Faculty Diversity
Instapundit links to the Christian Science Monitor’s editorial on ideological faculty diversity. First, let’s stipulate diversity of all kinds is generally better. Second, let’s not the irony of all the whining about the prof in Florida who is supportive of radical Palestinians. In that case, ideological diversity doesn’t stretch very far. Go figure.
Third, let’s examine a key problem with the study done by Frank Luntz. He cites an overwhelming number of professors in the humanities and social sciences who are liberal. The good Dr. Luntz should know, as a political science PhD, that one needs a control. What are the percentages of natural science profs who are registered Democrats and hold similar views to their counterparts in the other areas?
Obviously, chemistry isn’t taught with a political point. Bush is doing his best with the biosciences though. The important point is that PhDs have long been more likely to vote Democratic and with reallignment that should continue to increase.
Natural science professors provide a good control group. They certainly aren’t hired for their political views (though Stanley Fish pointed out that no one really is) and how much they differ from their colleagues controls for the effect of education on partisan ID and ideology.
Why didn’t the good Dr. Luntz include such a control since he obviously has training in the social sciences? It wouldn’t have fit neatly in the story he wanted to tell.
As stipulated above, ideological diversity is a good thing. Not that many conservatives want to go into academia. Ideology affects the decision to make academia a career choice and certainly the context of the environment reinforces that effect. There isn’t anything dark happening here, it is simply a problem of self-selection. If the Good Dr. Luntz doesn’t like it, then perhaps he should think about how to encourage conservatives to pursue academic careers.