Hey Len, take a look at this!

[Marswolf]

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1334

Released: July 10, 2007

Zogby Poll: Most Think Political Bias Among College Professors a Serious Problem

Four in 10 said the problem is "very serious;" Tenure seen as harmful to teaching quality

As legislation is introduced in more than a dozen states across the country to counter political pressure and proselytizing on students in college classrooms, a majority of Americans believe the political bias of college professors is a serious problem, a new Zogby Interactive poll shows.

Nearly six in 10 - 58% - said they see it as a serious problem, with 39% saying it was a "very serious" problem.

The online survey of 9,464 adult respondents nationwide was conducted July 5-9, 2007, and carries a margin of error of +/- 1.0 percentage points.

Predictably, whether political bias is a problem depends greatly on the philosophy of the respondents. While 91% of very conservative adults said the bias is a "serious problem," just 3% of liberals agreed. Conservatives have long held that college campuses are a haven for liberal professors. The activist group Students for Academic Freedom, founded by conservative activist David Horowitz, has promoted state legislation invoking a "Students Bill of Rights" on campuses to protect conservative students from academic reprisals by professors who hold contradictory beliefs.

Men were much more likely than women to see the bias of professors as a problem - 64% of men agreed, while 53% of women said the same.

Whites were twice as likely to call it a "serious problem" as African Americans, the survey showed.

The survey also showed that an overwhelming majority also believe that job security for college professors leaves them less motivated to do a good job than those professors who do not enjoy a tenured status - 65% said they believe non-tenured professors are more motivated to do a good job in the classroom.

Asked whether they think the quality of a college education today is better or worse than it was 25 years ago, 46% said they think it is worse, while 29% said it is better. Another 16% said the quality now is about the same as it was a generation ago. Older respondents were much more likely than their younger counterparts to say the education quality has deteriorated: just 21% of those age 70 and older said it was better now, compared to 47% of those age 18 to 24 who said today's education was better. Among women, 30% said it was better, while 43% said it was worse and 17% said it was about the same. Among men, 29% said it was better, 49% said it was worse, and 16% said it was about the same.

[Guest Len]

Am I surprised? No.

Do I believe a word of it? Yes and no.

[/rant on]

Generally speaking, the more formal education you have the more liberal you will be. So, since college profs are required to have a great deal of formal education, its no surprise there are more liberals on campus than off.

Conservatives would argue the reason this is the case is that colleges are indoctrinating our youth to be liberal. Of course, I could point to 200 years of election history in the USA that would suggest otherwise, but I digress.

Liberals would argue that this is because the smarter you are, the more likely you are to be right, and thus liberalism must be right. This is a circular argument that holds little/no water.

Now we turn to the American people, most of which have never set foot on a college campus, and so their opinions are meaningless to me since they have nothing to support their beliefs except for what they hear in the media, which loves to talk about this topic. If you have not been to college, you should not get a vote on the quality or political bias of college education.

Now, let's turn to the suggestion that liberal profs consciously stifle conservative speech or otherwise retaliate against such.

1) There are a few cases of this, of course. Very few.

2) Most others can be explained away by students complaining about grades or required work they don't want to do, or being exposed to ideas their high schools never exposed them to. Oh, the horror.

3) Virtually all colleges have grievance processes and investigative processes to ferret all this out.

4) So-called Students' Biill of Rights are a sham for several reasons:

a) Most of these rights already exist at most colleges -its redundant.

These Bills of Rights often stifle free expression rather than foster it. PC run amok.

c) Just another attempt by conservatives (often religious conservatives with biases against science) to influence curriculum.

Finally, let's look at the notion that tenure creates lazy professors who are protected from ever losing their jobs.

1) Tenure is NO GUARANTEE of job security. Anyone in doubt of this may feel free to read my contract of employment, which is a public document. I can be fired for many reasons, including breach of responsibility, failure to perform, financial exigency, programmatic changes, misconduct, criminal behavior, etc... All tenure does for me is give me access to some due process in termination proceedings and gives me the freedom to say what I want in my classroom/laboratory/research paper -within the boundaries of my discipline and the course I am teaching.

2) Tenure is NOT a free ride to say whatever you want in the classroom. See above.

