Best Practices Guide

ADL has been carefully monitoring the state of antisemitism on college and university campuses, and how schools are responding. As reflected in our Campus Antisemitism Report Card, ADL’s goal is to incentivize colleges and universities to create and maintain a safe and welcoming campus and commit to no tolerance for antisemitism.

Below is an overview of best practices when it comes to the steps schools should take to most effectively counter rising antisemitism and hate.

*This resource is not intended and should not be interpreted as providing legal advice. Please consult with your own legal counsel.

Clearly Communicate Campus Rules, Standards and Policies

ADL recommends that all colleges and universities send a communication to the campus community at the beginning of the school year and periodically throughout the academic year that welcomes students back to campus and sets clear expectations for behavior moving forward. This communication should set the tone, laying out the rights and responsibilities of all campus community members to create and ensure a safe, welcoming environment for all. In this communication, clearly state that antisemitic discrimination and harassment in any form will not be tolerated, and explain the consequences for violating the campus Code of Conduct and other school policies.

Speak Up

When antisemitism in any form affects members of the campus community, it is imperative that university administrators speak up and clearly communicate that antisemitism is unacceptable and contrary to the school’s values.

  1. In Condemnation of Antisemitism

The federal government has called upon colleges to “issue clear and unwavering statements condemning all forms of hate, including antisemitism, especially in the wake of antisemitic incidents,” and to “treat antisemitism with the same seriousness as other forms of hate. In some cases, speaking up may be required to meet Title VI obligations. ADL urges college and university leaders to embrace and use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism and to clearly and unequivocally speak out to condemn acts of antisemitism when they occur on campus to signal to the campus community that antisemitism on campus will not be tolerated.

Administrators must recognize that “zionist” is often coded language for “Jew.” Anti-Zionist manifestations of antisemitism, like all manifestations of antisemitism, must be taken seriously and condemned on campus.

Sample Statements:

Example of robust guidance that explicitly addresses anti-Zionist manifestations of antisemitism:

  • New York University’s Guidance and Expectations on Student Conduct: Nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy (“NDAH”): Using code words, like “Zionist,” does not eliminate the possibility that your speech violates the NDAH Policy.  For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity.  Speech and conduct that would violate the NDAH if targeting Jewish or Israeli people can also violate the NDAH if directed toward Zionists.  For example, excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a “no Zionist” litmus test for participation in any NYU activity, using or disseminating tropes, stereotypes, and conspiracies about Zionists (e.g., “Zionists control the media”), demanding a person who is or is perceived to be Jewish or Israeli to state a position on Israel or Zionism, minimizing or denying the Holocaust, or invoking Holocaust imagery or symbols to harass or discriminate.
  • Harvard University’s Non-Discrimination and Anti-Bullying Policies FAQ: Updated to note that the policy may be violated through “Verbal abuse or use of antisemitic, racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Zionist, anti-Arab, Islamophobic, anti-LDS, or anti-Catholic slurs or hostile behavior, which could include insulting, teasing, mocking, degrading, or ridiculing or denying the ancestral history of another person or group regardless of whether the person is actually a member of the group (e.g., Jewish, Israeli, Arab, or Muslim), including but not limited to displays or electronic transmission of derogatory, demeaning, or hostile materials based on one or more protected or perceived protected characteristics (e.g., Jewish, Zionist, Arab, or Muslim identity... The Non-Discrimination Policy includes among its protected categories religion, national origin, shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, and political beliefs. For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity. Conduct that would violate the Non-Discrimination Policy if targeting Jewish or Israeli people can also violate the policy if directed toward Zionists. Examples of such conduct include excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a “no Zionist” litmus test for participation in any Harvard activity, using or disseminating tropes, stereotypes, and conspiracies about Zionists (e.g., “Zionists control the media”), or demanding a person who is or is perceived to be Jewish or Israeli to state a position on Israel or Zionism to harass or discriminate.
     
  1. When Protests and/or Encampments Violate Campus Policies

When students violate campus policies or the law, there must be clear and immediate consequences. Members of the campus community must understand that while speech may be protected on campus, violations of time, place and manner restrictions – restrictions that are often necessary to ensure campus safety – are not. And while speech critical of Israel and supportive of the Palestinian cause is protected, threats, intimidation and harassment are not. Schools must be able to ensure adherence to their own rules, including through clear communication. Below is a list of sample statements denouncing protest- and encampment-related incidents.

ADL also recommends that colleges and universities make clear that non-discrimination and anti-harassment policies, student codes of conduct, residential life policies, and faculty codes of conduct will be strictly enforced, and disciplinary measures taken in appropriate cases, up to and including suspension and expulsion. Colleges and universities should publicly and proactively support students in understanding their legal protections and commit to transparency regarding outcomes of complaints.

Sample Statements from Public Universities Following Protests

  • Following arrests of pro-Palestinian protestors on campus, University of Florida’s spokesman released a media statement: “the University of Florida is not a daycare, and we do not treat protestors like children – they knew the rules, they broke the rules, and they’ll face the consequences...Individuals who refused to comply were arrested after [the University police department] gave multiple warnings and multiple opportunities to comply.”
  • Following arrests of pro-Palestinian protestors on campus, the University of Texas at Austin released a statement: “Because of the encampments and other violations of the University’s Institutional Rules related to protests, protestors were told repeatedly to disperse. When they refused to disperse, some arrests were made for trespassing. Others were arrested for disorderly conduct. Protests are allowed at the University of Texas. Since October and prior to April 24, no fewer than 13 pro-Palestinian free speech events were held on the UT campus, and four more demonstrations have been held since Thursday, largely without incident. The University strongly supports the free speech and assembly rights of our community, and we want students and others on campus to know that protests on campus are fully permissible, provided that they do not violate Institutional Rules or threaten the safety of our campus community.”

Sample Statements from Private Universities Following Protests

  • Following the removal of an encampment on campus, Tulane University released a statement: “After issuing numerous warnings, Tulane University Police Department led a coordinated effort by the New Orleans Police Department and Louisiana State Police to remove protestors who have trespassed on our campus over the last two days and erected an illegal encampment on the edge of the lawn in front of Gibson Hall along St. Charles Avenue... Students who participated in this unlawful occupation have also been referred to the Office of Student Conduct for immediate disciplinary action. Seven students have been suspended. We are also actively looking into reports of university employees participating in this unlawful demonstration.”
  • Following the prevention of an imminent encampment on campus, Washington University in St. Louis released a statement: “On Saturday, April 27, a large group of individuals entered the Washington University campus with the intention of causing a significant disruption to the university... It quickly became clear through the words and actions of this group that they did not have good intentions on our campus and that this demonstration had the potential to get out of control and become dangerous. When the group began to set up a camp in violation of university policy, we made the decision to tell everyone present that they needed to leave. We arrested 100 individuals who refused to leave after being asked multiple times. This number includes 23 WashU students and 4 university employees...We are firmly committed to free expression and allow ample opportunity for voices to be heard on our campus. However, we expect everyone to respect our policies and we will take swift action to enforce them to their fullest extent.”

Oppose BDS, including Academic Boycotts

ADL recommends that colleges and universities re-affirm their opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, whether a resolution has been proposed on campus or not, to showcase to the campus community that the movement is antithetical to campus values.

A backgrounder on the BDS movement can be found here.

A backgrounder on soft and shadow boycotts can be found here.

A report that comprehensively quantifies the financial implications of BDS-aligned investment strategies for universities can be found here.

Sample Positions Opposing BDS that received full credit on the Report Card:

Investigate Student Groups Violating Campus Policies

ADL recommends that colleges and universities investigate whether anti-Israel and anti-Zionist student groups on campus that are openly glorifying and supporting terrorism or calling for eliminationist or violent actions, including but not limited to Students for Justice in Palestine, may be violating student codes of conduct or other applicable policies or laws. Where warranted, universities should take action to revoke official recognition and funding of such groups, making clear that university logos, facilities and other resources will not be used to further these activities.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • In November 2023, Brandeis University issued a statement announcing the University’s decision to no longer officially recognize the Brandeis chapter of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), following an investigation that determined that the organization’s rhetoric – including open support for Hamas – was not aligned with the University’s policies.
  • In November 2023, George Washington University suspended its SJP chapter after an investigation confirmed that the group’s activities had violated university policies.
  • In February 2024, MIT suspended the MIT Coalition Against Apartheid student group following an unauthorized protest and takeover of a campus building. The interim suspension was announced alongside a committee investigation that would determine whether the suspension should be upheld in the long-term.
  • In April 2024, University of Pennsylvania revoked official University recognition of Penn Students Against the Occupation of Palestine following a month-long investigation into the conduct of the student organization that found that the group had failed to comply with university policies.
  • In September 2025, Swarthmore College announced that the campus SJP chapter was found responsible for multiple Code violations on campus, including: Bullying and Intimidation; Disorderly Conduct; Discrimination, including Harassment based on a Protected Class; Failure to Comply; Fire Safety; Retaliation; Property Damage; Unauthorized Entry or Access; and Unauthorized Use of College Resources and College Services. As a result of this investigation SJP’s affiliation with the College was officially revoked.

