CCRT 2013-14 Trend Report

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014
the university of texas at austin
Lead Team
Executive Summary
Katherine Antwi Green

Assistant Vice President,
Office of Institutional Equity
Jointly coordinated by the Division of Diversity and Community Engagement and the Division
Ryan A. Miller
responds to reports of bias incidents affecting The University of Texas at Austin community.
Director, Campus Climate

and Student Engagement
Ana Ixchel Rosal

Executive Director,
Student Diversity Initatives
Dr. Audrey Sorrells

Associate Dean of Students for
Research, Office of the Dean of
Students
Liason to the Vice

President for Diversity
and Community
Engagement
Dr. Susan Somers-Willett
Assistant Vice President
for Research and policy,
Division of Diversity and
Community Engagement
of Student Affairs, the Campus Climate Response Team (CCRT) is a university-wide team that
Launched in March 2012, the CCRT serves as a coordinated point of contact when bias incidents
occur, gathering information and connecting students, faculty, and staff with university resources
as appropriate. The team also supports campus community members when bias incidents occur,
facilitating dialogue between parties when possible and serving as a repository of information
about such incidents. By connecting the university community to an array of resources, collecting
data, and considering short- and long-term responses to bias incidents, the CCRT aims to foster a
more welcoming, inclusive campus culture for all.
During the 2013-2014 academic year (including summer 2014), the CCRT received 670 reports
regarding 69 distinct bias incidents. This represents a 713% increase in reports over the 20122013 academic year, during which the CCRT received 94 reports. The sevenfold increase stems
in large part from reports on two high-profile events sponsored by a student group, which account
for 597 (or 89%) of the 670 reports made. Another reason for the number of reports could be
increased awareness on campus of the CCRT and its reporting function. Due to the magnitude
of reports related to these two incidents, this report examines most of the data in two different
sections: Incidents with Fewer Than 10 Reports and Incidents with 10 or More Reports. Separating
the data in this way lends a better view of campus climate trends overall and throughout the year
while still giving all data full consideration.
Incidents with Fewer Than 10 Reports (73 reports, 67 incidents)

The CCRT received reports on 67 distinct incidents receiving fewer than 10 reports each.
Roughly one-fifth of reports in this category were filed anonymously, and witnesses to
bias incidents were just as likely to make reports as victims. Seventy-seven percent of all
incidents reported were identified as having occurred on campus. Students provided the
vast majority of reports in this category (77%), followed by staff (14%).
A large number of 2013-2014 CCRT reports in this category cite race/ethnicity bias (42%),
followed by gender (30%), sexual orientation (28%), and gender expression (26%). Nearly
half (48%) of all reports cited verbal harassment/slurs. Other common incident types in this
category include complaints against departments/organizations (31%), physical harassment

(15%), graffiti/vandalism (12%), and online harassment (12%). The most popular outcome
preferred by those making reports in this category is diversity education (36%), followed
by reporting the incident for the purposes of information gathering (26%) and disciplinary
action (21%).1
Given the sensitive nature of bias incidents, the CCRT responds within two business days to
any report that includes valid contact information. After making initial one-on-one contact
with respondents to discuss an incident, the CCRT coordinates with these individuals to
direct them to the appropriate sources of support. Examples of responses to incidents with
fewer than 10 reports include coordinating educational sessions with those initiating an
incident; continuing conversations with off-campus residence halls regarding best practices
for residential communities; bringing into dialogue those who were targeted by and those
who initiated an incident; and making referrals to campus resources such as the UT Austin
Police Department and the universitys Office of Institutional Equity.
Incidents with 10 or More Reports (597 reports, 2 incidents)

The vast majority (89%) of reports received during the 2013-2014 academic year pertain to
two separate events sponsored by a student organization. Twenty-five reports pertain to an
Affirmative Action Bake Sale held on campus in September 2013. The team also received
572 reports about a planned Catch an Illegal Immigrant event announced on Facebook in
November 2013. The two incidents proved to be high-profile, both on campus and with local
and/or national media.
Students provided the most reports for both the bake sale and the planned immigrant
event (88% and 71% respectively), followed by alumni (8% and 11% respectively). All reports
were made using the online form. All individuals filing reports about the bake sale indicated
race/ethnicity as a primary bias concern, and many selected at least one other category.
A majority (52%) of bake sale respondents also selected gender as a bias concern. In
the reports about the planned immigrant event, the vast majority of respondents (85%)
indicated race/ethnicity as the type of bias. Given the option to select multiple types of bias,
a large percentage of respondents to this event also selected citizenship (77%) and national
origin (76%) as bias concerns.
Those reporting had the opportunity to select more than one response in several areas, so percentages may total
more than 100%. See the data contained in the report for more information.
1

Over 90% of respondents to each event requested disciplinary action against the
student group organizing the events. Some reports specifically request loss of funding
for the organization and/or the suspension of the group or its members. In the case of
the announced immigrant event, 69% of respondents asking for disciplinary action also
requested cancellation of the event. In both cases, staff affiliated with the CCRT met with
student leaders involved with the event as well as those planning responses. UT Austin
administrators responded swiftly to both events with official public statements, and in
the case of the immigration event, plans for the event were cancelled the day after these
statements were released.
Role of Social and Digital Media

Social media and digital communication play a significant role in several 2013-2014
incident reports. Of the 572 reports about the planned immigrant event, 31% specifically
mention Facebook as the respondents means of discovery for the event; nearly all reports
mentioning social media include a link to the Facebook event page, and 16% of reports
quote a portion of that pages language verbatim. In addition, student responses to this
planned event included email and social media communications that linked directly to the
CCRT website, which could help account for the large volume of reports about this incident.
These results suggest that social media and digital communication can considerably
influence campus engagement with bias incidents at UT Austin. Paired with the fact
that 12% of incidents with fewer than 10 reports cite online harassment, the data also
indicate that bias and responses to bias at UT Austin are occurring significantly in digital
environmentsa trend that deserves more study and attention.
Preliminary Two-Year Campus Climate Trends

This report is the second annual UT Austin Campus Climate Trend Report released by the
CCRT. When comparing CCRT report data for the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 academic
years (excluding the two high-profile incidents), bias related to race/ethnicity is the most
common type of bias identified during both periods (46% and 42%, respectively). Reports
citing sexual orientation (31%, 28%) and gender (21%, 30%) round out the three most
common types of bias across years. Verbal slurs are the most commonly reported type of
incident during year one and two (47%, 48%), followed by complaints against departments/
organizations. Students were most likely to report bias incidents (78%, 77%), and faculty
and parents were least likely to report bias incidents across time. Almost all reports
received were filed online in both years (96%, 100%).

