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 required advance notice for demonstrations, requiring organisers to register them in advance. Before the April protests, this policy was mainly effective at handling student activism.

On the one hand, the policy allowed students to advocate on an institutional level. Designated demonstration areas enable students to highlight critical social issues that would otherwise go unnoticed. Additionally, setting timed demonstrations increases attention to them, allowing greater media coverage and interaction with other students, thereby amplifying the campaign's message 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 leading students to miss classes. Columbia University mitigated these effects by shifting to hybrid learning and adapting the academic routine to allow students to explore alternative ways to study and attend classes. Moreover, the advance notice system also minimised divisions among students, faculty, and administrators over contentious issues, allowing individuals to avoid demonstration areas on topics they passionately oppose.

Yet the Interim University Policy for Safe Demonstrations ultimately fell short because it could not accommodate the significant spike in student activism. The existing policy failed to specify how to manage the scale and frequency of protests in early 2024, and ambiguous regulations further blurred the line between acceptable and unacceptable forms 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 it causes to campus life, both for themselves and for the students around them. By better understanding the need for clear, enforceable policies surrounding student demonstrations, activists can more effectively utilise student protests as a platform for change.