Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
It comes as the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act, passed under the previous Conservative government in 2023, imposes a duty on institutions to secure and promote freedom of speech so long as it is lawful – a duty which comes into force in August.
In its guidance, the OfS said: 'Higher education providers and constituent institutions should have a high tolerance for all kinds of lawful speech.
'There should be a very strong presumption in favour of permitting lawful speech.'
The guidance stated:
– Academic staff should not be constrained or pressured in their teaching to endorse or reject particular value judgements.
– Policies that regulate protests and demonstrations should not restrict these activities because they express or support a particular viewpoint so long as it is legal.
– Institutions should not encourage students or staff to report others over lawful expression of a particular point of view.
– The starting point of investigating any complaint relating to speech should be that lawful speech will not be punished because of a viewpoint that it expresses.
– Providers must take steps to secure freedom of speech for visiting speakers. A speaker who has been invited to speak should not be stopped from doing so on the grounds of their ideas or opinions.
The OfS made clear that it 'will not protect Holocaust denial'.
The guidance was published alongside a survey, conducted on behalf of the watchdog by YouGov, which revealed a fifth of academics (21%) feel 'not very free' or 'not at all free' to discuss challenging or controversial topics in their teaching, with almost a quarter (24%) of those citing fear of physical attack.
The percentage of those who do not feel free to teach controversial topics rises to a third for academics from ethnic minority backgrounds while female academics are more likely than their male counterparts to say they do not feel free discussing such topics in their teaching, research, speaking engagements or on social media.
The survey, undertaken by 1,234 respondents between March 15 and April 19 last year, also showed that the most common topic academics feel restricted in discussing is sex and gender, followed by race and racism.
Twenty-eight per cent of participants said their university has become less tolerant of a range of viewpoints during their tenure.
Just under half (46%) think their university would prioritise freedom of speech over not causing offence, while two-thirds (67%) believe their university would prioritise staff and/or students feeling safe over freedom of speech.
Arif Ahmed, director for freedom of speech and academic freedom at the OfS, said: 'The core mission of universities and colleges is the pursuit of knowledge. Free speech and academic freedom are fundamental to this purpose.
'Students need to know that they can freely share lawful views and opinions, and be prepared to hear a range of views as part of their studies. This includes things that they may find uncomfortable or shocking.
'By being exposed to a diversity of academic thought, students will develop their analytical and critical thinking skills.'
OfS chairman Professor Edward Peck, told MPs earlier this year that the watchdog's role in defending freedom of speech on campuses is 'absolutely crucial'.
'Universities, colleges and other providers should be places where ideas can be explored, examined, challenged, or disagreement can be facilitated. Where new viewpoints can be discovered,' he said.
'It's crucial – without that I don't think we'd have a university sector which would be the envy of the world as it is now. So that's my starting point.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
The Online Safety Act humiliates us all
Illustration by Gary Waters / Ikon Images Fear not, Britain is healing. Now you must risk having your identity being leaked if you want to watch porn. Our economy will lose no more precious dynamism to that wasteful outlet, and we will soon attain the highest sustained growth in the G7. Porn-mad illegal immigrants will reckon they are better off in pervy France. Lastly, of course, once our pent-up ranks inevitably take to robust exercise, our national security will be secured by a new breed of super-fit super-soldiers. Economic stability, secure borders, and national security – remember those? They were the new government's quite reasonable 'foundations'. Them fastened, Starmer was to pursue a happily honed briefcase of just five missions. The country needed to kickstart growth, future-proof the NHS, smash the class ceiling, make the streets safe and discover abundant clean energy. And so, if leadership is the art of prioritisation, it is unclear why Keir Starmer's party is spending so much energy on the Online Safety Act. As an exercise it does not appear to support any of the main goals. It seems only to have created unnecessary strain in national politics. At the time of writing, there are more than 450,000 people with doubts. That is how many signatories there are on the petition, 'Repeal the Online Safety Act' on Parliament's website. The petition is supported by both left and right, Nigel Farage and Owen Jones. The Act was meant to stop children seeing harmful content online. It demanded that websites verify users' ages and withhold sensitive content until they do so. Now, any adult