History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.
The Times letter page today runs several comments from critics of the concept of intellectual diversity on campus; as has often occurred regarding this issue, the critics wind up making the argument for intellectual diversity more powerfully than do the proponents of the cause, especially since, given the ideological tenor of the Times editorial page, it seems reasonable to assume that the letters editor didn't choose submissions that were deliberately unrepresentative.
Markus Meister expresses his sympathies for the few academic Republicans who exist, given that they must suffer from the" cognitive dissonance" of the fact that, as"academics are trained to reason using logic, to question evidence and to consider and evaluate several possible interpretations of events," but"all these activities are discouraged and indeed ridiculed by the present Republican leadership."
UCLA professor John McCumber concedes that a case exists that" campus collegiality leads to tyranny of the majority" (no kidding--this is why the concept is so attractive to campus ideologues), but adds the real reason for the small number of conservatives in the academy:"A successful career in academia, after all, requires willingness to be critical of yourself and to learn from experience, along with a lack of interest in material incentives. All these are antithetical to Republicanism as it has recently come to be." This from the same person who has argued that"humanities offer insights into human experience that we need when industries, militaries, governments, game engines, middleware and all else fails. This is the knowledge that helps us recover from heartbreak, to make sense of 9/11, to understand betrayal," but apparently these insights into human experience apply only to people on the left end of the spectrum.
And then Times readers get to hear from Renate Bridenthal, who has argued in other forums for colleges to embrace a"global studies" curriculum so as to promote"militant action" to restore remediation and open admissions at CUNY. Bridenthal wonders whether conservatives will"now demand affirmative action in universities for themselves"--unintentionally conceding that a stated rationale for affirmative action as it has come to be defined is that racial or ethnic diversity contributes to diversity of perspectives on campus. Of course, there is no need for affirmative action to achive in intellectual diversity on campus, since careful monitoring by administrators to ensure that department staffing decisions are based on a quest to cover a wide array of curricular options rather than to stack up more and more specialists in race, class, and gender while"traditional" fields go wholly unstaffed can go a long way toward achieving the goal.
Does anyone really think that people like this could evaluate fairly a candidate whose scholarship makes him or her appear to be conservative--or, even worse, has written for conservative publications?
[Update: Reader Mark Safranski correctly points out that a better question is whether individuals with that kind of missionary political zeal and authoritarian temperment can be trusted to treat their students - undergraduate and graduate- fairly and in a professional manner? As he notes,"Take out 'Republican' and insert 'Jew' or 'Black' or 'Woman' in some of the quoted statements and see how it reads in terms of professionalism. No, political conviction is not the same as race or gender or even religion but the reflexive, unthinking, prejudicial hostility the statements contain are certainly analagous."]
Thanks, Van. I certainly wasn't denying that possibility. I was trying to draw Adam Kotsko out about his experience as a fairly radical and serious young guy on an evangelical campus in the midwest. I've known excellent teachers of diverse backgrounds and would hate to have been denied access to any of them -- even the one who committed fraud in order to be able to teach, because he was the best of them.
Van L. Hayhow -
11/23/2004
Prof. Luker:
It has been thirty years since I was an undergraduate but my two favorite history professors included one who was regarded as the most conservative people on the campus (and in those days most of the small state colleges in my home state were pretty conservative) and the other had no known political leanings that anyone could detect.
Van L. Hayhow
Ralph E. Luker -
11/23/2004
Really? What would a gauche think about what you just said? But, you're correct that much of what KC and others have been saying is predicated on the prevailing atmosphere in state institutions, private research universities, and elite liberal arts colleges, where -- more often than not -- conservative is a sort of dirty word.
Adam Kotsko -
11/23/2004
One of the best professors I've ever had is pretty radically conservative, at least theologically speaking. Another professor who is liberal in political and theological views is extremely conservative in "lifestyle" type issues. I guess it depends on what you mean by "conservative" -- but then you do realize that I was in an Evangelical Christian college, where a lot of "K. C."'s stereotypes are basically reversed. If I was going to be stimulated at all, it would have to be by someone who was conservative in some respect.
Ralph E. Luker -
11/23/2004
You can't tell us why because you're lazy, Kotsko.
But, seriously, have you _ever_ had a stimulating teacher who you would think of as a conservative in significant respects? There are no David Horowitzes in this crowd. I'm in favor of having a Marxist or two on every Business School faculty. At least, Business Schools are better served by being on University campuses, rather than as stand alone institutions. But thoughtful and provocative conservatives should be welcome in history and theology departments, as well. No stereotyping about what a conservative is, please.
Adam Kotsko -
11/23/2004
For reasons I can't quite put my finger on, I just really hate posts like this. I don't doubt your evidence or your reasoning or whatever, but these kinds of discussions just make me say, "No."
If I figure out why, I'll let you know.