The number of reports made in 2013-2014 increased 713% over the previous year,
presumably due to the high number of reports made regarding two high-profile incidents.
At the same time, the volume of reports can also be influenced by a number of other
factors, including awareness and use of the CCRT reporting function by the campus
community. Although the number of reports made during 2013-2014 increased drastically
over the previous year, the number of reported incidents went down 16%, from 82
incidents in 2012-2013 to 69 incidents in 2013-2014.
Given the data outlined in this report, the CCRT recognizes that bias incidents continue to
affect The University of Texas at Austins campus community and that swift responses from
administration and campus members have the potential to influence the outcomes of such
incidents. Overall, bias incidents are underreported on college campuses and the incidents
discussed herein reflect only a fraction of all occurrences at UT Austin. The CCRT entreats all
members of the campus community to take personal responsibility in eliminating bias and hate
on campus. The team is committed to sustaining and exploring new methods for promoting bias
incident reporting, leveraging opportunities to provide diversity education on campus, encouraging
communication between campus community members, and assessing internal processes so that
the CCRT can have the greatest impact.
Please visit the CCRT online at: http://www.utexas.edu/diversity/ccrt

Contents
About the CCRT
The History of the CCRT................................................................................................... 7
CCRT Members................................................................................................................ 8
Reporting Form and Data Collection.............................................................................. 8
Response Process.........................................................................................................10
2013-2014 Campus Climate Trend Data

Overview of Reports Received..........................................................................11
Incidents with Fewer Than 10 Reports. .....................................................12
Reports Received...........................................................................................................12
Report Attributes...........................................................................................................13
Types of Bias Reported.................................................................................................14
Types of Incidents Reported.........................................................................................14
Responses Preferred by Those Reporting...................................................................16
CCRT and Coordinated Responses..............................................................................16
Incidents with 10 or More Reports...............................................................18

Reports Received...........................................................................................................18
Affrimative Action Bake Sale Event...........................................................................19
Report Attributes..............................................................................................20
Types of Bias Reported....................................................................................21
Responses Preferred by Those Reporting......................................................21
Catch an Illegal Immigrant Event...............................................................................22
Report Attributes..............................................................................................25
Types of Bias Reported....................................................................................26
Social Media Engagement...............................................................................26
Responses Preferred by Those Reporting......................................................27
CCRT and Coordinated Responses..............................................................................28
Preliminary Two-Year Campus Climate Trends......................................29

5

List of Tables
Overview of Reports Recieved
Table 1. Total CCRT Reports Received, 2012-2014..........................................................11
Incidents with Fewer than 10 Reports

Table 2. CCRT Reports Received, by Month, 2013-2014.................................................12
Table 3. CCRT Report Attributes, 2013-2014....................................................................13
Table 4. Types of Bias Reported to CCRT, 2013-2014......................................................14
Table 5. Types of Incidents Reported to CCRT, 2013-2014..............................................15
Table 6. Responses Preferred by Those Reporting, 2013-2014......................................16
Incidents with 10 or More Reports

Table 7. Breakdown of Incidents with 10 or More CCRT Reports, 2013-2014...............18
Table 8. CCRT Report Attributes, Affirmative Action Bake Sale, 2013-2014...............20
Table 9. Type of Bias Reported to CCRT, Affirmative Action Bake Sale,
2013-2014............................................................................................................................21
Table 10. Responses Preferred by Those Reporting, Affirmative Action
Bake Sale, 2013-2014.......................................................................................................21
Table 11. CCRT Report Attributes, Catch an Illegal Immigrant Event, 2013-2014......25
Table 12. Types of Bias Reported to CCRT, Catch an Illegal Immigrant
Event, 2013-2014................................................................................................................26
Table 13. Social Media Engagement, Catch an Illegal ImmigrantEvent,
2013-2014............................................................................................................................26
Table 14. Responses Preferred by Those Reporting, Catch an Illegal Immigrant
Event, 2013-2014................................................................................................................27
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Lead Team would like to acknowledge the support of the Division of Diversity and Community Engagement (DDCE) and
the Division of Student Affairs, as well as the generous work of the CCRT and DDCE Research and Policy team members.
EDITOR: Susan Somers-Willett
DATA ANALYSIS: Matthew Chester
WRITERS: Matthew Chester, Susan Somers-Willett
DATA COLLECTION: Ryan A. Miller
PROOFREADERS: Ashley Bliss-Herrera, Jessica Khalaf
DESIGN: Susan Somers-Willett

Copyright 2015. All Rights Reserved. The University of Texas at Austin, Division of Diversity and Community Engagement.
Note: Percentages contained in this report are rounded to the nearest whole number.

responses in partnership with university departments and
About the CCRT
community partners. Through the work of the CCRT, gaps in
The History of the CCRT
UT Austins policies and procedures can be identified and
In Summer 2009, President William Powers Jr. requested
bias incidents swiftly addressed in order to foster a more
that Vice President for Diversity and Community Engage-
welcoming and inclusive campus culture.
ment Gregory J. Vincent and Vice President for Student

Affairs Juan C. Gonzlez investigate whether the universitys
dispute resolution procedures were sufficient to handle any
The core functions of the CCRT include:
outbreaks of hateful or violent speech in a coordinated,

campus-wide manner; how diversity programming on
Receiving reports and coordinating
campus could be more robust; and how best to advance
responses to the reported incidents
diversity on campus. As part of this charge, Dr. Vincent
Supporting the individuals involved,
created the Campus Climate Response Work Group in Fall
including those targeted by the incident
2009, composed of representatives from the Division of
and those initiating the incident
Diversity and Community Engagement and the Division

of Student Affairs. The groups final report recommended
Providing appropriate and effective
creating a response team to ensure a more coordinated
diversity education to address bias
campus-wide response to incidents of bias and hate.
incidents
Identifying appropriate support services
In Spring 2011, President Powers requested that Dr. Vincent

establish the Campus Climate Response Team (CCRT).
and connecting community members with
Comprised of a group of staff members from across the
them
university, the CCRT facilitates appropriate responses to
Evaluating the response process following
campus climate incidents affecting the UT Austin community
each incident report
and serves as a repository for reports of bias. The team
Coordinating, when appropriate, activities
reports to the Office of the Vice President for Diversity

