2024-11-27, 22:58 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Colleges Liberal?  (Read 25197 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« on: 2005-03-29, 21:27 »

Washington Post article, so I'm posting the full text incase they require registration to view it after today.

Quote
College Faculties A Most Liberal Lot, Study Finds

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 29, 2005; Page C01

College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.

"What's most striking is how few conservatives there are in any field," said Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University and a co-author of the study. "There was no field we studied in which there were more conservatives than liberals or more Republicans than Democrats. It's a very homogenous environment, not just in the places you'd expect to be dominated by liberals."

Religious services take a back seat for many faculty members, with 51 percent saying they rarely or never attend church or synagogue and 31 percent calling themselves regular churchgoers. On the gender front, 72 percent of the full-time faculty are male and 28 percent female.

The findings, by Lichter and fellow political science professors Stanley Rothman of Smith College and Neil Nevitte of the University of Toronto, are based on a survey of 1,643 full-time faculty at 183 four-year schools. The researchers relied on 1999 data from the North American Academic Study Survey, the most recent comprehensive data available.

The study appears in the March issue of the Forum, an online political science journal. It was funded by the Randolph Foundation, a right-leaning group that has given grants to such conservative organizations as the Independent Women's Forum and Americans for Tax Reform.

Rothman sees the findings as evidence of "possible discrimination" against conservatives in hiring and promotion. Even after factoring in levels of achievement, as measured by published work and organization memberships, "the most likely conclusion" is that "being conservative counts against you," he said. "It doesn't surprise me, because I've observed it happening." The study, however, describes this finding as "preliminary."

When asked about the findings, Jonathan Knight, director of academic freedom and tenure for the American Association of University Professors, said, "The question is how this translates into what happens within the academic community on such issues as curriculum, admission of students, evaluation of students, evaluation of faculty for salary and promotion." Knight said he isn't aware of "any good evidence" that personal views are having an impact on campus policies.

"It's hard to see that these liberal views cut very deeply into the education of students. In fact, a number of studies show the core values that students bring into the university are not very much altered by being in college."

Rothman, Lichter and Nevitte find a leftward shift on campus over the past two decades. In the last major survey of college faculty, by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1984, 39 percent identified themselves as liberal.

In contrast with the finding that nearly three-quarters of college faculty are liberal, a Harris Poll of the general public last year found that 33 percent describe themselves as conservative and 18 percent as liberal.

The liberal label that a majority of the faculty members attached to themselves is reflected on a variety of issues. The professors and instructors surveyed are, strongly or somewhat, in favor of abortion rights (84 percent); believe homosexuality is acceptable (67 percent); and want more environmental protection "even if it raises prices or costs jobs" (88 percent). What's more, the study found, 65 percent want the government to ensure full employment, a stance to the left of the Democratic Party.

Recent campus controversies have reinforced the left-wing faculty image. The University of Colorado is reviewing its tenure system after one professor, Ward Churchill, created an uproar by likening World Trade Center victims to Nazis. Harvard's faculty of arts and sciences voted no confidence in the university's president, Lawrence Summers, after he privately wondered whether women had the same natural ability as men in science and math.

The study did not attempt to examine whether the political views of faculty members affect the content of their courses.

The researchers say that liberals, men and non-regular churchgoers are more likely to be teaching at top schools, while conservatives, women and more religious faculty are more likely to be relegated to lower-tier colleges and universities.

Top-tier schools, roughly a third of the total, are defined as highly ranked liberal arts colleges and research universities that grant PhDs.

The most liberal faculties are those devoted to the humanities (81 percent) and social sciences (75 percent), according to the study. But liberals outnumbered conservatives even among engineering faculty (51 percent to 19 percent) and business faculty (49 percent to 39 percent).

The most left-leaning departments are English literature, philosophy, political science and religious studies, where at least 80 percent of the faculty say they are liberal and no more than 5 percent call themselves conservative, the study says.