Integrate Antisemitism into Appropriate Policies

ADL recommends that colleges and universities integrate a definition of antisemitism into their Codes of Conduct and/or other related policies. The definition should include a reference to Israel, Zionism or anti-Zionism. Definitions should either be thoroughly explained in the policy or clearly hyperlinked on the policy page. Such action is important to explicitly signal to the campus community that antisemitic harassment will not be tolerated on campus.

Policies that fall short of meeting the recommendation may include references to antisemitism that do not explicitly reference anti-Zionism, Zionism or Israel, thereby failing to acknowledge that anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism. Criticism of the Israeli government that does not transcend into anti-Zionism and antisemitism should not be part of the language or definition used.

Examples of Robust Policies:

  • Duke University, Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct: Antisemitic conduct implicates the Policy and can manifest in the Duke environment in a number of ways. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” Examples of antisemitic conduct that implicates this Policy include:
    • Repeated instances of antisemitic slurs directed toward an individual, regardless of whether that individual is Jewish.
    • Refusing to allow an individual to participate in any program sponsored or hosted by Duke because they are perceived to be from Israel, are associated with a Jewish organization, wears religious attire, like a kippah, or displays a religious symbol associated with Judaism, like a Star of David.
    • Defacing a Jewish employee’s or student’s property with a hateful symbol such as a swastika.
    • Using force or intimidation to obstruct the path of an employee or student because they are Jewish, perceived to be Jewish, or supportive of Jewish institutions or organizations.
    • Refusing to grant a student some expected benefit, such as a letter of recommendation, based on the perception that the student is Jewish, is associated with a Jewish organization, or because that student is perceived to be from Israel.
  • New York University’s Guidance and Expectations on Student Conduct: Nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy (“NDAH”): Using code words, like “Zionist,” does not eliminate the possibility that your speech violates the NDAH Policy.  For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity.  Speech and conduct that would violate the NDAH if targeting Jewish or Israeli people can also violate the NDAH if directed toward Zionists.  For example, excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a “no Zionist” litmus test for participation in any NYU activity, using or disseminating tropes, stereotypes, and conspiracies about Zionists (e.g., “Zionists control the media”), demanding a person who is or is perceived to be Jewish or Israeli to state a position on Israel or Zionism, minimizing or denying the Holocaust, or invoking Holocaust imagery or symbols to harass or discriminate.
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct: Antisemitism can be a form of intersectional discrimination or harassment based on religion and/or national origin. Antisemitism may manifest as engaging in any of the following conduct against an individual because the individual is or is perceived to be Jewish or because the individual is or is perceived to be from Israel: repeatedly using antisemitic slurs; defacing an individual’s property with a hateful symbol or word (e.g., a swastika); denying an individual access to or refusing to allow an individual to participate in any program sponsored or hosted by the University; using force or intimidation to obstruct the path of an individual; or refusing to grant an individual a benefit to which they are entitled (e.g., a letter of recommendation). Evidence of an individual’s perceived protected status may include, for example, association with Israel or with a Jewish organization, wearing religious attire (e.g., a kippah), or displaying a religious symbol associated with Judaism (e.g., a star of David).
  • Tulane University’s Examples of Prohibited Conduct: Antisemitism is a form of discrimination or harassment that is based on one's religion (Judaism) and/or national origin (e.g., an individual from a Jewish majority country). Antisemitic conduct implicates the Policy and can manifest in the Tulane environment in a number of ways. Examples of antisemitic conduct that implicates this Policy include:
    • Repeated instances of antisemitic slurs directed toward an individual, regardless of whether that individual is Jewish.
    • Refusing to allow an individual to participate in any program sponsored or hosted by Tulane because they are perceived to be from Israel, are associated with a Jewish organization, wears religious attire, like a kippah, or displays a religious symbol associated with Judaism, like a Star of David.
    • Defacing a Jewish employee’s or student’s property with a hateful symbol such as a swastika.
    • Using force or intimidation to obstruct the path of an employee or student because they are Jewish, perceived to be Jewish, or supportive of Jewish institutions or organizations.
    • Refusing to grant a student some expected benefit, such as a letter of recommendation, based on the perception that the student is Jewish, is associated with a Jewish organization, or because that student is perceived to be from Israel and/or is Zionist.
  • University of Minnesota’s Policies and Protections: A Foundation for Accountability: Explicit Prohibitions Against Antisemitism: The University's Student Conduct Code and Equal Opportunity Policy explicitly prohibit discrimination based on religion, shared ancestry, or ethnic characteristics – legal protections that encompass antisemitic harassment. Please see the Guiding Principles of the Student Conduct Code. This includes harassment in all forms, including harassment toward individuals (a) for reasons of race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry, genetic information, disability, status as a veteran, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or gender expression or (b) based on actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, and citizenship or residency in any country, including Israel and the Arab world countries. This includes, for example, antisemitic and Islamophobic discrimination or harassment. These policies are enforced through investigations by the Office for Community Standards and the Equal Opportunity & Title IX Office. Adjudicators receive annual training on identifying antisemitic behavior under Title VI.
  • Temple University’s Policies and Procedures Manual: The policy prohibits any bias-related intimidation or harassment, including antisemitic and anti-Israeli conduct, via gestures, written, verbal or physical act, or through electronic communication.

Support Jewish Members of the Campus Community

ADL recommends that colleges and universities collaborate closely with Jewish student organizations on campus, such as Hillels, Chabad, and Jewish Greek life organizations, to promote and support their activities and ensure that Jewish student life on campus is consistently thriving. Collaborating with external, Jewish organizations and/or local Jewish communities can also be helpful in bringing new initiatives to promote Jewish student life to campuses, for Jewish and non-Jewish students alike. Forming close partnerships with such groups can aid colleges and universities in further supporting the Jewish campus community in times of crisis.

Support of internal Jewish groups and collaborations with external Jewish organizations may include:

  • Providing funding and resources to organize relevant events for the campus community.
  • Sponsoring interfaith initiatives to foster communication and collaboration between various religious, cultural and faith groups on campus, including Jewish groups.
  • Organizing additional security if needed to ensure the Jewish campus community is protected.
  • Publicly promoting Jewish religious and cultural events on campus to the same extent the university would uplift holiday-related events supported by other religious communities.
  • Regularly meeting with representatives of such groups to hear their concerns and suggestions and to ensure their voice is part of the decision-making process for relevant matters, including shaping educational initiatives, task force operations and religious accommodation and non-discrimination policies.

Create A Task Force to Safeguard Jewish Life and Monitor/Confront Antisemitism

ADL recommends that colleges and universities participate in Hillel’s Campus Climate Initiative and/or develop a task force against antisemitism or focused on Jewish student life that is composed of relevant stakeholders (such as Jewish organizational representatives, Jewish staff members, or Jewish students). Task forces that jointly address antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate, and/or other forms of discrimination, meet ADL’s criteria and are encouraged, as long as they have relevant representation from the internal and/or external Jewish community.

Task forces, or participation in Hillel’s Campus Climate Initiative, are valuable in aiding colleges and universities in identifying major concerns regarding antisemitism on campus, providing recommendations regarding how to tackle the issues and safeguard the Jewish campus community, and raising awareness of antisemitism among the administration. Having Jewish voices form part of such task forces is crucial to ensure that all potential concerns are explored and that the Jewish campus community feels comfortable in confiding in the task force.

Task forces should aim to:

  • Conduct an initial evaluation of the state of Jewish life and antisemitism on campus to guide the long-term strategy and aims of the task force.
  • Establish clear and measurable goals with respect to improving Jewish life and addressing antisemitism on campus.
  • Meet regularly to discuss the topics of Jewish life and antisemitism on campus, engaging internal and external stakeholders (including Jewish students and staff, Jewish student organizations, and the local Jewish community) as appropriate.
  • Conduct research to assess Jewish life and antisemitism on campus, gathering data on incident rates, student satisfaction, and campus community concerns.
  • Produce annual, or more frequent, reports on Jewish life and antisemitism on campus, outlining key recommendations based on the findings, concrete implementation plans, and progress updates.
  • Work in coordination with other initiatives aimed at addressing other forms of hate on campus to cultivate allyship and drive a whole-of-campus approach to combatting harassment and discrimination.