and Community Engagement, and it is jointly coordinated
with other campus-wide entities,
through the Division of Diversity and Community Engage-
especially those involved with crisis
ment and the Division of Student Affairs.
management
Exchanging information between the CCRT
The primary goal of the CCRT is to create a more inclusive,
and staff members departments via
welcoming campus for all students, faculty, and staff by
representatives on the team
connecting them to the appropriate resources when bias

incidents occur and by developing short- and long-term

CCRT Members
Dr. Sherri Sanders*

Campus Diversity and Strategic Initiatives
Elizabeth Smith
International Students and Scholar Services
Dr. Stella Smith
Dr. Susan Somers-Willett
Office of the Vice President, DDCE
Dr. Betty Jeanne Taylor
CCRT members include representatives from the Division

of Student Affairs, the Division of Diversity and Community
Engagement (DDCE), the Office of the Executive Vice
President and Provost, and University Operations.
Depending upon the campus climate incident, representatives from other university offices and departments, as well
as the Austin community, may be involved in the process of
resolving a particular incident.
*Dr. Sanders served as CCRT liaison to Dr. Gregory J. Vincent, Vice President
for Diversity and Community Engagement from 2013-2014.
CCRT Lead Team Members (2013-2014)

Katherine Antwi Green
Assistant Vice President, Office of Institutional Equity
Dr. Elizabeth Medina
Assistant Dean of Students, Office of the Dean of Students
Ryan Miller
Associate Director, Campus Diversity and Strategic Initiatives
The primary goal of the CCRT

is to create a more inclusive,
welcoming campus for all
students, faculty, and staff
by connecting them to the
appropriate resources when
bias incidents occur and
developing short- and long-term
responses in partnership with
university departments and
community partners.
CCRT Members (2013-2014)

Leslie Blair
DDCE Community and External Relations
Brooke Bulow
Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs
Karen Chawner
Human Resource Services
Brandelyn Franks-Flunder
Student Diversity Initiatives
Dr. Doug Garrard
Office of the Dean of Students
Dr. Mona Ghosheh
Counseling and Mental Health Center
Travis Gill
Office of Institutional Equity
Laina Hubbard
Services for Students with Disabilities
Justin Jaskowiak
Division of Housing and Food Service
Terry McMahan
UT Police Department
Ixchel Rosal
Student Diversity Initiatives
Reporting Form and Data Collection

All students, faculty, staff, campus visitors, and contractors
are requested to report bias incidents, regardless of
whether they experience, witness, or are informed of them
as a third party. These reports can be made online via an
interactive form on the CCRT website (http://www.utexas.
edu/diversity/ccrt), or by phone and in person with the
Division of Diversity and Community Engagement, the Office
of the Dean of Students, or the Office of Institutional Equity.
The data collected on the online form is as follows:

Campus Climate Incident Online Report Form

* Provide the facts of the incident in as much detail as
possible. Describe all comments, conduct, gestures, markings,
physical injuries, property damage, etc. Identify alleged
offender(s) by name and UT Austin affiliation, if known, or by
physical appearance. List any possible witness(es) by name
with contact information, if known, or if unknown please
indicate if there were any witnesses.
Name:
Local Address:
Phone Number:
E-mail Address:
* Required Fields
* What is your association with the incident? (please select
one):
Victim
Witness
Third Party
Other
* If the incident is bias-related, what is the perceived motive

for the bias? Please select all that apply:
* What is your affiliation with The University of Texas at

Austin? (please select one):
Student
Faculty
Staff
Alumnus
Parent
Visitor
Other
Age
Citizenship
Disability
Ethnicity/Race
Gender
Gender Expression
Gender Identity
National Origin
Religion
Sexual Orientation
Veteran Status
Unsure/Do Not Know
Other (please specify):
Have you reported the incident to another University of

Texas at Austin office (optional)?
* Date of Incident (mm-dd-yyyy):
Yes (If so, please identify the office and person to whom
you reported the incident):
Approximate Time of Incident (if applicable):
No
What response did you receive from the office to which you
initially reported the incident (optional)?
* Did the incident occur on campus?
Yes
No
What type of response would you like to see as a result of
reporting this incident (optional)?
* Location(s) of Incident (be as specific as possible):

Response Process
If it is determined that the situation is best managed by

convening the broader group of university representatives
Once a report is filed, the CCRT attempts to contact the
that form the CCRT, a team meeting is called to order. The
reporting party within two business days. CCRT Lead Team
team evaluates the incident, providing when necessary:
members follow standard intake procedures to determine

whether the situation, as reported, falls within the param-
eters of a campus climate incident and whether the
Coordination of responses to the reported
incident should be referred to other response teams, such
incident
as the Critical Incident Response Team or the Behavior

Assessment Team. Lead team members also determine if
Mediation for impacted student(s), staff,
there is a possible violation of the universitys Institutional
and faculty
Rules on Student Services and Activities or polices outlined

in the General Information Catalog so that the incident may
Support and information to targeted
be addressed by the appropriate university entity.
student(s), staff, and faculty
If it is determined that the situation would best be managed
Support and information to student(s),
by an entity other than the CCRT, CCRT Lead Team members
staff or faculty who initiated the incident
partner and refer the incident to the appropriate party. For
Educational programming and resources
example, incidents involving individual students who have
for the UT Austin community
allegedly violated institutional rules may be referred to

Student Judicial Services; incidents involving student organizations engaged in possible violation of institutional rules
may be forwarded to Student Activities. As another example,
a case may be referred to Division of Housing and Food
Service staff if the incident involves university residence
hall students. In addition, if the situation involves university
faculty or staff possibly violating a university policy, the
Office of Institutional Equity responds to the incident and
refers it to appropriate university offices.
10

2013-2014 Campus Climate Trend Data

Overview of Reports Received
Table 1
TOTAL CCRT REPORTS RECEIVED,
2012-2014
In total, the team received 670 reports about 69 distinct

incidents during the 2013-2014 academic year (including
summer 2014). This represents a 713% increase in reports
over the previous academic year. All of the 2013-2014
reports were initially received through the online report
Academic
Incident
Year
Type
2013-2014
form; no reports were made in person or by phone.
# Reports
# Incidents
All Reports
670
69
Incidents
597
73
67
94
82
with 10 or
The seven-fold increase in reports largely stems from two
More Reports
high-profile incidents sponsored by a student group. Of the
Incidents
670 reports received, 25 reports pertain to an on-campus
with Fewer
event held by this student group. An additional 572 reports
Than 10
pertain to a second event planned but eventually cancelled
Reports
by the same student group. Due to the magnitude of reports
2012-2013
related to these two incidents (89% of 2013-2014 total
All Reports
reports), this report examines these data separately under

the Incidents with 10 or More Reports section.
After excluding reports related to these two events, the
CCRT received a total of 73 reports on 67 distinct incidents.
In the following section, Incidents with Fewer Than 10
Reports, these 73 reports are explored in greater depth. It
should be noted that bias incidents are underreported on
college campuses2 and that this total reflects only a fraction
of all occurrences.
Wessler, S. L. (2004). Hate crimes and bias-motivated harassment on campus. In D. R. Karp & T. Allena (Eds.), Restorative justice on the college campus (pp. 194202). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
11

