Liberal Bias in Higher Education

[piasharn]

The idea that colleges and universities lean to the left is not a new one. However, a recent study has shown that, in a survey of 1,643 full-time faculty at 183 four-year schools, 72% consider themselves liberal, while only 15% identify as conservative. This, of course, has resulted in a great number of people (on both sides of the fence) getting their panties in a twist and jumping to conclusions.

While the study has confirmed that a student is more likely to have a liberal professor (especially in the arts [performing, visual, and music], english, humanities, and science), I am of the opinion that we need more information before we can decide exactly what this tidbit actually means.

We know that this is occurring. Now we need to find out why, and what effect(s) it has on the population.

Does it mean that colleges and universities actively discriminate against conservatives who are trying to enter the field, or are conservatives simply not going into education? Does it mean that professors are forcing their beliefs upon their students, or do they keep their opinions to themselves? Were the professors liberal before they began teaching, or did they become more progressive as time went on? Is it some combination of factors?

At this point in time, none of these questions can be answered, yet many people seem to be forgetting this. I'm going to make an attempt to look into some of the possibilities, but please remember that I am not touting any of these claims as truth.

In an op-ed column for the New York Times, Paul Krugman addresses some possible reasons. One of the first he points out is self-selection. That is, people who are more liberal are more drawn to education. This is not an isolated occurrence. For example, conservatives and Republicans tend to outnumber liberals and Democrats in the military by a significant margin. From what I have seen, the military does not care about what you are. (Unless you're gay.) It's simply that a military career is more appealing to those who lean to the the right.

There are other factors which would indicate that self-selection may be part of this issue. Conservatives as a whole have not been the best proponents of higher education. The term "over-educated" is often thrown at liberals as an insult. (Something which has always baffled me. Is it even possible to know too much?) Given the sneering attitudes towards college and university education, it does not seem surprising that many conservatives would not want to work in this field.

Few people were shocked by the inequality in the humanities and liberal arts (pun unintended), but the imbalance in the hard sciences such as biology and physics was something of a surprise.

But perhaps it shouldn't be. Many members of the right frequently attack a fundamental part of the sciences, something that is the very cornerstone of studies from anthropology and biology to genetics and geology: the theory of evolution. Krugman writes:

"Think of the message this sends: today's Republican Party - increasingly dominated by people who believe truth should be determined by revelation, not research - doesn't respect science, or scholarship in general. It shouldn't be surprising that scholars have returned the favor by losing respect for the Republican Party.

"Conservatives should be worried by the alienation of the universities; they should at least wonder if some of the fault lies not in the professors, but in themselves. Instead, they're seeking a Lysenkoist solution that would have politics determine courses' content."

He has a point, he really does. If conservatives are going to spend so much time and effort attacking science, it should come as no surprise that scientists want nothing to do with them. Also, it bears pointing out that while I, and many other liberals, are all for showing all points of view, one has to draw the line somewhere. Is it right to force science classes to teach creationism when it cannot be supported in any way, shape, or form by science? Evolution is not taught arbitrarily. It isn't taught because the big bad liberals are trying to turn children away from God and/or Christianity. It is taught because it is the foundation of many scientific studies. It is taught because it can be supported by science.

If we are to give all points of view equal time in the classroom, should we also teach the flat-earth theory? After all, the Bible implies that this is true (along with numerous other scientific and historical fallacies), and there are actually groups of people who believe that it is. Should it be taught, even though we have mountains of evidence that disprove it?

Is it biased to not teach a subject that we know is false? Is it a sign of discrimination?

(I could continue on this sidebar for some time. And I think I may have to write up a post on the theory of evolution and its use in science. For now, I'll get back on topic.)

Self-selection certainly bears looking into. I am not suggesting that this is the only reason for the academic bias, but it could definately be part of it.

While we know that most professors are liberal, does this mean that they push their beliefs down their students' throats? Do they give higher grades for more liberal essays? Some conservatives certainly seem to think so, and they have plenty of stories to support their belief. Once again, though, there may be more going on than we think.

Back in January, a story about a teacher flunking a student's pro-U.S. essay made the rounds. The immediate assumption was that the professor gave a failing grade because he didn't agree with the student's conservative views. However, a conservative poli-sci professor analyzed the essay and states that he would have failed it as well. Not because of the beliefs the student espoused, but because it failed to address the assignment and utilized poor language skills.

Again, is this a case of prejudice? If the essay was badly written and failed to fulfill the requirements of the report, can this scenario be used as proof that liberal professors fail conservative students merely because of their beliefs? One comment in the above post put it eloquently:

"For me there’s something deeper going on—not with this particular case, but it represents a trend among conservative students to blame all bad grades on liberal bias. In fact, what I find is that my conservative students tend to gloss over material that confronts their worldview. Thus when I cover Marx, my conservative students dismiss the material and my lectures, then write poor essays on exams, and then complain of my liberal bias when they receive their grade."

As a final note, I don't feel that the political alignment of the professors is the most important aspect. As long as their personal beliefs stay personal, and they grade their students in a fair, unbiased method, I don't think that it matters if they are liberal or conservative.

One of my required courses was a general english class. This one focused on debate and argumentative reasoning. Our professor warned us right off the bat that she would be introducing some rather contraversial topics to entice us into debating. She also told us that just because she made a claim, it did not mean that she believed it to be true. Anything she brought up was to give us a starting point, or to play the devil's advocate, or simply to make us think about our arguments.

In other words, she did not teach us what to think. She taught us how to think. And this, in my mind, is exactly what teachers should do.

The irony of this situation is that now certain conservatives are calling for a solution to this issue. Namely, they want affirmative action. Of course whenever the issue is discussed concerning race, they respond that if a business does not want to hire a black employee, they should have that right. However, if a private university doesn't want to hire a conservative professor, they should be forced to by law?

Buh?

I suppose that all this really proves is that human beings make absolutely no sense.