INTRODUCTION 2
In the summer of 1964, Virginia Governor Albertis Harrison placed a telephone call that would alter the course of higher education in Virginia The call was to Dr Dana
B Hamel, then Director of the Roanoke Technical Institute in Roanoke, Virginia
Governor Harrison, a strong advocate for industrial growth in Virginia, reached out to Dr Hamel to invite him to become the Director of the new Virginia Department of Technical Education This department, along with its Board, aimed to create a network of technical colleges across the state, with the first college set to open in the fall of 1965 Harrison's initiative not only provided training and educational opportunities for Virginians but also fostered a shift away from the divisive climate of Massive Resistance.
The Massive Resistance period, which began in 1956, refers to a series of state laws enacted in response to the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown vs Board of Education Coined by Virginia Senator Harry F Byrd, the term encapsulated the opposition to desegregation in Virginia's public schools These laws aimed to uphold segregated education by withholding state funding from school districts that attempted to integrate Governor Harrison recognized the significant social issues arising from these laws.
From 1958 to 1962, while serving as Virginia's Attorney General, Harrison personally opposed the Massive Resistance laws; however, his official role required him to uphold these laws in legal cases before both the Virginia and United States Supreme Courts.
Within Virginia’s higher education community, especially its traditionally all- white colleges and universities, desegregation was proceeding, but at a very slow pace
In 1965, six of the 19 traditionally all-white colleges and universities in Virginia were enrolling undergraduate African-American students, with a combined total enrollment of
In 1967, a group of 46 students was noted in a report by Piedmont Dr Dana Hamel emphasized that the newly established Board did not have any directives concerning race or desegregation, and the topic of race was not addressed during the creation of the technical college system (personal communication, June 5).
2013) The enrollment policy in the technical college system, from the outset, was open door; a distinction still held today in the community college sector regarding access
(Cohen, Brawer, & Kisker, 2014) All would be admitted regardless of race or gender The technical college system grew quickly and with it came a new landscape for
Virginia’s post-secondary education institutions
During the 1950s, Virginia's higher education institutions initiated desegregation, marked by the University of Virginia and The College of William and Mary admitting their first African-American students (Picott, 1958).
In 1950, the University of Virginia made history by admitting its first African-American student to its law school, paving the way for greater diversity in legal education Inspired by this progress, the College of William & Mary followed suit in 1951, enrolling its inaugural African-American student into its law program.
& Mary, 2015) In 1953, Virginia Tech (then known as Virginia Polytechnic Institute) became the first four-year traditionally all-white university within the 11 former
Confederate states to begin accepting undergraduate African-American students (Virginia Tech University, 2015) Progress was being made, albeit very slowly
In the K-12 education system, the court-ordered desegregation sparked significant backlash across Southern states, leading to the enactment of laws designed to oppose the Supreme Court's ruling Virginia responded with the Massive Resistance laws in reaction to the 1954 Supreme Court decision This landmark ruling in Brown v Board of Education overturned the longstanding principle of "separate but equal."
Plessey v Ferguson (1896) The 1954 Supreme Court ruling declared separate was not equal, thus abolishing segregated K-12 schools
In the Congress of the United States in 1956, under the Leadership of South Carolina Senator Strom Thurman, Southern Congressmen and Senators signed the
In response to the Brown v Board of Education ruling, the Southern Manifesto was created to protest against desegregation (Day, 2014) Following this, Virginia lawmakers, influenced by Senator Harry F Byrd, enacted several state laws that limited the ability of African-American students to enroll in previously all-white schools.
The set of bills, known as the Massive Resistance laws, were passed in a special session of the Virginia General Assembly in 1956 (Virginia Foundation for the
In 1956, the Virginia Assembly enacted a pupil placement act that replaced local school boards with a centralized Pupil Placement Board, appointed by the Governor, to determine student school placements Additionally, legislation (S 56) was introduced to restrict state funding and potentially close school districts that complied with the 1954 Supreme Court ruling in Brown v Board of Education, with the Governor holding the authority to decide on school closures.
In response to the Brown v Board of Education decision, all public schools in Prince Edward County were closed for five years, significantly impacting local education (Bonastia, 2012) Additionally, schools in Norfolk and Arlington experienced closures, although for a shorter duration.
The 1902 State Constitution, in effect in 1956, prohibited the attendance of "white and colored children" in the same schools (Sec 140) Additionally, Section 141 explicitly banned the use of state funds for private education.