Task forces and their internal faculty or external members should be publicly announced. Students who may be members of the task force do not need to be publicly announced if there are security concerns. Task forces should be charged with a clear mission and given a time frame for reporting. It should be clear to whom the Task Force reports and how the recommendations will be accepted, (for example will a Board of Trustees be tasked with voting on implementation?). Task Force recommendations and reports should be publicly available. For more best practices on task force reports, see here.

Hillel’s Campus Climate Initiative & Similar Programs

Hillel’s Campus Climate Initiative (CCI) “collaborates with higher education administrators to ensure a positive campus climate in which Jewish students feel comfortable expressing their identity and values, free of antisemitism, harassment, or marginalization.” By leveraging campus-specific data, training campus administrators and staff, and providing guidance regarding policy implementation, CCI allows administrators to explore the issue of antisemitism on their campuses, as well as take steps to effectively counter it.

Other similar programs are offered by the Academic Engagement Network

While ADL will be closely assessing the progress and effectiveness of task forces, examples of robust Task Forces and similar initiatives include:

  • University of Pennsylvania’s Task Force on Antisemitism has representation from members of the Jewish campus community, has been consulting with the broader campus community to receive constituent feedback to inform its operations, and has committed to providing consistent updates on three key areas of action to address campus antisemitism – safety & security, engagement, and education.
  • Columbia University’s Task Force on Antisemitism, developed in collaboration with its affiliated Barnard College, has representation from members of the Jewish campus community. The task force has committed to “engage in a serious and honest assessment of the sources and extent of the discomfort of [the Jewish campus community]..., review University policies, rules, and practices that impact the campus climate to make sure they protect the University’s core commitment to free speech, as well as to a safe and inclusive environment for all..., [and to] propose various other ways to sensitize the entire community to antisemitism, to counter it more effectively, and to support Jews at Columbia.” The task force released its first report in March 2024 and its fourth and final report in December 2025.
  • University of Maryland’s Task Force on Antisemitism and Islamophobia seeks to tackle both anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim hatred and has vowed to engage with members of both communities to inform the operations of the task force. The purpose of the task force is to “understand the causes of antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents, assess the effectiveness of existing preventive measures, and propose new initiatives to foster understanding, dialogue and support.”
  • New York University’s Center for the Study of Antisemitism does not follow the traditional task force model, but instead spearheads research to develop novel ways of combatting antisemitism, both on campus and beyond. As well as working with the University Hebrew and Judaic Studies departments, the center aims to bring together numerous departments to facilitate interdisciplinary research into antisemitism and develop unique programming to confront the issue head-on.
  • Temple University's Blue Ribbon Commission on Antisemitism and University Responses, established in 2022 - prior to the nationwide surge in campus antisemitism - was created to examine the university’s response to the needs of Jewish students, faculty, and staff. The commission issued a series of recommendations aimed at strengthening support, inclusion, and safety for the Jewish community on campus. Many of these recommendations have already been implemented or are actively in progress, reflecting the university’s ongoing commitment to combating antisemitism and fostering an inclusive campus environment.
  • Members of the University of Minnesota’s administration regularly convene strategic meetings with Jewish faculty and students to address, prevent, and respond to antisemitic incidents and foster a more inclusive environment for Jewish students, faculty, and staff. After a Spring 2024 meeting, the administration outlined 10 commitments to fostering a safe, welcoming, and supportive campus. These included commitments to support the University’s study abroad programs and faculty relationships with Israel; discuss opportunities to enhance student trust in the University’s processes to address bias and harassment; and open a consistent dialogue between senior leaders and Jewish student leaders. 

Include Jewish Students in Campus Climate Surveys

ADL recommends that colleges and universities conduct annual campus climate surveys wherein the topics of Jewish student life and antisemitism on campus are addressed. While this was not an assessed criterion in the first iteration of the Campus Antisemitism Report Card, ADL believes it is a key step colleges and universities can take to understand the state of Jewish student life and antisemitism on their campuses and guide subsequent efforts.

To support colleges and universities seeking to conduct campus climate studies to assess the experiences of Jewish students on their campuses, ADL partnered with Gratz College to develop a Model Campus Climate Survey to help drive learnings on antisemitism. The survey includes tried-and-tested survey questions developed by an ADL-convened group that included academics, researchers and experts in antisemitism.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • University of Chicago’s 2016/17 Campus Climate Survey and report on religion focused on various groups, including Jewish students. The survey assessed how different groups perceive religious tolerance and respect on campus, rates at which different groups experience online and/or in-person discrimination, rates of self-censorship, and experiences of conflict between individual religious needs and classroom experiences. The University completed a follow-up 2023 survey, with results due to be published soon.
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison's 2021 Campus Climate Survey and report focused on various groups, including Jewish students. The survey assessed how different groups feel on campus (e.g. welcome, safe, excluded), how different groups feel in different campus environments, and rates at which different groups experience hostile behavior.
  • Vassar College regularly conducts campus climate surveys, surveying students based on their sense of belonging on campus, their knowledge of how to access support, rates of self-censorship and their experiences in classrooms and beyond. The College breaks down the findings by identity of respondents, thereby being able to get an understanding of the specific experiences of Jewish students on campus.
  • Carleton College conducts an end-of-year survey of Jewish, Muslim and Christian students to better understand their experiences on campus, asking how well the Office of the Chaplain has supported each community and what they can do better and inquiring as to how welcome, informed and comfortable they feel on campus.

Promote Jewish Studies/Pro-Israel Programming

ADL recommends that colleges and universities offer students ample opportunities to engage with Jewish studies and pro-Israel-related educational initiatives and programming. As well as fostering greater awareness and understanding, such initiatives can promote allyship and civil discourse on campus. Jewish studies can be offered via specific modules, events and programming throughout the academic year, and through minors and/or majors. Pro-Israel-related programming can include classes, exchange programs, and discussion series offered to the campus community.

In developing programs for Jewish studies, ADL urges college and university leaders to reject and distance themselves from harmful and often antisemitic academic efforts to “delink” the study of Zionism from Jewish Studies.

Examples of Robust Approaches to Jewish Studies:

Examples of Robust Approaches to Israel Programming that received full credit on the Report Card:

  • American University’s Meltzer Schwartzberg Center for Israel Studies is an educational center for Israel studies which offers Israel-related courses, events, and conferences to the entire campus community.
  • Brandeis University’s Schusterman Center for Israel Studies is dedicated to promoting Israel studies and Israel-related research efforts, sponsoring publications on Israel, hosting events and conferences, and providing educational resources to the entire campus community. The Center also hosts a Summer Institute for Israel Studies which seeks to work with higher education professionals to enhance their approach to teaching about Israel studies.

Promote Interfaith Initiatives

ADL recommends that colleges and universities offer interfaith programming or establish a group dedicated to developing interfaith initiatives throughout the academic year. Such initiatives are crucial in promoting dialogue and understanding and fostering allyship among groups of different faiths.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

Accommodate Jewish Holidays

ADL recommends that colleges and universities offer a clear and readily accessible accommodations policy for religious observances and promote awareness of the Jewish holidays. The latter can be fulfilled by adding the Jewish holidays to the school calendar or otherwise lifting up Jewish holiday-related events on campus hosted by Chabad, Hillel, or other organizations or community members to the same extent the university would uplift holiday-related events supported by other religious communities.

Such action is important in raising awareness of dates that are important for the Jewish campus community, fostering campus-wide appreciation for holidays and ensuring that academic conflicts with religious holidays are less likely to occur.

Universities should not only implement robust religious holiday accommodation policies but also proactively establish non-testing days on major religious holidays, including Jewish holidays. By preventing examinations and mandatory assessments from taking place on these significant dates, institutions can foster an inclusive academic environment that respects religious observances. This approach removes the need for students to individually request accommodations, a process that can often be administratively complex and stressful. It also ensures that no student is placed at an academic disadvantage for observing their religious practices, reinforcing the university’s commitment to equity and diversity.

Establishing non-testing days also alleviates the burden on educators and administrative staff, who are often responsible for reviewing and granting accommodation requests on a case-by-case basis. By instituting a universal policy, universities can streamline academic scheduling and avoid last-minute conflicts that may arise when students seek alternative exam dates. Moreover, this policy would signal a broader commitment to religious inclusion, demonstrating that institutions value the well-being and diverse backgrounds of their student body. Ultimately, creating a system that preemptively addresses these concerns benefits both students and faculty, fostering a more supportive and equitable academic experience for all.

