The Academic Freedom Bill of Rights and Left-Wing Bias in the Classroom.
[1]
By now you've probably heard about the Academic Freedom Bill of Rights proposed by Florida Republicans. (I can't get the link to the whole bill to work, so I've only read second-hand accounts of it so far.)
I don't suppose that I'll need to convince you that the bill is damned dangerous. What worries me more than the bill itself, however, is that the right’s complaints about left-wing bias in higher education might have some merit.
I’ve never seen any helpful data on the problem (if you know of any, please let me know about it), so all I have to go on is my own experience. This is particularly bad because philosophy strikes me as an atypical discipline (even more atypical than most of the other ones, if you see my point). Politically, philosophy seems to me to be closer to the sciences and to political science and econ than to sociology and anthropology and the non-philosophy humanities. We tend to be liberals around these parts, but we don’t have so much of that flaky lefty fringe that seems so common in english, lit crit, soc and anth. Anyway, though I also had history and poli sci majors undergrad, I don’t have the kind of experience with those disciplines that I have with philosophy.
For what it’s worth, here’s some of the (pathetically scanty) evidence available to me:
[2]
The vast majority of professors that I know are liberals. A large percentage of the remaining folks are leftier-than-liberal leftists. There are some Republicans around (two in my own department!), though they don’t seem to be too terribly conservative. I’m fairly certain that the full-time members of my department would never push their politics in the classroom. They are all strongly committed to the ideal of objectivity (something, note, that hardcore lefties tend to disparage).
However, I’ve heard horror stories about 1-year people doing so. One student told me that one of our 1-years told her class on the first day: “If you love your country or believe in God, this is not the class for you.” Hard as that is to believe, I do believe the student; she strikes me as extremely honest, and she only gave up the story when I pressed her for it. Furthermore, I've heard similar stories about that instructor from other students.
Furthermore, given the things I’ve heard some people from other departments (mostly humanities and social sciences) say, if I had to bet my life on the matter, I’d bet that they do get out of line in the classroom at least some times. But, again, that’s little more than a guess.
[3]
Curious about this subject, I put the question to my two Phil 101 classes yesterday. “Do your instructors ever push their politics in class?” I asked.
Results in the first class (a class of 30 students): An almost immediate and almost overwhelming collective “YES!” Yikes! They just grin and bear it, they said. Who wants to risk your grade by angering the professor, they said. As you might well imagine, I was not happy about this result at all.
Results in the second class (an Honors class of about 18): A longish pause for thought. Then about 1/3-1/2 answered more-or-less in the affirmative, about 1/3 didn’t seem to have an opinion, about 1/3 answered in the negative. A couple of student said that it was worse in their high schools.
Obviously this indicates that there's prima facie cause for concern. That means we've got to collect real data.
[4]
Then there’s my very own experience in undergrad bio class, when the prof literally screamed at me because he (incorrectly) thought that I was going to question evolution. This tale is fascinatingly recounted at Crooked Timber. This obviously isn’t about politics, but it’s in the spirit of what the right is worried about.
Incidentally, the prof's name was Hinni (or Hini?). Kind of an asshole, but a decent teacher as I recall.
This is a tougher case given that it is so painfully obvious that some form of evolution did occur. Still, I think the screaming part is a little out of line.
Also, of course, this one isn't about politics--the the proponents of the AFBR seem to have evolution in their sights, too.
[5]
My tentative conclusion: there is clear cause for concern, but insufficient data to warrant either panic or the AFBR. That is, it would be irresponsible of us to either ignore the putative problem or accept something like the AFBR at this point. If professors—of whatever political stripe—really are pushing political (and related) views on their students (who, remember, do constitute what is basically a captive audience), then our own liberal principles demand that we do something about this.
In fact, in my book, what separates real liberals from pseudo-liberals is this: ardent liberals think that liberal bias is no better than conservative bias. Bias is bias, and the true liberal wants nothing to do with it.