Incidents with Fewer Than 10 Reports

Reports Received
2013 (13 reports), February 2014 (10 reports), and October
2013 and April 2014 (nine reports each). Few bias incidents
were reported during the summer and intersession. Five
In the category of incidents with fewer than 10 reports,
incidents were reported multiple times (four incidents
the CCRT received 34 reports during Fall 2013, 27 during
reported twice, one incident reported three times).
Spring 2014, and 12 during Summer 2014. Months with the

highest number of incidents reported include September
Table 2
CCRT REPORTS RECEIVED, BY MONTH, 2013-2014
Month Reported
# Reports
% Reports
# Incidents
% Incidents
August 2013
5%
6%
September 2013
13
18%
10
14%
October 2013
12%
14%
November 2013
7%
8%
December 2013
4%
5%
January 2014
3%
3%
February 2014
10
14%
14%
March 2014
8%
9%
April 2014
12%
12%
May 2014
0%
0%
June 2014
8%
8%
July 2014
4%
5%
August 2014
4%
5%
Total
73 Reports
67 Incidents*
*Five incidents were reported multiple times by different individuals (four incidents reported twice, one incident reported three times).
.
12

Report Attributes
Roughly one-fifth of reports in this category were filed anonymously. Those reporting bias incidents were most willing to
share their e-mail address (71%), followed by phone number
Although the CCRT encourages those reporting incidents to
(63%), and physical address (58%) as a means of contact.
identify themselves so the team may follow-up and gather
Seventy-seven percent of all incidents reported were identi-
additional information needed, anonymous reports are
fied as having occurred on campus.
permitted because some individuals may fear retaliation or

wish for the CCRT to simply have a record of an incident. All
The form asks individuals to identify themselves in relation
73 of the 2013-2014 incident reports in this category were
to the bias incident. Thirty-two percent of people report-
filed via the interactive form available on the CCRT website.
ing in this category self-identified as victims of an incident,
Table 3
CCRT REPORT ATTRIBUTES, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
Reported Online
73
100%
Reported via E-mail
0%
Reported via Telephone
0%
Anonymous Reporting
Reported Anonymously
16
22%
Contact Information
Included Address
42
58%
Included Phone Number
46
63%
Included E-mail Address
52
71%
Victim
23
32%
Witness
26
36%
Third Party
16
22%
Other
10%
Student
56
77%
Faculty
1%
Staff
10
14%
Parent
0%
Alumnus
4%
Other
3%
Vistor
1%
Incident Occurred on Campus
56
77%
Reporting Method
Association to Incident
Affiliation of Reporter
Incident Location
13

while 36% identified as witnesses, and 22% identified as
Table 4
TYPES OF BIAS REPORTED TO CCRT, 2013-2014
third parties (i.e., they heard about the incident but did not
witness or personally experience it). Students provided the
vast majority of reports (77%), followed by staff (14%). One
Type of Bias
# Reports
% Reports
faculty member, three alumni, and one visitor filed reports
Race/Ethnicity
30
42%
Gender
21
30%
Sexual Orientation
20
28%
Gender Expression
18
26%
Gender Identity
12
17%
Religion
10
14%
National Origin
13%
Unsure/Do Not Know
13%
Citizenship
6%
Veteran Status
3%
and many selected race/ethnicity and at least one other
Age
3%
category, most often citizenship, gender, national origin,
Disability
0%
Other
0%
during the 2013-2014 year.
Types of Bias Reported

A large number of 2013-2014 CCRT reports in this category
cite bias incidents based on race/ethnicity (42%), followed
by gender (30%), sexual orientation (28%), and gender
expression (26%). Respondents are given the option to
report multiple forms of bias related to one incident,
and/or religion. Bias based on gender, gender identity, and

sexual orientation tends to be reported in tandem. Data
Note: The CCRT form allows for more than one response to this question.
also show overlap among reports based on race/ethnicity

and sexual orientation biases. The paucity of reports based
on disability, age, and veteran status may suggest areas
for exploration, including future outreach and educational
Types of Incidents Reported
efforts.

On the CCRT form online, respondents are asked to provide
details about the bias incident in a dialogue box. Responses
are then grouped and coded by incident type. For the
2013-2014 period, the most prevalent type of incident in
this category is verbal harassment/slurs, making up nearly
half of all reports (48%). Other common incident types in
this category are complaints against departments/organizations (31%), physical harassment (15%), graffiti/vandalism
(12%), and online harassment (12%).
14

Table 5
TYPES OF INCIDENTS REPORTED TO CCRT,
2013-2014
Examples of the types of incidents reported

to the CCRT include:
Faculty and student commentary in the
classroom perceived as derogatory and
insensitive
Incident Type
Graffiti/vandalism on and off campus

based on race, religion, and/or sexual
orientation
Hostile and insensitive treatment or
interaction with a campus department/unit
Messaging by the university perceived as
insensitive or based on stereotypes
# Reports
% Reports
Verbal Harassment/Slurs
33
48%
Complaint Against
Department/Organization
21
31%
Physical Harassment
10
15%
Graffiti/Vandalism
12%
Online Harassment
12%
Derogatory Party Theme
6%
Physical harassment/assault
Student organizations participating in
traditions perceived as insensitive or based
on stereotypes
Harassment by strangers based on
perceived sexual orientation
Derogatory racial remarks made by fans
during university sporting events
Insulting or insensitive online posts
pertaining to race, gender identity, or sexual
orientation
Slurs or verbal/physical harassment on and
off campus
Party themes based on racist stereotypes
and hosted by student organizations
Physical objects thrown at individuals on
and off campus accompanied by racial or
homophobic epithets
15

