People have been handing out leaflets on campus containing what appears to be extremist material.

Are the people concerned students or unconnected to the university? This in itself my indicate the right course of action.

What seems to you to be 'extremist' about the content? Identify those features that are unacceptable to you.

Consult any relevant existing university policies for guidance and precedents, and bear in mind any wider legal context, and your own legal obligations.

Know your limits: you might like to clarify your boundaries by using this tool or set your own personal limits.

Consider developing a new 'policy' on the issue, if needed, on the basis of your definition of limits together with your university's existing policies. In this way any measures you take do not look like an ad hoc reaction that have targeted one group prejudicially, and you can demonstrate fairness across the board.

If you have good relationships with Muslim student representatives or groups on campus, consult them for their views: not only on the content of the material, but also on its impact on them.

Meanwhile, if you have good relationships with community contacts it is worth getting their opinion or assessment on the material and its likely impact. They may have some more constructive or imaginative solutions beyond the 'Either/Or' of 'ban or tolerate'.

Whichever decision you decide to implement, make sure that you sustain good relationships with the students and the off-campus contacts. Their involvement and support will be vital in implementing and sustaining change.

Case study

One of the community leaders who engages effectively to counter extremism vividly recalls listening to a powerful exposition of al-Qaida ideology in an indoctrination setting. Such experience is invaluable in coming to understand the pressure points –religious, cultural and psychological – employed and in helping other community leaders to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the al-Qaida narrative and the points at which to make effective interventions.

Broadly speaking this approach requires religious, community and political knowledge. This in turn points to a particular kind of understanding –an 'insider's view'. This perspective will be especially insightful when the intervening community representative has had a prior relationship with the al-Qaida propagandist in question. What sets this kind of understanding apart is its high level of community context and empathy. This can have enormous benefits when community groups seek to utilise it for a practical, preventative counter-terrorist purpose.