3) Tenure can make some professors lazy in their later years. Absolutely true. Not many, but some. Its human nature, and we slow down as we grow older. In response to this, many colleges and universities have what is called "post-tenure review" where tenured faculty are evaluated for performance on a regular basis. This can be an annual evaluation, or once ever so many years. At my college, and at every public university and college in TN as far as I know, ALL faculty are evaluated EVERY year.

3) At many colleges, the majority of teaching faculty not only are not tenured, they are not even full-time. Adjuncts do much of the heavy lifting, and they have zero job security.

So, the next time Zogby wishes to do a survey on this issue, I suggest that everyone who responds be required to actually know what they are talking about before they opine away.

[/rant off]

[fury2neon]

I disagree the most educated economist I have met and/or read have been violently anti-socialistic.

Most college professors are liberal because they support socialist thinking even though the only economics they have had is Econ 101 & 102 Micro/Macro. It is usually an ignorance of the results of liberal ideas that people are liberal. And a refusal to admit that an idea that has failed over and over again was ever even been tried (referring again to socialism). It is only those who are supported by socialist programs or those who will get others to pay for said programs that support those ideas. Over the past 70 years there has been a big push to get as many people on the receiving end of socialist programs as possible.

Hence "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."

-- Professor Alexander Tytler

Where is our nation in this circle? The more we move toward socialism the closer we move to dictatorship. It is prime lesson of the past 200 years.

[Marswolf]

Heh, heh. I thought that might strike a nerve.

From my experience, most professors attain tenure in the same way one becomes a general in the Army. You agree with those who are in a position to put you into that classification. That is - you kiss butt. I call it "playing the game." I find it interesting that a number of tenured professors I know refuse to admit that publicly but if pressed will do so in private.

When I figured that out, I decided to not become a professor - or a general.

I've been on a couple of college campuses and picked up some degrees along the way, so I don't think I can be accused of being a know-nothing on this topic. I started out a liberal and the more educated I became - mostly education picked up outside of classroom - the more I became an adherent of non-liberal thinking. Not "conservative" thinking in the current meaning of that term, but more a believer in very small government and few government services or interference in the lives of citizens. I know a lot of very smart people who are liberals, but without exception the smartest people I know are not of that persuasion. The false and arrogant perception among many liberals that they are smarter than conservatives is interesting to me psychologically. I have commented among colleagues (some of them liberals) about that trait and have on a couple of occasions put it to good use in impaling smug and self-important snots.

Somewhere along the line, I think higher education forgot that it is there to educate - not lead youth to "the truth." Top professors in technical fields tend to be researchers first and teachers as a sideline. In the liberal arts, they tend to promote their social agenda rather than present a balanced view. Education has become secondary for them. I do see clear evidence of an attempt to indoctrinate rather than educate among my college teaching friends. A number of these professors appear to be petty tyrants who will punish students for disagreeing with them. And I've seen students complain and even sue to try to get fair treatment to no avail. I like these people as friends, but they shouldn't be teaching. From my experience, I'd say that the majority of teachers, college and otherwise, should not be in their position for one reason or another. I have tremendous respect and admiration for people who can teach well. I have tremendous contempt for those hold teaching positions and teach poorly or use their position to lord over their students as petty dictators.

The first requirement for teaching students in any educational area should be the desire and ability to actually teach. It's surprising how many teachers I know who fail this test. They either want to rule students rather than educate them, or they are just incompetent as a teacher. The second requirement should be the ability to put your political and religious views aside and teach a balanced examination of your subject. If a student can figure out that you are a liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, theist or atheist then you aren't doing your job properly. You are there to educate - not indoctrinate.

I only partially agree with the poll. Universities, in my experience, do tend to be a bastion of liberal thinking and indoctrination. I don't think this is because smarter people are liberals, but because the teaching profession tends to be a mutual admiration society. Sort of a self-sustaining fantasy land. The liberalism isn't monolithic. There is often a token non-liberal who is well respected in his field, but overall those in higher positions are expected to tow the party line. In that sense, often universities are not strongholds of intellectualism but instead of political conformity.

