Only around one in five students think freedom of expression is under threat in universities.
Just one in five students think freedom of expression is under threat in their universities, a new report from King’s College London (KCL) has revealed.
The report, released by KCL’s Policy Institute, found that just 22 per cent of the 2,153 students surveyed thought freedom of expression was threatened in their universities. In contrast, 51 percent thought freedom of expression was under threat in the UK at large.
The report defined freedom of expression as four freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom to protest, academic freedom and freedom from hate.
Professor Jonathan Grant, Vice-President/Vice-Principal Service at KCL, said that the results refuted the “growing narrative that universities are suppressing uncomfortable facts or unpopular views”.
Freedom of expression in universities is protected by a range of legislation, including the 1986 Education Act and the Human Rights Act. Concerns about freedom of expression at universities have led to a range of state interventions, including a Parliamentary inquiry and guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission on universities’ and students’ unions’ duties to protect freedom of expression, particularly freedom of speech.
However, the majority of students did not think that freedom of speech was restricted in universities. Just 12 percent of students thought freedom of speech was inhibited fairly or very often in universities, compared to 44 percent who thought it was not at all inhibited.
A spokesperson for the National Union of Students, which represents students at a national level, said that students supported freedom of speech “more than the general public”.
They said: “This study underlines that the so-called crisis of freedom of speech in universities is overstated, just as the Joint Committee on Human Rights in Parliament concluded in 2017.”
Contented, activist and libertarian
The report also sorted students into “contented”, “activist” and “libertarian” categories. “Contented” students (56 percent) were generally satisfied with their ability to exercise freedom of expression, and did not have strong views on whether their universities’ student safety policies infringed upon it.
“Activist” students (23 percent), meanwhile, believed strongly that they had freedom of expression at university, and were strongly against being exposed to intolerant or offensive ideas.
On the other hand, “libertarian” students (20 per cent) were not convinced that their universities were taking sufficient steps to protect students from hatred so everyone could exercise freedom of expression, and yet were strongly opposed to university intervention except in extreme circumstances.
Professor Grant said that while the results showed that most students were happy, “more could be done” to help students feel comfortable expressing themselves on campus, “especially those on the right of the political spectrum”.
He also expressed concern that the “activist” and “libertarian” minorities made it harder to devise a solution due to their strong, yet “completely contrasting” views on addressing the issue.
The National Union of Students’ spokesperson, however, said that while universities and students’ unions were legally required to uphold freedom of expression on campus, freedom of speech was “not an absolute right and must be balanced with other legal duties”.
They concluded by adding that the existence of “strongly held” views on how universities should balance freedom of speech with other rights “in itself shows that they [students] are engaging in debate on contentious issues.”