Following the addition of trigger warnings to more than 1,000 works or the removal of those texts from reading lists due to their “difficult” content, university students claim they feel patronised and “molly-coddled.”
At least 10 universities, including three from the prestigious Russell Group, have either removed or made optional texts in case they hurt or offend students, according to an inquiry.
The 2017 Pulitzer Prize winner The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead and the timeless comedy Miss Julie by August Strindberg are among the works that were withdrawn.
Trigger warnings have also been added to the works of famous authors including Geoffrey Chaucer, William Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Charlotte Bronte, Charles Dickens, and Agatha Christie.
Elizabeth McGregor, 22, is enrolled in a University of Essex course called “Beginning the Novel,” which no longer contains The Underground Railroad, a well praised work about slavery that has received praise from Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama.
The book was taken off the reading list in part due to its “graphic description of slavery abuse and violence,” despite the fact that the Pulitzer Prize judges deemed these depictions crucial, saying that it “combines the violence of slavery and the drama of escape in a myth that speaks to contemporary America.”
Students have been informed a few times that we may decide whether or not to read readings, often when the topics are about racism, slavery, or gender, according to Ms. McGregor, who spoke to the Times.
They treat us like we’re little kids and are coddling us.
The book was only removed off one reading list, according to the university, in part because “another book was considered as more suited to the learning purposes.”
The book is still on the shelves of the library, according to a spokesperson, and students are exposed to the realities of slavery in other courses and modules. The spokesperson also said that the use of content warnings was done because “we find it helpful and considerate to inform students about the issues that might be present in books or plays they are reading.”
The History Of Mary Prince, another book about slavery, is not required reading for history students at Exeter because it contains “graphic depictions of prejudice, enslavement, and severe brutality.” According to a spokesman, no student has yet requested an alternative.
The Diary of Thomas Thistlewood, a novel about slavery, is not required reading for Lancaster University history majors due to its “detail involving sexual assaults and violent brutality.”
A 14,000-page journal kept by Englishman Thomas Thistlewood is included in the book. It offers an in-depth account of his actions as a slave owner in Jamaica in the 1800s as well as a wealth of knowledge about plantation life and owner-slave relationships.
A University of California scholar on slavery named Daina Ramey Berry expressed worry about the “want to minimise, to sanitise, to soften the history of servitude” and urged people to examine such works.
There are actual persons who committed these heinous acts, she told the Times. Folks need to be aware that what occurred and those people were real.
The Times made over 300 freedom of information requests to all 140 UK institutions inquiring about trigger warnings and text removal owing to content issues.
The removal of books for this purpose was acknowledged by Essex and Sussex universities; this is thought to be the first instance at a British university.
Due to its treatment of suicide, the University of Sussex has “permanently pulled” Miss Julie from an undergraduate literature programme. This decision was taken in response to student complaints about the material’s possible “psychological” and “emotional repercussions.”
Before graduating in 2019, Jack Ross served as the president of Sussex’s Conservative Student Association. According to Jack Ross, this professor “informed the class that the Iraq war happened because white people wanted to kill brown people, and no one was able to challenge him,” according to the Times.
He continued: “I put my hand up and indicated the reality was more nuanced than that when another instructor labelled Israel as aggressors, and he began weeping.
To achieve decent grades, I thought I had to play the game.
The university asked philosopher Kathleen Stock to retire as a professor last year after she was accused of being transphobic due to her views on sex and gender.
Restrictions on free speech have grown “insidious” on campus, according to James Noble, a former biochemistry PHD student at the institution.
He also claimed that some students were afraid they would get worse grades “when voicing opinions that were different from the lecturers.”
A Sussex spokesman responded to the Times by stating that the school has ‘vigorously and firmly’ protected Ms. Stock’s right to academic freedom and free expression.
We will always promote critical thinking and spirited discussion in the classroom, no matter how tough, while also ensuring we support our students’ well-being, she said, adding that every subject would contain both optional and obligatory reading.
Regarding Miss Julie’s removal from the reading list, the spokesperson said that the FOI answer acquired by the Times was written wrongly and that its removal was only temporary and a reaction to student suicides.
She indicated that she anticipated the book, which is still on the library’s shelves, would be brought back in the following year.