[1]
By now you've probably heard about the Academic Freedom Bill of Rights proposed by Florida Republicans. (I can't get the link to the whole bill to work, so I've only read second-hand accounts of it so far.)
I don't suppose that I'll need to convince you that the bill is damned dangerous. What worries me more than the bill itself, however, is that the right’s complaints about left-wing bias in higher education might have some merit.
I’ve never seen any helpful data on the problem (if you know of any, please let me know about it), so all I have to go on is my own experience. This is particularly bad because philosophy strikes me as an atypical discipline (even more atypical than most of the other ones, if you see my point). Politically, philosophy seems to me to be closer to the sciences and to political science and econ than to sociology and anthropology and the non-philosophy humanities. We tend to be liberals around these parts, but we don’t have so much of that flaky lefty fringe that seems so common in english, lit crit, soc and anth. Anyway, though I also had history and poli sci majors undergrad, I don’t have the kind of experience with those disciplines that I have with philosophy.
For what it’s worth, here’s some of the (pathetically scanty) evidence available to me:
[2]
The vast majority of professors that I know are liberals. A large percentage of the remaining folks are leftier-than-liberal leftists. There are some Republicans around (two in my own department!), though they don’t seem to be too terribly conservative. I’m fairly certain that the full-time members of my department would never push their politics in the classroom. They are all strongly committed to the ideal of objectivity (something, note, that hardcore lefties tend to disparage).
However, I’ve heard horror stories about 1-year people doing so. One student told me that one of our 1-years told her class on the first day: “If you love your country or believe in God, this is not the class for you.” Hard as that is to believe, I do believe the student; she strikes me as extremely honest, and she only gave up the story when I pressed her for it. Furthermore, I've heard similar stories about that instructor from other students.
Furthermore, given the things I’ve heard some people from other departments (mostly humanities and social sciences) say, if I had to bet my life on the matter, I’d bet that they do get out of line in the classroom at least some times. But, again, that’s little more than a guess.
[3]
Curious about this subject, I put the question to my two Phil 101 classes yesterday. “Do your instructors ever push their politics in class?” I asked.
Results in the first class (a class of 30 students): An almost immediate and almost overwhelming collective “YES!” Yikes! They just grin and bear it, they said. Who wants to risk your grade by angering the professor, they said. As you might well imagine, I was not happy about this result at all.
Results in the second class (an Honors class of about 18): A longish pause for thought. Then about 1/3-1/2 answered more-or-less in the affirmative, about 1/3 didn’t seem to have an opinion, about 1/3 answered in the negative. A couple of student said that it was worse in their high schools.
Obviously this indicates that there's prima facie cause for concern. That means we've got to collect real data.
[4]
Then there’s my very own experience in undergrad bio class, when the prof literally screamed at me because he (incorrectly) thought that I was going to question evolution. This tale is fascinatingly recounted at Crooked Timber. This obviously isn’t about politics, but it’s in the spirit of what the right is worried about.
Incidentally, the prof's name was Hinni (or Hini?). Kind of an asshole, but a decent teacher as I recall.
This is a tougher case given that it is so painfully obvious that some form of evolution did occur. Still, I think the screaming part is a little out of line.
Also, of course, this one isn't about politics--the the proponents of the AFBR seem to have evolution in their sights, too.
[5]
My tentative conclusion: there is clear cause for concern, but insufficient data to warrant either panic or the AFBR. That is, it would be irresponsible of us to either ignore the putative problem or accept something like the AFBR at this point. If professors—of whatever political stripe—really are pushing political (and related) views on their students (who, remember, do constitute what is basically a captive audience), then our own liberal principles demand that we do something about this.
