logo
#

Latest news with #HigherEducation(

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

Leader Live

time19-06-2025

  • Politics
  • Leader Live

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. 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.'

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

North Wales Chronicle

time19-06-2025

  • Politics
  • North Wales Chronicle

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. 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.'

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

South Wales Guardian

time19-06-2025

  • Politics
  • South Wales Guardian

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. 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.'

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows
Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

Rhyl Journal

time19-06-2025

  • Politics
  • Rhyl Journal

Fifth of academics do not feel free to teach controversial topics, survey shows

The Office for Students (OfS) gave examples of how universities and colleges should respond to scenarios surrounding freedom of speech in its guidance published on Thursday, including around protests, investigating staff and student complaints and ensuring speakers are not stopped from expressing their ideas or opinions. 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.'

Fining Kathleen Stock's university does not protect free speech
Fining Kathleen Stock's university does not protect free speech

Yahoo

time26-03-2025

  • Politics
  • Yahoo

Fining Kathleen Stock's university does not protect free speech

The University of Sussex has been fined £585,000 by the higher-education regulator, the Office for Students, for its handling of the resignation of Professor Kathleen Stock. The OfS claims that the university was in breach of 'our free speech and academic freedom requirements' and also found fault with 'the university's management and governance practices'. Specifically, the OfS criticised the university's Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement, which it said had created a 'chilling effect' for staff and students who felt unable to voice gender-critical opinions. Some are heralding this news as a free-speech victory: a public recognition of the disgraceful treatment of Stock by the university is indeed welcome, as even now many fail to see why the whole debacle was so damning for free speech on campus and personally distressing for her. This kind of external intervention by a regulator is needed, some argue, and they welcome the new powers the OfS might enjoy following the implementation of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act. I am not cheering, though, despite being a free-speech absolutist. Sussex was my alma mater, and believe me, the problem with censorious behaviour long predates the Stock affair. The trans issue was just starting to crop up on campus in my second year; friends of mine were being ostracised from the leftie pools we all swam in for being perplexed with the demand that 'trans women were women'. By the end of my time there, Judith Butler may as well have been handing out the handshakes at our graduation ceremony. Among both staff and students there were political biases that were hard to challenge for fear of being stigmatised. The OfS claim that censorship was a top-down imposition by policies is at best generous, at worst inaccurate – the problem with free speech on campus runs much deeper. It's for this reason that fines and legal wrangling is not the solution for those of us who care about fighting censorship. Free speech has long been in crisis on campus. You could crack that nut with fines and legislation, court rulings and government finger-wagging. But state supervision of universities is not going to solve the campus censorship crisis, nor is it something true freedom lovers should be comfortable with. Take the response from Sussex University's vice-chancellor Professor Sasha Roseneil, who has managed to turn the ruling into a fight about minority rights. 'We will strongly contest these findings and have grave concerns about the implications of its decisions for students and staff, especially those from minoritised groups', she wrote in an article for Politics Home. The university's response to the ruling was to argue that it will now be all but 'impossible for universities to prevent abuse, harassment or bullying on campuses'. Such histrionic blindness to the issue at hand shows how deep the rot goes when it comes to campus censorship. Things are changing – and not thanks to ministers or regulators. Instead, what has opened up a chink of light for discussion about free speech on campus is individuals sticking their neck on the line. The trans issue has been the most influential in both escalating and challenging a culture of conformity on campus. Ever since women like Stock, or Jo Phoenix, went public, it has shone a spotlight on the inadequacy of our universities when it comes to defending free expression. Free speech can't be imposed; it has to be the foundation of a university from which everything else follows. We need to win the battle of ideas on campus – that means more students involved in fighting for free speech by holding public discussions and standing up for their peers to disagree with them on contentious issues. It means staff rediscovering their mettle and refusing to be bullied by administrative bodies waving policy documents. And finally, change will also have to come from outside the campus walls, where the censorious cry of 'you can't say that' just doesn't wash anymore. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store