Australian Universities Graded on Antisemitism and Protest Handling

🎓 The Surge of Antisemitism Concerns on Australian Campuses

Australian higher education institutions have long been places of vibrant debate and intellectual exchange, but recent years have seen a troubling rise in reports of antisemitism. Antisemitism, defined as hostility, prejudice, or discrimination against Jewish people, has manifested in various forms on university campuses. This includes graffiti with antisemitic symbols, verbal harassment of Jewish students and staff, and the circulation of conspiracy theories implying Jewish control over media or governments. Such incidents often intensify during protests related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where slogans or imagery sometimes cross into hate speech.

Parliamentary inquiries, such as the 2025 Senate probe into antisemitism at Australian universities, revealed that Jewish students frequently feel unsafe and alienated. For instance, surveys indicated that only about 17% of Jewish students ranked their universities highly on actions against antisemitism. Pro-Palestinian encampments, which emerged prominently after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the subsequent Gaza war, have been flashpoints. At universities like the University of Sydney and the Australian National University, these encampments lasted weeks, prompting complaints about intimidation and disruption to campus life.

Yet, context matters. Many protests advocate for Palestinian rights and criticize Israeli policies—legitimate political expression protected under Australian law, including the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (RDA). The challenge lies in distinguishing protected speech from vilification that targets Jewish individuals based on their identity. Universities Australia, the peak body for higher education, emphasizes that institutions must foster environments where free inquiry thrives alongside safety for all.

This backdrop of tension has led to calls for greater accountability, culminating in a new federal initiative to evaluate how well universities manage these issues.

🔥 The Bondi Beach Attack: A Turning Point

On December 14, 2025, a devastating antisemitic terrorist attack at a Hanukkah celebration on Bondi Beach in Sydney claimed 15 lives, shocking the nation. The incident, described by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as an assault on all Australians, highlighted the real-world dangers of escalating hate. It followed a surge in antisemitic incidents nationwide, with Jewish community groups reporting normalized prejudice spilling from online spaces to public life.

The attack accelerated government action on longstanding recommendations. In July 2025, Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism Jillian Segal released her plan, urging public institutions, especially universities, to adopt robust measures. Post-Bondi, the Albanese government fast-tracked elements, including empowering the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) to oversee compliance and forming a 12-month Antisemitism Education Taskforce chaired by David Gonski, former chancellor of UNSW Sydney.

These steps underscore a shift toward proactive governance in higher education, aiming to prevent campuses from becoming breeding grounds for extremism while preserving academic freedom.

📋 Unveiling the University Report Card System

The centerpiece of this response is a 'report card' system, set to grade Australian universities from A to D on their handling of antisemitism and related protests. Proposed by Segal and led by Greg Craven, former vice-chancellor of Australian Catholic University and appointed in November 2025, the first assessments target the Group of Eight (Go8) elite universities, with results expected by May 2026.

Leaked documents circulated to vice-chancellors outline the framework's focus on four priority areas, ensuring campuses remain safe and inclusive. This initiative builds on Segal's plan, which calls for transparent reporting on complaints and disciplinary actions, integration of antisemitism definitions into codes of conduct, and potential funding adjustments for poor performers.

Universities Australia CEO Luke Sheehy has noted cooperative efforts, but questions linger about implementation details and impartiality.

📊 Breaking Down the Grading Criteria

The grading hinges on practical, measurable outcomes across key domains:

• Campus Access Policies: Effectiveness in regulating outdoor protests, encampments, flags, imagery, and promotional materials to prevent disruption or intimidation.
• Rapid Response Mechanisms: How swiftly and appropriately universities address incidents during protests or displays on campuses and in buildings.
• Complaints Processes: Accessibility, fairness, and efficiency in handling reports of antisemitism, with trauma-informed support for complainants.
• Training and Definitions: Adoption of a clear antisemitism definition—often the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition—and mandatory staff/student training programs.

For example, adopting IHRA, which includes examples like denying Jewish self-determination, helps distinguish criticism of Israel from antisemitic tropes. However, critics argue it risks conflating anti-Zionism with Jew-hatred. The Monash Interdisciplinary Research on Racism Australia (MIRRA) report recommends harm-based definitions tailored to Australian contexts, emphasizing procedural fairness.

