The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A Disproportionate Response: Five Years of the Prevent Duty in UKHE

A Disproportionate Response: Five Years of the Prevent Duty in UKHE
A Disproportionate Response: Five Years of the Prevent Duty in UKHE
The Desecuritising Higher Education Project was a research project hosted at
Birmingham City University and funded by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable
Trust which ran between October 2018 and December 2020. The project sought
to investigate the Prevent Duty within UK Higher Education and examine the
attitudes and experiences of those impacted by it. In this report, we provide an
overview of our findings, key of which were the following:
1. On websites and in policies, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have
demonstrated their compliance with the Prevent Duty and reassured
audiences about its purpose.
2. However, there were instances of HEIs being far more sceptical towards the
Prevent Duty, demonstrating reluctant compliance or resisting elements
of the law.
3.The Prevent Duty has introduced extra layers of responsibility that have
expanded bureaucratic processes and increased managerial oversight.
4. Training was a prominent aspect of compliance with the Prevent Duty and
was delivered extensively, in a range of different formats, and targeted to
various audiences.
5. Despite the arrival of the Prevent Duty, referrals to Channel within HEIs in
England and Wales remain minimal.
6. HEIs did not always disclose information in reply to FOIs because doing so
was thought to risk national security or impede the prevention or detection
of crime.
7. Staff were divided on the place of the Prevent Duty in UK Higher Education
(UKHE) and its framing as safeguarding.
8. Both staff and students shared a scepticism about the ease and
practicality of identifying the signs of vulnerability to radicalisation.
9. Both staff and students raised concerns about the possible negative effects
of the Prevent Duty, including issues relating to the learning environment,
freedom of expression, surveillance of populations and trust between
students and staff.
Birmingham City University
Whiting, Andrew
a587eaf0-17b1-4508-b1c6-4cdc4c4537e3
Spiller, Keith
d0ea9172-6ef6-4f80-9f34-2285b41ab237
Awan, Imran
40d444cb-e6f7-4100-b554-975b1eee8498
Whiting, Andrew
a587eaf0-17b1-4508-b1c6-4cdc4c4537e3
Spiller, Keith
d0ea9172-6ef6-4f80-9f34-2285b41ab237
Awan, Imran
40d444cb-e6f7-4100-b554-975b1eee8498

Whiting, Andrew, Spiller, Keith and Awan, Imran (2021) A Disproportionate Response: Five Years of the Prevent Duty in UKHE , Birmingham City University

Record type: Book

Abstract

The Desecuritising Higher Education Project was a research project hosted at
Birmingham City University and funded by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable
Trust which ran between October 2018 and December 2020. The project sought
to investigate the Prevent Duty within UK Higher Education and examine the
attitudes and experiences of those impacted by it. In this report, we provide an
overview of our findings, key of which were the following:
1. On websites and in policies, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have
demonstrated their compliance with the Prevent Duty and reassured
audiences about its purpose.
2. However, there were instances of HEIs being far more sceptical towards the
Prevent Duty, demonstrating reluctant compliance or resisting elements
of the law.
3.The Prevent Duty has introduced extra layers of responsibility that have
expanded bureaucratic processes and increased managerial oversight.
4. Training was a prominent aspect of compliance with the Prevent Duty and
was delivered extensively, in a range of different formats, and targeted to
various audiences.
5. Despite the arrival of the Prevent Duty, referrals to Channel within HEIs in
England and Wales remain minimal.
6. HEIs did not always disclose information in reply to FOIs because doing so
was thought to risk national security or impede the prevention or detection
of crime.
7. Staff were divided on the place of the Prevent Duty in UK Higher Education
(UKHE) and its framing as safeguarding.
8. Both staff and students shared a scepticism about the ease and
practicality of identifying the signs of vulnerability to radicalisation.
9. Both staff and students raised concerns about the possible negative effects
of the Prevent Duty, including issues relating to the learning environment,
freedom of expression, surveillance of populations and trust between
students and staff.

Text
a-disproportionate-response-final-report-132640783134972833 - Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only

More information

Published date: 14 April 2021

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 471679
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/471679
PURE UUID: 83c33342-3cbb-4c44-ad87-0ff82b66540a
ORCID for Keith Spiller: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5796-8165

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 16 Nov 2022 17:38
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:14

Export record

Contributors

Author: Andrew Whiting
Author: Keith Spiller ORCID iD
Author: Imran Awan

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×