It’s no secret that academia is, and has been, dominated by politically and socially left-tilting faculty members. For years now David Horowitz has been the most prominent voice on this issue, and indeed at times has been a voice crying in the wilderness. This is not an argument for conservatives to avoid higher education or even the secular academy. In fact I would make the claim that a new study conducted through the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. gives conservatives good reasons to think harder and longer about going into the professorate. The study, entitled “Left Pipeline: Why Conservatives Don’t Get Doctorates,” is available online at http://www.aei.org/docLib/20071114_WOESSNER.pdf. Anyone who believes that non-religious institutions ought to self-regulate with respect to maintaining a truly diverse faculty should pay attention to this study. Seems to me that “diversity” in the hiring of professors is increasingly defined by ethnicity or sexual orientation to the neglect of the diversity of ideas. Conservative Ph.D.’s are out there (although more scarce than liberals), and they are essential for maintaining a rich and diverse learning environment for students. A favorite extracurricular activity of liberal professors is to build straw men by asserting that conservative professors “aren’t about education, they’re about indoctrination.” Well, certainly we can cite instances where that is true, and most unfortunately so. If the liberals are honest, though, they’ll admit that they can find numerous instances where those of their own ilk are doing the same thing. Left-tilting deans and department chairs at research universities and non-religious liberal arts colleges would do well to remember that in their faculty searches.
4 CommentsFides Quaerens Intellectum
Aim at heaven and you will get earth thrown in. Aim at earth and you get neither. -C.S. Lewis
4 responses so far ↓
Really — You’re citing Horowitz? And you expect to be taken seriously?
John, John, John . . .
Your point might have been a fair one if it weren’t for the fact that even a broken clock is correct twice a day. Note the substance of my blogpost is the new study, not Horowitz. Thanks for the comment!
JDB
At a theology conference I attended this week I met an adjunct professor of theology from Princeton. We talked about the state of PhDs today as he just finished his last year and now serves as adviser to PhD candidates. I was surprised, not by what he said, but that someone on the “inside” would say it. He said that the system was broken (and so much so) that universities would be better off not requiring that the professors it hires have attained PhDs. The current system, he said, is simply a series of hoops that candidates are supposed to jump through, **all the while saying nothing that would rock the ideological boat.** He told me (as an example) that if I came to Princeton and said all the right (left) things and none of the wrong (right) things I could get through just fine. If I decided to draw my proverbial line in the sand regarding any matter of Biblical orthodoxy they’d have me out of there in a minute. The end result, he claimed, were a bunch of politically-savvy yes-men.
Paul,
Thanks for this real-life example. Some professors on faculty at Christian institutions point out that they actually have MORE academic freedom in the faith-based classroom than they once did at secular teaching posts. Nick Wolterstorff has made a similar case for the value of teaching in a faith-based institution vs. a state institution. Thanks for the comment!