who wants to watch porn must upload a driver's license, a scan of their face or another form of identification the site they wish to use. For too many adults, age requirements amount to a ban. The fear of extortion and humiliation are just too high. There is already a lucrative blackmail industry based around getting that information and extorting people with the threat of public release. A country with a rich population being forced to attach identifying information to their consumption will attract hackers from around the world. Data is also leaked for emotional, impulsive reasons. In 2015, vigilante hackers leaked the userbase of adultery arrangement website Ashley Madison. A similar story broke this week, with eerie advances in the tech. Tea was a site for American women to gossip about men. In revenge, hackers published an interactive map of America with a pin on the homes of every user, which shows their name and picture when you click it. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe And anyway, practically, the government cannot produce first-rate technological solutions. Most Brits older than ten will remember the way the government's home-made tracker app came out the box already creaking. So, most Brits older than ten will have about zero faith in the state's ability to outwit motivated hackers. Luckily, most Brits older than ten are also able to outwit the state themselves. After the Act came into force, the UK app stores' charts were all topped by virtual private network (VPN) apps. These apps, which anyone can use, allow users to spoof their location as if they were in another country, thereby sidestepping the government's measures. Secretary of State for science, innovation and technology Peter Kyle was reduced to asking people to follow his law and not download VPNs. Leadership is also the art of explanation. You must delineate a series of because-answers connecting decisions to the overall goals, and also to the everyday, personal interests of your electorate. If they raise doubts, you should explain why the decision makes sense. If you cannot, you should rethink the decision. The Navy Seal leadership manual I consulted for this piece said the worst thing you can do is tell your troops, in the manner of an exhausted parent, 'because I said so!' Its musclebound author apparently did not imagine he would need to caution against an even laster last resort: 'because if you don't, you support paedophiles.' And yet! The government could have treated its public as intelligent adults with whom it can reason. Instead, Kyle posted: 'If you want to overturn the Online Safety Act you are on the side of predators.' On Sky News the same day, he said 'Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he'd be perpetrating his crimes online. And Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side.' Starmer has admirable qualities, but he is also a moralising disciplinarian reflexively becoming more and more himself amid the troubles of a hard first year. Labour struggles, people get locked up for tweets. Labour struggles, people can't protest for Palestine. Labour struggles, people can't watch porn. Now, keeping children away from porn is as wise, if not wiser, than keeping them away from cigarettes. But even if we could enforce it, which we can't, this policy is not the way to do it. The government should withdraw the act and Kyle should apologise to Farage. Starmer, meanwhile, should stick to the strategy. [See more: Bonnie Blue has no limits] Related
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
Chinese university students told to spy on classmates, report says
Chinese students at UK universities are being pressured to spy on their classmates in an attempt to suppress the discussion of issues that are sensitive to the Chinese government, a new report UK-China Transparency (UKCT) think tank says its survey of academics in China studies also highlighted reports of Chinese government officials warning lecturers to avoid discussing certain topics in their comes days after a new law came into force placing more responsibility on universities to uphold academic freedom and free Chinese embassy in London called the report "groundless and absurd", adding that China respects freedom of speech in the UK and elsewhere. The regulator, the Office for Students (OfS), says freedom of speech and academic freedom are "fundamental" to higher new legislation, which came into force last week, says universities should do more to actively promote academic freedom and freedom of speech, including in cases where institutions have agreements in place with other could be fined millions if they fail to do so, the OfS has the UKCT report says some universities are reluctant to address the issue of Chinese interference because of their financial reliance on Chinese student fees. The report alleges that some Chinese academics involved in sensitive research had been denied visas by the Chinese government, while others said family members back in China had been harassed or threatened because of their work in the sensitive topics can range from science and tech to politics and humanities, the report says, such as alleged ethnic cleansing in China's Xinjiang region, the outbreak of Covid or the rise of Chinese technology academics reported intimidation by visiting scholars or other Chinese officials, as well as by