I tend to agree that those who have not been on a college campus as a student or in another capacity have a more difficult time in forming a reasoned opinion on the state of collegiate education. But that doesn't mean they can't come to a sensible conclusion. If attendance at an event was a requirement for sensible conclusions, there would be no field of history. Sometimes outsiders have a better view of reality than those inside a situation.

My view is that education at these institutions is neither better nor worse than it was when I was first enrolled, now almost exactly 40 years ago. It's just as bad now as it was when I was a student.

[SkWaShDeM]

I'm in college still, and I'm going to refrain from commenting on this topic as much as I can. I will have trouble refraining from getting downright insulting towards a few of my former professors over the years...

[Branket]

I'm in college still, and I'm going to refrain from commenting on this topic as much as I can. I will have trouble refraining from getting downright insulting towards a few of my former professors over the years...

+1

[molonlabetn]

The only class I ever failed, or even came close, was the result of a differing opinion with one English professor over a paper I wrote and presented... he thought I was 'insensitive'.

[fury2neon]

The only class I ever failed, or even came close, was the result of a differing opinion with one English professor over a paper I wrote and presented... he thought I was 'insensitive'.

I had a similar experience with an English professor. She hated males and really hated engineers which is what my major was at the time. I was surprised that a teacher at an engineering school would hate engineers so much. Don't think a single engineer in her class had higher than a C.

Another professor that I did not have but friend did specifically cursed at and tried to humiliate anyone who tried to express an opinion that did not match their own. This was a tenured prof who consistently acted this way and never received any reprimands from the administration.

Of course this is just two out of a nearly a hundred. Most of the ones I had encouraged good discussion.

[towerclimber37]

see...I can tell that when I go back to finish my Batchelors degree, I'm going to have fun!

[Guest Len]

I'd also like to point out that the perception that most profs are liberals is just that, a perception. It depends GREATLY on the discipline. Let's take a quick walk down the path to enlightenment, Western-style:

1) The Humanities. Where I currently reside. Here we find the most liberal of the bunch. Where are they? Mostly hanging out in the English Department faculty lounge. The smell in the air here is of arrogance mixed with despair over the state of modern spelling/grammar usage. In the English Dept at my school there are about 15 liberals, 3 or 4 conservatives and a few who resist classification or have no clue about the outside world. The other academic departments in the humanities (philosophy, languages, speech communication, yada) are a little more diverse. In my dept, We have 4 liberals, 3 conservatives and 1 moderate.

2) Social & Behavioral Sciences. Where I "grew up," although I'm a humanist by nature and by experience. Here we have an interesting mix. Mostly liberal, mind you, but you'll see the occasional conservative Economist or Historian. You will also find here the ultra-liberal "women's studies," "africana studies" and other pseudo-disciplines which are really sub-sets of cultural studies and sociology, but don't tell them that. These people make me look like Dick Cheney, but are fun at parties.

3) Physical "hard" Sciences. They maybe lean left, but are generally a diverse group, with a large percentage of a-political folks who rarely set foot outside their laboratory and so have no clue what's up in the world. Probably the most a-political bunch. Most of the left-leaning comes from a strong environmentalism. Your classic "tree huggers" reside herein.

I'll stick Engineers in this group, but I can not name one Engineer I know that I can fix a political label to. TN Tech has some liberal engineers, but also some conservative ones, from what I hear from people I know there.

4) The Business School. Here you find a parking lot littered with "W '04" stickers to this day. I am willing to bet money that the majority of the biz folks at my school voted for W. I have no clue how the rest of the biz universe leans, although many MBAs are conservative, or more accurately what I like to refer to as "country club republicans" -for typical GOP tax policy, but caring little about root conservative social issues.

I completely agree that the average student should not be able to tell this about their professors by what is said in the classroom. If a prof is doing his/her job well, most times, it won't come up or you should not be able to tell. In my classes, I use a variety of examples from across the political spectrum. (I teach lots of public speaking, where persuasion is a key skill and lots of mass communication, where political policies directly impact the subject matter, so stuff comes up.) Do my students know where I stand? Of course they do. I make them figure it out in some classes, and I'm also the adviser for the college democrats club. And I ran for office as a Democrat, and my office is decorated with a few items that might give my political affiliation away. If you are reasonably alert, you'll figure it out.

