & Victor, 2017; Heim, 2017; McKelway, 2017) . Shortly after the event, news outlets on both sides of the United States political spectrum—from democrat to republican—considered the “Unite the Right” rally one of the most hateful, bigoted, and violent events to occur in U. S. in the 21st century (Alvarez, 2017; Astor, Caron, & Victor, 2017; Heim, 2017; McKelway, 2017) . As a result of the “Unite the Right” rally and subsequent violence, the University of Virginia itself was thrust into damage control, with university administration delaying classes and urging all educational stakeholders to remain in their places of residence until Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe’s state of emergency was lifted (Alvarez, 2017) . From August 11th through August 12th, the University of Virginia and then-UVA President Theresa A. Sullivan issued a series of four statements commenting on the situation in-progress in Charlottesville. In the first statement from August 11th, Sullivan (2017a) claimed “violence displayed on Grounds is intolerable and is entirely inconsistent with the University’s values”(para. 2) . The next morning at 10:29 AM, the University released a statement supporting

FAQs

What is the main focus of the study described in the document?

The study examines whether official statements from higher education leaders communicated hate and bias policies and guidance for engaging with them after the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” crisis.

How many institutional statements were analyzed, and what was the key finding?

Ninety-nine institutional statements were analyzed. Only 8% included directives on how to engage with hate and bias policies, even though over 75% of institutions had such policies in place.

Why did the University of Virginia issue statements during the Charlottesville crisis?

The document explains that UVA faced damage control after the rally and related violence, delaying classes and urging stakeholders to stay in residence while emergency measures were in effect.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by nayy☆