Example of a Robust Approach:

  • Brandeis University’s policy prohibits classes on Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur and the first and last day of Sukkot. As part of this policy, testing and examinations do not occur on these dates.

Sample Religious Accommodations Policies that Earned Full Credit:

  • Elon University’s Religious Observance Notification Policy offers an easily accessible digital form that students can complete to request an excused absence during religious holidays. Alongside the form, the webpage provides guidance on the policy, the process for receiving an excused absence, major religious holidays, and expectations for how faculty should approach class and exam scheduling with religious holidays in mind.

Examples of Exemplary Promotion of Jewish Religious Holidays

Promote Civil Discourse on Israel-Hamas War and Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

The broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the Israel-Hamas war, have activated strong emotions and differences of opinion and perspective for many people, including on college and university campuses. As such, ADL recommends that colleges and universities take a proactive approach to fostering civil and educational discourse among members of the campus community on the topic. As well as promoting awareness of the personal significance of the conflict to many members of the campus community, such action can cultivate allyship, reducing antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate in the process.

ADL’s 10 Ways to Have Conscientious Conversations on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict guide offers guidance to promoting such discourse.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • Following the outbreak of the 2023 Israel-Hamas War, Dartmouth College immediately announced a series of public forums and other programming, driven by the College’s chairs of Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies, to foster dialogue and aid the campus community in understanding the background and nature of the conflict.
  • Since October 2023, Elon University has focused on fostering civil dialogue on the topic of the Israel-Hamas War through a series of roundtables. These efforts are rooted in earlier University policies, dating back to 2014, when a program was established to “set up rapid response panels to discuss timely and controversial issues in the news.”
  • MIT’s Institute Community and Equity Office (ICEO) funds weekly lunches for members of the Jewish and Middle Eastern/North African (MENA) communities to gather separately to build community. The University has also developed “3rd Space Luncheons,” a weekly luncheon of faculty, staff, and students who identify with multiple communities, including Jewish/Israeli and Muslim/Palestinian, who enter into unstructured civil dialogue to build bridges. The University also has a Civil Discourse in the Classroom and Beyond program.
  • Washington University in St. Louis’ Division of Student Affairs offers “Dialogue Across Difference,” an eight-week course that teaches undergraduate students how to explore difficult topics such as politics, religion, race and gender in a positive and productive way. As well as fostering civil discourse, antisemitism is included within this course.
  • In October 2024, Caltech kicked off its Dialogue across Difference series, which is intended to build campus community members’ capacity to engage in civil discourse on difficult topics.
  • Alongside a Dialogues Across Differences Initiative, which now includes a required component in first-year orientation, American University has launched a campus-wide Civic Life project, guided by a cross-campus Steering Committee and featuring the inaugural Student Civic Life Fellows program. The Fellows participate in a leadership course focused on facilitating tough conversations on complex issues.
  • The University of Chicago has a Forum for Free Inquiry and Expression, which serves as a focal point for understanding and applying free expression in academia and in the broader culture. Furthermore, the University has also established the Parrhesia Public Thought and Discourse program, which provides an innovative undergraduate curriculum, programming, and outreach in freedom of expression and the theory and practice of discourse.

Develop Partnerships with Jewish Organizations & Israeli Institutions

Developing strategic partnerships with both internal and external Jewish organizations is essential for fostering a supportive environment for Jewish members of the campus community and effectively addressing campus antisemitism. Internally, collaborating with Jewish student groups and campus organizations can provide valuable insights into the specific needs of Jewish students, inform inclusive programming, and ensure that institutional policies are responsive to the realities of antisemitism on campus.

Externally, working with expert organizations can help universities develop comprehensive policies to combat antisemitism, facilitate specialized training for administrators and faculty, and strengthen the administration’s commitment to addressing discrimination.  

Universities should also actively engage with Israeli institutions just as they do with other international academic partners. Establishing study abroad programs, hosting visiting fellows and professors, and fostering collaborative research projects with Israeli universities not only enriches academic opportunities but also demonstrates a firm stance against increasingly prevalent calls for academic boycotts. These partnerships affirm the university’s commitment to intellectual diversity, global collaboration, and the free exchange of ideas, ensuring that Israeli academia is valued alongside institutions worldwide.

Create & Support Jewish Alumni Groups  

Creating Jewish alumni groups provides a valuable network that strengthens the connection between Jewish graduates and their alma mater while offering crucial support for current and incoming Jewish students. These groups serve as a key component in keeping Jewish alumni engaged with campus life, ensuring they remain informed about developments affecting Jewish students and can advocate for continued institutional support.

Additionally, they create a bridge between generations, allowing incoming Jewish students to access mentorship, career guidance, and personal advice from those who have already navigated the campus experience. By fostering these connections, universities can cultivate a strong and enduring Jewish community that not only enhances student support but also reinforces alumni involvement in shaping a more inclusive and supportive campus environment.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • The Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance (HJAA) works to ensure that every student on campus – both Jewish and non-Jewish – is safe. Going above and beyond the traditional operations of alumni networks, HJAA has conducted an in-depth investigation of the campus climate, publishing a report on its findings, and hosted a ‘Crisis on Campus: Antisemitism, Zionism, and the Future of Higher Education’ conference in September 2024.  
  • The Stanford Jewish Alumni Network has worked to develop robust programming to raise awareness of antisemitism on campus, including via a webinar series and resource sharing.  
  • The Columbia Jewish Alumni Association was established to encourage the University administration to combat the campus antisemitism crisis post-10/7. One of the association’s initiatives includes a mentorship program (‘Acheinu’), designed to match students with alumni volunteers who can provide support during a student’s academic journey.

Create & Support Jewish Staff and Faculty Groups

Establishing Jewish staff and faculty Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) - or similar support networks – is a crucial step in fostering an inclusive and supportive campus environment. These ERGs provide Jewish faculty and staff with a space to connect, share experiences, and advocate for policies that combat antisemitism and enhance Jewish life on campus.  

They also serve as an important resource for university leadership, offering firsthand insights into the needs of Jewish employees and students while helping to shape institutional responses to antisemitism and discrimination. Additionally, Jewish ERGs can play a vital role in mentorship and community-building, providing guidance and support for both Jewish colleagues and students. By encouraging the establishment of – and formally recognizing and supporting – these groups, universities demonstrate a commitment to ensuring that Jewish voices are heard in shaping campus policies and culture.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • UCLA’s Jewish Faculty Resilience Group (JFrg) is a network of faculty, researchers, and staff dedicated to supporting the Jewish campus community and combatting campus antisemitism.
  • Duke University’s Jewish Employee Resource Group is “dedicated to building a supportive community where Jewish employees can connect, engage, and thrive.” The group works to promote awareness of the diversity of Jewish identities, facilitate connections, and combat antisemitism on campus.
  • DePaul University’s Jewish Faculty Staff Alliance exists to support Jewish faculty and staff at the university, creating spaces for Jewish staff and faculty to gather, working with the administration to ameliorate the campus climate and partnering with external organizations to address antisemitism on campus.
  • Yale University’s Forum for Jewish Faculty and Friends was founded with the objective of foster education about antisemitism on campus and has hosted programming dedicated to raising awareness of the Jewish experience and antisemitism pre- and post-10/7.

Ensure Campus Safety

Offer Robust Incident Reporting Mechanisms

ADL recommends that colleges and universities have a clear, robust and easily findable way for members of the campus community to report incidents (i.e. via an easily accessible digital form that can be filled out and that sets expectations regarding response times). Such tools are valuable in ensuring that incidents that have been witnessed or experienced are promptly reported, investigated and addressed. With 2023 and 2025 ADL studies showing that a majority of Jewish students are not reporting incidents on campus because they do not know what to do, because they fear potential backlash or because they do not believe they will get the help they need, having robust reporting mechanisms that prioritize easy access, swift action, and protection for the target is key to cultivating a safer campus climate. For more best practices on incident reporting mechanisms, see here.

Examples of Robust Reporting Systems that Earned Full Credit on the Report Card:

  • The New York University Bias Response Line provides an online reporting form with clarification that a response should be expected within 48 hours of the business day following submission. Alongside the digital form and an email address, the website provides a list of FAQs and, for urgent situations, contact details for the police department, the campus safety department, and the campus wellness department.
  • The Brandeis Office of Equal Opportunity outlines a clear three-step reporting and adjudication process, with the option of filing a report via a digital form, via email, or via a phone call. Individuals reporting an incident via the digital form – which clearly outlines the different categories of discrimination – are assigned a unique report key code to review updates and responses to their report. Options to contact emergency services in the case of an urgent situation are also provided.

