Search

According to the ACLU (2005), ". . .at times of national stress -- real or imagined -- First Amendment rights come under enormous pressure." So, too, academic freedom of expression for faculty, staff, and students has become a casualty in the post-9/11 world. Academics were criticized and reprimanded for not being patriotic enough. Using a conceptual framework that includes historical reanalysis, terror management theory, contradictory constructions of patriotism, and electronic discourse, this essay explores the nexus between patriotism and free expression in higher education. We examine historical trends in freedom of expression, analyze three higher education case studies (Chilling Churchill; 9/11 and Middle Eastern Studies; and Shunning Bob Jensen), and suggest why patriotism and censorship go hand and glove in times of national crisis. We end one a cautionary note, expressing concern about how easily words can be turned against academics, the very people who should have the highest level of protection for their words. Nearly 20 years ago, Professor Pat Somers joined the faculty at the University of Texas at Austin bringing her trademark wit and her seemingly indefatigable energy to root out injustice. The paper below represents one such branch of her academic curiosity in response to a perceived injustice to a fellow member of the Academy. This paper was first presented as a draft manuscript at the American Educational Research Association and later submitted to a notable journal. Unfortunately, a second paper on academic freedom was already included in the edition, but the editors encouraged Pat and her team to pursue other publications. And then, as with many things, this paper fell to the side as Pat pursued a new branch of academic curiosity and stewarded her many doctoral students through the dissertation process. As you will note in the dedication, Pat was a deeply curious and pedagogically dynamic member of the Academy and this paper stands at the ready for updating and resubmission. We present it today unadulterated as a testimony to Pat's prescience, her passion and her drive -- a historical glimpse into the early days of a very real threat to academic freedom that persists today.

As a fundamental communication tool, media has undergone transformative changes throughout history. This has a lot to do with education. Each era has been characterized by its own unique media paradigms, from the invention of the printing press in the 15th century to the emergence of radio and television in the 20th century. These paradigms not only define how information is disseminated but also shape the social and political landscapes of their respective periods. In the modern age, the emergence of digital technology and the internet has brought about a new media paradigm that deeply influences every aspect of human interaction and the fabric of society. Today, new media, characterized by its interactivity, decentralization, and unprecedented access, dominates our daily lives. The significance of new media, which affects individual behaviors and global politics, economy, and cultures, cannot be underestimated. This process is also of great importance in terms of education. In particular, media literacy education will enable the individual to personally prepare for or otherwise intervene in the positive or negative aspects of their interaction with the media. From connecting distant communities to altering the dynamics of political campaigns, the impact of new media is ubiquitous. However, along with these advantages, new challenges have also emerged. One of the most concerning aspects of this shift in media is the potential for its exploitation by malicious groups, particularly evident in the rise of "terror agencies" utilizing new media platforms. These organizations adeptly employ new media tools for propaganda, recruitment, and operations, forming a symbiotic relationship that poses significant threats to global security. This article explores how new media paradigms enable the existence of terrorist organizations, the place of education in this regard, and what this complex relationship means for our interconnected world.

Recent efforts prohibiting race-related diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have informed localized public pushback narrating anti-equity campaigns. Emerging research and media accounts have largely focused on adults engaged with or against these efforts, with less attention on youth and their perceptions of these campaigns. To center youth voice, we analyzed 224 student newspaper articles published in Carmel, Indiana and Loudoun County, Virginia--two sites replete with localized contestations of equity reform. Using narrative policy analysis and approaches to counter-narratives, findings demonstrate youths' roles as engaged policy actors as student journalists highlighted forms of political engagement and action in their local contexts. We include recommendations for school leaders and policymakers to promote youth voice and engagement in education governance.

Democracy is increasingly being challenged, by disengagement and by anti-pluralist movements (Levitsky and Ziblatt in How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future, Viking, New York, 2018; Wikforss in "Därför demokrati. Om kunskapen och folkstyret" [Because of this, democracy. On knowledge and people's rule] Fri Tanke, 2021; Svolik et al. in J Democr 34(1):5-20, 2023). This article draws upon a theoretical discussion about democracy, pluralism, and threats to democracy. Departing from Dewey, Laclau, Mouffe, Young and Allen, we address democracy as an ideology that centers around pluralism, or an ever-increasing inclusion of voices from the margins as its goal. We argue that perceiving democracy pedagogically as a pluralistic ideology would support students' democratic citizenship and equip them for a world where threats to democracy are being reported. Employing a case study on Finnish social studies textbooks, we analyze how democracy as well as threats to democracy are discursively portrayed. Our study shows that the textbooks present democracy as predominantly institutional and static. We also find that while disengagement is portrayed as a problem for democracy, anti-pluralist movements are generally not referred to as a threat. Additionally, we examine a discourse in the textbooks that connects freedom of speech with democracy in a way that favors a multitude of opinions, even antidemocratic ones, over creating space for marginalized voices. Drawing on the theoretical discussion and the results of the analysis, we argue that a focus on pluralism as the core of democracy makes the opposition between restricting hate speech and advocating for democracy redundant.