Responses Preferred by Those

Reporting
Table 6
RESPONSES PREFERRED BY THOSE
REPORTING, 2013-2014
Preferred Response
# Reports
% Reports
Diversity Education
14
36%
Awareness/Information
Gathering
10
26%
Disciplinary Action
21%
Policy Change/Reform
18%
16%
A large number of these reports (36%) request increased
Acknowledgment/Apology
from Other Party
and/or targeted diversity education to help prevent future
Administrative Statement
8%
Removal of Graffiti
8%
On the CCRT reporting form, respondents are asked to

indicate in a dialogue box what kind of outcome they
would prefer as a result of their reports. Responses to this
question were grouped and coded with one or more type
of preferred response. Because the question is optional on
the CCRT report form, percentages listed in this section are
based on the responses provided.
occurrences of bias. Some point specifically to departments,

organizations, or individuals whom they believe would
benefit from this education, while others describe a need
Percentages listed are based on the responses provided to this question.
for broader social justice and diversity education across the

campus community.
CCRT and Coordinated Responses
In addition to diversity education, many respondents
indicated that they simply wanted to inform the CCRT of
In response to every CCRT report that includes at least one
the incident for the sake of reporting. These incidents were
piece of contact information, a team member makes at
coded as awareness/information gathering and accounted
least two attempts to contact the individual by telephone or
for 26% of reports. Other frequently preferred responses
e-mail, the first attempt occurring within two business days
include disciplinary action (21%), a policy change/reform
of the report. In practice, team members prefer contact by
(18%), or acknowledgment/apology from the other party
telephone since it allows for an immediate exchange and
involved in an incident (16%). A limited number of reports
sense of support. During this initial point of contact, team
(8% each) specifically request an administrative statement
members offer to speak over the phone or in person to
from the university or removal of graffiti on university
respondents in order to discuss the incident further and
grounds.
connect them with the appropriate university resources.
16

Examples of responses coordinated by

campus partners directly as a result of
CCRT reports include:
Examples of responses coordinated by

the CCRT include:
Personal contact to acknowledge the
Investigation and resolution of incidents
report, discuss the incident, share
classified as a criminal act (coordinated
information on CCRT processes, share
with UTPD) or university policy violation
available resources and services, and
(coordinated with the Office of the Dean
schedule in-person meetings
of Students and the Office of Institutional

Equity)
Educational conversations/meetings with
Initiation of an informal non-discrimination
those initiating an incident regarding the
policy resolution process (through the
intent and impact of their actions
Office of Institutional Equity)

Diversity training and education with a
Educational conversations bringing

together those who were targeted by an
departments staff, student organization
incident and those who initiated an incident
members, and students enrolled in a course

Educational conversations or meetings with
Sharing information with relevant campus
those initiating an incident (particularly
offices and departments to make them
student organizations) regarding the
aware of incidents
intent and impact of their actions, how the

incident aligns with the organizations goals
or mission, etc.
Communications to relevant constituencies

regarding incidents and CCRTs ongoing
Adjusting ongoing programming (such as
responses
a student leadership training series) to

incorporate education about bias incidents
Referrals to campus resources, services,
Public communications (such as a
departments, and units
statement or press release) regarding

incidents
Ongoing conversations with off-campus/
Documentation and removal of graffiti
private residence halls regarding best
in cooperation with UTPD and University
practices for residential communities
Operations
17


Reports Received
second event garnered several hundred reports, it is
important to note that YCT cancelled the event before it
The CCRT received multiple reports pertaining to two
took place. Combined, reports about these two events
separate events sponsored by the student organization
account for 595, or 89%, of all 670 reports received by the
Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT). Twenty-five reports
CCRT during the 2013-2014 academic year. Because of the
pertained to an Affirmative Action Bake Sale held on
magnitude of reports received and their potential to skew
campus. The team also received 572 reports about a
the data across the entire year, these data are examined
planned Catch an Illegal Immigrant event. Though this
separately.
Table 7
BREAKDOWN OF INCIDENTS WITH 10 OR MORE CCRT REPORTS, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
# Incidents
Affirmative Action Bake Sale
25
4%
Catch an Illegal Immigrant Event
572
96%
Total 2013-2014 Incidents

with 10 or More Reports
595
100%
18

Affirmative Action Bake Sale Event
followed by Asians, Latinos, Blacks, and Native Americans

in descending order. Women were also given a discount.
On September 25, 2013, the UT Austin chapter of YCT
Several media outlets reported on the bake sale.
sponsored an Affirmative Action Bake Sale on campus

in protest of affirmative action policies. Prices for baked
On September 27, the universitys Vice President for
goods varied based on customers race and gender.
Diversity and Community Engagement Dr. Gregory J. Vincent
White individuals were charged the most for baked goods,
released a statement regarding the incident:
Statement from Dr. Gregory J. Vincent, Vice President for Diversity and Community
Engagement at The University of Texas at Austin
On Wednesday, the UT chapter of Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT) held a bake sale on the West Mall,
where they sold goods to students at varying prices based on their race and gender. In doing so, they join
a handful of student groups at other universities who over the years have used the same reductive tactic
to garner the spotlight for their views on affirmative action. (For an example of a similar incident at the
University of California, Berkeley, see the Chancellors open letter to the campus community written in
2011.)
Such methods are inflammatory and demeaning. Yet focusing our attention on the provocative nature
of the YCTs actions ignores a much more important issue: they create an environment of exclusion
and disrespect among our students, faculty and staff. The choice of a tiered pricing structure creates
the misperception that some students either do not belong at the university or do not deserve to have
access to our institutionor worse, that they belong or deserve only to a certain degree. Nothing could be
further from the truth. The YCTs approach to this issue also ignores the fact that demographics are just
one of many criteria taken into account when applying for admission to UT, a fact that the university has
repeatedly and staunchly defended in the Fisher v. UT case.
The university honor code entreats students to abide by the core values of the university, one of which is
freedom, but two others of which are individual opportunity and responsibility. The West Mall is a place
where free speech is exercised by all students, and rightly so, because it is meant to be an arena that
inspires dialogue from diverse viewpoints. However, it is also meant to be a space where students exhibit
respect for each other while holding those viewpoints. Although it is their right to do so, it is deplorable
that a few students took advantage of this open forum to direct negative sentiment toward their peers.
In seeking an audience for their ideas, the YCT resorted to exercising one of the universitys core values
to the detriment of others. Such actions are counterproductive to true dialogue on our campus, and it is
unrepresentative of the ideals toward which our community strives.3
Vincent, G. J. (2013, September 27). Statement from Dr. Gregory J. Vincent, vice president for diversity and community engagement at The University of Texas at Austin.
DDCE Central. Retrieved from http://ddce.utexas.edu/news/2013/09/27/statement-from-dr-gregory-vincent-about-the-young-conservatives-of-texass-bake-sale
19

