About Article

The UK Government defines vulnerability to radicalisation as, ‘the process by which a person comes to support terrorism and extremist ideologies associated with terrorist groups’. In 2015 legislation was passed to enhance the national capacity to pre-emptively identify vulnerable people by coopting public sector workers. This responsibility (‘the Prevent duty’) has mandated the monitoring of citizen’s behaviours based on a relationship between vulnerability, radicalisation, and terrorism that is far from concrete. Despite this, the duty is presented as a clear and actionable framework designed to support frontline workers identify vulnerability and report concerns. Within this context our paper adopts a vernacular approach to present findings from focus groups and interviews with university students and staff about their comprehension, experiences, and evaluations of vulnerability and the duty. We approach these insights as valuable (but oft neglected) instances of ‘everyday’ security knowledge and argue that they are particularly valuable in the context of a duty that coopts those within Higher Education as counter-radicalisation practitioners and subjects. Our paper argues that conceptual, operational, and normative disconnects between policy and insights ‘on the ground’ mean that the duty assumes an uncertain position within Higher Education to the detriment to of its stated objectives.