In 1956, the Commonwealth of Virginia's Massive Resistance legislation aimed to implement a voucher system for funding white students' attendance at private schools This push for change culminated in a Constitutional convention, during which seven amendments concerning public education were proposed to modify the Virginia Constitution.
Virginia's official response to the Brown v Board of Education ruling, known as Massive Resistance, persisted until 1970 (Eckhart, 2008) Understanding this movement requires recognizing the historical context: nearly a century had passed since the Civil War, yet much of the South remained resistant to racial equality despite national progress The 1896 Supreme Court decision in Plessy v Ferguson reinforced the notion of "separate but equal," perpetuating the belief in African-American inferiority, a doctrine that had governed Virginia for over fifty years (United States Supreme Court, 1896).
Albertis Harrison played a crucial yet often overlooked role in the establishment of Virginia's technical and community college systems His public service career began in 1931 as the Attorney for Brunswick County, culminating in a 15-year tenure on the State’s Supreme Court before his retirement in 1982 Notably, Harrison is one of the few individuals to have served across all three branches of Virginia's government During his time in the Senate from 1948 to 1957, he notably opposed the Massive Resistance legislation proposed by Senator Harry F Byrd, demonstrating his commitment to progressive educational policies As Governor from 1962, Harrison continued to influence the state's educational landscape significantly.
In 1966, significant changes occurred in Virginia's society and workforce under Harrison's leadership, as he increased funding for both K-12 and higher education to address the need for industrialization and modernization in the state's economy His vision and political ingenuity led to the establishment of technical colleges, providing thousands with access to post-secondary education and job training, which had been previously unavailable.
LITERATURE REVIEW 18
To establish its community college system, Virginia required the alignment of key elements: funding, public motivation, and political vision For decades, federal legislation had provided financial support for vocational education, making it logical for Virginia, which initially developed as a network of vocational-technical colleges, to pursue these federal funding sources In the early 20th century, Virginia's educational leaders primarily associated vocational education with high schools rather than colleges, shaping the foundation of the state's educational framework.
As Virginia’s technical college system began to emerge in the mid-1960s, there existed a number of post-high school technical colleges operated by the Virginia
The Polytechnic Institute and the University of Virginia established branch campuses that primarily offered two-year vocational-technical training With the evolution of the technical college system, these university branches were integrated into the newly formed two-year technical college system, enhancing access to post-secondary education and vocational training (Hamel, 1972).
The establishment of a college system was driven by the motivation and public will to counter the Massive Resistance movement of the 1950s and 1960s This movement emerged in reaction to the landmark Brown v Board of Education rulings, which aimed to dismantle racial segregation in public schools.
1954 and 1955 mandating desegregation of public school systems throughout the United States Virginia’s response created a climate highly negative to education and business
Perceived as an anti-education state, Virginia faced a decline in business investments, prompting many investors to favor North Carolina for new operations (Lechner, 1998) In response to this unfavorable business climate, the Virginia Industrialization Group was formed, bringing together prominent leaders from Virginia's business and industry sectors (Saunders, 1980) This group included several individuals who would later become founding members of the Board of Technical Education, highlighting its significance in revitalizing Virginia's economic landscape For more details on the membership of the Virginia Industrialization Group, refer to Appendix C.
The Virginia Industrialization Group, emerging from the Massive Resistance movement, played a significant role in advancing both business and technical education Although the group's influence on the development of technical and community college education in Virginia remains undocumented, historical records suggest a strong link between the Industrialization Group and the establishment of Virginia's community college system.
Governor Albertis Harrison had the political vision to create a technical and subsequent community college system in Virginia Prior to becoming Governor,
Harrison had spent most of his adult life in public service as a member of the state
Assembly and eventually Attorney General (State of Virginia, 1995) While running for governor, he campaigned on a platform of jobs and industrialization (State of Virginia,
1995) As Governor, Harrison appointed former Virginia Industrialization Group
Richard Holmquist served as an Industrial Development advisor with an annual salary of $25,000 funded by the Virginia Industrialization Group His advisory role was instrumental in establishing the Virginia Division of Industrial Development and Planning, which was initially directed by Joseph G Hamrick Hamrick, also a member of the Virginia Industrialization Group, frequently attended meetings of the Board for Technical Education.