Report Attributes
The form asks individuals to identify themselves in relation

to the bias incident. Twelve percent of individuals self-
identified as victims of the incident, while 52% identified
The CCRT received 25 reports in response to the bake
as witnesses, and 20% identified as third parties (i.e., they
sale. All reports related to the incident were filed via the
heard about the incident but did not witness or personally
form available on the CCRT website. Roughly one-fourth of
experience it). Four individuals (16%) identified as other and
reports were filed anonymously. Students provided the vast
disclosed that they discovered the event via a Twitter post
majority of reports (88%), followed by alumni (8%) and staff
by the YCT.
(4%). No faculty, parents, or visitors submitted reports about

the YCT bake sale.
Table 8
CCRT REPORT ATTRIBUTES, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BAKE SALE, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
Reporting Method
Reported Online
25
100%
Anonymous Reporting
24%
Contact Information
Included Address
12
48%
14
56%
20
80%
Victim
12%
Witness
13
52%
Third Party
20%
Other
16%
Student
22
77%
Faculty
0%
Staff
4%
Parent
0%
Alumnus
8%
Other
0%
Vistor
0%
Incident Occurred on Campus
56
77%
Incident Location
20


Responses Preferred by
Those Reporting
Respondents are given the option to report multiple
biases related to one incident. All individuals that filed
reports about the bake sale indicated race/ethnicity as
a primary bias concern, and many selected at least one
other category. A majority (52%) of respondents also
selected gender as a bias concern. Approximately 16
percent considered national origin a bias concern, followed
by gender identity or gender expression (8% each), and
based only on the responses provided.
citizenship (4%).
A majority of these respondents (94%) wished for disciplinary action against the YCT and its members. Some
reports specifically suggest loss of funding for the organization and/or suspension of members involved in the bake
Table 9
TYPE OF BIAS REPORTED TO CCRT,
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BAKE SALE, 2013-2014
Type of Bias
sale. Other preferred responses include diversity education

for the YCT and its members (25%) or policy change/reform
at the university (19%). A limited number of respondents
# Reports
% Reports
Race/Ethnicity
25
100%
Gender
13
52%
National Origin
16%
Gender Identity
8%
Gender Expression
8%
Citizenship
4%
Sexual Orientation
0%
Preferred Response
Veteran Status
0%
Age
Disability
(6%) reported wanting an apology from the YCT or an official

administrative statement from the university.
Table 10
REPORTING, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BAKE
SALE, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
Disciplinary Action
15
94%
0%
Diversity Education
25%
0%
19%
Religion
0%
6%
Unsure/Do Not Know
0%
from Other Party
Other
0%
6%
21


On November 18, 2013, the UT Austin chapter of YCT created a Facebook event announcing its plans to host a Catch an Illegal
Immigrant game on campus. In their Facebook event description, the YCT stated the following:
YCT will be having a Catch an Illegal Immigrant event this upcoming Wednesday. The details of the
game goes [sic] as follows:
There will be several people walking around the UT campus with the label illegal immigrant on their
clothing. Any UT student who catches one of these illegal immigrants and brings them back to our
table will receive a $25 gift card.
The purpose of this event is to spark a campus-wide discussion about the issue of illegal
immigration, and how it affects our everyday lives.4
Following this announcement, several media outlets reported on the Catch an Illegal Immigrant plans. In response, UT Austin
officials released several statements. On November 18, both Vice President for Diversity and Community Engagement Dr. Gregory J.
Vincent and UT Austin President Bill Powers released the following statements:
Statement from Dr. Gregory J. Vincent Regarding YCT Game Scheduled for Nov. 20
Apparently drawing from a 2005-06 plan of Young Conservative organizations on campuses across
the country, the UT Austin chapter of Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT) is hosting a game on
campus this Wednesday called Catch an Illegal Immigrant.
The game involves students walking around campus with the words Illegal Immigrant on their
back. Students who capture the marked students and bring them back to the YCT table will be
rewarded with a $25 gift card.
As was the case with the YCT bake sale on the West Mall last month, such tactics are inflammatory and demeaning. And once again in trying to be provocative, the YCT is contributing to an
environment of exclusion and disrespect among our students, faculty and staff by sending the
message that certain students do not belong on our campus. Some UT Austin students are undocumented, and under Dream Act legislation signed into law in 2001, these students are entitled to
attend state universities. They are part of a growing diverse population on campus and in the state
(continued on next page)
Hayden, J. (2013, November 18). Young Conservatives of Texas plan catch an illegal immigrant game. The Daily Kos. Retrieved from http://www.dailykos.com/
story/2013/11/18/1256537/-Young-Conservatives-of-Texas-plan-Catch-an-illegal-immigrant-game
22

of Texasa population that plays increasingly larger roles in our intellectual, economic, political and
cultural communities.
The university honor code entreats students to abide by the core values of the university, one
of which is freedom, but two others of which are individual opportunity and responsibility. The
university also values free speech and our campus continues to be an arena that inspires dialogue
from diverse viewpoints. However, it is also meant to be a community where students exhibit respect
for each other while holding those viewpoints.
If the members of YCT carry out their plan for Catch an Illegal Immigrant, they are willfully ignoring
the honor code and contributing to the degradation of our campus culture. And once again, they
will have resorted to exercising one of the universitys core values to the detriment of others. Such
actions are counterproductive to true dialogue on our campus, and it is unrepresentative of the
ideals toward which our community strives.5
Statement from UT Austin President Bill Powers

