Should College Professors Who Signed BDS Pledges Be Teaching Classes About Israel?

Community members have reached out to express concerns regarding the North Carolina State University course, “History of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict,” which is scheduled to be taught by Kristen Alff this spring. Classes begin Jan. 12.

Alff signed Palestine and Praxis: Open Letter and Call to Action —using her “NC State University” credentials — which characterized Israel as a “settler colonial state.”

The letter affirmed, “In the classroom and on campus, we commit to pressuring our academic institutions and organizations to respect the Palestinian call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions [BDS] of Israel by instating measures that remove complicity and partnership with military, academic, and legal institutions involved in entrenching Israel’s policies.”

Alff also signed a “Statement on Palestine from North Carolina Academics,” which said, “We acknowledge our complicity in Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians” and “[We] reject the prevalent ‘two-sides’ narrative.”

NC State is a public university and part of the University of North Carolina (UNC) System. It is required by State law and the UNC equality policy to be institutionally neutral “on the political controversies of the day.”

What rationale could NC State possibly have for selecting an instructor who has signed a letter that publicly pledged to advocate for BDS against Israel, “in the classroom and on campus,” to teach a course focused on Israel?

I reached out to Dean Deanna Dannels, copying her executive assistant, inquiring, “Do you have any concerns about institutional neutrality and this course?” I received an automatic “out of office” reply. Additionally, I received an “out of office” message from Traci Brynne Voyles, who is Head of the History Department.

In late December, I asked Alff, “Do you use your classroom at a North Carolina public university to advocate for BDS?” She responded, “I absolutely do not advocate for BSD [sic] in my classroom nor at the university level.”

I asked why she signed the BDS pledge. Alff responded, “I anticipate my students’ thinking to change throughout the semester and their lives. I too am open and change my mind over time.”

I then asked if she was planning to request her name be removed as a signatory from the BDS pledge. Alff did not respond, and her name continues to be included as a signatory.

NC State philosophy student PJ Shaw told me, “The most harmful way for antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment to be spread is in the classroom. Because, if it is coming through a professor, it is perceived to be the most reputable path.”

Shaw suggested how the university should respond: “It shouldn’t be a ‘wait and see how she does’ situation. It should be a red flag immediately and the school should say, ‘OK, even if you think you can do a neutral job with this, we’re going to find someone else who hasn’t publicly signed a [BDS] pledge.'”

On Dec. 2, the university denied my public records request for Alff’s syllabus, stating, “NC State University considers syllabi to be the intellectual property of our faculty members and protected from disclosure under federal copyright law.”

On Dec. 19, the UNC System issued a new syllabi policy that will take effect in the 2026-27 academic year, following the completion of Alff’s course.

It mandates that instructors include a “list of all course materials (physical and/or electronic) that students are required to purchase” on their publicly available syllabus.

However, many instructors depend on free course materials that can be accessed at no cost through the university. This new policy will permit instructors to have one version of their syllabus for students and a second, redacted version, for the public. This is ridiculous and will continue to allow instructors to hide the content of their courses, biases, and radicalism from the public.

Let’s examine a syllabus from 2021 to further understand how little UNC’s new syllabi policy will help.

In 2021, I reported that UNC-Chapel Hill’s recurring course, “The Conflict over Israel/Palestine,” was being taught by Kylie Broderick, even though she publicly promoted the view that Israel should not exist. At the end of teaching the course, she publicly said, “The notion of objectivity is a tool of colonizers and one that we must completely reject.” Broderick also signed the BDS pledge and later became known for tweeting “F—k Israel.”

I was leaked a copy of Broderick’s syllabus which I reported on extensively at the time.

I do not see a single assigned reading or podcast on Broderick’s 2021 syllabus that indicates it is a required purchase. Under the new UNC syllabi policy, a significant number, if not all, of the materials assigned by Broderick could have been redacted from the publicly accessible version of her syllabus because they did not require a purchase.

I contacted UNC System President Peter Hans about the new syllabi policy he issued. He did not respond. The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal wrote to Hans, suggesting the new syllabi policy be changed to include “all required readings and materials, regardless of cost.”

The UNC System has lost the public trust by disregarding institutional neutrality and choosing radical anti-Israel instructors to teach courses about Israel.

It is essential now for the North Carolina General Assembly to intervene and pass a simple bill requiring that all course syllabi be made publicly available without omissions or redactions. The public has the right to be fully informed about what our public universities are teaching.

Peter Reitzes writes about antisemitism in North Carolina and beyond.