Harry F Byrd and his associates likely did not anticipate that their ill-conceived Massive Resistance movement would inadvertently pave the way for the establishment of Virginia's first truly open higher education institutions When the inaugural technical colleges launched in the fall of 1965, they welcomed all individuals seeking education, regardless of economic, racial, or ethnic backgrounds This initiative emerged at a critical time, marking a significant shift in access to education in Virginia.
METHODOLOGY 55
The project commenced with interviews of Dr Dana B Hamel, the founding Director of the Virginia Technical College System and later the Chancellor of the Virginia Community College System Through these discussions, I uncovered a significant gap in research regarding the establishment of technical colleges Additionally, Dr Hamel provided me with important documents and materials that further enriched my understanding of this topic.
I located from various libraries and archives, corroborated what he had told me
The oral history interviews, along with primary and secondary documents, provided a chronological context for the events leading to the establishment of the colleges Key occurrences during this period included the landmark Brown v Board of Education ruling, the phenomenon of Massive Resistance, the expansion of federal legislation promoting higher education, and targeted federal initiatives supporting vocational and technical education.
The oral history project with Dana Hamel provided a clear framework for my research, focusing on the detailed minutes from the initial meetings of the Board for Technical Education These minutes, covering the period from July 1964 to February 1966 with a gap until May 1966, were meticulously documented Dr Hamel's expertise in interpreting these minutes proved essential, eliminating ambiguity and enhancing the accuracy of our analysis.
The documentary method, utilizing archival and primary documents, effectively contextualizes the establishment of the Virginia Technical College System within the significant political and social changes occurring in Virginia from 1955 to 1965 This era was marked by the state's leadership's strong commitment to implementing Massive Resistance policies.
Resistance caused significant harm to the public education system By integrating oral history methods with documentary evidence, a narrative can be constructed that reflects both personal experiences and situational contexts (Wagner, 2004).
“I can’t begin to tell you the things I discovered while I was looking for something else.” Shelby Foote (Coleman, Faulkner, & Kennedy, 1999, p 54)
This study reveals three key findings regarding the creation of the Virginia Technical College System (VTCS) Firstly, a combination of complex sociopolitical factors, available funding, and a stagnant industrial sector contributed to a contested environment in Virginia Secondly, business and economic influences served as significant drivers for change, fueling the demand for the VTCS Lastly, strong leadership, particularly from Dana Hamel, and the formation of collaborative relationships were essential for the establishment of the technical colleges.
From 1954 to 1959, Virginia implemented Massive Resistance laws aimed at blocking the desegregation of public schools following the Brown rulings, which prompted a nationwide reevaluation of racial relations State leaders, particularly Senator Harry F Byrd, took extreme measures, including amending the 1902 Constitution, to resist desegregation This defiance created a contentious atmosphere marked by social, political, and economic tensions, leading to a persistent power struggle between Virginia's State Rights advocates and the Federal Judiciary Ultimately, this conflict harmed the state's reputation, public school system, and business sectors.
The establishment of the Virginia Technical College System (VTCS) emerged from a significant intersection of influences, primarily driven by the Virginia Industrialization Group, a coalition of influential business, newspaper, and industry leaders The reinforcement of segregation laws severely impacted Virginia's public education system and tarnished the state's national reputation Had it not been for Virginia's extreme response to the 1954 and 1955 Brown v Board of Education rulings, the motivation to develop a college system like the VTCS might have remained unattainable.
In 1957, Lindsay Almond was elected Governor of Virginia, where he upheld the hardline desegregation policies of his predecessor, Thomas Stanley A strong proponent of the Massive Resistance laws, Almond is infamously known for closing public schools in various regions of the state Previously serving as Virginia’s Attorney General, he played a significant role in the landmark case of Davis v County School Board of Prince Edward County, which became one of the five cases included in the historic Brown v Board of Education ruling.
Education case argued before the U S Supreme Court in 1954 (Library of Virginia,
In 2015, Almond exhibited a closer connection to the Brown rulings compared to other elected officials in Virginia; however, this relationship did not lead him to embrace or comprehend the significant changes these rulings entailed.
Effective leadership is characterized by a commitment to doing what is right, as noted by Northouse (2013) While the definition of "right" may evolve with changing circumstances, a leader's core values should remain consistent, even in the face of contradictory positions In Virginia, Almond and several elected officials were influenced by the Byrd Machine, led by Harry F Byrd, who championed Massive Resistance and anticipated that his followers would uphold this agenda.