staff at Confucius are partnership organisations operating at several UK universities, which bring together institutions in the UK and China, as well as a Chinese government agency which provides promote Chinese culture and language on UK campuses, but have been criticised over alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party. OfS chief executive Susan Lapworth previously said she expected Confucius Institutes to be looked into under the new free speech laws, over concerns that they could present a threat to free speech on OfS already has powers to ensure free speech is upheld by universities, including against any threats from the influence of foreign states or powers are due to be strengthened with a new complaints system, in which university staff members and visiting speakers will be able to raise issues directly with the regulator also said universities should amend or terminate any agreements which threatened free speech on campus, including scholarships or schemes funded by foreign BBC understands the OfS expects universities to have "an appropriate level of curiosity" about any such arrangements, regardless of any potential loss of income for the university.A Chinese embassy spokesperson said the country had always adhered to its policy of not interfering with other countries' internal the UKCT says its survey responses from academics suggested some students from China had told their lecturers they had been asked to spy on their peers by Chinese students, of various nationalities, reported being uncomfortable discussing issues in class deemed sensitive to the Chinese government, and were reluctant to pursue further academic interest in these subjects, the report Minister Jacqui Smith said any attempt by a foreign state to intimidate, harass or harm individuals in the UK "will not be tolerated". "We are also working directly with the Office for Students to support universities in safeguarding free speech and tackling any form of harassment on campus," she said academic freedom was "non-negotiable in our world-leading institutions", adding that the implementation of the new legislation made that "explicitly clear".The record £585,000 fine handed down by the OfS earlier this year has "put universities on notice" that they must do their part to protect these freedoms, she added, or they will "face the consequences".Additional reporting by Education Editor Branwen Jeffreys
BBC News
5 hours ago
- BBC News
Government pledges extra £100m funding to tackle people smuggling
The Home Office has announced £100m in extra funding as part of efforts to crack down on illegal people smuggling in the English money will pay for up to 300 additional National Crime Agency (NCA) officers as well as new technology and than 25,000 people made the journey from France to the UK in small boats before the end of July, a record for this point in the Secretary Yvette Cooper said the move would help the UK better "track the [smuggling] gangs and bring them down". The Conservative Party called it a "desperate grab for headlines which will make no real difference". Last month, the government agreed a "one in, one out" pilot scheme with France which aims to deter migrants from crossing the Channel. Under the scheme, some arrivals would be returned to France and in exchange the UK would accept an equivalent number of asylum seekers, subject to security to the Home Office, the new £100m will boost border security and strengthen investigations targeting smuggling kingpins who have operations across Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Cooper said gangs had shown a "a ruthless ability to adapt their tactics and maximise their profits, no matter how many lives they put at risk".The NCA has 91 ongoing investigations into people-smuggling networks affecting the UK, the agency's director general of operations Rob Jones said. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp accused Labour of having "no serious plan" to tackle the issue."The British public deserves real action, not empty slogans and tinkering at the edges," he in the Daily Express, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said it was an effort to "throw taxpayer money at the illegal immigration crisis and hope it will go away"."Another £100 million here or there won't move the needle. It won't stop the boats or the gangs," he and previous Conservative governments have both struggled to reduce the number of people coming to the UK illegally in small Conservatives had proposed sending arrivals to Rwanda, but the scheme was delayed by legal challenges. The general election was called before it could be of Sir Keir Starmer's first acts as prime minister was to scrap the plan, calling it a another measure, which was revealed on Sunday, people advertising illegal Channel crossings online could face up to five years in prison under a new offence the government plans to illegal immigration to the UK is already a crime, but officials believe the new offence would give police and other agencies more power to disrupt criminal would criminalise the creation of material for publication online which promotes or offers services that facilitate a breach of UK immigration would include people using social media to advertise fake passports or visas, or the promise of illegal work opportunities in the UK, and as well as jail time could carry a large fine.