ADL also recommends that colleges and universities publish anonymized aggregate data on the prevalence and nature of bias incident reports, the findings of investigations and any actions taken (including sanctions). This transparency should go beyond the publication of hate crime data and should encompass bias incidents that do not rise to the level of crimes. Such efforts would aid the campus community in understanding trends and instill confidence in the reporting process.

Examples of Strong Transparency in Reporting Incidents and Sharing Bias Incident Data:

  • Syracuse University maintains a live dashboard that publicly documents all bias incidents reported to the institution. The dashboard provides details of each incident, including what occurred, when it happened, and the current status of the investigation, ensuring transparency and accountability.
  • University of Maryland and Stanford University provide dashboards, accessible exclusively to members of their campus communities, that document bias incidents on campus, including descriptions of each event. At University of Maryland, bias incident data is also regularly reported and made publicly available through the student newspaper, fostering awareness and accountability.
  • Princeton University’s Bias Annual Report presents trends and observations related to reported bias incidents and complaints of discrimination and harassment. The report specifically includes details on investigations and outcomes and data related to campus concerns around the Israel-Hamas war.
  • Rutgers University-New Brunswick publicly releases aggregate data regarding identity-based bias incidents on campus, specifying the classification of reported incidents, types of incidents, affiliations of reporters, and the number of incidents specifically labelled as being antisemitic.

Establish a Title VI Office or Coordinator

Colleges and universities should establish a Title VI office or designate a coordinator responsible for preventing and addressing discrimination prohibited by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, including antisemitism and discrimination based on national origin. The functions of this office or individual should include:

  1. Offer support to students, faculty, and staff who report harassment or bias based on race, color, or national origin;
  2. Make sure campus community members know how to report discrimination;
  3. Ensure complaints are taken seriously and investigated promptly and fairly, and complainants are informed of the progress and resolutions of their complaints in a timely fashion;
  4. Lead training and education to prevent discrimination;
  5. Keep accurate records of complaints of discrimination and track trends;
  6. Review the reports and complaints of discrimination to ensure that they do not individually or together indicate a hostile environment for students, faculty, or staff;
  7. Share data about the complaints of discrimination received on the school's website to the maximum extent permitted by law.

For more information on Title VI, see here. For more information on Title VII, see here. For best practices for Title VI offices and coordinators, see here. 

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  1. In March 2025, New York University (NYU) announced the appointment of NYU’s inaugural Title VI coordinator within NYU’s Office of Equal Opportunity. The coordinator is responsible for addressing and investigating instances of discrimination or harassment on campus, as well as educating the NYU community about what constitutes discrimination and harassment.
  2. In December 2024, the University of Pennsylvania announced the opening of the Office of Religious and Ethnic Interests (Title VI) (OREI). Focusing on education, investigation and conflict resolution, OREI works in partnership across the Penn community to prevent and respond to issues and reports involving alleged discrimination and harassment based on an individual or group’s religion or ethnicity.

Update Security Protocols and Enforce Time, Place and Manner Restrictions

ADL recommends that colleges and universities review and update security protocols on campus to ensure that there is adequate staffing during student protests, and that criminal acts of harassment, vandalism, and assault are immediately investigated, and time, place and manner restrictions are enforced. Such action can prevent demonstrations from becoming unsafe.

Examples of Robust Approaches:

  • Following October 7th, University of California, Berkeley re-assessed their security protocols, ramping up security in coordination with UCPD, hiring additional private security for campus rallies and protests, and providing administrative oversight during protests.
  • In January 2024, American University released a statement stating that “recent events and incidents on campus have made Jewish students feel unsafe and unwelcome,” which was followed with an outline of immediate actions being taken by the University to ensure the safety of Jewish students on campus. These actions included banning protests inside university buildings.
  • In February 2024, Columbia University established the Interim University Policy for Safe Demonstrations, defining the processes that need to be followed, with respect to registration and conduct, to ensure that demonstrations on campus are safe and adhere to the University’s policies. In October 2025, the University further strengthened its Rules of University Conduct, following a series of violations of the policy in the Spring 2025 term.
  • Arizona State University published Free Speech at ASU, a resource that outlines the conduct permitted during demonstrations on campus and the time, place and manner guidelines for when and how speech can take place on campus. These include the prohibition of unauthorized structures and tents, limiting protests to daytime hours and underscoring that protestors must always follow the instructions of University officials if they are asked to relocate or cease protest activities.

Examples of policies prohibiting encampments:

  • California State University (CSU) System: Directed by the CSU system, all 23 CSU campuses must abide by new Time, Place and Manner restrictions, including ‘No Camping, Overnight Demonstrations, Overnight Loitering, Furniture, or Large Household Items.’  
  • Rutgers University: Placing or building of structures is prohibited without express permission by Rutgers University. Structures established without permission will be removed and the sponsoring organization, department, and/or individual will be responsible for all related costs. No inflatable structures are permitted. Overnight camping, placement of tents, or encampments will not be permitted.

Examples of policies prohibiting masked harassment:

  • California State University System: Wearing masks or face coverings is permissible for all persons who are complying with University policies and applicable laws. However, no person, while on University Property, may wear a mask, personal disguise, or otherwise conceal their identity with the intent of intimidating and harassing any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violations of applicable University policy or local, state, or federal laws. No person shall refuse to identify themselves while on University Property to University officials who are acting in the performance of their duties in situations where assistance or intervention is needed. For all persons who in the judgment of a University official are in violation of a University policy or the law, the University reserves the right to require such persons, including Students, Employees, and Nonaffiliates, to show identification when requested to do so by a University official. Failure to provide identification in this circumstance is itself a violation of this Policy and may also be a criminal violation.
  • University of Michigan: No person shall, while on University property or in University buildings or in University buses, passenger vans, or other University vehicles, engage in the following disorderly conduct: Wear a mask, personal disguise, or otherwise conceal their identity with the intent of intimidating any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violations of University policy, University ordinances, or municipal, state, or federal laws.
  • Purdue University: The following actions constitute conduct for which students may be subject to informal action or disciplinary sanctions...the wearing of a mask or personal disguise, or otherwise the concealing one’s identity with the intent to intimidate any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violations of University policy, University regulations, or municipal, state, or federal laws, whether or not, in each case, such abuse, conduct, act of intimidation, threat, or identity concealment occurs on or in University property.”
  • Temple University: The policy prohibits “wearing a mask, personal disguise, or otherwise concealing one’s identity with the intent of intimidating any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violation(s) of University policy, or municipal, state, or federal laws.”

Examples of policies prohibiting event disruptions:

  • Elon University:  
    • All forms of demonstration and other expressive activity (including protests, rallies, marches, assemblies, speeches, vigils, displaying signs, circulation of petitions, etc.) (“Demonstrations”) must not interfere with the normal operations of the University, or block access to university facilities or events.
    • When Demonstrations occur in the context of a speaker on campus, audience members may not behave in a way that infringes upon others’ ability to view or to hear the speaker. During the speech itself, prolonged or continued chanting or possible incitement of a disturbance intended to distract the speaker or disrupt the speech can, at the discretion of law enforcement or designated University officials, result in individuals being removed from the event.  
    • Amplification of speakers is only permitted in a manner that does not disrupt classes, normal university operations, or other approved events and follows applicable local laws and ordinances.
  • Columbia University: A person is in violation of these Rules when such person individually or with a group, incident to a demonstration, including a rally or picketing:
    • (Simple) interferes over a short period of time with entrance to, exit from, passage within, or use of, a University facility but does not substantially disrupt any University function;
    • (Serious) continues for more than a very short period of time to physically prevent, or clearly attempt to prevent, passage within, or unimpeded use of, a University facility, and thereby interferes with the normal conduct of a University function;
    • (Simple) briefly interrupts a University function;
    • (Serious) disrupts a University function or renders its continuation impossible.

Ensure Safe and Unfettered Access to All Areas of Campus, Including Classrooms and Academic Buildings

Unfettered and equitable access to all campus buildings, spaces, events and activities is essential to safeguard the entire campus community. While free expression and association are encouraged and protected, harassment that jeopardizes the rights and safety of other community members is not.

ADL recommends including language in campus Codes of Conduct and/or other related policies that ensures access to classrooms and academic buildings.

