American higher education is confronting a significant crisis regarding Jewish student life, yet much of the national conversation about campus antisemitism has focused on presidents and chancellors, which keeps it at a level far removed from the staff who actually shape daily student life: deans, provosts, diversity and inclusion directors, counseling center staff and spiritual life leaders. The challenge facing universities is not solely one of policy enforcement but also one of institutional competence; that is, whether higher education staff who interact with students on a regular basis — and are often the first responders when things go wrong — possess the historical knowledge, conceptual frameworks and professional skills necessary to recognize and effectively address contemporary antisemitism.

Recently, nearly 50 mid-level campus administrators from public and private universities and colleges nationwide gathered in New York City for a conference hosted by the Academic Engagement Network and did something relatively rare: they engaged seriously with questions about antisemitism and Jewish inclusion — issues their campuses are still grappling with more than two years after Oct. 7, 2023.

nicoletaionescu/Getty Images

Illustrative.

The highly visible manifestations of this crisis — from protests and encampments that violated reasonable time, place and manner restrictions of free expression to the harassment and isolation of Jewish students, federal Title VI investigations and headline-grabbing congressional testimonies — have a less-discussed root. Many university and college administrators and staff, including those on the front lines of institutional responses, have received little formal education about Jewish history, Jewish identity, or contemporary antisemitism. This dynamic is not primarily attributable to hostility or indifference; rather, it reflects a longstanding gap in institutional literacy regarding the Jewish experience.

On campuses, antisemitism remains among the least understood forms of discrimination. Many administrators who are deeply fluent in the history and mechanics of racism, sexism and other forms of bias have had little opportunity to learn about the diversity of Jewish identity or the ways antisemitism manifests in contemporary academic environments. The result is not a lack of concern, but a lack of preparation.

Administrators are also increasingly asked to navigate one of the most contested questions in contemporary campus life: the relationship between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. Reasonable people may disagree about where the line should be drawn in particular cases, but administrators need a sophisticated understanding of both Jewish identity and contemporary antisemitism to evaluate those situations thoughtfully. Too often, they are asked to make difficult judgments without adequate preparation or training.

There is also a reality that is rarely discussed publicly: Jewish faculty and staff across the country are experiencing ostracism, harassment and, in some cases, discriminatory treatment because of their Zionist identities. Administrators need to recognize this as a workplace concern, not merely a student-affairs issue — and many lack the frameworks necessary to do so effectively.

Meaningful engagement requires the creation of institutional spaces in which difficult conversations can occur outside the immediate pressures of crisis management, political polarization and social media diatribes. It means grappling with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a multifaceted and multi-perspective approach. It means asking administrators to do the same slow, deliberate, intentional and often uncomfortable work of building knowledge that we ask students to do — and trusting that doing so can change how people lead.

It also means bringing faculty and administrators into constructive dialogue with one another, rather than leaving them to operate in silos. The faculty experience of antisemitism and the administrator’s responsibility for campus climate are deeply connected, but in most institutions those conversations never happen in the same room. The value of convenings that bring together university leaders and faculty lies less in the learning from any single conference session than in the cumulative effect of sustained professional engagement over time — and in modeling what administrator-faculty collaboration looks like.

The gap between intention and action is wide. The mid-level administrators with whom I have had the privilege to work care deeply about their students, including Jewish students. But empathy alone cannot substitute for the knowledge and skills required to recognize antisemitism, support Jewish students effectively and respond appropriately when incidents occur. 

The mental health dimension is also real and underappreciated. Jewish students are experiencing measurable psychological harm in hostile campus environments, and administrators who work in counseling and student wellness need specific tools to address it.

Most importantly, when given the time, space and professional support to engage seriously with these issues, administrators grow in their capacity to lead. Such efforts rarely produce immediate transformation, but data from our yearlong professional development programs suggest they can foster meaningful changes in institutional awareness, professional practice and campus culture.

Addressing campus antisemitism cannot be understood solely as a legal or compliance challenge, although policy interventions remain important. At its core, combating campus antisemitism is an educational and institutional-capacity challenge. Administrators who participate in programs like the recent conference my organization hosted return to their campuses with more than new knowledge. They develop relationships with Jewish faculty and staff, connections with colleagues facing similar challenges and a professional community that makes this work more sustainable and effective.

Universities are increasingly judged not only by their stated commitments to inclusion, but by whether students actually experience those commitments in practice. For Jewish students, as for many others, a sense of belonging is shaped less by presidential statements than by everyday interactions with the administrators and staff who help define campus culture.

Because mid-level university and college staff are the officials who shape campus culture at institutions enrolling hundreds of thousands of students, the ripple effects are significant. Jewish students need administrators who are not only empathetic but informed, prepared and confident in responding to antisemitism. Building that capacity requires sustained investment in professional development. If universities are serious about creating campuses where Jewish students can thrive, educating the staff who shape students’ daily experiences is not a peripheral concern — it is an institutional imperative.

Stephanie G. Wapner is the director of administrator engagement programs at the Academic Engagement Network.