TEQSA will reinforce this by writing to vice-chancellors ahead of Orientation Week (O-Week), urging stronger responses. Poor grades could trigger sanctions, though full defunding remains unlikely; instead, targeted grant reviews are probable.

Read the full Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism for deeper insights.

🗣️ Stakeholder Reactions: Support, Skepticism, and Debate

Views on the report card are polarized. Jewish advocacy groups like the Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS) and Executive Council of Australian Jewry hail it as essential, with AUJS's Liat Granot stating Jewish students face an 'unsustainable' environment where antisemitism undermines free inquiry.

Conversely, the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) raises impartiality concerns about Craven, described as a 'partisan commentator.' Go8 CEO Vicki Thomson warns funding cuts are a 'blunt instrument,' diverting resources from safety efforts. Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi labels it a 'chilling effect' on activism, evoking McCarthyism.

On X (formerly Twitter), trending posts reflect this divide, with academics decrying threats to academic freedom and others demanding accountability amid rising hate crimes.

The parliamentary inquiry echoes balance, recommending simplified complaints, trauma-informed training, and TEQSA empowerment without overreach.

⚖️ Navigating Free Speech Versus Campus Safety

A core tension is balancing protest rights with protection from harm. Australian law, guided by the Australia Model Code for Campus Protest, permits peaceful assembly but prohibits vilification under Section 18C of the RDA. The Rabat Plan of Action provides a global framework: assess context, speaker intent, content, and likelihood of harm before restricting speech.

Universities like Deakin and the University of Adelaide have banned unauthorized encampments indoors, while others use misconduct procedures. Best practices include risk assessments, bystander intervention training (e.g., MATE programs), and post-event debriefs, as per the MIRRA report.

Holistic approaches address intersecting racisms, including Islamophobia, ensuring no group is sidelined. Explore career advice for safe academic environments.

💡 Actionable Recommendations and Best Practices

To excel under the new system, universities can implement proven strategies:

• Develop clear, accessible reporting via apps like SafeZone, with anonymous options and independent oversight.
• Roll out mandatory training: leadership briefings on IHRA or alternatives like the Jerusalem Declaration, intercultural dialogue workshops, and digital literacy on spotting tropes.
• Enhance protest management: pre-event risk assessments, police liaisons, and restorative justice for low-level incidents.
• Foster belonging: Jewish cultural events, research hubs like Monash's Centre for Anti-Racism, and regular safety audits.

The Antisemitism Education Taskforce supports scaling Monash's training nationwide. Vice-chancellors should engage Jewish groups quarterly, per inquiry recommendations.

Check the Monash MIRRA Report for comprehensive guidance.

For those in academia, proactive steps build resilience—consider rating professors on inclusive teaching or browsing higher ed jobs at proactive institutions.

🌐 Broader Implications for Australian Higher Education

This grading system signals heightened scrutiny, potentially influencing international student recruitment, research funding, and reputations. Go8 universities, handling 40% of research grants, face pressure to lead. TEQSA's expanded role ensures compliance with standards like the National Higher Education Code.

Positive outcomes could include safer campuses, reduced attrition among Jewish scholars (critical for fields like medicine and law), and models for handling other tensions. Long-term, it promotes EDI frameworks addressing all biases.

Aspiring academics, explore university jobs in Australia or career advice to thrive in evolving landscapes.

Review the Parliamentary Inquiry Report.

Photo by Eriksson Luo on Unsplash

📚 What Students and Staff Should Know

For students: Know your rights—report via centralized portals, seek counseling, and advocate peacefully. Jewish students may access AUJS support; others, EDI officers.

Staff: Undergo training, model civility in classes, and flag risks early. Institutions excelling here attract top talent.

In summary, while controversial, the report card pushes for accountable, inclusive higher education. Share your experiences in the comments, rate courses at Rate My Professor, search higher ed jobs, or post openings at Post a Job. Stay informed via higher ed career advice and university jobs.