Examples of robust policies on ensuring safe and unfettered access to campus areas:

  • California State University’s Interim Systemwide Time, Place, and Manner Policy which applies to all 23 CSU campuses.
    • Those engaged in the exercise of free speech and assembly rights shall not:
      • Obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic, or otherwise endanger persons or property.
      • Conduct their activity in or on University parking lots, parking structures, driveways, crosswalks, exits, fire lanes, streets, roadways, and/or obstruct walkways, doorways, passageways, or otherwise deny a person access to normally unrestricted University Property, or in any manner that blocks paths of vehicular or pedestrian travel.
    • Non-Affiliates on University Property shall not:
      • Knowingly and willfully interfere with the peaceful conduct of the activities of the Campus or facility by intimidating, harassing, or obstructing any University Employee, Student, or any other person.
    • Alleged violations of the Student Conduct Code may include, but not be limited to, the following:
      • Willful, material, and substantial disruption or obstruction of a University-related activity, or any on-Campus activity.
      • Participating in an activity that substantially and materially disrupts the normal operations of the University or infringes on the rights of members of the University community.
      • Willful, material, and substantial obstruction of the free flow of pedestrian or other traffic, on or leading to Campus property or an off-Campus University related activity.
  • Brown University’s Protest and Demonstration Policy states:
    • Protest and demonstration are a necessary and acceptable means of expression within the Brown community. Protest and demonstration become unacceptable when they obstruct the basic exchange of ideas or disrupt or materially interfere with the normal functions of the University. Such disruption or interference is a form of censorship, no matter who initiates it or for what reasons. By asserting their rights to protest or demonstrate, individuals cannot decide for the entire community which ideas will or will not receive free expression. . . .
    • Halting, disrupting or otherwise seizing control of a lecture, debate, or public forum or directly or indirectly preventing a speaker from speaking, for one’s own purposes, even for a brief period of time, is not permitted.
    • Blocking, obstructing or impeding passage of a person or vehicle, and erecting or placing obstructions, including signs or similar objects that could be used to disrupt the view of others thus depriving others of their rights, are prohibited.
    • Unauthorized entry and/or use of any University space is prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to, unauthorized entry into or occupation of any University room, building, area of campus, or other space controlled by the University in a manner not permitted by the standard rules or policies governing operation for that space. Refusal to leave a space at the request of a University official is considered unauthorized use of space.

Policies and Procedures

Reaffirm Faculty Responsibilities and Protect the Classrooms

The inherent power imbalances between faculty and students in the classroom heightens the vulnerability of students to faculty coercion and political indoctrination. Faculty members have a duty to protect students’ academic freedom and encourage their students’ free pursuit of learning, and must take great care to avoid imposing their own views on students. For example, faculty members should not be allowed to cancel a class session for the purpose of encouraging students to participate in a political protest or rally preferred by faculty, or threaten to withhold students’ grades if faculty demands are not met.

Faculty also may not discriminate against any student on political grounds or based on a student’s legally protected identity characteristics. These norms of faculty conduct should be made explicitly clear at the beginning of the school year.

The sanctity of the classroom – historically known as a safe place for students to learn, pontificate, and debate – is essential to the overall success and integrity of the higher education experience. ADL recommends adopting a policy that aims to ensure that free expression does not interfere with the University's academic mission to educate and maintain an environment that is devoid of antisemitism, discrimination, harassment, or intimidation.

For more information on expectations for faculty conduct in the classroom and on campus, see here.

Examples of robust policies reaffirming faculty responsibilities and protecting the classroom:

  • Cal State Long Beach, statement:
    • Faculty are not permitted to cancel classes in support of marches, protests, or other political events, nor should they coerce students into participation. Additionally, faculty are prohibited from requiring or promoting student attendance at any events unless such participation directly contributes to the academic objectives of the course.
    • While faculty members have academic freedom to define course assignments and extra credit opportunities, their course assignments and extra credit opportunities should serve a bona fide pedagogical purpose that is relevant to the subject matter of the courses they are teaching.
    • Faculty should refrain from offering students extra credit to attend political rallies or marches for non-pedagogical purposes to further their own personal social or political agendas.
    • Faculty are prohibited from cancelling a class session for purposes of encouraging students to participate in a protest or rally as a demonstration of the faculty member’s support for a particular social or political movement.
    • Faculty are expected to fulfil their employment duties, including teaching classes at their assigned times and places, unless they have been approved for vacation or time off through normal campus processes.
  • UC Berkeley, policies prohibit:
    • Significant intrusion of material unrelated to the course (APM 015, Section II, A.1.b & Section B4(b) of Unit 18 agreement).
    • Use of the position or powers of a faculty member to coerce the judgment or conscience of a student or to cause harm to a student for arbitrary or personal reasons (APM 015, Section II, A.5 & Section B4(h) of Unit 18 agreement).
    • Misuse of the classroom by, for example, allowing it to be used for political indoctrination, for purposes other than those for which the course was constituted, or for providing grades without commensurate and appropriate student achievement (Regents’ Policy 2301).
    • Regents' Policy 2301 stipulates "the right of students to have their classes held on the regularly scheduled basis and to be taught by the instructor whose responsibility it is to teach the course in question is to be upheld.”
    • APM 015, Part II, A.1.c. defines "significant failure to adhere, without legitimate reason, to the rules of the faculty in the conduct of courses, to meet class, to keep office hours, or to hold examinations as scheduled" to be a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.

Mandate Antisemitism Education for All Members of the Campus Community

ADL recommends that colleges and universities offer mandatory antisemitism education for all members of the campus community, either via standalone courses or through integration into existing educational initiatives. Colleges and universities in states with legislation that prohibits such mandatory efforts are instead urged to develop non-mandatory antisemitism education courses, encourage members of the campus community to partake, and track rates of participation among students and staff.

If you are interested in organizing an ADL-led antisemitism training for members of your campus community, please reach out to [email protected] to be connected to the appropriate regional office.  

Example of Robust Antisemitism Education Initiatives for the Campus Community:

  • Indiana University’s Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism offers “an active program of courses, lectures, conferences, and publications.” The institute invites experts on antisemitism to speak directly to the campus community through a speaker series, offers a series of courses on antisemitism, hosts a podcast, provides resources for independent learning, and promotes new antisemitism research via various channels.
  • At New York University (NYU):
    • All degree-seeking students are required to complete a mandatory Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment (NDAH) training, which contains examples and content that is specific to antisemitism (including anti-Zionism) as well as other forms of discrimination and harassment.
    • All New York employees, including faculty, and staff, are required to take the state mandated sexual harassment training which also now includes a section on other forms of discrimination and harassment, specifically covering antisemitism along with other forms of NDAH issues.
    • NYU also offers its entire community a comprehensive training program called the “Jewish Ally Zone,” which has been offered to hundreds of community members since its creation in 2021.
  • Temple University has implemented mandatory Title VI training, which includes specific examples of scenarios focusing on antisemitism. This initiative is required of all for all students, faculty, and staff and is delivered through an online training module. Developed in collaboration with diverse university stakeholders, the training focuses on recognizing and addressing bias related to religion, ethnicity, national origin, and shared ancestry, with a specific emphasis on antisemitic assumptions. Participants are guided through real-world scenarios designed to deepen understanding of how biases may manifest and to promote thoughtful, informed responses that move beyond harmful stereotypes.

Example of Robust Antisemitism Education Initiatives for Campus Administrators:

Have an Academic Disruption Action Plan

Incidents may arise on campus that disrupt activities, events, or academics. Some examples of these types of disruptions include protests that interfere with exams or block student access to certain buildings; encampments or sit-ins that violate time place and manner restrictions; shouting down commencement speakers; and building takeovers.

ADL recommends that universities create a proactive action plan to prepare for such disruptions. Guidance tailored to specific types of protest activities can be found here.  

For additional resources, please see the Community Relations Service from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Navigating Campus Conflicts: A Guide for Campus Leaders and Public Safety Personnel.

Incorporate Anti-Discrimination Standards into Faculty Handbooks to Address Antisemitism  

Non-Discrimination, Harassment, and Antisemitism

Such policies establish the institution’s commitment to a work environment free from discrimination and harassment, including antisemitism. The policies should clearly define who is protected under the policy and identify the types of discrimination prohibited, supported by relevant examples.