The proposed Young Conservatives of Texas event is completely out of line with the values we
espouse at The University of Texas at Austin. Our students, faculty and the entire university work
hard both to promote diversity and engage in a respectful exchange of ideas. The Wednesday event
does not reflect that approach or commitment.
As Americans, we should always visualize our Statue of Liberty and remember that our country
was built on the strength of immigration. Our nation continues to grapple with difficult questions
surrounding immigration. I ask YCT to be part of that discussion but to find more productive and
respectful ways to do so that do not demean their fellow students.6
After media attention and statements from UT Austin administration, the YCT canceled the Catch an Illegal Immigrant event on
November 19, 2013. The YCT-UT Austin chapter chairman released a statement online, noting that the event was misguided and
the idea for the event was intentionally over-the-top in order to get attention for the subject.7
Vincent, G. J. (2013, November 18). Statement from Dr. Gregory J. Vincent regarding YCT game scheduled for Nov. 20. DDCE Central. Retrieved from http://ddce.
utexas.edu/news/2013/11/18/statement-from-dr-gregory-j-vincent-regarding-yct-game-scheduled-for-nov-20
6
Powers, W. C. (2013, November 18). President Powers responds to YCT: Immigration event is not in line with UT Austin values. The University of Texas News. Retrieved
from http://www.utexas.edu/news/2013/11/18/yct-game
7
Green, A. (2013, November 19). Young Conservatives of Texas cancel Catch an Illegal Immigrant planned for Wednesday on The University of Texas campus. The
Daily Texan. http://www.dailytexanonline.com/2013/11/19/young-conservatives-of-texas-cancel-catch-an-illegal-immigrant-planned-for-wednesday-on
23

Following this announcement, both the university and Vice President Vincent responded in public statements on November 19:
Statement from The University of Texas at Austin

The University of Texas at Austin honors the right of free speech for all students. We welcome the
Young Conservatives of Texas decision to cancel Wednesdays event and look forward to the group
being part of a thoughtful campus discussion about immigration.8
Statement from Dr. Vincent Regarding Cancellation of YCT Event

We are pleased that the Young Conservatives of Texas have wisely decided to cancel the Catch an
Illegal Immigrant event. As a university, we welcome the robust exchange of ideas and freedom of
expression but always advocate for and support an inclusive and respectful learning environment.
We strongly support students who have organized around this issue in order to advocate for that
inclusion, and we are reassured that discussion and protest around pivotal issues can take place on
campus in a way that acknowledges and respects all individuals.9
In response to the planned event, a number of protesters
the demonstration took place with several hundred students
coordinated an on-campus demonstration to take place
in attendance and actress America Ferrera as a featured
at the same time and location as the originally scheduled
speaker.11 Additionally, an online petition was created asking
Catch an Illegal Immigrant event. This demonstration was
the university to stop recognizing the YCT as a registered
announced and organized via Facebook. More than 4,800
student organization. By December 13, 2013, the petition
individuals indicated they would attend. On November 20,
had garnered 5,254 signatures.12
10
The University of Texas at Austin. (2013, November 19). UT Austins response to YCT decision to cancel event. The University of Texas News. Retrieved from http://
www.utexas.edu/news/2013/11/19/yct-event-cancelle
9
Vincent, G. J. (2013, November 19). Statement from Dr. Vincent regarding cancellation of YCT event. DDCE Central. Retrieved from http://ddce.utexas.edu/
news/2013/11/19/statement-from-dr-vincent-regarding-cancellation-of-yct-event
10
In solidarity with the 11 million undocumented immigrants and the 400 undocumented Longhorns. Facebook. Retrieved from http://www.facebook.com/
events/636297229745845
11
Green, A. (2013, November 20). Counter protest on immigration reform joined by actress America Ferrera. The Daily Texan. Retrieved from http://www.
dailytexanonline.com/news/2013/11/20/counter-protest-on-immigration-reform-joined-by-actress-america-ferrera
12
Grant, T. (2013, November 18). Revoke Young Conservatives of Texass status as a registered student organization. Change.org. Retrieved from http://www.
change.org/p/revoke-young-conservatives-of-texas-s-status-as-a-registered-student-organization
24

Report Attributes
submitted reports. Those in the other category represent
a wide range of individuals, including prospective graduate
The CCRT received 572 reports in response to the YCT
students, Austin residents, students from other Texas
Catch an Illegal Immigrant event. All incident reports were
universities, and family members of UT Austin students.
filed via the interactive form available on the CCRT website.
The reporting form asks individuals to identify themselves
One-fourth of reports were filed anonymously. Those
in relation to the bias incident. Eleven percent of individuals
reporting bias incidents were most willing to share their
self-identified as victims of the incident, while 35% identified
e-mail address (73%), followed by address (62%), and phone
as witnesses, and 43% identified as third parties (i.e., they
number (63%) as a means of contact.
heard about the incident but did not witness or personally
Students (71%) provided the vast majority of reports,
experience it). Twelve percent of individuals identified as
followed by alumni (11%), other (8%), visitors (5%), and
other, which included responses such as all of the above,
staff (4%). Four faculty members and three parents also
and online witness.
Table 11
CCRT REPORT ATTRIBUTES, CATCH AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT EVENT, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
Reporting Method
Reported Online
572
100%
Anonymous Reporting
145
25%
Contact Information
Included Address
332
63%
326
62%
384
73%
61
11%
Witness
199
35%
Third Party
246
43%
Other
66
12%
Student
407
71%
Faculty
1%
Staff
20
4%
Parent
~1%
Alumnus
63
11%
Other
47
8%
Vistor
28
5%
Victim
25

Social Media Engagement
Respondents are given the option to report multiple forms of
Student responses to this planned event included email
bias related to one incident. A vast majority of respondents
and social media communications that linked directly to
(85%) indicated race/ethnicity as a primary bias concern. A
the CCRT website. Of the 572 reports received about the
large percentage of respondents also selected citizenship
planned Catch an Illegal Immigrant event, 178 reports
(77%) and national origin (76%) as bias concerns. Apart from
(31%) specifically mentioned Facebook as their means
race/ethnicity, citizenship, and national origin, few respon-
of discovery for the event. Seven responses included a
dents selected other forms of bias as motivation for the
mention of both Twitter and Facebook.
incident.
Nearly all reports mentioning social media included a
specific link to the Facebook event page created by the
Table 12
TYPES OF BIAS REPORTED TO CCRT, CATCH
AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT EVENT, 2013-2014
Type of Bias
YCT. Furthermore, 89 reports (16%) quoted a portion of the

Facebook invites language verbatim. It should be noted that
respondents were not prompted about their social media
# Reports
% Reports
Race/Ethnicity
485
85%
independently in an optional free-response section where
Citizenship
441
77%
they described the incident. These results indicate that
National Origin
432
76%
Gender
11
1%
Religion
<1%
Gender Identity
<1%
Unsure/Do Not Know
<1%
Veteran Status
<1%
Age
<1%
Social Media
Gender Expression
<1%
Mentions
Sexual Orientation
<1%
Disability
0%
Other
0%
engagement; rather, they mentioned Twitter and Facebook
communications via social media can significantly influence

engagement with and activism surrounding campus bias
incidents.
Table 13
SOCIAL MEDIA ENGAGEMENT, CATCH AN
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT EVENT, 2013-2014
# Reports
% Reports
178
31%
Twitter and Facebook
~1%
Twitter Only
0%
Facebook Only
26