"In general," says Lichter, who also heads the nonprofit Center for Media and Public Affairs, "even broad-minded people gravitate toward other people like themselves. That's why you need diversity, not just of race and gender but also, maybe especially, of ideas and perspective."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...av=rss_politics

Something to keep in mind for any who are in college.  Question what you're taught.[/color]
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #1 on: 2005-03-29, 21:32 »

Question what you're taught?
I don't see how this relates to that. Question everything you are taught, don't question what liberals teach you because they are liberals. Remember, 100% of college professors are human.
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Angst
Rabid Doomer
 

Team Member
Elite
***
Posts: 1011

WWW
« Reply #2 on: 2005-03-29, 21:48 »

Quote
"It's hard to see that these liberal views cut very deeply into the education of students. In fact, a number of studies show the core values that students bring into the university are not very much altered by being in college."
BULL!! I call bull on that so bad it's not even funny.
Damn near every single english, government, or other social studies course I've taken has turned out to have very little to do with the subject, and very much to do with liberal politics.

I have been asked to leave an INTRO TO COLLEGE classroom for the following reason:
Teacher poses a hypothetical situation, a CEO position needs to be filled. A man and a woman have applied for the job. A female coworker says the woman should get the job because there need to be more female CEO's. When the teacher asked who should get the job, I raised my hand, waited to be called on, and asked who was more qualified. The teacher said I was being disruptive and asked me to leave.

Multiple english classes have assigned, almost exclusively, contemporary readings that bash religion and conservative values.

I've been in MATH classes where the teacher interrupts their own lecture to talk politics.

I have taken THREE classes that haven't involved anything beyond the subject matter, those teachers were all conservatives, and have been removed from the staff because they got poor reviews from students who wanted their A's for free.

I can understand the need to question what's being taught, but I'm paying these people for an education, not political indoctrination.

Quote
"That's why you need diversity, not just of race and gender but also, maybe especially, of ideas and perspective."
Politically-driven diversity is only skin-deep. I've had some fun with that one too.
« Last Edit: 2005-03-29, 21:49 by Angst » Logged

"Who says a chainsaw isn't a ranged weapon?"
jess
 
Archvile
*****
Posts: 134

« Reply #3 on: 2005-03-29, 23:02 »

Hrm.. are we talking public or private schools here? Professors aren't supposed to talk about their personal political views in the classrooms here. I don't think I've been to a class in my life where we've talked politics.. maybe I'm alone on this one? Not that I care about politics in the first place (yes this is very ignorant of me, but I prefer to be numb to it. Too much bullshit for my liking), but the results are distorted. I mean, not every college was given the survey, they aren't including independants/other parties, and for all anyone knows most of the schools could've been in liberal areas of the country. No one can really base judgements on 183 schools out of thousands. Before I get harpooned, yes I do know there is a bias towards one more than the other because most teachers are in professional groups (I can't think of the names off the top of my head right now, but there's a national group and there are local groups as well, somewhat like a national teacher's union).

I can see most of you rolling your eyes right now because I'm not as much into politics as every one else, but I don't think we should be added another stereotype to the list. Some colleges actually do make an effort to allow free thinking, and they do not let the professors' personal opinions cloud/change our beliefs. Professors are only allowed to offer their personal opinions if it is relevant to the class material. It's like teaching religion in public schools. Teachers aren't allowed to focus on their personal beliefs unless is it relevant to what they are teaching. If they celebrate/cover their religion in class they have to also celebrate/cover the religions of the students in the class, which is why religion isn't taught in public schools (also because of the seperation of church and state). Anyway I'm getting off topic. The point is, some colleges have made an effort to limit bias in the classrooms. Just because they are republican or democratic doesn't mean they are teaching it, which brings me to my next point.

What college student doesn't change during their years in college? You can ask anyone that I've had deep discussions with, I have grown up quite a bit (yea I know, sometimes it doesn't seem like it), and have started seeing things in new ways. College *IS* the place to grow and mature into the people are meant to become. Who are we to say it's the college professors' personal opinions changing these students? How much of the change is because they are seeing things from a new perspective? Maybe the students who have "changed" should take a survey? What about surveying the colleges that have put an effort into limiting the personal views of the professor?

Maybe I'm just an ignorant little person that knows nothing of the world around me, but I still don't think we can make judgements based on 183 schools. The correlation is almost nonexistant (almost is the key word). I will admit there are times the professors' biased opinions *could* affect the students views, but I think an effort needs to be made to look into the schoolsthat limit the professor to teaching only material related to the class.

