Durmstrang is a wizardry school in the Harry Potter books. If you’d stayed in college, though, you might have learned that the German literary movement was called sturm und drang.
Which leads to the larger point: Why did you choose to go to school anyway? To have your pre-existing notions about the world confirmed? What experience did you hope to have that would constitute actual learning? Doesn’t learning come more effectively from the challenging and exploration of worldviews, especially those you don’t already hold?
But college teaching is not about standing up and spending every lecture telling students ideas of your own choosing. You have to cover some basic material, discuss alternative viewpoints and approaches to problems, teach some history in the field. Cover the canon, as it were. In fact, it’s the dedication to the canon that has so often touched off complaints about a curriculum full of “dead white men.” There are courses which might have a lot more leeway and faculty can really promote their leanings, but these are generally going to be found as electives and a student who doesn’t like those ideas, or doesn’t trust his own intellect to endure the onslaught of bias, can choose to not sign up.
Yes, even in survey courses there’s room for faculty to emphasize some ideas over others, criticize some thinkers more than others spend more time on theories that they favor. But I don’t believe that’s as harmful (or pervasive) as you imply.
Great point. I didn’t think of this. Most higher ed in the US does have an international flair to it. This is just one way of many that the left has another advantage over the right in the US. Most other industrialized countries are much farther “left” (or socialist) than the US. As globalization increases, this helps the American left gain ground. Universities are only one example of this.
Debaser:The Republicans have moved to the center much like Clinton did in the 90’s and they are benefitting from it. The Democrats continue to move to the left, and continue to suffer at the polls because of it.
Debaser:This is just one way of many that the left has another advantage over the right in the US. Most other industrialized countries are much farther “left” (or socialist) than the US. As globalization increases, this helps the American left gain ground.
So are you arguing that the American left is gaining ground, or losing it?
Why the confusion? I’m trying to lose weight. I went to the gym today and “gained ground” towards my goal. If I have a big dinner tonight, then I will be losing ground towards my goal.
It’s possible for one factor to be working to the advantage of the left while some other factor works to the disadvantage of the left, at the same time even. Why would you think otherwise?
Orbifold’s comment in response to this post was, IMHO, completely justified. The notion that a teacher advances his own political ideology simply by virtue of his being present in class, even a class that is completely detached from politics (calculus, in this case), is absurd.
On that basis, I’m going to have to ask how you feel teaching would be “dramatically different” if 90% of the faculty were conservative. I would contend that, provided preaching in classes was kept at its current levels (approximately zero, in my experience), and that no discriminatory policies were put into place, teaching in a significant number of programs would change very little. For example:
Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Engineering, etc., I would expect very little change (unless religious conservatives filled the ranks of biology, in which case there would be a significant difference)
I understand that economics and business are fairly conservative already, so I would expect little change.
In some areas, such as those dealing with culture, language, and the arts, I would almost prefer to have liberal teachers. Liberals may (huge stereotype here) be more willing to take seriously the study other cultures, something that seems like it would be positive in these fields. It might also be possible that differing political ideologies would have different interpretations of literature/performance arts/etc. However, these teachers have an obligation to present to their students a variety of interpretations, especially at the introductory level (which is the highest a lot of students will get). In this regard, I think intellectually honest liberal and conservative professors would differ very little.
Some other programs (psychology, sociology, political science) may have more differences, but it seems to me that changes in intellectual honesty will have a much greater effect on teaching than will changes in the political ideology of the professors. Again, provided that several legitimate theories are presented to the students when controversy exists, I have my doubts that many programs would change significantly.
I would also like to know how teaching would be dramatically different if 90% of the faculty were conservative. A would agree that most courses would change very little, if at all.
I’ll use my experience as an example - I teach introductory level geography courses at a community college. I guess by some on the outside looking in would consider me to be a liberal. So how do I go about teaching introductory level geography courses in a conservative manner that counters my “bias” as a “liberal”? Or rather, in what way would a conservative teaching introductory level geography courses differ significantly from how I would teach such courses?