Best Practices:

  • Columbia University Office for Institutional Equity’s (OIE) Anti-Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment Policies & Procedures for Faculty & Staff: Columbia University prohibits discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment, on the basis of: age; alienage or citizenship status; arrest or conviction record; caregiver status; caste; color; credit history; creed; disability; familial status; genetic predisposition or carrier status; height, weight or the combination of height and weight (body size); gender; gender expression; gender identity; lactation accommodation; marital status; national origin (including shared ancestry, ethnic characteristics, or citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity); pregnancy; race; religion; salary history; sex; sexual orientation; sexual or reproductive health decisions; status as a victim of domestic violence, stalking, or sex offenses; unemployment status; veteran or active military status; or any other protected characteristic as established by law.” As part of a totality of the circumstances analysis for national origin, shared ancestry, and ethnicity claims of antisemitism, OIE considers the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (“IHRA”) definition of antisemitism, among other resources, including the framework provided for by the Columbia Antisemitism Task Force. The Columbia Antisemitism Task Force explains, “antisemitism can manifest in a range of ways, including as ethnic slurs, epithets, and caricatures; stereotypes; antisemitic tropes and symbols; Holocaust denial; targeting Jews or Israelis for violence or celebrating violence against them; exclusion or discrimination based on Jewish identity or ancestry or real or perceived ties to Israel; and certain double standards applied to Israel.”  
  • Pomona College’s Workplace Nondiscrimination Policy: Pomona College complies with all applicable state and federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination and harassment in the workplace. This policy uses the term "Legally Protected Characteristics" to encompass all of the categories that are protected by state and federal employment laws, including: sex (including pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions, breastfeeding, and conditions related to breastfeeding), gender identity and expression, pregnancy, reproductive health decision-making, religion (including religious dress and grooming practices), creed, color, race (including traits historically associated with race, including but not limitehttps://policy.ucop.edu/doc/1001004/Anti-Discriminationd to hair texture and protective hairstyles), national or ethnic origin, actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity, sexual orientation, medical condition, physical or mental disability, age (age 40 and over), marital status, registered domestic partner status, military and/or veteran status, genetic characteristics and information or any other basis prohibited by state or federal law. All forms of harassment and discrimination destroy that foundation of respect and violate the sense of community vital to the College's educational enterprise...The College also recognizes that discrimination and harassment may occur in an intersectional manner. Intersectional discrimination and harassment occur when discrimination or harassment is based on a combination of interconnected protected statuses. A non-exhaustive list of examples of intersectional discrimination and harassment is below.
    • Antisemitism can be a form of intersectional discrimination or harassment based on religion, shared ancestry, and/or national origin. Antisemitism may manifest as engaging in any of the following conduct against an individual because the individual is or is perceived to be Jewish or because the individual is or is perceived to be from Israel: repeatedly using anti-Semitic slurs; defacing an individual's property with a hateful symbol or word (e.g., a swastika); denying an individual access to or refusing to allow an individual to participate in any program sponsored or hosted by the College; using force or intimidation to obstruct the path of an individual; or refusing to grant an individual a benefit to which they are entitled (e.g., a letter of recommendation). Evidence of an individual's perceived protected status may include, for example, association with Israel or with a Jewish organization, wearing religious attire (e.g., a kippah), or displaying a religious symbol associated with Judaism (e.g., a star of David).
  • University of California’s Systemwide Anti-Discrimination Policy: This Anti-Discrimination Policy (“Policy”) applies to all University of California (“University”) employees as well as undergraduate, graduate, and professional students (“students”), and third parties....Following federal guidance, Prohibited Conduct under the A-D Policy based on national or ethnic origin or ancestry extends to individuals who experience Discrimination or Harassment based on their actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, or citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity. This includes, for example, antisemitic, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic Discrimination or Harassment. Some of these forms of Discrimination or Harassment may also represent Prohibited Conduct based on other Protected Categories covered by the A-D Policy, including based on religion. Examples of such Discrimination or Harassment may include:
    • A professor bars Jewish students from a seminar on the Middle East based on the belief that their ties to Israel will polarize class discussions.
    • Denying access to or participation in any University program or activity based on their religious or ethnic dress (e.g., a keffiyeh, hijab, burka, turban, or kippah), with the exception of legitimate business-related dress codes that may be required in certain contexts, such as clinical patient care settings or for safety reasons such as when operating heavy machinery.
    • Repeatedly subjecting individuals to derogatory comments based on their religious or ethnic dress (e.g., a keffiyeh, hijab, burka, turban, or kippah).  
  • Michigan State University’s Anti-Discrimination Policy in the Faculty Handbook:
    • Article II) This policy states expectations for institutional and individual conduct. It applies to all University community members, including faculty, staff, students, registered student organizations, student governing bodies, and the University's administrative units, and to the University's contractors in the execution of their University contracts or engagements, with respect to the following:
      • All educational, employment, cultural, and social activities occurring on the University campus;
      • University-sponsored programs occurring off-campus, including but not limited to cooperative extension, intercollegiate athletics, lifelong education, and any regularly scheduled classes;
      • University housing;
      • and Programs and activities sponsored by student governing bodies, including their constituent groups, and by registered student organizations...
    • Article III) Unlawful acts of discrimination or harassment are prohibited...Complaints under this Policy are processed and investigated by the Office of Institutional Equity (OIE) pursuant to the OIE Complaint Procedures...
    • Article V) The University investigates complaints involving conduct occurring at the locations, programs, and activities listed in Article II above. The University also investigates complaints of conduct occurring off-campus, even if not occurring in the context of a University program or activity, if the alleged conduct creates or contributes to a hostile environment on campus.

Academic Freedom and Free Expression

Such policies affirm the rights of faculty and students to free inquiry, expression, and debate, while clearly defining conduct (i.e., discrimination and harassment) that violates institutional policies and standards.  

Best Practices:

  • Temple University’s Faculty Handbook: All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure*, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, as follows:
    • “(a) Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.
    • (b) Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
    • (c) College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.”
  • University of California Academic Responsibility/Duty Policy: Academic freedom safeguards must be accompanied by an equally demanding standard of academic responsibility, requiring responsible service, consistent with the objectives of the University.
  • University of Pennsylvania Faculty Handbook: The teacher is entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject. The teacher is a member of a learned profession and of an educational institution. When speaking or writing as an individual, the teacher should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but should note that a special position in the community imposes special obligations. As a person of learning and a member of an educational institution, the teacher should remember that the public may judge the profession and the institution by their utterances. Hence the teacher should at all times show respect for the opinions of others, and should indicate when they are not speaking for the institution.
  • Columbia University IHRA FAQ Webpage: The University encourages the free exchange of ideas, beliefs, and opinions, including on issues relating to armed conflict, human and civil rights, competing moral, historical, and political claims, and controversies such as the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. However, academic freedom is not a license to discriminate based on someone’s membership in a protected class. If harassing speech or conduct that otherwise appears to be based on views about a country’s policies or practices is infused with discriminatory comments about persons from, or associated with, that country or another country, then it may constitute discriminatory harassment. In addition, a hostile environment also can be created when students are not free to express their views about issues that are closely connected to their identity as members of a protected class.

Classroom Conduct and Instructional Responsibilities

Such policies outline expectations for maintaining an inclusive, respectful, and academically rigorous classroom. They address the appropriate boundaries of faculty authority, including avoiding political indoctrination, promoting viewpoint diversity, and ensuring course content is pedagogically relevant.

Best Practices:

  • Columbia University’s Faculty Handbook: Faculty should allow the free expression of opinions within the classroom that may be different from their own and should not permit any such differences to influence their evaluations of their students. This is an important part of the faculty’s responsibility to their students and the educational mission of the University, but it must be done with civility, tolerance, and respect for ideas that differ from their own. When students feel that one of their instructors has not met that requirement, they are encouraged to resolve the problems directly with the faculty member but may instead turn to the department chair or dean. They may also seek a formal hearing of their complaints against the faculty member under the grievance procedures of their school.
  • CUNY Brooklyn’s Faculty Summer 2026 Guidance: A faculty member may not use the authority inherent in the instructional role to discriminate, harass, or to compel a student to engage in political action that is not listed on the syllabus available before the semester begins. The evaluation of students and the awarding of credit must be based on a professional judgment of academic performance and not on matters irrelevant to academic performance, such as race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, shared ancestry, or other protected status.
  • University of California Faculty Code of Conduct: Types of unacceptable conduct:
    • Failure to meet the responsibilities of instruction, including:
      • (a) arbitrary denial of access to instruction;
      • (b) significant intrusion of material unrelated to the course;
      • (c) significant failure to adhere, without legitimate reason, to the rules of the faculty in the conduct of courses, to meet class, to keep office hours, or to hold examinations as scheduled;
      • (d) evaluation of student work by criteria not directly reflective of course performance;
      • (e) undue and unexcused delay in evaluating student work.
    • Use of the position or powers of a faculty member to coerce the judgment or conscience of a student or to cause harm to a student for arbitrary or personal reasons.
    • Participating in or deliberately abetting disruption, interference, or intimidation in the classroom.
  • University of California Regents Policy 2301: Policy on Course Content:
    • Misuse of the classroom by, for example, allowing it to be used for political indoctrination, for purposes other than those for which the course was constituted, or for providing grades without commensurate and appropriate student achievement, constitutes misuse of the University as an institution.
    • It should be understood that the Board of Regents has always recognized the importance of an "open forum policy" on the campuses, of a free exchange of ideas, and of pursuit of the truth wherever it may lead--popular or unpopular though that may be. There are many hours available during the daily activities of students and faculty for free discourse on matters of concern to them as citizens. It cannot be argued successfully that it is necessary to interrupt progress of an academic course or to modify grading procedures to provide such discussion. It is the Regents' responsibility to the very concept of a University to protect the institution from the misuse of the classroom and to ensure the rights of all to teaching and learning.
    • Therefore, it is the Regents' policy that no campus, no academic college, no department, and no instructor distort the instructional process in a manner which deviates from the responsibilities inherent in academic freedom. The right of students to have their classes held on the regularly scheduled basis and to be taught by the instructor whose responsibility it is to teach the course in question is to be upheld.

