Bell report on antisemitism in English schools draws criticism from teacher over pro-Palestinian students

A secondary school teacher with ten years of experience has written an opinion piece criticizing a recent government decision on antisemitism in English schools. The government last week accepted the recommendations of an independent review led by Sir David Bell, a former head of Ofsted. All schools in England have been asked to treat antisemitism as a distinct form of harm.

The writer questions whether Bell is a neutral figure. The writer points to his membership of a pro-Israel charitable academic institution that opposes the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, and to anti-Muslim statements the writer attributes to him during his time as head of Ofsted. The writer also objects to the review’s use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which the report calls on schools to adopt. The writer describes this definition as contested, noting that it treats describing the State of Israel as a racist project, or comparing its actions to those of the Nazis, as a form of hatred directed against Jews. In the writer’s reading, this means that anti-Zionism is equated with antisemitism.

The report has been widely cited for its finding that “roughly three in five” Jewish students experienced antisemitism at school. The writer says this figure does not withstand scrutiny, quoting the report’s own acknowledgment that “the small sample size, which included only 92 students who said they were Jewish, calls for caution in interpreting the results.” The writer also cites a 2025 poll in which 45 percent of British adults agreed with the statement “Israel treats the Palestinians the way the Nazis treated the Jews,” with the figure reaching 60 percent among young people. The writer argues that under the definition the report uses, nearly half of Britons would be classed as antisemites.

The writer works in an area of east London with a large Muslim population. The writer says students there are strongly committed to the Palestinian cause, take part in demonstrations with their parents on weekends, and wear badges on their school bags. The writer says these students have followed, through phones and live coverage, what the writer calls a campaign of extermination targeting children who look like them. The writer states that they have never witnessed statements hostile to Jews in the true sense, and that other colleagues have had the same experience.

The writer argues that schools are not places of widespread antisemitic hatred, as the government and media have suggested, and that young people can engage in nuanced and complex discussion. The writer’s central objection is that, under the adopted definition, criticising Israel or rejecting Zionism is enough to classify a person as antisemitic. The writer asks whether the review concerns supporting Jewish children or silencing all forms of solidarity with Palestine.

The writer contends that the review presents itself as concern for Jewish students and teachers but in practice extends the government’s campaign to suppress pro-Palestinian expression across public life. The writer says the report appears more interested in banning Palestinian badges and ensuring that teachers maintain “political neutrality” on the State of Israel than in providing support to victims of antisemitic discrimination.

Source: Read the original report (translated from Arabic)