From Chalkboards to Change: The Nature of Student Protests
In April 2024, Columbia University took center-stage amidst the Israel-Palestine conflict. Pro-Palestinian groups established the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” on campus, openly protesting for the school to divest from Israeli-supporting companies. As tensions continued to rise, the US government authorised the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to break up the encampment, leading to more than 100 student arrests. Yet, even as the dust begins to settle, the underlying question remains: Do the benefits of student activism outweigh the costs of academic disruption?
At the time of the protests, Columbia University had implemented the Interim University Policy for Safe Demonstrations in light of increasing tensions in the Middle East. The policy featured designated demonstration areas with fixed timings, minimising the disruption these demonstrations had on campus life. At the same time, the university even had an advance notice requirement, which made it mandatory for demonstrations to be registered with the university. Before the April protests, this policy was mostly effective in handling student activism.
On one hand, the policy allowed students to advocate on an institutional level. Having designated areas for demonstrations allows students to highlight critical social issues that would otherwise go unnoticed. Additionally, having set timings for demonstrations also increases the attention given to these demonstrations, allowing for greater media coverage and interaction with other students, thereby amplifying the message of the campaign and reaching a wider audience.
At the same time, the policy also mitigated the risks involved with student demonstrations. Student protests are highly disruptive to campus life, causing delays in examinations and students missing classes. Columbia University was able to mitigate these effects by shifting towards hybrid learning, adapting the academic routine for students to explore alternative means of studying and attending classes. Moreover, the advance notice system also minimised the division among students, faculty, and administrators surrounding contentious issues, allowing individuals to avoid demonstration areas on topics they passionately object to.
Yet, the Interim University Policy for Safe Demonstrations ultimately fell short due to the large spike in student activism that the policy could not accommodate. The existing policy lacked the specificity required to manage the scale and frequency of protests occuring in early 2024, which was only exacerbated by the ambiguous regulations that blurred the line regarding what was considered an acceptable form of protest.
The inadequacies of Columbia University’s demonstration policy serve as crucial learning points for student activists around the world. While student activism is noble, one must be cognisant of the immense disruption that it has to campus life, both for himself, and the students around him. By better understanding the need for clear, enforceable policies surrounding student demonstrations, activists can more effectively utilise student protests as a platform for change.