In early 1959, the United States District Court in Norfolk and the Virginia Supreme Court declared the Massive Resistance laws unconstitutional, marking a significant turning point in Virginia's political landscape (Library of Virginia, 2015) This ruling, combined with pressure from the state's business community in December 1958, placed Governor Almond at a crucial juncture He faced the dilemma of either continuing to advocate for Massive Resistance or adhering to the judicial decisions of both federal and state courts, risking opposition from influential political figures like Harry F Byrd.
Almond chose to do the right thing and defy the kingmaker
Almond was a lawyer and a former Attorney General for the State of Virginia
As Governor, he understood the law and recognized that defying it was not a viable option In a 1968 oral history interview with the John F Kennedy Library, Almond reflected on that period and his decision to part ways with Harry F Byrd.
In January 1959, following the Courts' ruling, Almond met with Byrd to address the situation Almond believed that Byrd's Massive Resistance movement was doomed to fail, but Byrd refused to accept this outcome.
Despite my efforts to engage him in reasoning, Byrd remained steadfast, insisting, “We can’t do it We must stand our ground against any integration in Virginia.” I ultimately responded, “Senator, I’ve exhausted all avenues available to me, except for violating federal law.”
I can’t do that as governor.” So from that conference our relations became more or less strained (sec 4)
In early February 1959, Almond stepped in front of the General Assembly of Virginia and logically and calmly presented his case for withdrawing support of Massive
In the late 1950s, Virginia's contested environment fostered the emergence of a new higher education model, paving the way for the establishment of the VTCS This period was characterized by the rise of Massive Resistance, a series of segregationist laws designed to oppose U.S Supreme Court rulings.
Brown v Board of Education catalyzed significant social change, leading to the closure of public schools and a halt in industrial investment in Virginia In 1958, the Virginia Industrialization Group held a tense dinner meeting with Governor Lindsay Almond to oppose the Massive Resistance policies Shortly after this exchange, Governor Almond publicly retracted his support for Massive Resistance, influenced by the group's pressure and recent Supreme Court rulings.
Resistance was an unsustainable cause
The Virginia Industrialization Group aimed to revitalize the state's industrial sector by developing a large, well-trained labor force They proposed establishing technical education centers across Virginia to facilitate this initiative, emphasizing the importance of a skilled workforce for economic growth.
CONCLUSIONS 96
In the late 1950s, Virginia's contested environment fostered the emergence of a new model of higher education, paving the way for the establishment of the VTCS This period was marked by the rise of Massive Resistance, a series of segregationist laws designed to challenge the U.S Supreme Court's decisions on desegregation.
Brown v Board of Education sparked significant social change, leading to the closure of public schools and halting industrial investment in Virginia In 1958, the Virginia Industrialization Group met with Governor Lindsay Almond to express their opposition to Massive Resistance, resulting in a tense exchange Shortly thereafter, Governor Almond publicly retracted his support for Massive Resistance, influenced by the pressure from the Industrialization Group and various Supreme Court rulings.
Resistance was an unsustainable cause
The Virginia Industrialization Group aimed to revitalize the state's industrial sector by establishing a system of technical education centers These centers were designed to quickly develop a large, well-trained labor force, supporting the overall healing process of Virginia's economy.
In the early 1960s, Virginia was primarily a rural state, with key population hubs in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads, while major universities were concentrated around Richmond, except for Virginia Polytechnic Institute in Blacksburg To develop a workforce ready for industry, Richard Holmquist advocated for a statewide technical education system To enhance public understanding of the necessity and structure of such institutions, he collaborated with Dr Dana B Hamel during his speaking engagements.
1964 (“ABIDC Meets at Hopewell,” 1964) At the time, Dr Hamel was the Director of the Roanoke Technical Institute; the only technical institute in the State
In 1962, Hamel was appointed as the Director of the Institute in Virginia, bringing with him significant experience from his previous roles in Ohio, including Acting President of the Ohio Mechanics Institute (Strother, 1964) As a recognized expert in technical education, Hamel enhanced the credibility of the advocacy by Holmquist and Hamrick for the establishment of a vocational system of technical education in Virginia.
In 1961, former Governor Lindsay Almond appointed Holmquist as an industrial development consultant, a role he maintained under Governor Harrison after his election in 1962 In 1963, Governor Harrison brought Hamrick on board to lead the initiative.