Responses Preferred by Those

Reporting
Table 14
REPORTING, CATCH AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT
EVENT, 2013-2014
Preferred Response

based only on the responses provided.
A large number of these respondents (92%) wished for disciplinary action against YCT and its members. Some reports
# Reports
% Reports
Disciplinary Action
321
92%
43
12%
from Other Party
21
6%
Diversity Education
20
6%
15
4%
Awareness/Information
Gathering
<1%
suggest loss of funding for the organization and/or expulsion
of members involved in the event. Furthermore, 220 of 321
responses (69%) that call for disciplinary action against YCT

also specifically requested cancellation of the event.
Other frequently preferred responses include an official
administrative statement from the university (12%), acknowledgement/apology from YCT (6%), diversity education for
YCT and its members (6%), or policy change/reform at the
university (4%). A limited number of respondents (<1%)
indicated they were reporting simply to alert the university to
the existence of this event.
27

CCRT and Coordinated Responses
Responses to incidents with 10 or more

reports include:

In response to every CCRT report that includes at least one
piece of contact information, a team member makes at
If they supplied a phone number, individuals
least two attempts to contact the individual by telephone
reporting the bake sale incident received a
or e-mail, the first attempt occurring within two business
phone call. If they only supplied an e-mail
days of the report. Overall, the CCRTs response to the
address, they received an e-mail message
bake sale and immigration event followed this pattern, with
inviting them to meet with a member of the
some exceptions noted here due to the volume of reports
team.
received.
Due to the volume of reports received (572),

individuals reporting the immigration incident
received an email if they supplied an email
address. Individuals who only supplied a
phone number received a phone call.
In response to both incidents, the CCRT
worked with campus partners to coordinate
appropriate activities, including providing
advice and input related to public messaging
from the university.
Staff affiliated with the CCRT met with
student leaders involved with the event as
well as those planning protests/responses.
The CCRT tracked the volume of responses
to both incidents and worked with Dr. Gregory
J. Vincent and senior administration as the
incidents and reports developed.
Staff affiliated with the CCRT who work within
the Office of the Dean of Students continued
to provide information and support to all
students interested in engaging this issue
from a variety of perspectives.
28

Preliminary Two-Year Campus Climate Trends

In February 2014, the CCRT released its first Campus Climate Trend Report with data collected on
bias incidents during the 2012-2013 academic year (i.e., year one). Data from this report share
several similarities with the current 2013-2014 report (i.e., year two).
The number of CCRT reports made in 2013-2014 increased 713% over the previous year,
presumably due to the high number of reports made regarding two high-profile incidents. At the
same time, the volume of reports can also be influenced by a number of other factors, including
awareness and use of the CCRT reporting function by the campus community. Regardless, the
large number of reports received about these incidents merited discrete consideration of the
data in order to accurately represent overall campus climate trends throughout the year. Although
the number of reports made during 2013-2014 increased drastically over the previous year, the
number of reported incidents went down 16%, from 82 incidents in 2012-2013 to 69 incidents in
2013-2014.
If excluding data from the two high-profile incidents, some preliminary trends since 2012 emerge.
In both years, September and February are the months with the highest percentages of reported
incidents. Furthermore, a vast majority of reports received were filed online (96% and 100%,
respectively). Students were most likely to report bias incidents in both years (78% and 77%).
Similarly, faculty and parents were least likely to report bias incidents in both years. Incidents
related to race/ethnicity were most common during both academic years (46% and 42%). Reports
citing sexual orientation (31%, 28%) and gender (21%, 30%) round out the three most common
types of bias across years. Finally, verbal slurs are the most commonly reported type of incident
during year one and two (47%, 48%), followed by complaints against departments/organizations
(15%, 31%).
To access all Campus Climate Trend Reports, learn more about the CCRT, or to report an incident,
please visit: http://www.utexas.edu/diversity/ccrt
29

CCRT 2013-14 Trend Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CCRT 2013-14 Trend Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

the university of texas at austin

Katherine Antwi Green

Director, Campus Climate

Ana Ixchel Rosal

Dr. Audrey Sorrells

Liason to the Vice

Incidents with Fewer Than 10 Reports (73 reports, 67 incidents)

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

Incidents with 10 or More Reports (597 reports, 2 incidents)

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

Role of Social and Digital Media

Preliminary Two-Year Campus Climate Trends

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

Please visit the CCRT online at: http://www.utexas.edu/diversity/ccrt

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

2013-2014 Campus Climate Trend Data

Incidents with 10 or More Reports...............................................................18

Preliminary Two-Year Campus Climate Trends......................................29

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

Incidents with Fewer than 10 Reports

Incidents with 10 or More Reports

DATA ANALYSIS: Matthew Chester

WRITERS: Matthew Chester, Susan Somers-Willett

DATA COLLECTION: Ryan A. Miller

PROOFREADERS: Ashley Bliss-Herrera, Jessica Khalaf

DESIGN: Susan Somers-Willett

Campus Climate Trend Report, 2013-2014

About the CCRT

community partners. Through the work of the CCRT, gaps in

The History of the CCRT

UT Austins policies and procedures can be identified and

In Summer 2009, President William Powers Jr. requested

bias incidents swiftly addressed in order to foster a more

that Vice President for Diversity and Community Engage-

welcoming and inclusive campus culture.

ment Gregory J. Vincent and Vice President for Student

The core functions of the CCRT include:

outbreaks of hateful or violent speech in a coordinated,

Receiving reports and coordinating

campus could be more robust; and how best to advance

responses to the reported incidents

diversity on campus. As part of this charge, Dr. Vincent

Supporting the individuals involved,

created the Campus Climate Response Work Group in Fall

including those targeted by the incident

2009, composed of representatives from the Division of

and those initiating the incident

Diversity and Community Engagement and the Division

Providing appropriate and effective

creating a response team to ensure a more coordinated

diversity education to address bias

campus-wide response to incidents of bias and hate.

In Spring 2011, President Powers requested that Dr. Vincent

and connecting community members with

Comprised of a group of staff members from across the

university, the CCRT facilitates appropriate responses to

Evaluating the response process following

campus climate incidents affecting the UT Austin community

each incident report

and serves as a repository for reports of bias. The team

Coordinating, when appropriate, activities

reports to the Office of the Vice President for Diversity

with other campus-wide entities,