you can take your ‘liberal bias’ and stick it up…
Are you sick of hearing tales of the so-called ‘liberal bias’ in universities? Well, next time you see someone say this on a blog or wherever, ask them what study they are using as the basis of their claim. If they cite one of the eight most popular studies (e.g., by David Horowitz, the ACTA, and others) that supposedly prove ‘liberal bias’ in the academy, then you now have an easy way to refute them: tell them that these studies do not meet minimum research standards, and thus their results are invalid. To back up your rebuttal, refer to the thorough and convincing critique by John Lee, “The ‘Faculty Bias’ Studies: Science or Propaganda,” which you can find at Free Exchange on Campus and which was funded by the American Federation of Teachers, one of the staunchest defenders of the democratic ideals of education.
April 26th, 2007 19:11
I agree that Horowitz is a fraud, but I do think that University Faculties are overwhelmingly liberal. The fundamental problem, however, with conservative critiques of the academy is not that they are wrong about the fact that most members of the academy are liberal, but that they fail to understand why this is the case.
It’s not because there is a liberal conspiracy or because of liberal indoctrination; rather, it’s because the attributes of the academic lifestyle are more appealing to liberals than they are to conservatives. Just like the majority of people who go to business school are typically conservative. it’s natural sorting that’s driving this as opposed to anything sinister.
While there are examples of conservatives being shut out of the academy (Daniel Pipes), there are also counterexamples of liberals being shut out of the academy (Norman Finkelstein). If conservatives really want more conservatives in the academy, they have to convince universities that it is in their interest to offer the kinds of incentives that conservatives seek.
Additionally, there are departments that are overwhelmingly conservative (Economics, engineering), but conservatives don’t cite those examples. The reason they don’t is because what they really have beef with is postcolonial theory and postmodernism. The attack on “liberal bias” is just a indirect way of undermining something they aren’t able to undermine in traditional ways (like publishing articles in peer reviewed journals).
April 27th, 2007 14:56
Yes, university faculty probably tend to be more liberal than conservative. But of course this fact alone does not constitute sufficient evidence of a bias in favor of hiring liberals, or of performing liberally-slanted research, or of teaching liberally-slanted classes. This is the argument made by the article I cited above: he debunks the shoddy research that purports to reach such a conclusion of ‘liberal bias.’
I agree with the direction of your argument that the conservatives are neglecting to consider the reasons why there are more liberal academics than there are conservatives ones. But I would take your critique even further. It’s not that “natural sorting” drives conservatives into certain careers like business and drives liberals into the academy, and it’s not just that the academic lifestyle is more appealing to liberals. Rather, American universities have been constructed around certain norms and institutions that are expressions of the same principles that liberals adhere to. American universities are liberal, in the sense that they are founded on the principle that the best teaching and research occurs through open, inclusive, and critical discussion, in which no traditions, values, or ideas are immune to being subjected to this criticism. (You start to get at this point with your argument that the attack on ‘liberal bias’ is just an indirect way of undermining something they aren’t able to undermine through publishing articles in peer reviewed journals… But I’d take your point further and say that it’s not just these obviously leftist theories, but the whole principle of critical debate in the university that they are trying to undermine.) This principle is at odds with the principles held by conservatives, particularly their respect for certain traditional ideas and values (from religion, patriarchal family structure, capitalist economy, etc.) that they refuse to submit to critical debates in which they would have to defend them and might have to change them if convinced that they are wrong.
So, if you accept my argument that there is something intrinsic to the institutions of American universities that is anathema to the conservatives principles, then you’ll have to rethink your argument that conservatives could “convince universities that it is in their interest to offer kinds of incentives that conservatives seek.” For universities to offer such incentives, they would have to reconstitute themselves as a different kind of institution, one that did not value the production of knowledge through critical discussion. Sadly, scarily, unfortunately, this institutional shift is precisely what is happening in universities today (and has been a constant tension within universities for a long time) with the corporatization of the university, its being turned into a business that produces knowledge for sale to corporations and the state. Academics should fight this corporatization by organizing in unions… (there’s lots more I could say about this…)
April 27th, 2007 15:40
” it’s natural sorting that’s driving this as opposed to anything sinister.”
Hey,Vijay, are you a Social Darwinist now?
April 27th, 2007 15:49
sorry, I meant to clarify that.
I meant self sorting driven by individual preferences as opposed to anything sinister.