Beyond Rankings: What Makes a College Truly Supportive of Jewish Students

A recent campus ranking has reignited an important but underexamined question: what does it actually mean for a college to be "good for Jewish students"?

Why The Rankings Fall Short

Alums for Campus Fairness's 2025–26 Campus Climate Brief lists campuses it judges most supportive (Tulane, University of Florida, Vanderbilt, Miami, Brandeis, Indiana, Arizona State, Binghamton, Dartmouth, USC) and most concerning (Middlebury, The New School, DePaul, Smith, Sarah Lawrence, San Francisco State, UT Dallas, Berkeley, Oberlin, George Mason). The group scores campuses on five metrics: reported antisemitic incidents; institutional response to antisemitism; anti‑Israel organizing; Jewish life on campus; and the broader legal and structural environment.

Those are relevant measures — but the methodology risks conflating three distinct things: physical safety, institutional support, and the presence (or absence) of pro‑Israel sentiment. Treating them as a single dimension can obscure the real experiences and needs of Jewish students.

Safety Versus Political Climate

Since October 7, Jewish students have reported alarming levels of hostility. A 2026 survey by the American Jewish Committee and Hillel International found that 42% of Jewish college students experienced antisemitism while in college; 34% avoided displaying Jewish identity for fear of backlash; 25% felt excluded from groups or events because they are Jewish; and 38% refrained from sharing views on Israel out of fear.

These incidents — swastikas, threats, exclusion based on identity — are not political disagreement. They are harassment and must be treated as such. Colleges have an obligation to protect Jewish students from intimidation and discrimination just as they protect any student.

But Not Every Protest Is Antisemitic

A pro‑Palestinian demonstration, criticism of Israeli leaders, opposition to the Gaza war, support for Palestinian statehood, or a student government divestment debate are not inherently antisemitic. They may upset some Jewish students — and colleges should take that seriously — but they can also be legitimate political expression and part of campus life. Conflating discomfort with danger risks either excusing harassment or overreacting to ordinary debate.

Differences Within Jewish Student Life

Jewish students are diverse. An Orthodox student who needs daily services and kosher food has different priorities than a secular student who rarely visits a synagogue. Some center Jewish identity on Israel; others emphasize culture, ethics, or social justice. The same campus will feel very different depending on those identities and priorities.

Consider how the brief treats anti‑Israel organizing: it praises Binghamton in part because a BDS student government resolution was rescinded. That may matter to families looking to avoid divestment campaigns — but a campus with little organized criticism of Israel is not automatically "better" for every Jewish student. What matters is whether Jewish students can practice their faith, speak and be heard, and participate in campus life without being threatened or excluded.

Questions Families Should Ask

Beyond headline rankings, families should evaluate campuses with specific, practical questions:

• Can a student wear a yarmulke or Star of David across campus without fear?
• Can an observant student find kosher food and keep Shabbat?
• Can a Zionist student defend Israel without being ostracized from unrelated organizations?
• Can a critic of Israel participate fully in Jewish life without being treated as less Jewish?
• Are Jewish organizations — across the ideological spectrum — allowed to meet and speak freely?
• Does the administration distinguish clearly between political advocacy and harassment, drawing a firm line at threats and intimidation?
• When controversy erupts, does the institution teach students how to engage constructively rather than trying to erase disagreement?

Education Requires Challenge, Not Danger

As the author’s experience at Swarthmore illustrates, intellectual challenge can be an important part of Jewish campus life. Jewish tradition itself prizes debate, interpretation, and argument. What students need is not insulation from opposing ideas but protection for the right to respond — and an environment where argument does not become intimidation.

The crucial distinction is between discomfort and danger, argument and intimidation, criticism and discrimination. Lose that distinction and universities face two bad outcomes: allow political activism to become cover for mistreating Jewish students, or protect students so aggressively from controversial ideas that they are effectively excluded from the intellectual work of college. Neither outcome respects Jewish students.

Conclusion

Rankings like Alums for Campus Fairness address part of what parents want to know about safety. But families and students will be better served asking whether a campus both protects Jewish students from antisemitism and challenges them intellectually — where they can practice Judaism, speak for or against Israel, confront ideas they find objectionable, and argue back without fear. That combination — protection plus robust debate — is what makes a college truly supportive of Jewish students.

This article was originally published on Forbes.com.