Universities in many liberal democracies, such as the US, the UK, or Germany, grapple with a pivotal question: how much room should be given to controversial utterances? On the one side, there are those who advocate for limiting permissible speech on campus to create a safe environment for a diverse student body and counter the mainstreaming of extremist views, particularly by right-wing populists. On the other side, concerns arise about stifling the free exchange of ideas and creating an atmosphere of fear and censorship. The debate is further complicated by participants' occasional uncertainties about the legal norms relevant in the given context, such as when freedom of speech is an issue and when it is not. This paper addresses the question of whether universities should allow actors with primarily political (as opposed to scholarly) agendas to speak on campus. Focusing on German universities, we begin by discussing some of the potentially relevant legal norms. We then propose shifting emphasis from "whether" we should make room for public political discussions on campus to "how" such events must be organized so that they deliver the goods that their advocates emphasize while avoiding the dangers of which critics warn. Drawing on conflict management literature concerned with process design, we make several practical suggestions on how to organize an event that brings political discourse to the university campus without causing harm.

In recent years an uneasy peace has descended in U.S. academe between those who feel research universities have done too little to advance the representation of minority groups and women and those who feel that the administrative policies developed to improve representation can and sometimes do come into conflict with core intellectual commitments of universities. Using quantitative and qualitative evidence from interviews with 47 natural sciences, engineering, and mathematics faculty members at a U.S. research university, the paper examines the background characteristics of three sets of protagonists -- academic progressives, academic traditionalists, and those whose views bridge the divide -- and the way respondents discussed and justified their viewpoints. The paper draws on the theory of strategic action fields to illuminate the structure and dynamics of the conflict and suggests modifications to the theory that would improve its explanatory power for this case.

By focusing on the role that "in loco parentis" plays on college campuses, according to the author, we are offered a new angle of vision, one that may break us out of simplistic understandings of campus life in our time. In the 1960s, college students fought for free speech and against in loco parentis. Students did not want their colleges to dictate, through rules or unstated norms, how they could fight for causes they believed in. Colleges began to step out of the role of guardian and allowed students new freedoms of expression. Fast forward to today when the college students of the 60's and 70's are raising children. Many still believe in the importance of free speech as an ideal and yet their generation is also known as "helicopter" or even "snowplow" parents. In their role as defender of free speech, they object as college students protest or no-platform speakers they disagree with. At the same time, when their child faces difficulties on campus -- from issues with roommates, to issues with a professor, to being caught breaking school rules -- they go on the attack, demanding that the college make things right. The goal of this article is to do some reflecting so that colleges are better positioned to offer the most reasonable and educative response to the tensions that exist between and within free speech demands and demands that colleges take on some of the "in loco parentis" roles that they were asked to step out of in the 1960s. Higher education can model what it means to respect growth and freedom, creating norms of interaction that have the potential to influence the wider culture.

British higher education is ranked among the best in the world, but some of its core values are under strain. Knowledge and critical thinking can be undermined by biased mind-sets, especially when engaging with the social media. Research demonstrates that false news goes viral much more quickly than true news. Political correctness and the woke movement can militate against freedom, especially in gender-related matters. Surveys show that many staff and students have a lower sense of wellbeing than the rest of the population. Conscious of these problems, the Government has responded with an Act to place extensive new obligations on certain types of online service providers, requiring them to protect their users by managing risks relating to illegal and harmful content. A separate Act has also been passed to protect freedom of speech in universities. The issue of staff and student unhappiness is much less amenable to legislation because it is so multi-faceted. However, it is a very important issue for a healthy, democratic society that fosters cooperation, trust and community. It needs to be addressed.