It happens at the same time as Leeds University is being sued by a recent Jewish graduate who alleges she was given a “fail” on a sociology paper because she did not criticise Israel.
Danielle Greyman said that the reason her article exposing Hamas’ atrocities against Palestinians failed was because it made no mention of the Jewish state.
The 23-year-old student had to retake the subject, which she passed even though she had never before failed an essay at university. Even so, Miss Greyman was unable to complete the requirements for her undergraduate degree in time to enrol in a master’s programme at Glasgow University.
Miss Greyman mentioned the use of human shields by Hamas in her original article, stating that it was seen as “a betrayal of the Palestinian people by their leadership.” This overlooks the reality that the Israeli state undertakes acts of violence, the moderator’s remark next to that section of the essay said.
An outside examiner who reviewed her essay concluded that it ought to have been passed.
Universities, according to Liz Truss, who is presently vying with Rishi Sunak of the Tories to become the next prime minister, are “patronising” and “mollycoddling” their pupils.
“A decent education should be supported by a free interchange of speech and ideas unrestricted by left-wing group thought,” she said.
Real life doesn’t come with a content warning, and we shouldn’t attempt to shield individuals from challenging concepts for the rest of their lives.
It occurs at a time when Nottingham Trent’s French students are no longer required to study the contentious Charlie Hebdo magazine, which has been dubbed “racist, sexist, xenophobic, and Islamophobic” by academic staff.
In 2015, Islamist militants assaulted the satirical journal after one of its drawings showed the prophet Mohammed. 12 people, including journalists, were slain.
The institution told the Times that it had made a “permanent” decision about the publication. No more commentary was made.
Three texts are not required for the Vulnerable Bodies, Precarious Lives course in Aberdeen because they “may be especially tough,” however there are substitutes available.
A Girl is a Half-formed Thing by Eimear McBride, Freshwater by Akwaeke Emezi, and All the Birds, Singing by Evie Wyld are on the objectionable list because they portray sexual assault and/or suicide.
If there are “issues you may find emotionally unpleasant,” participants in a Geoffrey Chaucer and mediaeval writing module for English Literature might choose not to participate in the discussion.
A Midsummer Night’s Dream and The Classic Fairy Tales have also received trigger warnings from the Scottish university because of its representations of “cruelty to animals and animal death” and “classism,” respectively.
Alternative texts were provided in “a limited number of optional courses,” according to a representative for Aberdeen, since those that depict sexual abuse may be “very traumatic” for students who have personally experienced comparable events.
Content warnings, they continued, provide employees the freedom to “explore contentious themes that would otherwise be difficult to handle in an inclusive and supportive atmosphere.”
Reading Die Mittagsfrau by Julia Franck and Tomboy by Thomas Meinecke is optional for Warwick University students taking modern languages and the Gender Trouble in Contemporary Germany module because they “gesture to contentious subjects.”
While considering “how best to include tough content into courses,” Warwick said the change was “temporary,” adding that it thought students should be exposed to difficult concepts.
Content warnings, according to a spokesman, are not standard practise and are used in less than 1% of the university’s curricula.
It follows a study released in June that showed a decline in tolerance among university students over the previous six years, with one in ten seeking to outlaw the Conservative Party on college campuses.
The ‘Covid generation’ of students, who came of age around the time of the Brexit vote, prefer greater curbs on free speech than their elders, according to a survey of 1,000 undergraduates by the Higher Education Policy Institute.
36 percent of respondents believe professors should be dismissed if they “teach material that significantly offends certain pupils.”
In contrast, just 15% responded to the study when it was previously done by the think tank in 2016.
Additionally, 76 percent—up from 51 percent—believe that institutions should “get rid” of tributes to problematic personalities like the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College Oxford.
University administrators “must take active efforts to confront these intolerant attitudes on campus, both encouraging and preserving free expression,” according to Universities Minister Michelle Donelan.
In contrast, 39%, more than twice as many as 16% in 2016, say that student unions should “exclude any speakers that create offence.” Additionally, 86 percent—up from 68 percent—support “trigger warnings” on course material that may distress students.
The number of students who want to ban the Conservative party from their campus has increased from 6 to 11%, indicating that they are less tolerant of traditional politicians.