More best practices on faculty conduct in the classroom can be found on the Faculty Conduct: Addressing Antisemitism in Higher Education page. 

Reporting, Investigation, and Due Process

Such policies provide clear, accessible mechanisms for reporting discrimination or bias incidents and outline fair, transparent procedures for review and resolution. They ensure protections for all parties, including confidentiality, impartial investigation, and safeguards against retaliation.

Best Practices:

  • Georgetown University Faculty Handbook Procedures to Investigate Allegations of Discrimination and Harassment: These procedures cover allegations of unlawful discrimination and harassment in employment or education on the basis of age, color, disability, family responsibilities, gender identity and expression, genetic information, marital status, matriculation, national origin, personal appearance, political affiliation, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran status and other factors prohibited by law. These internal Grievance Procedures to Investigate Allegations of Discrimination and Harassment provide a mechanism for faculty, staff, students, third parties and applicants for employment and admission to receive a prompt, fair, and impartial investigation and resolution on grievances of discrimination, harassment, and related retaliation.
    • The University strongly encourages Complainants (i.e., any individuals alleged to have experienced unlawful discrimination, harassment, and/or related retaliation) to report the incident and seek redress through OEOC’s Grievance Procedures. The University will provide a prompt investigation as well as a thorough and careful resolution. Individuals may use these procedures to address off-campus behaviors, which may violate the policies on harassment and discrimination as they relate to educational and employment opportunities. Individuals with questions about these grievance procedures may reach out to OEOC or at (202) 687-4798.
    • Students may also use these procedures to address off-campus behaviors, which may violate the policies on harassment and discrimination as they relate to educational and employment opportunities.
    • Complainants are encouraged to exhaust these procedures with regard to any grievance before pursuing remedies outside the University. However, the University acknowledges the rights of Complainants to seek redress from any external enforcement agency including the District of Columbia Office of Human Rights, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education and the United States Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. Complainants may also file a criminal complaint with the Metropolitan Police Department. The filing of an external complaint or investigation will not preclude the University from investigating and addressing issues or concerns raised to the University.
    • Additional information on Georgetown’s Grievance Procedures – including clauses on confidentiality, retaliation, requirements for filing grievances, and more – can be found on this Georgetown University Faculty Handbook page.
  • Duke University’s Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct: The Office for Institutional Equity (OIE) is responsible for administering the Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct (“Policy”) and its implementing procedures...This Policy prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of age, color, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, military status, national origin, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation (collectively, “protected status” or “protected characteristics”). This prohibition includes discrimination and harassment based on the perception of an individual’s protected status, even if that perception is incorrect...The Policy applies to all members of the Duke community (including members of Duke entities and affiliates supporting organizations and affiliates) and applies to all Prohibited Conduct that occurs on Duke property and/or during participation or attempted participation in a Duke program or activity. Duke will respond appropriately to conduct that occurs off Duke property and/or outside of a Duke-related program or activity, including off-campus or online conduct that is not part of a Duke program or activity if the alleged Prohibited Conduct is contributing to a hostile environment that occurs within a Duke program or activity...To maintain and support a community that is respectful and free from discrimination, harassment, and related misconduct, and to maximize Duke’s ability to respond promptly and effectively, Duke urges individuals to come forward with reports of Prohibited Conduct as soon as possible. Complainants and other reporting individuals are encouraged to seek assistance and utilize available resources if they feel they have been subjected to Prohibited Conduct. The sooner a report is made, the more effectively it can be investigated. There is, however, no time limitation for reporting Prohibited Conduct.
  • University of California Anti-Discrimination Policy: This Policy addresses the University’s responsibilities and procedures related to Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation, as defined in this Policy (together, “Prohibited Conduct”) in order to ensure equitable and inclusive education and employment environments. This Policy will be implemented in a manner that recognizes rights to freedom of speech and expression. However, freedom of speech and academic freedom are not limitless and, for example, do not protect speech or expressive conduct that violates federal and state anti-discrimination laws. This Policy defines Prohibited Conduct and explains the administrative procedures the University uses to resolve reports of such conduct. The University will respond promptly and equitably to reports of Prohibited Conduct. This includes action to stop, prevent, correct, or discipline behavior that violates this Policy...Individuals may engage in Prohibited Conduct in person or through other means. This includes, but is not limited to, conduct involving physical actions and/or any form of communication, including, but not limited to, spoken, written, and non-verbal communication through any means including, but not limited to, electronic media, such as the internet, social networks, cell phones, texts, and other devices or forms of contact. In addition, Prohibited Conduct may occur between individuals with the same Protected Category identity or different Protected Category identities...Any individual can report Prohibited Conduct. Reports can be made anonymously. Individuals may make a report to the Local Implementation Officer, any Responsible Employee, or another appropriate office such as the Academic Personnel Office, Student Affairs, Office of the Provost, or Human Resources Office. The individual or office that receives the report must forward it to the Local Implementation Officer. Upon receipt of a report of Prohibited Conduct from a Responsible Employee, the Local Implementation Officer will attempt to contact the Complainant, if known, to inform them of their rights, options, and resources...There is no time limit for reporting. Individuals should report incidents even if significant time has passed. However, the sooner the University receives a report, the better able it will be to respond, investigate, remedy, and impose corrective action/discipline if appropriate.
    • Additional information on the UC Policy – including clauses on initial assessments of reports, resolution processes, formal investigations, corrective actions, and procedures for reporting and responding to reports of prohibited conduct for students, staff and faculty – can be found on this UC Policy PDF page.   

Religious Accommodations for Students

Such policies establish faculty obligations to provide reasonable accommodations for students’ sincerely held religious beliefs and practices. They ensure that students are not penalized for observance of religious holidays or requirements, and that accommodation requests are handled consistently, respectfully, and without bias. Such policies also clarify expectations for advance notice, faculty discretion within defined limits, and alignment with institutional and legal standards.

Best Practices:

  • Columbia University’s Faculty Handbook: No student may be penalized for absences due to religious beliefs. Students are expected to inform their faculty of any religious holidays they intend to observe as early in the term as possible. Faculty are expected to find alternative means by which those students can satisfy missed academic requirements. If a suitable arrangement cannot be worked out between the student and the instructor, the instructor should consult the appropriate chair or dean or executive vice president. If an additional appeal is needed, it may be taken to the Provost whose determination is final.
  • Michigan State University’s Faculty Handbook: Michigan State University is a home for a vibrant, diverse, and multicultural community of students, faculty, and staff, and we value and actively support that diversity, including the diversity of spiritual expression and practice. Therefore, it is the policy of the University to enable students and faculty to observe those days set aside by their chosen religious faith. As Michigan State University has become increasingly multicultural, the incidence of conflicts between mandatory academic requirements and religious observances has increased. In the absence of a simple and dignified way to determine the validity of individual claims, the claim of a religious conflict should be accepted at face value.
  • Barnard College’s Faculty Handbook: It is the College’s policy to respect the religious beliefs of students and employees. In compliance with New York State law, no student will be penalized for absence due to religious beliefs. Each student who is absent from class because of religious beliefs will be given an equivalent opportunity to make up or satisfy the academic requirements involved. If a suitable arrangement cannot be worked out between the student and the Instructor, the Instructor should consult the Dean of Studies. If an additional appeal is needed, it should be taken to the Provost.  Instructors should plan their syllabi to avoid conflicts with religious holidays to the extent possible. The major Christian, Islamic, and Jewish religious holidays during the school year are listed on the Provost’s Office website. Please note that the Islamic and Jewish holidays begin on sundown of the preceding day. Visit the College’s complete policy on the Provost's Office website.     

Keep up to date with our fight against antisemitism, extremism and hate, and learn how you can make a difference.