Background or Context: Public school library book challenges have garnered ample media attention in recent years as many school districts and advocacy organizations have reported record numbers of book challenges. Book challenges are not a new phenomenon, historically speaking, but they have often illuminated values clashes in communities and raise questions about the rights and freedoms of public school students. Judicial rulings and school district policies that address book challenges could provide insights for many members of school communities (including, but not limited to, school board members, students, parents, and teachers) as they experience challenges, but these aspects of the legal record and their influence on responses to book challenges remains underexamined in scholarship. Purpose, Objective, Research Question, or Focus of Study: The 1982 Supreme Court case "Island Trees School District v. Pico" remains the lasting judicial precedent for interpreting public school students' First Amendment rights as they interact with school library books. We examine the extent to which school district book challenge policies align with court precedent set in "Pico" (1982) and the implications for students' rights and democratic participation during book challenges. Research Design: Drawing on elements of the law and society framework as well as political analysis categories, this study uses qualitative methods to illuminate specific elements of district policies that govern book challenges. Specifically, we examine 29 policies in school districts that experienced a publicly reported book challenge between 2017 and 2021 to understand relationships between school district book challenge policies and the "Pico" (1982) precedent. Conclusions or Recommendations: Our findings reveal ample space between judicial rulings and school district policies we examine. In fact, we find a broader array of relevant actors in book challenge processes than conceived by the courts and raise implications for students' constitutional rights and protections related to who policies indicate may or must be involved in these processes, the settings in which book challenge decisions are made, and the limited roles for public involvement during school library book challenges.

Context: College campuses in the United States are currently engaged in public and ongoing negotiation of the value and limits of free speech in educational contexts. Responses to invited campus speakers from students, faculty, and campus leaders point to diverging perspectives on the roles and responsibilities of higher education institutions and their members as communities of inquiry. Considering these perspectives raises questions about the epistemic aims of colleges and universities. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to investigate perspectives on the ethics of inquiry and on the value and demands of open-mindedness in higher education. Specifically, I examined one case of an invited campus speaker who sparked considerable debate--Charles Murray's invited talk at Middlebury College in 2017. Research Design: This study employs the methods of empirically engaged philosophy, a philosophical approach to inquiry that engages with empirical evidence in considering educational aims and implications for institutional structures and policies. I apply conceptual tools stemming from the philosophical theories of knowledge and justice to a thematic content analysis of public statements made by faculty, administrators, and students in the Middlebury case. Conclusions or Recommendations: Through analysis of this campus speaker case, I observed two alternative perspectives on the ethics of inquiry--rational individualism and just collectivism. These two perspectives shared a number of common commitments, including the importance of cultivation of the mind as a primary aim in higher education; the value of open-mindedness, debate, and protest in the pursuit of truth; and the importance of justice, equality, and inclusion. They diverged in their epistemic orientations (individual vs. collective responsibility), their views on the proper bounds of open debate within an institution oriented toward truth-seeking, and what virtuous open-mindedness requires of individuals and collectives. This study contributes to a contemporary understanding of the unique ethical responsibilities of colleges and universities as inquiring organizations, whose members may hold divergent epistemological orientations. By investigating the relationship between open-mindedness, inquiry, and justice in contemporary public discourse in higher education, this study addresses a need for deeper engagement with the philosophical foundations of higher education.

As society becomes increasingly dependent on technology, school leaders must navigate the evolution of websites, resources, and platforms, including social media, as part of their responsibility to facilitate a safe and productive learning environment for students. This article reviews both constitutional and case law as a means of informing educational leaders of their rights and duties, as well as providing a foundation upon which effective K-12 social media policies and practices for educators can be built. Specifically, we offer an analysis of landmark cases involving the First Amendment and free speech, the delicacy around teachers' roles as both public employees and private citizens, and recent court cases involving social media use. Additionally, we propose guidelines around social media use, compiled from both practitioners in the field and relevant literature.