Sorry if I missed this, but has anyone found any data on the political leanings of college graduates? I did some google searching and came up with naught (or at least nothing that wasn’t questionable).
Are college graduates, or even people with some college experience, more likely to be liberal in their leanings? Is the plethora of liberal college professors poisoning our future professionals? And a related question, if the majority of college graduates are conservatives, should we mandate more liberal professors?
My own personal experience: In 7 years of higher education (physics/EE) I never once had a professor share their political affiliation with me. I have no idea if they were liberals or conservatives; it never came up.
No, it’s absud to think that 85% of teachers having the same viewpoint would not have any effect on the ideology of the environment at the schools.
I’ll address these by category…
What’s a “discriminatory policy” that a right wing faculty would try and implement? Right now most schools practice affirmative action and give preference to certain applicants based on race. This is blatant racial discrimination and is openly practiced by the schools. If conservatives had some say, than this discriminatory policy might be stopped. This type of policy is also a perfect example of the type of bias that goes on. For a faculty member to even question this sort of practice would be irregular. Most faculty members are liberal, so you get these liberal sorts of policies.
Sure, sure. These hard science type of courses are the least likely to change based on who’s teaching them. You probably have the occasional nut who goes off on a totally unrelated tangent, but the heart of the subject matter isn’t up to much bias as far as politics goes.
What makes you think this? Our economic system is capitalism, so that’s what is taught. That there are people on the left suggesting that we teach something else like socialism just shows how far gone some of these colleges are.
Even at a Business College like the one I attended these types of classes make up more than half of the curriculum. It’s classes of history, the humanities and culture that are the most open for bias, IMO.
Huh? What makes you say this? If a teacher were to say something like this it would be another good example of the bias I’m talking about. It’s funny that in attempting to argue against my point you help to prove it. If you think negative things about conservatives then they will come through when you talk or type. You can’t avoid this, it’s human nature.
But, they won’t do a very good job of offering the viewpoint that they disagree with, will they? Many liberals don’t even understand conservative viewpoints (and vice versa). The only way to get both viewpoints shown is to have people with those viewpoints teaching them.
It makes sense to me. College grads get into the higher tax brackets and living in the suburbs, so they end up being fiscal conservatives more often. Those with Postgraduate work are the academic types who are ivory tower liberals.
It’s impossible to tell what these number would look like if 85% of the teachers were conservative, since we don’t really have a way of polling for theoretical situations. I’m betting the numbers would change, but I have no idea by how much.
Found an interesting discussion by Duke University prof Cathy Davidson on this issue:
She’s got a point about those low-paid helping professions. If conservatives are more likely than liberals to consider a high salary as an important factor in career choice, then you’re just never going to get the conservative applicant pool in higher education big enough to be representative.
And I think her idea about the conservative fellowships is a darn good one, if conservatives truly want more representation in higher ed. Graduate school is often very expensive and graduate student stipends are never lavish. Why don’t wealthy conservative foundations start funding more fellowships for PhD students in exchange for their promising to go into university/college teaching? A comfortable stipend from a foundation would give such students a hefty advantage over their peers who have to scramble for funding and compete for low-paid assistantships that take time away from their own studies and research.
Debaser: *“Liberals may (huge stereotype here) be more willing to take seriously the study other cultures, something that seems like it would be positive in these fields.” Huh? What makes you say this? *
For one thing, recall the recent “culture wars” over issues like “multiculturalism” and the role of mandatory “Western Civ” courses, and so forth. I certainly wouldn’t argue that conservatives in general are opposed to the study of other cultures. But there’s no denying that in the academic battles over “the canon” in recent decades, the people arguing in favor of expanding the canon to include more non-Western cultures and literatures were mostly liberals, and the people arguing in favor of preserving a core focus on Western civilization were mostly conservatives. I don’t think that’s a biased statement.
Debaser:Those with Postgraduate work are the academic types who are ivory tower liberals.
