Bias in Academia

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Very true, I was referring specifically to the folks with CBR who have been restricted and barred from certain campuses, even as others have no problems hosting them.

CBR? I must have missed something.

If conservatives are dissatisfied with their educational options, then they are going to set up their own schools anyways. I think that if you are really concerned about the death of american pluralism, you should try to figure out how these conservatives can be better served by the current universities.

On the contrary, it seems to me that the radical element of conservatism is attempting to inflame a situation that isn't really that newsworthy. Ok, most professors are liberal - so what? So far, I haven't seen any substantive argument based off that fact. Most of the outrage seems carefully manufactured and incited by the same small group of people to me. Thus, the sensible act for me is to oppose this active minority rather than to reform an educational system which, so far, has not been demonstrated to have any pervasive and systematic bias.

That's not what I've seen. I've had some good profs who focus on the content, but I've also had profs who, in the first class, start off by saying that he is glad to teach in Canada because it is a liberal paradise. Needless to say, half his class walked out on him, (I stayed).

Maybe it's a canadian thing. Even in high school I have had many very open and intelligent professors - one that stands out is a biology professor in my junior year of high school that devoted a whole class to a discussion of intelligent design and evolution that was, in my mind, very balanced. He gave his opinion when asked - when asked, mind you - that it was not scientific, but allowed the Christians in our class to discuss what they thought and was very courteous about it. I have yet to see such an open attitude displayed by anyone outside academia. This was from a man who was the faculty consultant to the anti-war "peace and justice coalition"- proof, in my mind, that being liberal does not equate to being biased in the classroom.

Where did I say I want a conservative litmus test? I want schools that fill the unfilled demand by parents and their kids who are disatisfied by the current regime. I want good professors to teach there, good being the operator moreso then conservative. For sure, I'd prefer a good conservative over a good liberal, but I'd take the good liberal before a poor conservative.

A school that is founded to be a conservative school will, by definition, have to enforce some kind of ideological selection. You can't set up an alternative network of conservative schools without screening the professors to get conservatives. Otherwise, they wouldn't be conservative schools - they would be liberal schools, since we've already established that there are more liberal professors than conservative.

No, I meant quality for a reason. I've been in school for awhile now, and I can't say that most courses offered by history departments are how shall we say, 'content driven'. It's the same complaint many other folks have had about the universities today.

That's what I mean by declining quality of the current public university system.

Once again, maybe it's Canada. I can't fathom a history class that wouldn't be content driven. What else would drive it?

But at any rate, I stick to my original point that quality is not relevant to the discussion. The major opponents of "academic liberal bias" have not been bringing up any issues of quality, but rather ideology.

My mother is a college prof. We have plenty of discussions over differing, how shall we put it, 'educational philosophies'. She would ask the question of whether it is possible to extricate ideology from education, since the purpose of education is to teach.

I distinguish them. When I use "ideology," I mean in the sense of "political ideology" for this discussion. I have taken politics classes from both conservative and liberal professors that I did not believe reinforced their respective ideologies, at least not consciously.

[Ben Kenobi]

Maybe it's a canadian thing. Even in high school I have had many very open and intelligent professors - one that stands out is a biology professor in my junior year of high school that devoted a whole class to a discussion of intelligent design and evolution that was, in my mind, very balanced. He gave his opinion when asked - when asked, mind you - that it was not scientific, but allowed the Christians in our class to discuss what they thought and was very courteous about it. I have yet to see such an open attitude displayed by anyone outside academia. This was from a man who was the faculty consultant to the anti-war "peace and justice coalition"- proof, in my mind, that being liberal does not equate to being biased in the classroom.

Interesting. I don't think this complaint is solely relegated to Canada, I have heard a variety of complaints in the US, but I still do not think it is as bad there as things are here. If more profs did what this one did here, we wouldn't have any discussions.

Most of the outrage seems carefully manufactured and incited by the same small group of people to me. Thus, the sensible act for me is to oppose this active minority rather than to reform an educational system which, so far, has not been demonstrated to have any pervasive and systematic bias.