Manan Ahmed -
11/23/2004
Aren't we talking about "egregious" cases anyways? Student evaluation comments should be able to quickly identify those. U of C, for example, posts all student evaluations to a website accessible within the university community - and they are *very helpful*. Also, grade inflation doesn't seem to have increased since they went online in 2001.
Jonathan, you are right that in the case of tenured faculty, no one pays the slightest attention. But, there are more than one ways to tackle that. Just like companies (Fortune 500 and others) can have "retreats" where execs re-learn team-work and whatever buzz word is au courant, Universities can have faculties go to a few days of seminars once every two years on "dissent in the classroom" or some such. I am just reaching sure, but between some active engagement on account of the administration and full disclosure to students, we can take care of the egregious ones. The rest can duke it out in the boxing ring of ideas.
Carl Patrick Burkart -
11/22/2004
I like the idea of posting comments without rating the quantitative data. From reading my own evaluations, I know that the written comments are more important and revealing than the quantitative data. It might also encourage students to take evaluations seriously. Of course, instructors could add their own voice to the process by posting syllabi along with the evaluations.
It is interesting to see the different attitudes toward this at different institutions. The University of Georgia began posting course grades for each instructor a couple of years back, allowing students to grade shop without giving them any information that would help in other ways. By contrast, in a recent training class at another institution, I suggested that students be able to view course syllabi before registering for classes and was laughed at by people who felt that this potentially informative aid would encourage grade shopping. (of course accredidation requirements are making it pretty much manditory for syllabi to be posted on the University website anyway, but that fact is not widely publicised).
Okay, I realize that I've strayed from the original topic, so I'll shut up now.
Jonathan Dresner -
11/22/2004
You're preaching to the converted on grade inflation, but posting quantitative student evaluations falls into your second category for me. Qualitative data, perhaps....
Carl Patrick Burkart -
11/22/2004
As a sometimes instructor, I'm aware of the worth of student evaluations and everything you say may be true. I would be open to other avenues. But (1.) grade inflation must be dealth with anyway (the alternative is for standardized tests to become the only meaningful form of evaluation), and (2) every other proposal that I have heard either ignors the issue or proposes a cure that is worse than the disease.
Jonathan Dresner -
11/22/2004
There are a number of public sites on which anyone can rate and discuss a professor. But student evaluations are a very weak indicator of anything except in egregious cases, and the numbers produced by these exercises are already taken too seriously as it is.
You want grade inflation to become worse? Post the data. You want classes to become infotainment, with a high premium on slickly produced content and meaningless "learning games"? Post the data.
I understand the impulse: accountability is worth pursuing. But the student evaluation process is not the avenue through which to pursue it.
mark safranski -
11/22/2004
"Or it might go the way of our punditry: polarized hackdom. I'm not arguing the point, I'm just pointing out the speculation involved in any kind of planned social/intellectual change."
Point taken.
Hopefully, the requirement for scholarly publication would produce at least a more erudite and better informed class of Crossfire-style shouters.
Carl Patrick Burkart -
11/22/2004
I agree that it would be difficult to adjudicate tendencies as opposed to individual cases of abuse of the professorial role. Still, posting student evaluations on a publically accessible website might make it easier for students to avoid instructors who might impinge on individual academic freedom. Of course, this would make it easier for pressure groups to complain about individual instructors, but that comes with the territory. We rightly give instructors broad authority in the classroom, and we must expect them to be able to defend their behavior in public forums. Does anyone have any evidence of institutions that do this? Has it had any measurable effect?
mark safranski -
11/22/2004
Thank you Ralph! The best security for freedom of speech is a recognition and respect for the free speech of others.
Jonathan Dresner -
11/22/2004
"A more politically diverse faculty might be more scrupulous about ethical standards of teaching, than one operating under the security blanket groupthink conditions."
Or it might go the way of our punditry: polarized hackdom. I'm not arguing the point, I'm just pointing out the speculation involved in any kind of planned social/intellectual change.
Jonathan Dresner -
11/22/2004
Manan: Those questions are on student evaluation forms. Ours, for example, ask students to respond to "The instructor was tolerant of differences; engaged in healthy confrontation of ideas and opinions with students" (other questions which might send up flags include "Grading and evaluation of student performance has been fair," "The instructor demonstrated genuine interest in students," "The instructor actively encouraged discussion" and "The instructor was a model teacher, a good example for other instructors.")
Similar questions were on the forms other places I have taught.
Two problems. First, nobody actually looks at any numbers on these forms except "Compared with other instructors that you have had at UHH, how would you evaluate this instructor?" [and the corresponding question for course]. Second, nobody ever looks at these numbers for tenured faculty, ever. Even if they did, they can't do anything about it, at least not anything meaningful. Individual cases can be adjudicated, but not tendencies.
