The guidance, which has been opened for consultation, covers a variety of scenarios surrounding free speech and academic freedom and is due to come into force in August 2024.
One scenario it puts forward is a university accepting students on visiting scholarships funded by their home government where “scholars must accept the principles of the ruling party of [their home] country”.
“Depending on the circumstances, these arrangements may undermine free speech and academic freedom at [the university]. If so, that university is likely to have to terminate or amend the scholarship agreement,” the scenario reads.
Many universities across the UK currently accept international students on government funded scholarships from multiple countries where it is widely suspected that academic freedom is much less prevalent, including China, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and others.
“Is it better to educate people who have strings attached to them by their own governments or to refuse to educate them?” Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, told The PIE News
“On paper, the purity of refusal makes a lot of sense and we should of course always strive not to compromise on what we stand for.
“The reason it could conceivably seem challenging to some institutions in the short term, however, is that four-in-10 people across the globe live under authoritarian regimes, and many of these regimes make day-to-day life quite grim for their local populations,” he said, noting the Economist’s Democracy Index.
China is one of the most prevalent countries being discussed due to concerns around how it has previously curtailed academic freedom of its students in various countries, including the US and Sweden.
The director of freedom of speech and academic freedom at the OfS told the BBC’s Today program that a “variety of international institutions” across the UK – in response to a question regarding Confucius Institutes – and each one will be examined based “on the evidence that we have”.
“It’s important these students aren’t discriminated against based on the views or actions of their government”
“We’re seeing reports that there may be concerns related to connections with foreign institutes – this applies everywhere. Any such arrangements, insofar as it creates restrictions on academic freedom and speech, not only for the students and academics that come, but also students in English universities, is a cause of concern for us,” said Arif Ahmed.
The guidance clearly takes aim at those Confucius Institutes and the China Scholarship Council, according to international education advisor Peter Brady, who predicted universities may take the “pragmatic option” of closing the institutes and not renewing CSC agreements.
“The reason universities require academic freedom is to keep them free from government intervention, having a government body intervening in the area of academic freedom is a bit of an oxymoron,” Brady also argued.
The Russell Group said its initial assessment sees areas that “could have unintended consequences”, especially surrounding discrimination against international students on scholarships.
“Whilst some receive scholarships funded by their home nation to attend university in the UK, this does not mean those individuals necessarily share or represent the views and political position of their home state.
“It’s important these students aren’t discriminated against based on the views or actions of their government,” a spokesperson told The PIE.
Universities UK called the issue “extraordinarily complex” in an “already complicated landscape”, adding it is essential that “any decisions made on the basis of this consultation are considered and proportionate”.
A new complaints scheme will also be launched in August alongside the guidance, allowing people to submit their own concerns about breaches of academic freedom through a portal.
Brady noted, however, that the OFS complaints system will be open, possibly creating the opportunity for “any member of a group opposing one country or another to register complaints about the commitment the student has made to gain the scholarship”.
International partnerships could also be affected by the guidance in other scenarios, but Ahmed said each case would be judged on its own facts.
“There have been public reports about concerns people have about international arrangements.
“If we see evidence through the complaints scheme that gives us reason to think that there is a breach of the free speech guidance then we will firmly act,” he confirmed.
The draft guidance also refers to the funding of universities, wherein if universities are partly funded by a commercial entity in from a different country and attempts are made to ideologically “test” incoming staff – as it’s laid out in one scenario – or there are notable challenges to their academic freedom, arrangements may need to be terminated or amended.
While the guidance promotes a debate on how universities approach the issue and how it could impact or undermine their own approach to academic freedom, Hillman still believes at its core that education is the most important aspect.
“Educating people from countries with unpalatable regimes can nonetheless build understanding of the benefits of democracy, transparency and openness.
“We must hope this new guidance builds understanding among undemocratic regime that UK education is built on our values. Time will tell if it works out like that,” Hillman added.
“One might argue that it may push universities to develop transparent ethical systems to review these relationships. But under these guidelines, even if the universities have taken into consideration the ethical issues and decided to enter in an agreement the OfS will be the ultimate arbiter,” Brady noted.
Both the Russell Group and UUK also said that they would continue to consider the implication of the document.