If someone were to show this bias, would you then be willing to reform the system? And how would one go about demonstrating this bias to your satisfaction?

I have taken politics classes from both conservative and liberal professors that I did not believe reinforced their respective ideologies, at least not consciously.

The mark of a good prof is that he ought to give both sides a fair hearing. However, in a subject like history I don't believe it is either possible or desireable to remove their bias. I have had some good politically liberal profs, which makes it all the more disappointing to see their comrades fare so poorly.

I can't fathom a history class that wouldn't be content driven. What else would drive it?

You are fortunate my friend. Here are my course options for the upcoming term.

1. Historiography*
2. Prairie West
3. BC History
4. 'History of feminism'*
5. Soviet History
6. Nordic History

7. Internship*
8.Comparative women's history*
9.Topics in cultural encounters*
10.History of science
11.Topics in Cultural history*
12.Topics in International history*

Five I would consider actually content driven.

[Odin]

The only areas I can see with a major bias are economics and business (towards the Right) and some parts of the social sciences (towards the Left).

This reminded me of a thread here a few months ago when someone got stuck in a Woman's Issues class with a Proff making her students regurgatate Blank Slate-ish BS about behavioral differences between men and women being all cultural if they wanted to get good grades. THESE people I have a problem with, be they on the left or on the right.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Interesting. I don't think this complaint is solely relegated to Canada, I have heard a variety of complaints in the US, but I still do not think it is as bad there as things are here. If more profs did what this one did here, we wouldn't have any discussions.

Well, I'm sure there are complaints on both sides of the border. I'm the first to admit though that my experience is quite narrow, and that, as a liberal myself, my ability to pick up liberal bias is probably not as fine tuned as yours.

If someone were to show this bias, would you then be willing to reform the system? And how would one go about demonstrating this bias to your satisfaction?

It would depend on what was biased. If it were shown to me that professors systematically gave low grades to conservative students without justification, for example, that would indicate bias, but not widespread or systematic bias; the answer would be to discipline the individual professor.

If it were demonstrated to me that a college systematically chose liberal candidates over equally qualified conservative candidates, or explicitly used political orientation as part of their selections process, that would indicate bias, but it would be systematic only to that university.

Because the "university system" is not monolithic - I imagine that our states are much more independent in these matters than canadian provinces, though I may be wring - it would be very hard to say that bias was institutionalized throughout the country, because a school in MD really doesn't care what schools in NV are doing. Bias, at its greatest extent, can only be systematic within a single university.

The mark of a good prof is that he ought to give both sides a fair hearing. However, in a subject like history I don't believe it is either possible or desireable to remove their bias. I have had some good politically liberal profs, which makes it all the more disappointing to see their comrades fare so poorly.

It may not be possible to always remove bias, but it should be possible to point out that bias exists, and that the teacher is not a perfect human being and that there are other ways to view things.

You are fortunate my friend. Here are my course options for the upcoming term.

1. Historiography*
2. Prairie West
3. BC History
4. 'History of feminism'*
5. Soviet History
6. Nordic History

7. Internship*
8.Comparative women's history*
9.Topics in cultural encounters*
10.History of science
11.Topics in Cultural history*
12.Topics in International history*

Five I would consider actually content driven.

I don't understand. You don't find women's studies, cultural history, or international history to be content driven? What exactly do you mean by "content?"

Historiography I can see though

[Ben Kenobi]

Historiography teaches you about how to assess content, it isn't directed at studying the content.

You don't find women's studies, cultural history, or international history to be content driven?

No, I don't. These are different ways of looking at history, different perceptual lenses if you will. The content showcases these lenses, and takes a back seat to the different ideologies.

Because the "university system" is not monolithic - I imagine that our states are much more independent in these matters than canadian provinces, though I may be wring - it would be very hard to say that bias was institutionalized throughout the country, because a school in MD really doesn't care what schools in NV are doing. Bias, at its greatest extent, can only be systematic within a single university.

