My report on antisemitism in education is based on hard evidence – now let’s implement its findings

There has been some discussion over the last week about the methodology behind my review into antisemitism in schools and colleges in England. Scrutiny of important work is entirely legitimate, but it is important to understand how the review reached its conclusions and why it drew on different forms of evidence. Undertaking this review was an immense responsibility. I wanted to understand what was happening specifically in schools and colleges.

My focus wasn’t primarily on determining the level of antisemitism as we already know Jewish people and communities have reported a significant rise in recent years. Rather, I wanted to identify the practical changes needed to help education settings prevent, recognise and respond to it more effectively. The review's focus throughout was on developing recommendations that would make a tangible difference on the ground. From the outset, I was clear that the review needed to draw on a wide range of voices and evidence.

No single statistic, survey or testimony can give us a complete picture of an issue as complex as antisemitism in education. That is precisely why the review considered both statistic-based evidence, and personal testimonies. Surveys can help us understand the scale and prevalence of experiences and attitudes. Equally, testimonies and personal experiences provide the context behind those numbers. Neither tells the whole story alone. I met with dozens of individuals and organisations from within and beyond Jewish communities in England, hearing directly from pupils, parents, teachers and others with different experiences and perspectives.

Alongside this, more than 5,000 16-to-19-year-olds responded to a survey. Like any survey, it has limitations. That is why it was never intended to stand alone or produce one headline figure from which sweeping conclusions could be drawn. Instead, it formed part of a much wider evidence base. What matters is what emerges when that evidence is considered together. The survey responses, testimony and wider evidence presented to the review consistently point to antisemitism being a real issue among young people and within schools and colleges.

Antisemitism is rising in wider society and it has filtered into our schools. You do not need to look far to see deeply troubling cases involving Jewish pupils and teachers. Statistics are important, but we do not need a single statistic to tell us that antisemitism is present – it is clearly visible. Questions have also been raised about my impartiality when conducting the review. I did not come to this review with an agenda or narrative I wanted to promote.

Instead, throughout this work I have been led by the evidence presented to me, and I would encourage anyone questioning its conclusions to engage with that evidence in full. Free speech and open debate are vital, especially in schools and colleges where young people are learning how to navigate these types of conversations. Young people should be able to discuss difficult and contentious political questions, including the actions of the State of Israel.

That's why I don't believe asking schools and colleges to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism will inhibit legitimate debate. Applied in a way that respects their legal duties, including on equality and freedom of speech, it should help institutions distinguish legitimate criticism from antisemitism. Debate must be encouraged in education, but school and college leaders also have a responsibility to ensure political expression is appropriate, particularly in the classroom, and that they meet their legal duties.

My conclusion is clear – antisemitism is a serious problem in our schools and colleges, and we must tackle it in a coherent and comprehensive way. My report is a start in that direction so now it’s all about implementation.