Really? I would have thought that “postgraduate work” included any type of post-bachelor’s degree, such as a law or medical degree or an MBA, which I certainly wouldn’t assume to indicate an academic or liberal orientation. Do you have a cite for the proposition that most voters with some postgraduate study are in fact academics?
(And by the way, if you do want to see more conservatives in academia, wouldn’t it be a good move to stop referring to it disparagingly as the “ivory tower” and so forth? Won’t conservative students be more disinclined to pursue graduate study and academic careers if they see that their fellow conservatives disrespect and belittle the profession?)
I was an econ major. I assure you we weren’t “taught capitalism.” Did English-speaking, capitalistic theorists and scholars make up a big part of what was taught? Well, yes. But in studying economics, you need to know a variety of theories and systems and principles of economic thought. Yes, I took a course in Marxian economics, and it wasn’t a matter of a communist professor trying to convert me to his way of thinking. It was a matter of students wanting to know about an economic system that played a pretty big role in the global political climate. To be a well-educated person, you need to know about other theories and ideas. Colleges aren’t “far gone” when they promote this.
You seem to think that these are all “how to” courses. How to be a capitalist. How to be a Marxian. Lord, I hope not, because on this campus Abnormal Pysch has pretty big enrollments…
So all this intensive indoctrination by the Liberal International infesting our college faculties has been ineffective. College grads refuse to follow as they’ve been led. What’s your complaint about?
Having the same viewpoint? This doesn’t make any sense. You seem to want to use the term liberal in the most sweeping of generalizations, in all cases, and in all circumstances. Why? What is this liberal viewpoint of which you speak? And I’m not being snarky here, I truly want to know. Break it down for me.
Why would you think it irregular? Sure, maybe many liberals may favor affirmative action, but not in the way you might think - one needs to look at the issue in a broader context. Maybe one reason why liberals support it is that it allows more students to attend the institution in question. In other words, various affirmative action policies gives the institution a competitive advantage over other institutions (or at least, stay competitive with respects to other institutions). Take away that advantage means fewer students, fewer dollars, loss in prestige, etc.
Why would a conservative favor a policy that, in the long run, might hurt the institution in terms of prestige and/or financially?
There are some people that may teach or advocate teaching “alternative” economics courses, but they are few and far between. And just because someone advocates teaching Marxist economics, for example, doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be taught. Economics (supply and demand) is just as much a part of academia as it is in the real world. If there’s no demand for “alernative economics” courses, then they won’t be taught.
Even if an economics course is a requirement for graduation, it’s usually a basic microeconomics (or macroeconomics) course and hardly one in which an “alternative” viewpoint will be covered or discusssed in great detail.
Sadly, these course will likely fall by the wayside as market forces continue to force institutions to cater to the demands of their clinets (students/parents/alumni). In the forseeable future it would not surprise me that these courses are dropped as a requirement for a degree - so your point here is largely moot. In other words, the most “liberal” of the cirriculum is dying out anyway.
Then please, by all means, give us “liberals” the conservative viewpoint.
That doesn’t tell you much because you don’t know what those voters’ political attitudes were before they attended school. You can’t be sure that their voting preferences are caused by their education or by the professors who taught them. At any rate, as someone else pointed out, the indoctrination seems to be going poorly mong college grads. This seems to reflect what HERI reported (I banged that out upthread)
Kimstu is right. I do not think you really mean that having a JD, MBA, DDS, MD, MArch, MSE, MDiv, or any of the other hundred-odd degrees I could list here automatically makes the degree holder an “academic type who is an ivory tower liberal.” There are a lot of degrees out there. Postgrad does not mean PhD.
That’s hardly the point. It’s silly to deny that there can be any problem at colleges regarding bias as long as college grads continue to vote republican. I just think demographics trump all other things when it comes to determining who votes for who. College grads make more money. People with money tend to be conservative. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t a bias problem on campus.
Good point. I don’t know the figures on this, but I didn’t think of Docs or MBA’s who probably amount for a good number of those with “post graduate” work. I retract that comment.
So are you arguing that the American left is gaining ground, or losing it?