RadicalizationIf we want students to feel safe at school, we can’t encourage teachers to spot potential extremists

By Clarke Jones

Published 4 April 2019

Governments have been reaching into schools to try to nip violent extremism in the bud for some time. The Obama administration announced a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program in 2014. Programs like these have also been introduced without adequate evidence for their effectiveness. Delivering a program that hasn’t been properly evaluated could make the underlying issues worse. It could ultimately increase youth vulnerabilities (rather than resilience) to radicalization, and other antisocial behaviors.

In the wake of the Christchurch terrorist attack, former U.K. Prime Minister, Tony Blair told a global education forum extremism should be treated as a global problem like climate change. He said: “there should be an international agreement to put teaching against extremism into education systems around the world.”

Following terrorist attacks, it’s understandable politicians want to come up with quick, tangible measures to prevent other incidents and to tackle the problem at what is seen to be its core. There is merit in Blair saying challenging prejudice “needs to begin at an early age” (in schools). But we must also be cautious when promoting kneejerk responses to complex issues, particularly when it involves the welfare and future of children.

The Obama administration announced a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program in 2014. This aimed to deter US residents from joining violent extremist groups by bringing community and religious leaders together with law enforcement, health professionals, teachers, and social service employees.

This program has since come under scrutiny for focusing on, and stigmatizing, the Muslim community. When we consider that the proportion of fatalities from terrorist attacks committed by nationalist groups, including the one in Christchurch, is increasing, and deaths from attacks by Islamic militants are in decline, there is clearly potential for these programs to be misdirected.

Programs like these have also been introduced without adequate evidence for their effectiveness. Delivering a program that hasn’t been properly evaluated could make the underlying issues worse. It could ultimately increase youth vulnerabilities (rather than resilience) to radicalization, and other antisocial behaviors.

“Spot a radical” in school
Schools often become an easy focal point. The rationale for a CVE program is getting onto the threat before it starts, or capturing it if it has already begun to grow. Often this has meant CVE school programs mainly teach staff how to “spot a radical” and report them to government and remedial channels.