JOHN YANG: The prevailing images of college protests over the Israel-Hamas war in the past few weeks have been of escalating tensions, students clashing with police and mass arrests.
But students and administrators that at least six schools from Rhode Island to California have found common ground and negotiated agreements to close tent encampments.
Erin Gretzinger is a reporting Fellow at the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Erin, what are these agreements look like?
What of what of schools agreed to do?
ERIN GRETZINGER, Chronicle of Higher Education: Yeah, so at the schools who have made agreements, so far, we've seen distinct stipulations, but common themes and each of those agreements.
At Northwestern, which made an agreement early last week, we saw several steps toward what students viewed in the groups there as moving toward their major demand of divestment.
So there we saw them make agreements to have a committee that will look at divestment, Northwestern agreed to disclose investments to all internal stakeholders, as well as some movement on agreements that have been in the works for longer for students who are Muslim, who are from the Middle East, and are of North African descent.
So looking at students centers as well.
We've seen similar things in agreements at Brown, who will take a vote on divestment this fall.
And overall, I think the main themes to take away here are that these encampments have been really central for administrators who wanted to focus on deescalating the situation, that's been the main mantra of these administrators.
Students, on the other hand, have really looked at these as key first steps toward their broader demand of divestment.
JOHN YANG: I was going to ask that I mean, how meaningful are these are these concessions?
Because they're not the vesting?
They're going to talk about the vesting.
ERIN GRETZINGER: Yeah, absolutely.
And I think what a lot of higher ed onlookers have seen in these agreements is that these administrations appear to have taken student demands seriously, but have still fallen short on what other students see as the key purpose of these protests, which is divestment.
So there is some question I think some pro-Palestinian student demonstrators, and experts I've talked to as well, who studies student political activism, aren't quite sure how far these agreements will go if they go as far as some student protesters would hope.
There's questions of if this will ultimately result in divestment.
And similar universities have taken actions before Brown and Northwestern have had similar reports and committees studying these issues, but nothing has moved in the past.
JOHN YANG: And have there been any criticism to the reactions to this from other student activists, and maybe donors and alumni of the of the schools.
ERIN GRETZINGER: Yeah, so there's definitely been a sense that while some student groups who forged these agreements are declaring victory and at university administrators as well, some Jewish groups, local campus and national have criticized these agreements, particularly at Northwestern University, we saw some immense backlash there, with three major Jewish groups calling on the President there to resign, characterizing this as a betrayal to the students for failing to enforce their policies there.
There's also been a federal discrimination lawsuit filed against Northwestern.
So you can see there's sort of the broad, broad spectrum of reactions here and really gets to the point I think of presidents being in hot water in this moment, and having to contend with many different stakeholders, sort of pulling everyone in different directions.
JOHN YANG: I mean, given that the administrators of hot water what was the motivation for the students to sort of bail them out to try to get an agreement?
ERIN GRETZINGER: Yeah, it's an interesting question, because I've talked to experts who say, you know, students in this regard, have a really clear eyed goal of divestment.
And that puts college administrators in a tricky place, because normally, they have a playbook to sort of go into negotiations with students, essentially, whether it's an identity based movement, they can turn to suit certain student affairs programs, or if it's a matter of student employee relations, they can go to the negotiating table surrounding unionization.
But here when they have such clear cut demands, like divestment, there's not a lot of room for compromise in the students eyes.
And I think that's important to consider in these agreements, where so many students have not even chosen to come to the table, even when their administrators have asked them to.
JOHN YANG: You talked to going to the table at Pomona and Yale students that won't talk what are their motivations?
ERIN GRETZINGER: Yes.
So there's a sense that you know, some people have criticized these students that if you want to meet your meet your ultimate goal divestment, you have to come to the table and you have to negotiate.
Other experts and students themselves have said, we don't want to stop short divestment until then there's no point in meeting right until these universities are at least this disclosing their investments, taking some action toward that they don't see a point in meeting and I think it gets at a broader tension as well.
Experts I've spoken to point out that this generation of student activists have grown up In an era full of social justice movements from Black Lives Matter in 2020, March for Our Lives, climate change, and they've sort of been instilled with a lack of trust in public officials that they see as motivating students to not necessarily come to the table to not be placated, as that's one of the major criticisms of some pro-Palestinian protesters in this moment that these agreements are placating students to basically step back take down these encampments before their ultimate goals are met.
JOHN YANG: In the schools who wanted to negotiate and reach these agreements.
Are they in any way pressuring the schools that aren't doing that?
ERIN GRETZINGER: It's a good question.
I think it's hard to say how many schools will fall behind these other institutions, because different institutions in this moment are facing different kinds of pressures for private schools.
You know, we have seen an immense amount of donor pressure building up since October 7.
I think public schools have a different sort of obligation there have a lot of eyes on them from their state legislatures.
I think there's also different pressures when it comes to their strict -- they have to strictly abide by First Amendment time place manner restrictions.
And I think a universal pressure in this moment is that it's the end of the semester, and it's kind of a double edged sword in that sense.
It's a really busy time.
There's graduation finals, alumni events that may be pushing some schools to want to pursue action.
JOHN YANG: Erin Gretzinger of the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Thank you very much.
ERIN GRETZINGER: Thank you.
