New study of conservative students at liberal schools

[interesteddad]

<p>Really interesting new study presented last week:</p>

<p>[News:</a> Politics or Civility? - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/08/18/conservative]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/08/18/conservative)</p>

<p>Researchers interviewed politically conservative students at two notoriously liberal schools, a “western public” and an “eastern elite” liberal arts college:</p>

<p>

They did in-depth interviews with conservative students at two colleges that they named only in general terms – “Eastern elite,” a small private institution, and “Western public,” a large university. Both are institutions that have been identified by conservative critics as being particularly left-leaning. At both institutions, they sought out as interview subjects the students who are members of conservative groups or who are visibly conservative, and also “in the closet” conservatives – by asking the conservative student leaders for the names of those who had indicated their agreement but who were not involved in public campus discourse.

</p>

<p>They found very different opinions with conservative students happy at the small eastern elite:</p>

<p>

The conservative students at Eastern elite were under no illusions that they were anything but an extreme minority – and the institution’s reputation is such that some were discouraged by friends back home from even enrolling. But almost uniformly, they were happy. They identified their professors as being liberal, but admired them nonetheless. </p>

<p>In fact, as Wood noted here, “they viewed the experience of being in the minority as a positive one” in teaching them to examine and defend their beliefs, and “almost every single one said that they received a better education” by being in the extreme minority, a finding “in contrast to the conservative critique.” Further, she said, “not a single one of them said that they regretted not going to a more conservative school.”</p>

<p>The students at Eastern elite were clearly aware of the conservative critique and many times answered questions about possible bias by saying that they had heard about that elsewhere but had never experienced it themselves.

</p>

<p>Not so much at the large western public:</p>

<p>

In contrast, she said, at Western public, with larger classes and much less faculty-student interaction on an individual basis, students were more likely to say that they were the victims of bias – but also that they didn’t really know the faculty members. And at Western, students talked about “trying to get in fights” with professors in class, of “trying to catch their professors in the act of liberal indoctrination.”</p>

<p>Another difference Wood noted relates to the role of faculty members on both campuses who were in the conservative minority. In the close-knit environment of Eastern elite, these faculty members were visible on campus, taking part in the debates, organizing lectures and so forth. At Western public, she said, there was a similar cohort of right-leaning faculty members, but they were far less active.

</p>

<p>The whole article is a fascinating read.</p>

[arbiter213]

<p>Soooo… Berkeley and… Wesleyan?</p>

[BillyMc]

<p>So, when people know each other better, differences don’t seem as negative. However, when their interaction is impersonal, it is defined by the groups they are in.</p>

<p>Seems to be a good conclusion.</p>

<p>I have many friends who are conservative, and I get along much better with them than some liberal students. I wouldn’t describe myself as “liberal”, because I don’t agree with the entirety of that movement, but I am a Socialist. That said, I would look favorably upon someone for being for social justice, and unfavorably for being against it. I can see my biases towards those I do not know. Yet the conservatives I am friends with do seem to care about people, just in different ways.</p>

<p>I think this is a message that once you get to know people, they’re not as bad as your group-associations might suggest.</p>

[garland]

<p>Cool–it’s so good to hear the usual stereotypes exploded. Wouldn’t be surprised by the Eastern school being Wes, or perhaps your D’s alma mater, Idad.</p>

[interesteddad]

<p>Gotta be Berkeley and Swarthmore, two whipping boys of the right’s diatribes against “lefty” colleges.</p>

<p>They even have quotes from the peer reviewer of the paper, Sarah Willie-Breton in the Sociology Department at Swarthmore.</p>

<p>Amherst would be an outside possibility, although it’s not quite as “iconically” leftist as Swarthmore in the right wing literature.</p>

[BillyMc]

<p>interesteddad, did the article say the Eastern school was a liberal arts college, or did you infer that? Because otherwise, I’d say certain Ivy League schools would also be possible, because of liberal reputations.</p>

<p>I don’t know what to make of a Swarthmore sociologist being a peer reviewer. Maybe they would want her because it’s her school? Or maybe they wouldn’t want a bias from someone from that school?</p>

[interesteddad]

<p>The article does not explicitly say other than the description of a “small Eastern elite”, but they it pretty clear they are talking about a small liberal arts college:</p>

<p>

They were many of the same qualities that elite liberal arts college advocates talk about. “They were proud of their institution. They saw their peers — liberals and conservatives — as future leaders of the country,” and that made the conservatives want to be part of the community and part of the conversation.</p>

<p>They also felt that they had very close relationships with faculty members with whom they disagreed on politics. “They viewed their faculty members as professionals, as experts in their fields, as people who would never be biased” based on a student’s politics, Wood said.

</p>

<p>

Much of this related to “very small class size” and to a sense that all students and faculty members were part of a common community, and wanted to disagree with one another respectfully. As a result, Wood said, while the conservative students generally said that they didn’t hold back their views, they didn’t describe going to class looking for a fight — and they talked about wanting to disagree with professors in respectful ways, since they felt treated with respect.

</p>

[BillyMc]

<p>Ah, okay. Yes, that does seem to point in the direction of a liberal arts college. But more important than what colleges this study was conducted at is the message we can take from it. I think it’s a good one. Though I do feel sorry for the conservative students at the large Western university, who are on the lookout for bias or indoctrination. Whether that belief is founded in reality or not, that’s not a good learning environment.</p>

[interesteddad]

<p>There are also hints in student comments that point to Swarthmore’s most notoriously agenda-driven professor and courses to be avoided for conservative students. It is well known that students of this particular professor should always work a gender/feminist angle into their papers. It’s a bit of a running joke.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Gotta be Berkeley and Swarthmore, two whipping boys of the right’s diatribes against “lefty” colleges.</p>

<p>They even have quotes from the peer reviewer of the paper, Sarah Willie-Breton in the Sociology Department at Swarthmore.

</p>

<p>I-dad, I believe that the participation of Willie-Breton does point AWAY from Swarthmore. I’d put my money on … Vassar. Researchers like to haunt grounds they know well.</p>