In fact, in my book, what separates real liberals from pseudo-liberals is this: ardent liberals think that liberal bias is no better than conservative bias. Bias is bias, and the true liberal wants nothing to do with it.
posted by Winston Smith at
9:21 AM
5 Comments:
Just a few points to go along with [3]:
A recent Poli-Sci class I took (The Presidency), where the professor spoke about his absolute conviction that Ronald Reagan was a committed budget fighter-- right before showing us hard evidence that (save perhaps rhetorically) he was nothing of the sort. Indeed, the whole class was filled with the sort of rhetorical context one gets from watching a lot of Fox news...
A class I took on the synoptic gospels: the professor assumed that we all walked into class convinced of the truth of the Christian Bible. He had fairly good reason to be; when he asked the class how many were Christian, at least 90% raised their hand. He blinked a bit at the rest of us and asked why we were there...
A history class I just finished: day 1 the professor asked if objective reality existed. I replied that it sure seems to, but our experience of it is filtered through a subjective sense of reality. She asked to whom the universe was an objective experience (this conversation sounds like something that should come from your department). I was feeling a bit annoyed-- hadn’t she listened to my response?-- and said with a shrug “god?” She snorted. To her credit, she caught herself _very_ quickly, and asked other students their opinions...
____________
One of the solutions I’ve heard to this issue is hiring quotas, republicans and democrats must be in simple balance with each other. This seems kind of backwards to me. Left Bias + Right Bias does not equal 0 bias. It equals a lot of noise...
A friend of mine suggests that we take a poll-- after a student finishes with a class, they are asked what they think the Professor’s politics might be. I suggest perhaps we go one step further than that. If we put the question on teacher evaluations, and the students on aggregate seem to be correct, perhaps that professor has a harder time getting tenure. Of course, that assumes that a professor’s ability to teach is what Universities are making hiring decisions based on...
Quotas aren't the answer.
Maybe an outreach program.
from wmr:
Chris over at Mixing Memory offered Horowitz a suggestion for conducting a study of the alleged bias; Horowitz blew him off. Didn't sound as if H has much interest in real scholarship.
FROM wmr:
1] I must begin this by saying that I am not disparaging the honesty or intelligence of your students. I have noticed that for many people having politics is like having an accent: "Ah ain't got no accent, but y'all shore talk funny." That is, they feel their own way of thinking is obviously and naturally correct, but everyone else has political reasons for thinking the way they do.
Also, people often find it difficult to distinguish between "here are some arguments against that" and "your politics are all messed up" or between "here are some reasons to think X" and "X is the only proper way to think".
These sorts of observer effects are among the reasons why it is not a good idea to jump immediately from a perception of bias to proposing legislation. Some unbiased investigation should intervene. And yes, I believe that is possible, even in the current political climate.
2] In your final paragraph, you say "ardent liberals think that liberal bias is no better than conservative bias". I presume that you are referring to a classical liberal position along the line of Mill and Green, or in more common terms "the market place of ideas." Is it fair to speak in disapproving tones of a "bias" toward allowing proponents of any point of view the opportunity to make their case? As long as they are not barred from the marketplace, can the result, no matter how lopsided, be reasonably described as biased? Once again, there is need for empirical investigation to ensure that some one is in fact being unfairly barred before considering possible remedies.
This is a tough one for me, because, on the one hand, I completely agree that a teacher should make success in a class open to all sorts of people. However, in my experience as a student, often students who argued against the teacher would confuse the pointing out of poorly constructed arguments with bias. How does a teacher sharpen a student's logic and reasoning without challenging what comes out of their mouths?
I felt quite free to disagree with my profs in college, and I found that they actually enjoyed a good challenge. It is true that I was quite chummy with them, and I agreed with them about a lot of things, but I tend to think these cries of "bias" are more related to young students' not being challenged in the past. They don't know how to deal with it.
There was an article some time back about a supposedly "bias" PolySci prof. In it, there was one lone Republican student who welcomed having a knowledgable adversary to argue with. It was kind of refreshing.
But back to the point, I think this (mostly) has to do with maturity issues, not some completely closed off nature of academia.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home