This conceptual research analyses the historical development of the German concept of "Bildung" to the Danish "dannelse." The starting point is J.G. Fichte's 1808 "Addresses to the German Nation," in which "Bildung" is analyzed as a key concept. The paper illustrates the influence Fichte had on N.F.S. Grundtvig, the "father of modern Denmark," with important adaptations based on English liberties and Nordic mythology. Grundtvig's "dannelse" is then analyzed based on his 1832 "milestone" work, "Nordic Mythology." The paper finds that "Bildung" and "dannelse" can be considered parallel concepts of similarity in their shared emphasis on the mother-tongue as a "living language," and focus on social cohesion. However, "Bildung" and "dannelse" can also be characterized as concepts of difference, in that: 1) "dannelse" popularized "Bildung," meaning that it was not just for the academic bourgeoisie, but the entire "folk"; 2) freedom of expression is fundamental to "dannelse," in contrast to the stability of will and moral order in "Bildung;" 3) in "dannelse," national unity is expanded to a wider circle of belonging, the whole of humankind; 4) Nordic mythology is a social cohesive in "dannelse," to contrast Fichte's more rational conception of "Bildung." Written by a British author for an English-speaking readership, this research does not feign to be more than a prefatory glance at two rich and complex concepts. However, in shedding light on the historical development of "Bildung" to "dannelse," it aspires to edge readers closer toward a shared conceptual understanding or, more aptly, to better understand misunderstandings.

LGBTQIA students are an important stakeholder group on college and university campuses, especially as both their visibility and expectations for support and empowerment on campus increase. But how ready is the field of higher education for litigation related to LGBTQIA issues, and how should student affairs practitioners prepare to address LGBTQIA students' possible negative campus experiences proactively? By reviewing details of cases that have set an important precedent and signal what might be coming with respect to LGBTQIA students' rights and experiences in higher education, this article seeks to provide detail and analysis of important legal areas that student affairs practitioners should be attuned to as they continue to educate thousands of LGBTQIA students each year. I explore how Title IX may be increasingly a route of redress for LGBTQIA students who have experienced discrimination; how rulings on religious freedom of expression may erode some of LGBTQIA students' rights on college and universities campuses; and the special relationship doctrine and how it may be applied to LGBTQIA students in mental health crisis.

The study was conducted to examine the consciousness levels of gifted children about children's rights and to compare them with their non-gifted peers. The general survey model was used in this study, in which the consciousness levels of gifted and non-gifted children on children's rights were compared. The study group of the research consists of 63 gifted and 65 non-gifted primary school students studying in a science and art center in Afyonkarahisar. In the research, the "Children's Rights Consciousness Level Determination Scale" developed by Akgül and Çaglayan (2019) was used to determine the consciousness levels of students about children's rights. In the analysis of the collected data, the difference between the groups was examined with the Mann Whitney U test using the data analysis program. As a result of the research, the consciousness level of gifted students about children's rights was found to be significantly higher than their non-gifted peers. In addition, this difference emerged in the "right to information and opinion" dimension of the scale. The unique developmental characteristics of gifted children may have an impact on their knowledge, consciousness and behavior towards children's rights. However, there is a need for comparative and longitudinal large-scale studies based on epidemiological data on the sensitivity of gifted children to children's rights. In addition, educational and behavioral interventions should be made in order to increase the consciousness of gifted children about children's rights, regardless of their educational environment.

Purpose: The Samuel Paty murder has generated a great response from the professional community and the world of education and schools in Europe and worldwide. In a unique way, civic educators expressed horror, sorrow, and solidarity with the family and with their French colleagues. The article is dedicated to Samuel Paty and the question of whether and how we as a community of international civic educators can learn from this terrible event. Design/methodology/approach: The article presents a case reconstruction using press and public documents attempting to disentangle the actors' positions, their stated intentions and contexts, and the following political intricacies of the case. Findings: The murder of Samuel Paty provoked a series of educational policy reactions that have paradoxical effects on civic education in schools, seen its intentions of political-social inclusion into a citizenship model. The case analysis documents the pitfalls of the instrumentalization of civic education for the securitization of societies.

Video diaries are an innovative tool for ethnographic research, contributing to the quality of fieldwork and ethnographic data by giving additional attention to participant voices. Grounded in two fieldwork periods in secondary and higher education, this paper illustrates three key qualities through which video diaries contributed to ethnographic research: (1) Building trusting relationships with participants, (2) providing a space for participant autonomy, and (3) being a medium of self-explication and truth-telling. In video diaries, participants exercised free speech, providing a widely unmediated, personal perspective on their professional identity, roles, and relationships. This personal perspective allowed participants to contribute to trusting on their own terms, which mitigated face-work -- especially when talking about conflicts and challenges -- and provided additional entry points for conversations, enabling deep dialogue and understanding. Ultimately, the use of video diaries significantly strengthened the researcher-participant relationship and enriched the ethnographic data and the quality of interactions.