I agree, it makes sense to look at each individual university rather then the system as a whole. I don't think it would be possible to show bias across every single university, although I may be quite mistaken in that assessment. There are going to be good and bad universities within the overall system.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Historiography teaches you about how to assess content, it isn't directed at studying the content.

Yes, I knew about that much.

No, I don't. These are different ways of looking at history, different perceptual lenses if you will. The content showcases these lenses, and takes a back seat to the different ideologies.

It seems like the study of women's roles through time would be a valid historical study. The others are a bit too generally titled for me to guess at what their content might be.

I agree, it makes sense to look at each individual university rather then the system as a whole. I don't think it would be possible to show bias across every single university, although I may be quite mistaken in that assessment. There are going to be good and bad universities within the overall system.

As it stands, I'm not aware of any convincing argument of systematic bias against any major university.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Cyclotron

Negative. The fact that most teachers are liberal does not mean that most teachers express bias. It would be perfectly possible for a college full of Green Party members to have to institutional bias if they never brought up their political affiliation or taught in a manner that was essentially equal to both sides.

If the studies in this matter showed that bias was widespread, I would agree with you - but so far, all that has been demonstrated is that a certain political affiliation is widespread.

While waiting for someone to actually do a good study of the issue all I have to guide me are my personal experiences in academia. These tell me that there is bias, enough so that I would have been hesitant to major in certain areas in order to avoid it. That said most professors I has weren't purposefully trying to harm those with a different perspective. Their only crime collectively was an inability to present some valid alternative viewpoints.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Jaguar
God, it's CLOSED minded, with a D. What the **** is a close mind? You can't be close-minded.

I hope you all choke.

JIAR

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Sikander


While waiting for someone to actually do a good study of the issue all I have to guide me are my personal experiences in academia. These tell me that there is bias, enough so that I would have been hesitant to major in certain areas in order to avoid it. That said most professors I has weren't purposefully trying to harm those with a different perspective. Their only crime collectively was an inability to present some valid alternative viewpoints.

Part of the problem is that the alternative viewpoint you have in mind isn't really valid. There are many disputes within academia, but the kind of dispute you are looking for doesn't really exist.

Example: a well known academic was hired to write a book on conservative political philosophy. he found it extremely difficult to right since there isn't really a coherent set of principles that underlie conservative thought.

Give the Libertarians credit: they might be wrong, but they have a well thought out set of principles that underlies their ideology. They are the only people on the conservative side of the fence who really do. Hence, it would be easy to write a book about Libertarianism (and there are a lot),

[Senethro]

America is a crazy place. The concept that there are people in your own country who are enemies and must be defeated is not one present in great quantity in the UK. The whole left/right partisanship and the energy that goes into the generated opposition is astounding.

What I see is that certain political and social institutions are trying to create conditions more favourable to their survival via a status quo maintained by constant tension.

[Japher]

What I see is that certain political and social institutions are trying to create conditions more favourable to their survival via a status quo maintained by constant tension.

You mean that the democrats are keeping the poor poor by promoting and maintaining (unneeded) social programs?

[Senethro]

Originally posted by Japher


You mean that the democrats are keeping the poor poor by promoting and maintaining (unneeded) social programs?

I feel you've totally missed the point by highlighting the democrats only.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Have I said that I believe gay people are evil and that they are the spawn of satan?

Oh, what a drama queen...

One would think that reading your robust reply.

YOU might well think that.

I couldn't speak for the generality, as you seem to think you can (the use of the impersonal 'one').

[Odin]

Originally posted by Japher


You mean that the democrats are keeping the poor poor by promoting and maintaining (unneeded) social programs?

[Solly]

Originally posted by Sikander


Academia still spews out more partisan hackery than think tanks do despite peer review. For one thing there are a lot more people in academia than working in think tanks. For another, just how useful is peer review in the social "sciences" where one's peers are pretty damned likely to hold similar viewpoints and where science itself is a pretty weak force?

Coupled with this peer review is poorly rewarded, and frequently reviewers are not given full access to the relevant data and methods.