Even in the post-MeToo era, “the hallmark of educational institutions’ failure to confront sexual abuse,” Moria Donegan recently observed, is defied by official expressions of “sympathy and praise survivors’ courage, all while working against those very women’s interests.” Although not yet frequent enough, there are important acts of institutional courage that prove it is possible – and highly beneficial – to set and maintain a different standard. Institutional courage is not a one-and-done. Institutions that succeed in the long run will find themselves having to recommit to institutional courage. Not once, but over and over.

This point was brought home at Oregon State University (OSU) recently. In August, 2020, OSU’s new president F. King Alexander made comments to the press in support of a football player accused of assault, with no supportive statements for the survivors/victims, including student athletes at his former institution. Seeing an opportunity to encourage institutional courage, individuals took action. I wrote to Alexander to encourage a reconsideration of these public statements, taking the stance that perhaps he was not aware of the potential for harm to both students and the institution. Courage Senior Advisor, Anne DePrince, and I published a perspective on the courage needed for leaders of all institutions, who must be prepared to confront interpersonal harm within their institutions.

Ultimately, we as an institution did not stand for this kind of institutional betrayal of our students and our own values. To get there, though, required us each to identify that something was wrong and find ways to act together. For example, faculty eventually delivered a no-confidence vote and called for greater transparency and care for survivors. Behind the scenes, many others worked together quietly and effectively.

What was so jarring was that we knew better as an institution – in fact, we had previously learned this lesson and done better.

In 2014, John Canzano, writing for The Oregonian, detailed Brenda Tracy’s sexual assault years before that included OSU football team members. It was a now-familiar story of a survivor, initially failed and forgotten by criminal and university systems, coming forward to ask what had been and could be done.

What was unfamiliar was then-President Ed Ray’s email to the university.

President Ray wrote to apologize to Brenda Tracy, personally and behalf of the institution. It was a real apology, from the top, on behalf of the institution. President Ray acknowledged the institution’s role in the harm done and sought to make real change, by engaging with Brenda Tracy and other survivors and making real change.

So often, as Brenda Tracy initially experienced, survivors do not get a supportive response, so this was indeed an impactful gesture for her personally.

But that email helped more than Brenda Tracy. Survivors across campus were moved that anyone cared about sexual assault at all, let alone about the ways institutions contributed to the harm. In fact, institutional responses can affect the mental health outcomes for survivors, making President Ray’s apology a powerful public health intervention for all members of the OSU institution.

OSU is searching for a new president again, with this vivid reminder that courage once is not enough: Institutions must recommit to courage. When institutions act courageously rather than cowardly, we raise the institutional capital of the institution while supporting individual members of the institution.