This paper suggests that the phenomenon of 'cancel culture' has significant pedagogical implications for teacher education. In particular, the analysis problematises the phenomenon of cancel culture, focusing on how issues relating to race, racism and structural injustice are framed in social media. It is argued that for teacher education programs wrestling with how to guide teachers to deal with cancel culture, it is not enough to emphasise critical thinking, media literacy, debate and free speech. It is also important to avoid reproducing social media's framing of cancel culture as an individualised and psychologised phenomenon, and urge teachers to pay attention to structural issues of race, racism and injustice. It is suggested that despite the political or other risks involved, teacher education programs can make a valuable contribution to public debates by engaging cancel culture in ways that nurture vigilance and restorative justice measures.

Higher education in the 2020s remains deeply divided on the role of religion, or what the Council on the Advancement of Standards (CAS) in 2023 describes as "religious, secular, and spiritual identities." In two previous articles in this Journal, one 2010 article by the late Peter Magolda and one in 2014 by Perry Glanzer, detail the ways in which students and the student groups themselves should be considered in relationship with their institutions. However, ten years after those arguments, questions of how religious leadership should relate to and interact with the institution still remain. The ways in which institutions are utilizing critical religious pluralism theory are at the forefront of three relationship-minded considerations the authors wish to highlight. Initially, understanding the relationships requires reexamination of the ways interpretations of the First Amendment affect public and the private university settings for religious life. This article explores the relevance of professionalizing the relationship between religious leaders and the institution, the ways in which such a relationship can support stability of the religious communities themselves, and the importance of progressive Christian groups as a part of a more religiously diverse campus's pluralistic religious and spiritual ethos. The gaps in Magolda and Glanzer's arguments, plus the emergence of critical religious pluralism theory, offers new opportunities to consider higher education policies and practices related to "religious, secular, and spiritual" identities.

The current study's purpose is to present a picture of the extent to and frequency at which Israeli Arab principals are perceived as displaying the leadership styles of participative leadership versus directive leadership and transformation versus transactional leadership and then investigating the relationship of these leadership styles to teachers' organizational commitment (OC). Data were collected from two sources: senior management team members and teachers to avoid same source and common method bias: 426 participants overall from 71 high schools in the Israeli Arab educational system. Unianova analysis and hierarchical regression analyses were used to test the proposed relationships. The results of the overall model indicated that although principals in the Arab society in Israel are perceived mostly as directive leaders, participative leadership was positively associated with teacher OC beyond the specific influence of directive leadership. Changes in teacher perceptions, toward freedom of self-expression and career advancement, seem to be reflected in the influence of principals' leadership styles on teachers' OC that are derived in part from cultural features of the school's environment. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Electronic communication plays a significant role in most schools and in all of our personal lives as well. The legal question of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable electronic speech for students that is constructed and delivered totally off-campus on such platforms such as Snapchat, Tic Toc, Facebook or Meta, U-Tube, and regular email, to name just a few, begs the question of when school officials may intervene and penalize students for electronic communication? With electronic communication having such a significant role in schools, a new array of legal issues has surfaced for off-campus speech. The U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case of "Tinker v. Des Moines" and subsequent cases clarified the various parameters of appropriate student speech on campus and when school officials may take corrective action to curtail that speech. The "Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L." decision by the Supreme Court in 2021 offers some limited guidance on how student off-campus electronic speech may be contemplated by school officials. How do prospective principal candidates view off-campus posts in light of the "Mahanoy" decision?

A Netflix original six-episode series, "The Chair," examines the experiences of a woman faculty of color department chair at the fictional Pembroke College. One of the many stressors she must navigate is a response to an incompetent white male faculty (who is also her love interest) after he makes a Nazi salute during a lecture in class. By watching this series, many viewers learned about how higher education administrators may respond to situations where a faculty member engages in questionable speech. The ensuing drama that occurs on campus in response to the Nazi salute and the students' perceptions that the administration will and can do nothing of consequence to the professor showcases the messiness and intricacies of what has been termed "cancel culture." In this paper, I use intersectional analysis to examine "The Chair" and the messages it sends about race, privilege, and cancel culture in higher education.

As political division and polarization continually increases in the United States, civic knowledge faces decline. Journalism education provides a potential remedy for these democracy-endangering harms by imparting valuable instruction regarding civics and the role of the media in society. However, with no standardization in the country, individual educators and school districts largely must develop their own curricula. Luckily, student media associations provide support and leadership to student media programs, which is articulated through their mission statements. Filling a gap in the existing research, this study conducted a thematic analysis and found discursive leadership within the mission statements of such associations.