Division of Industrial Development The Virginia Industrialization Group paid
Holmquist and Hamrick’s salaries, in full or in part during this timeframe I have found no evidence indicating Hamel was ever officially affiliated with the Virginia
In March 1964, House Bill 205 was enacted in Virginia, establishing the Department of Technical Education and the Board for Technical Education Following this, Joseph Hamrick, alongside SCHEV Director William McFarlane, recommended Dr Dana B Hamel for the role of Director of the Board Subsequently, in July 1964, Governor Harrison appointed Dr Hamel as the Director of the Department of Technical Education.
The establishment of the Virginia Technical College System (VTCS) is a significant historical narrative shaped by various social, political, and economic forces This study explores critical questions about the creation of technical colleges, including whether race and open admissions were considered in the decision-making process Additionally, it examines the rationale behind the selection of Dana Hamel as the first director and later Chancellor of the VTCS.
Virginia Community College System, and not someone else? Each of these questions are addressed and discussed separately
According to the minutes documenting the meetings from July 1964 through May
In 1965, the Board for Technical Education did not engage in discussions about segregation or admissions policies for technical colleges, raising questions about whether race was ever a topic of conversation The meeting minutes do not indicate any such discussions, and I could not confirm if they occurred elsewhere Dr Hamel highlighted the importance of understanding the establishment of these colleges within the context of the contentious Massive Resistance era and emphasized the goal of preparing an industry-ready labor force Despite the polarized social climate, Hamel noted that race was not officially addressed in relation to admission requirements, likely influenced by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was enacted on July 2 of that year.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it illegal for educational institutions, including technical schools, to engage in discriminatory admissions practices Following the signing of this landmark legislation, the inaugural meeting of the Board for Technical Education took place on July 14, 1964 To qualify for federal funding, technical colleges were required to adopt non-discriminatory admission policies that prohibited bias based on race, color, or ethnic origin.
Hamel highlights the absence of discussions regarding race-based admission limitations, which is evident when examining the historical context of the Virginia Industrialization Group This group consisted of businessmen dedicated to enhancing technical education to boost the state's skilled labor pool, recognizing that a well-trained workforce was crucial for the prosperity of Virginia's business sector Key figures such as Stuart Saunders and Richard played significant roles in this initiative.
Holmquist, Joseph Hamrick and Lewis Powell, all key players in the Virginia
Industrialization Group, were interested in the promotion of business and industry throughout the state The former prosperous business climate in Virginia had grown stagnant as a result of Massive Resistance
In a confidential 1958 letter to Stuart Saunders and Harvie Wilkinson, Lewis Powell highlighted Virginia's stagnation in attracting major new industries, stating, “Virginia has already come to a virtual standstill in terms of major new industries locating here.” He emphasized that “there will be no substantial new capital investment in Virginia until this crisis is satisfactorily resolved,” referring to the ongoing issue of Massive Resistance.
Powell’s letter demonstrates the Groups opposition to every aspect of the Massive
The Massive Resistance movement significantly hindered industrial development in Virginia, as highlighted by Stuart Saunders, who noted that it posed one of the greatest obstacles to progress (Saunders, 1980) This movement not only promoted segregation in education but also led to a chaotic public school system, which threatened the state's economic growth (Saunders, 1980) The resulting decline in education created a less skilled workforce, deterring business investors from establishing operations in Virginia (Powell, 1958) Addressing the challenges posed by Massive Resistance was crucial for promoting industry and improving the state's economic prospects.
The Virginia Industrialization Group, as revealed in the Lewis Powell papers at Washington and Lee University, demonstrates a high level of organization and intent in their initiatives Their influence was pivotal in persuading Governor Almond to distance himself from the policy of Massive Resistance, and they played a crucial role in establishing a distinct Virginia Division of Industrial Development within the state government Additionally, the Group financially supported key personnel, including underwriting Holmquist’s and part of Hamrick’s salaries Notably, before the early 1960s, Industrial Development was integrated into the Department of Conservation and Planning (Saunders, 1980).
The Virginia Industrialization Group aimed to promote vocational-technical education to attract and retain industry in the state, recognizing the need for a well-trained labor force Richard Holmquist and Joseph Hamrick led the marketing efforts for industrial and technical education, enlisting Dana Hamel to help educate the public on its significance.