Ralph E. Luker -
11/22/2004
Your points are very well taken, Mark. I'm impressed when I see someone defending the rights of those with whom they disagree. It happens too rarely.
mark safranski -
11/22/2004
As a parenthetical aside I have to mention that I did my graduate work under two avowed Marxists. The experience was wonderful and they exemplified the standards of good scholarship and teaching.
Unprofessional conduct is a separate issue from the political conviction of the instructor. However, we are all quicker to note borderline unprofessional politicized conduct in the classroom among those whose with whom we disagree and we're quicker to speak up when that happens. A more politically diverse faculty might be more scrupulous about ethical standards of teaching, than one operating under the security blanket groupthink conditions.
It might also be more intellectually stimulating for the students.
Manan Ahmed -
11/22/2004
I have to agree that the boorish behavior of leftist or conservatives in the classroom is a distinct issue from hiring practices. Anyone who creates an intimidating and unwelcoming or blatantly political atmosphere in the classroom should be addressed via university wide procedural steps(sensitivity training?). If we don't tolerate sexual harrassment or racial slurs in the classroom, we should not tolerate political bigotry.
I don't think outright monitoring is needed. A question on student evaluations: Did you feel comfortable expressing your views in class? Or did you feel that the instructor imposed her/his subjective views? should be enough to let the department know that a conversation w/ the instructor is in order. I do not see it as a freedom of expression issue for the instructor. The classroom is a contracted space - between the university and the student. The instructor, above all, has a contractual commitment to provide a safe and unthreatening learning enviornment to ALL students - rightwing, leftwing or loony-wing.
Robert KC Johnson -
11/22/2004
I agree with both of these points. While it's quite possible that administrators taking a more active role in ensuring curricular and intellectual diversity in staffing positions wouldn't satisfy David Horowitz, et. al., it would likely make the criticism that Horowitz offers of the academy far less compelling. I should say that I don't, however, "concede the ability of departments to determine where their strengths should lie"--departments like Michigan's or Illinois' History Departments, which have, I believe, abused this authority, need rigorous administrative oversight on staffing matters.
On the second point, I agree completely from an intellectual angle. From a practical standpoint, though, the problem in the academy today regarding political proseletizing in the classroom comes almost exclusively from one side. Creating a more intellectually diverse atmosphere on campus, coupled with administrations who actively uphold the academic freedom for students that almost all colleges promise in their bulletings, would make it less likely that campus ideologues would feel such behavior is permissible.
I readily concede that both of these solutions might not resolve the problem--as you point out, we're dealing with structural issues here, and also a problem that has been many years in the making. But they also (I believe) have a chance of success while simultaneously avoiding the problem of coming up with changes that weaken or eliminate the concept of academic freedom.
Carl Patrick Burkart -
11/22/2004
I have two points:
The first is a reprint of one of my previous comments that I left on a thread below after the conversation was pretty much over:
"Dr. Johnson's solution for this particular problem is comforting to someone (like me) who is worried about David Horowitz plans for state legislatures to meddle in faculty appointments. In fact, I would gladly see this argument be pursued along methodological grounds. You can make a pretty good case that there need to be more historians of military, political, and economic institutions. The thing, is, even if administrators began to actively attempt to shape departmental hiring by requiring new lines to be filled by people who take more traditional approaches, the number of conservatives or Republicans in academia might increase little or not at all. So you've conceeded the ability of departments to determine where their strengths should lie, and the outcry about disrimination against conservatives would continue unabated. In short, perhaps this is worth doing for intellectual and methodological reasons, but it is unlikely to "solve" the current problem."
Secondly, the problem of how faculty members treat students in the classroom is perhaps related, but it mush be dealth with seperately. After all, it is possible for conservatives to occupy 35% of possitions in a department and still have professors who are intolerant of contrary views in the classroom or see their classes as a forum for political proseletizing. Again, we are looking at important structural issues about what constitues academic freedom and what role the administration should have in monitoring the political content of classroom discussion. It would be possible to shift the balance towards greater academic freedom for students (and less for faculty members) while having little to no effect on the number of Conservatives in academia.
Robert KC Johnson -
11/22/2004
Agree completely. This is why I attach such importance to the need for fairness in personnel questions in general, because it represents the only insurance against this type of intellectual close-mindedness entering the classroom.
mark safranski -
11/22/2004
KC Johnson wrote:
"Does anyone really think that people like this could evaluate fairly a candidate whose scholarship makes him or her appear to be conservative--or, even worse, has written for conservative publications?"
Or that individuals with that kind of missionary political zeal and authoritarian temperment can be trusted
to treat their students - undergraduate and graduate- fairly and in a professional manner ?
Take out " Republican " and insert " Jew" or " Black" or " Woman" in some of the quoted statements and see how it reads in terms of professionalism. No, political conviction is not the same as race or gender or even religion but the reflexive, unthinking, prejudicial hostility the statements contain are certainly analagous.