(Btw: One will also find evidence of my love of firearms, James Bond, geography, and chocolate in my office.)

[fury2neon]

...and chocolate in my office.

UMMM, Chocolate... sorry, I shouldn't read while hungry...

[Marswolf]

Interesting breakdown, Len. I don't know that I can question your assessment of the degrees of liberalism in the different colleges. My experience is a bit diverse, but not as inclusive as yours. Officially, my fields were engineering, psychology and philosophy with a few interesting minors but I was always researching other stuff in the library. As an engineering student, I probably spent more time in the law library than on engineering. I shall defer to you on the matter.

I do have one question about your Business School. How many of the teaching staff there have been business owners? Don't make a research project of it. Just off the top of your head is fine. I'm just curious.

Since we are getting the normal "I hate English professor" stories, I'll tell one with a twist. First a little background. When I first went to college as an Electrical Engineering student, I had a Pakistani advisor. He had no clue as to what I should be taking. Never did figure out why a double-E should take honors chemistry. Anyway, after a disastrous quarter of horribly schedule arranged classes, I just asked him if I could just sign his name and make my own class schedule and selection. So I did that throughout my stay at that school. The result was my talking classes out of sequence, which actually worked fine for me except I ended up in my senior year having to take stuff like freshman PE and an English class I had never gotten around to.

This is about the English class. I decided to get my credits in an English Literature class. I wasn't big on class attendance. I don't think they let you cut class much these days (nanny state) but I did that a lot. So I went to the first class session. Found out about the midterm exam but didn't take it for some reason. But the professor let me do a makeup mid-term and I made a "B" on it. Part of the requirement was a term paper and I turned in one on an allegorical interpretation of Chaucer's The Knight's Tale. I then heard that if you were happy with your mid-term grade, you didn't have to take the final exam - which suited me fine. So, I had been to one class meeting, did a makeup mid-term and turned in a paper. I decided to go to the last class meeting. The professor stood in front of the room and asked if I was in the class........ ......... Now, ponder that for a second.... ........ I figured out I, and the rest of the students, was about to hear why I failed his class miserably. I sheepishly raised my hand and he turned away. Then he said he taught a graduate level Chaucer class and my paper was the best he had received that quarter. He gave me an "A" for the class. That was my only 4-point quarter in college. Other stuff was always more important than grades.

BTW Len, we like a lot of the same things. In my case, chocolate is fine. But basically if it can be classified as candy, I'll go for it. Fortunately I have a high metabolism. Otherwise I'd weigh 500 pounds.

[Guest Len]

Good story, and proves latent intelligence is just as important, if not more so (maybe WAY more so) than book knowledge. Mars, you are (and I mean this with all sincerity) a gentleman and a scholar.

On the other issue, since I teach at a community college, many of the faculty in the "Business Divison" actually have significant real-world experience. Community colleges generally place a premium on such experience and will count it when calculating your salary. (Faculty salaries around here are based on a scale that includes degree, teaching experience, rank, and "relevant professional experience.")

One good example is our logistics management program. The guy who started it is ex-Army officer (I want to say Colonel but am not 100% sure) and basically had a hand in inventing the modern day version of the "Red Ball Express." He picked up his Masters degree courtesy of the Army along the way, but it had very little to do with why he was hired. If you can run a division-level supply operation I think you can probably teach these kids how to run a small trucking firm or work for FedEx. And they guy can actually teach, which is a nice plus! As you might guess he is not a big liberal. We scored big when we landed this guy. He felt like a change of pace and wanted to teach rather than manage. He took a huge pay cut, of course. (Well, maybe there's a little liberal in him afterall! )

[Marswolf]

I wonder if Northeast State Technical Community College could use someone to teach how to make drug lords invest their money where we want them to invest it?

[Marswolf]

see...I can tell that when I go back to finish my Batchelors degree, I'm going to have fun!

Piece of free advice Tower (you know how much free advice is worth), don't wait too long to go back for that degree. Months become years that become never.

[Smith]

I think the so-called "perception":rolleyes: of liberalism is in fact accurate. This is backed by the teacher unions, rantings of numerous professors, statements of many University's in response to political & social issues, ratio of appearances of political activist and speakers, & not to mention the whole makeup of the public school system from K-post grad.