SIDE NOTE: WOW! I never thought my education classes would ever pay off hehe
« Last Edit: 2005-03-29, 23:06 by jess » Logged
Chilvence
 
Ogre
**
Posts: 55

« Reply #4 on: 2005-03-29, 23:07 »

Quote from: Tabun
Question everything you are taught
I couldn't agree more with that. By some bizarre stroke of irony though, that was your 1984'th post Slipgate - Smile
Logged
Moshman
 
Beta Tester
Vadrigar
**********
Posts: 615

Yarg!

« Reply #5 on: 2005-03-29, 23:27 »

I agree, schools in general are pretty liberal. They don't teach in truth, just in their political veiws to influence the new age. Back in high school there was an assistant in a class that did not permit me to talk politics. I asked her and she got mad. My political views are concervative, she doesn't want me to contradict her liberal teachings.
« Last Edit: 2005-03-29, 23:30 by Little Washu » Logged

Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #6 on: 2005-03-29, 23:28 »

Don't worry Jess, the only way to keep talking sense when it comes to politics, is by not getting involved at any level ;]

Also, little as I may know about the liberal standpoints, the things Angst describes sound more like dumbical, stupidocrate or ignorican behaviour, more than anything else..
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Moshman
 
Beta Tester
Vadrigar
**********
Posts: 615

Yarg!

« Reply #7 on: 2005-03-29, 23:33 »

I try not to talk about such issues myself, I may go in a spastic rage, but really isn't enforcing your veiws, and eliminating the opposing force a little suspicious?
Logged

Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #8 on: 2005-03-29, 23:51 »

Quote from: Tabun
Question what you're taught?
I don't see how this relates to that.
Of course it relates to it.  How many students go into college with their eyes open to such a heavy bias?  They believe they're going to be taught facts, not be indoctrinated with a socio-political belief system.  They should not have to deal with this, especially since, as Makou points out, this is an education they or their parents are paying for.  The phrase "truth in advertising" comes to mind...  If you go into a church you know what's coming at you.  If you go into a political campaign rally, you know what's coming at you.  In the academic world, you get blindsided by it unless you know about it ahead of time, and a hell of a lot of people don't know.  This is something people really need to know about so that they have a better chance of properly separating facts from rhetoric and politics.  If there were a severe right-wing bias, and said right-wingers were engaging in the exact same kind of indoctrination, then that should be a known issue as well.  I'm just putting this on the table so people who might not otherwise know can be aware of what's going on.
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #9 on: 2005-03-30, 00:44 »

But I that's not what I meant, ofcourse. Like I said, no matter how the system is balanced (or not), the problem lies in the (apparant) fact that professors like to teach their classes something about their beliefs, not about the subjects they're supposed to be teaching. I don't see how it makes any difference whether a liberal, conservative or satan-worshipper (for all I care) teaches you the use of irrational numbers in math, the way the human skin regenerates or the way Napoleon fought his battles.

Now if there'd be some kind of conspiracy to create 'colleges' that are used to usurp the throne and make political drones out of everyone, I'm sure there's some interesting theories about that - I'm saying that's different than complaining about the political preference of teachers in itsself. That does not mean it's unwise to worry about it, or to strive for good balance of preferences, just that there is no intrinsic problem, as long as the actual teaching is done right in the first place.

When it comes to something like philosophy, and taking the terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' literally, I'd say if you have to pick a bias, I'd certainly prefer one that encourages change and free thinking. Which brings me to another point - teaching adolescents about this kind of thing seems odd to me, because it's obvious that hardly any mind is ready to work objectively enough to deal with 'The Big Questions'. But that's another story altogether.
« Last Edit: 2005-03-30, 00:48 by Tabun » Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #10 on: 2005-03-30, 01:25 »

Hmm...  and they teach elementary school children how to have sex now in this country.  I know parents who have encountered this first-hand.  If they can (supposedly) handle that sort of thing, then why should politics be such a problem?  Besides, we're talking about colleges and universities, not middle school.  I don't think there are many adolescents in college, at least, not age-wise anyway.