The scholarly journal is an increasingly homogenised global institution marked by pro forma writing, standardised processes of review and production and uniform design aesthetics. Recognising that this model does not necessarily serve the interdisciplinary agenda of a small community of music scholars in South Africa, the journal South African Music Studies has resisted absorption into large corporate publishing houses. The importance of remaining independent became clear in 2015 and 2016 when the most important student revolts since 1976 forced the editors to reconsider the responsibility of the journal to publish content that responded in interesting and significant ways to the national #FeesMustFall crisis. This paper discusses some of the strategies followed by the editors to foreground -- and indeed, to privilege -- Africa-centred modes of writing and reasoning during this turbulent time. These decolonial strategies included reconceptualising the role of editor as a proactive figure and employing novel modes of structural and visual design. Not without its pitfalls, this editorial approach and its resultant controversies raised important legal questions about freedom of expression and about the scholarly journal as an institution of knowledge production and transformation in Africa.

The purpose of this research was to study the spreading of political hate speech by the far right through Twitter. A mixed methodology was employed, combining both quantitative and qualitative tools, within the framework of digital ethnography. Five characteristic cases of campaigns linked to political hate speech were chosen, meeting the four criteria set: Latin American scope with representativeness in terms of breadth and impact, political motivation, more than 100,000 tweets, and massive use of fake accounts. The analysis was performed with T-Hoarder, Gephi and MAXQDA. The conclusions drawn are that these campaigns do not occur spontaneously. Rather, a destabilizing political intention lies behind them, sponsored by organizations with considerable ability to disseminate messages and with extensive funds. The massive presence of false accounts, the repetition of certain spelling errors in identical form and the striking increase in the number of accounts just before campaigns are evidence of the automation of these processes. The constant use of aggressive and disparaging terms associated with hatred triggers extreme polarization and a climate of tension, threatening the building and consolidation of democracy itself. Apart from punitive measures, there is a need to implement educational proposals.

Teachers' decision-making about resource selection is made more complex when resources are appraised for their potential to raise controversial issues or cause offence to others within school communities. Debates around the use of trigger warnings, freedom of speech and the impact of exclusionary practices further complicate these processes. In this article, Bacchi's (Bacchi, 2012; Bacchi & Goodwin, 2016) What's the problem represented to be? (WPR) approach is applied to the critical policy analysis of five Australian policy texts that deal with resource selection and controversial issues in schools. By comparing the ways these policies represent certain kinds of 'problems', it highlights the tendency of government departments to problematise this as a process that must be managed for the purpose of mitigating contestation. An examination of dominant and alternative policy constructions also prompts reflection on the discursive effects of policy and why resource selection should be re-problematised as a pedagogical opportunity and inclusionary practice.

In this study, one current and three former British Columbia (BC) offshore school principals were interviewed to seek their insights on how they contended with being compelled to censor material and disallow topics of conversation while administering a Canadian curriculum in an international context. Using a research design consistent with an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) methodological framework, the data were interpreted using three reduction cycles to generate five categories: disillusionment, anger, struggle, expedience, and subversion. The participants' responses were synthesized through the five categories in light of the phenomenon of moral distress, which occurs when a person is hindered from following a course of action consonant with their own moral judgement. Participants' reflections on leading Canadian high schools outside of Canada offered meaningful insights into their lived experiences abroad and provided a basis for a more robust consideration of how principals make sense of morally distressing situations in their schools.

The Prevent Duty requires universities in the United Kingdom to identify and report students who might be seen as 'vulnerable' to radicalisation. Since its introduction in 2015, the duty has been subject to increasing empirical research in the education sector. However, there has been limited research that specifically explores Muslim students' perceptions of Prevent in British universities. This paper directly addresses this gap in research by drawing upon the qualitative experiences of 25 university students who self-identified as 'British Muslims'. Individual, semi-structured interviews were transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis. The findings demonstrate the securitisation of higher education and 'policing' of Muslim students. The paper draws on Pantazis and Pemberton's use of the 'new suspect community' thesis in order to examine participants' views and experiences. When analysing the data, three particular themes are especially prominent: as a tool of 'surveillance', Prevent hampers freedom of speech, threatens student activism and forces Muslim students to hide their Muslim identity to avoid being labelled as 'radical' or 'vulnerable' to terrorism. It will be concluded that the 'surveillance' function of Prevent is problematic on the grounds that it renders universities 'modern-day panopticons'.