To say it is not is like my History professors many attempts to rewrite the historical perspective.

Not all are this way, but even a 60% to 40% (being very gracious IMO)ratio is a heavily out-weighted scale.

I just wish we could all admit the reality of this issue and move on. Colleges will also lean left and conservatives will continue to be born out of their ignorance of practical application. It's a win/win:)

[towerclimber37]

Piece of free advice Tower (you know how much free advice is worth), don't wait too long to go back for that degree. Months become years that become never.

I won't Mars, I'm trying to figure out what I want to be when I grow up though...

[fury2neon]

He felt like a change of pace and wanted to teach rather than manage. He took a huge pay cut, of course. (Well, maybe there's a little liberal in him afterall! )

I would say that if he felt he got more out of teaching than managing then it was in his own self interest. Money is not everything and is not the only thing of value. You can be very conservative and not see money as what you value.

[Marswolf]

I won't Mars, I'm trying to figure out what I want to be when I grow up though...

I understand that. But a typical company professional help wanted description starts with "4-year degree." In a lot of cases, it doesn't matter what the degree is in. They want people who might move into a supervisory position and they won't let non-degreed people supervise those with a degree.

[Guest Len]

Correct-o-mundo. What the degree is in is often of little consequence (except in the obvious technical fields, etc.) Companies want people who can think, who can analyze information, who can come to conclusions based on that information and who can then effectively communicate the results of said deliberations to others. Many people see the degree as the "ticket" to a job, and to some extent it is. But really people should be in college to learn how to think critically and apply knowledge to situations. That will serve them well throughout life, regardless of whether the BA is in English or Art History or whatever. And if I was the guy doing the hiring, if you proved you had those abilities as well as some latent intelligence via other credentials, then you are still hired. A college degree is but one path to enlightenment, and is a path of no guarantees, regardless of the GPA or the college issuing the paper. (There are lots of dumb graduates of Ivy League schools.) Give me someone who can think any day over someone who can parrot back facts.

And Tower, I'm with Mars on this one. Don't wait to long.

Also, on this liberal bias in colleges, sure there is a tilt, but man it varies alot from place to place. It also varies by discipline. I read a study a couple years back in the Chronicle of Higher Education that looked at this very issue. The study found that the degree of "liberalism" (identified by such things as voting records, political affiliation, self-reports) was highest in Humanities and lower everywhere else, especially in the business and engineering areas, where the tilt is often the other way. This guided my walk through the halls of academe in an earlier post.

Next, we must look at the degree of harm being inflicted upon the masses by all this liberal indoctrination that supposedly goes on. College is a place to be exposed to new and different ideas, not a repetition of the pablum parroted out in high school. People often freak when exposed to new or uncomfortable ideas. Someone once told me that education SHOULD be uncomfortable, it should transport you out of your safe zone and expose you to all sorts of things you never thought of before. Education is not about the search for TRUTH, its about the search for how to find your personal truth. You can't do that by ignoring some ideas. I'll take a conservative who has a well-reasoned philosophy behind his/her beliefs any day over a knee-jerk liberal (or conservative). If you can show me you have thought it through, have pondered the alternatives and come to a conclusion, you earn respect in my book, even if we continue to disagree.

Finally, revisionist history is not the sole domain of the liberal. Conservatives often overlook the numerous and lasting positive impacts of liberal thought on this nation and the world. The demonizing of the labor movement is but one classic example. Women's rights (including the right to vote), civil rights, clean water, safe food & drugs, the list goes on. I sleep well at night secure in my belief that government of the people by the people for the people has a place in securing our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Truly the most liberal of notions.

I understand that. But a typical company professional help wanted description starts with "4-year degree." In a lot of cases, it doesn't matter what the degree is in. They want people who might move into a supervisory position and they won't let non-degreed people supervise those with a degree.

[Guest Len]

This is not the article I recall reading, but it is an interesting summary of some recent research: http://chronicle.com/free/v53/i21/21a00801.htm

As you can see, the jury is still out and results depend a great deal on who is doing the study and the methodology employed. (No great shock there.)

The "We jump.." article referred to on the right side of the page may be what I remember, but you have to be a paid subscriber to read it. Sigh...