All ranting aside, I would say that the problem is that the teaching is not done right at all.  It's one thing to have a bias, it's another to include the "this is the right way to think" within the curriculum.  When the lecture podium is used as a pulpit to preach their own personal ideals as if they were fact, that's a problem.  Educators should bear the burden of objectivity, not the students.  They should be mature and enlightened enough to know better, or they aren't qualified to teach.
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #11 on: 2005-03-30, 02:18 »

My bad, it seems I still don't entirely grasp the definition 'college' in the states. Sadly, some people can't handle anything, regardless of their age ;]

Entirely agreed on the second paragraph there.
I must say I haven't detected much problems concerning biases, close-mindedness and other forms of subjectiveness in my Dutch highschool. There, the skills of teachers were more lacking in the application of proper methods - we had an awful 'don't ask questions or try to understand, learn _rules_' approach to math, which is unforgiveable IMO.

College (computer science) was worse though. We were taught things like 'show certainty even when you have none', 'makes prices for your work artificially high' and 'try to secure a further project by leaving some flaws in the product'. All informally ofcourse, but it totally appalled me. The use of the Dutch language was equally horrid, but that's a different matter. We had one or two professors who were firmly anti-MS, but they only mentioned this in lectures in a jocular fashion. Besides, anyone learning programming can pick MS's products as a good example of how not to tackle something, so I guess that doesn't count as entirely out of place.. Slipgate - Wink
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
ConfusedUs
 

Elite (2k+)
**
Posts: 2358

WWW
« Reply #12 on: 2005-03-30, 03:45 »

Liberal vs Conservative
Democrat vs Republican
Blacks vs Whites
etc vs etc

They're all just ways of saying "Hey, let's do X my way, not your way, when we really need to be fixing Y".

I hate politics so much.
Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8814

WWW
« Reply #13 on: 2005-03-30, 17:05 »

Aye.  What I dislike - regardless of any bias - are those individuals and groups who will not be upfront about where they stand and why.  If you can't do that, then you're obviously up to no good, or at least are masking your true beliefs.  It's one thing to have a bias, it's another thing to lie about it or pretend that you don't.  I think the other problem is the human side as Tab pointed out, or rather I should say the egocentric point of view that every living thing has.  By egocentric I mean "originating from the self."  Most people who are biased have a tendency to not see themselves as such.  Introspection and self-examination are the only answer to self-ignorance, and not too many people are willing to do that.  They're afraid of what they'll actually see.
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Woodsman
Icon of Booze
 

Beta Tester
Icon of Sin
***********
Posts: 827

« Reply #14 on: 2005-03-30, 22:26 »

Id submit my 2 cents but given that the colleges around here are U.C davis and U.C berkley my impressions might be shall be way... slanted.
Logged
Moshman
 
Beta Tester
Vadrigar
**********
Posts: 615

Yarg!

« Reply #15 on: 2005-03-31, 21:08 »

One thing that gets me in schools in general...


They say they are "secular" but not really are. They teach the theory of evolution which has hardly next to nothing in solid evidence other then the human anatomy is slightly similar to that of primates. They teach it as fact. Now you can go the other road and say catholic schools teach their religion as purely fact but there is a difference, first on a personal note, there is no way to prove or disprove the existence of God, they teach the children to walk by faith and not by sight. They don't really enforce their ideals on them as much as publicly funded facilities do. Another thing they are a private school, parents choose that school because it is be it Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist and so on. Just the word believe in x calls it a religion by definition if you really want to dig deep. There doesn?t have to be gods or religious practices to call it a religion.


The school teaches it's own spin and ideological religion. Like evolution, how to use contraceptives, and promoting sexual immorality and perversion (say if you desire sex so much to pick up a porn mag to satisfy it so I was "taught") I don't want the school system raising my future child for me, and cramming their pop culture in my future child's vulnerable mind. I would weep if my child came to me and said, "God is evil, your wrong, I can be a homosexual if I want! That's what Ms. Hasben told us." My child telling me I'm wrong and worse God's wrong because the school teacher said. I want my child to develop his/her own beliefs, not what some false teacher says sitting at the podium, handing out worksheets about how we Christians persecute the homosexuals, when all we want to do is eat with them and wash their feet (metaphorically speaking), to help them, just as Jesus did with the tax-collectors. At least when I myself are persecuted, I know I'm doing my duty.


