Education systems are designed to equip young adults with skills that are valuable in the job market. However, at the collegiate level, it is equally essential to nurture the ability to engage with differing opinions in a civil and good-natured manner. This is a crucial aspect of intellectual discourse, which holds significant value beyond just professional environments.

Unfortunately, many higher education institutions have drifted away from this foundational goal. Instead of fostering critical thinking, there appears to be a shift towards dictating what students should think. This environment discourages dissenting voices, compelling students to remain silent if their views diverge from those being taught.

In light of this shift, a recent survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) reveals a growing discomfort among students when it comes to engaging with “controversial” topics and speakers, especially following the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

In today’s academic climate, it seems that “controversial public events” often refer to those with a conservative slant, and “controversial subjects” tend to be those aligned with conservative ideologies.

Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, half of the nation’s college students report feeling less comfortable attending controversial public events on campus and nearly half are less comfortable voicing opinions on controversial subjects in class.

Chief Research Advisor Dr. Sean Stevens at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression told The Center Square that Charlie Kirk’s September assassination at Utah Valley University “has had a chilling effect — not just at UVU, but across the country.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) surveyed 2,028 undergraduates nationwide – including an “oversample” of 204 students from Utah Valley University – in order to “understand how the assassination is shaping student attitudes and behavior.”

Stevens told The Center Square that “some of the data from Utah Valley University students are encouraging – revealing signs of increased tolerance, and even relative trust in administrative protections for free speech.”

Given the modern state of higher education, we can presume that “controversial public events” means “conservative public events.” And, by “controversial subjects,” we can also likely presume they mean “conservative subjects.”