When I talk of stuff like this, I'm not a cruise liner to heaven, I am a battleship at the very gates of hell, and if they are gonna fed this garbage to the next generation, of course I'm gonna stand up to it. When it comes down to it, you really dig deep into these kinds of subjects it's really interesting how fast it comes down to violations against God and the bible, think about the pop culture, how virtually every idea is an atrocity against the bible, that's why I'm a Christian, the prove lies in front of my eyes everywhere I go, all you have to do is listen and belive a little, and you'll see demons everywhere, even if they don't look like they are from Doom 3.
« Last Edit: 2005-04-01, 00:55 by Little Washu » Logged

Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #16 on: 2005-04-01, 00:02 »

Normally I try to read every post in a discussion, but I'm skipping the former one. Anyone wanting me to put some effort in seeing his/her viewpoint should be prepared to present it in a readable fashion. Paragraphs, structure, legibility. /me skips.
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Moshman
 
Beta Tester
Vadrigar
**********
Posts: 615

Yarg!

« Reply #17 on: 2005-04-01, 00:54 »


Better?  Slipgate - Smirk Cleaned it up a bit I was in a ranting ramble session sorry...
« Last Edit: 2005-04-01, 00:54 by Little Washu » Logged

Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #18 on: 2005-04-01, 01:08 »

Much better.

I do disagree on the theory of evolution though. Yes, it's a theory, but no, it cannot be compared with 'faith'. There is definitely compelling scientific evidence for it, be it in DNA research results, bone structure comparison, fossil reconstruction etc etc. If one is opposed to the teaching of this theory, then one should be equally opposed to the teaching of the uncertainty principle, gravitational pull theory and the like. As we need proper models to explore our abilities in scientific deductive and inductive reasoning, there is certainly no harm in presenting these.

That some people do not make the distinction between fact and theory is wrong ofcourse, but to attack and disregard theories which have not been disproved would be much worse. The difference with faith here is that one has to take it.. on faith.. and thus no scientific reasoning of any kind is (or should be) involved - that, for me, makes it obvious that theories, (but not faith) have a place in educational institutes.
And anyone enjoying education should always be aware that the things they are learning ought to be questioned at every step, and that part of their education is the acceptance of the things they learn to understand and agree on, as opposed to accepting things because 'they are said to be so'.
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Moshman
 
Beta Tester
Vadrigar
**********
Posts: 615

Yarg!

« Reply #19 on: 2005-04-01, 02:37 »

Your absolutly right, but I think we shouldn't rely to much on science to dictate the universe nor should Christianity. Okay I will put in a scientifical perspective. The scientists admit that they will never find out where the universe came from, so they concluded that the universe came from nothing. That condradicts all laws of science, so it in fact proves that there must be a supernatural force, and I think that it's God, and that's where they turn to as well. Everything that is in this universe can't possibly be a coincidence. Some say that is was an "accident", that is 100% iron-clad bull. 99% of the universe is phyically unstable, and we just happen to be in the "habitable zone" with a perfect life-bearing Earth, and life formed to the point that I'm now sitting in a chair, in a basement on my computer typing this message. If evolution and the rest of the theories that are 90% bull, can be taught as if fact in publically funded schools, then I think the above should be taught.


Now back to the accident theory. How could something like us, being almost a perfect being, be an accidental coincidence? How could one cell, be smart enough to get better (evolve) by itself. Why would it want to do that. But wait! there is no "want" in a single celled organism, it has no coscience, so how does something with out one develop one? So now I'm saying this supernatural force that created all the matter in the universe has a coscience and passed it on to us.

Look at the beauties of this world, seasons, love, literature, exitement, peace. The taste of a freshly char grilled steak right of the grill, the inocence in a puppy, that is all controlled by science? I think there is much more to it then that. It is like taking one-hundred thousand LEGOs and tossing it into the air and it landing into a perfect castle, it's impossible to the laws of science. For there to be a science to begin with there must be an extraordinary event to occur. I think this should be taught if all other theories can be taught. You can use reasoning withing these boundries, just as I am. So what is so bad explaining things like these in science classes and the such. Quite frankly, I would hate it if the universe was controlled by science, but I know science dosen't have full bragging rights.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to: