Defining Political Correctness and Its Non-Impact

[Jenn! 918]

A major new study of the political correctness of faculty members may challenge assumptions all around. For those who deny that there is an identifiable group of PC professors, the study says that there is in fact a group with consistently common perspectives, largely based on their views of discrimination (that it exists and matters).

But for those who say that these tenured radicals have all the power in academe, the study finds that politically correct professors' views on the role of politics in hiring decisions aren't very different from the views of other professors. Further, the study finds that a critical mass of politically incorrect professors is doing quite well in securing jobs at the most prestigious universities in the United States, despite claims that such scholars are an endangered species there.

The study is based on data collected for a report released last year, "The Social and Political Views of American Professors," which found that faculty members are more liberal than the public at large, but appear to be moderating compared to previous generations. That study - which was praised by many experts from varying perspectives for the breadth of its scope and depth of its data - asked professors many questions on social issues, but did not attempt to identify a politically correct cohort within academe.

The new study, which does so, was produced by Solon Simmons, co-author of last year's report and an assistant professor of conflict analysis and resolution at George Mason. The study appears in The Forum, an online journal that has published numerous key studies on the issue of professors' politics, including some that have been used to suggest that significant bias is present in the academy - a point of view the new study does not share.

The first thing that Simmons does in the study with the database - which covers a range of disciplines and institution types - is to identify a politically correct cohort, reflecting largely common views on a set of issues that are seen as defining political correctness. He finds a set of issues that produce this cohort.

The views are the belief that gender gaps in math and science fields are largely due to discrimination; support for affirmative action; and belief that discrimination is a key cause of racial inequities in American society. Generally, members of this cohort see race and gender as fundamental - and share that belief much more than beliefs about the curriculum or scholarship, such that the study says that "multiculturalism trumps postmodernism."

In an interview, Simmons acknowledged that many people use "politically correct" to imply more than just shared political beliefs, but also an intolerance of other views. He said that his definition did not attempt to group people together beyond their shared political beliefs.

Then Simmons analyzes disciplines, and finds sharp differences - largely consistent with previous studies about disciplines and political leanings. Humanities and social science fields tend to have higher politically correct rankings, while professional and science disciplines do not. The table that follows is in order of political correctness. Psychology is the only field where a majority of professors are politically correct. Four fields - finance, management information, mechanical engineering and electrical engineering - had no one who was politically correct.

The study then examines the breakdowns by college type. Again, consistent with findings that community college faculty members are less liberal than others, they are also less likely to be politically correct. The finding is important because one reason this database of faculty attitudes has been praised is that it includes community colleges - which have been left out of many other such studies despite their role in educating millions of students.

Notably, in community colleges and four-year colleges generally, the politically incorrect significantly outnumber the politically correct. (The "top 50 category" refers to the rankings of U.S. News & World Report.)

After having shown that, while there are politically correct professors, there are many who are not, Simmons turns to data to examine what happens to those who are politically incorrect. Here he looks for "stars," those who publish much more than others or who in other ways demonstrate levels of excellence beyond the norm. Here he finds considerable success by the politically incorrect. Of those at top 50 institutions, 73.3 percent are stars.

He reports that of politically incorrect stars, across institution types, 27.8 percent end up at top 50 institutions, while the other 72.2 percent do not. Of politically correct stars, 91.2 percent end up outside the top 50, suggesting that politically incorrect stars are more likely than their PC counterparts to end up at top institutions. While Simmons said that there are multiple ways to interpret these findings, they suggest at a minimum that some significant number of politically incorrect professors rise to the institutions of greatest prestige.

One of the big questions for the paper is whether political correctness - as defined in this study - matters. The charge made by conservative critics is that politically correct professors use classrooms to indoctrinate and try to prevent the hiring of conservatives. While not finding those trends, this study does find that the politically correct are less likely than other professors to keep their political views to themselves and more likely to be guided by their beliefs in suggesting research topics.

But on these questions, the politically correct are not monolithic, nor are those who are politically incorrect. For example, asked whether professors dealing with controversial topics should keep their views to themselves, 14.6 percent of the politically correct and 26.0 percent of the politically incorrect strongly agree, while 48.8 percent of the politically correct and 27.7 percent of the politically incorrect disagree.

When it comes to hiring and definitions of diversity, there is a strong belief - across levels of political correctness - that political tests should not be used. And while support isn't quite as strong, there is also broad support across political correctness levels for the idea that the goal of campus diversity should include "fostering the diversity of political views among faculty members."

Here are the data:

Taken together, these findings suggest that politically correct professors are not "illiberal" in their tolerance for others, or that they desire to have everyone agree with them, Simmons said. That is significant, he added, because that is among the reasons cited for concern by those who argue that the liberal tendencies of professors pose some inherent danger to academe.

The Forum also is publishing a short response to the paper by Robert Maranto, a political scientist at Villanova University, who is co-editor of the forthcoming volume The Politically Correct University. Maranto writes that the Simmons study is "intelligent and provocative," but that it plays down the impact of political correctness.

He notes that politically correct professors are more likely than others to be guided by their beliefs in selecting research topics, and says this explains why - he believes - sociologists have ignored certain successes in crime prevention and education professors have not studied certain kinds of school reforms. "The real impacts of the PC university are on knowledge generation," he writes.

- Scott Jaschik

Source

Edited August 16, 2008 by Jenn!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

But for those who say that these tenured radicals have all the power in academe, the study finds that politically correct professors' views on the role of politics in hiring decisions aren't very different from the views of other professors.

So - when it comes to hiring, either the 'other professors' (non-PC) are more PC than they're willing to admit or the PC professors aren't actually very PC at all?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm not sure I follow what they mean by a professor who is more politically correct....does it mean a professor who is more sensitive to words or phrases used in his lectures that are discriminating towards one group or another?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I'm not sure I follow what they mean by a professor who is more politically correct....does it mean a professor who is more sensitive to words or phrases used in his lectures that are discriminating towards one group or another?

From the article:

The first thing that Simmons does in the study with the database - which covers a range of disciplines and institution types - is to identify a politically correct cohort, reflecting largely common views on a set of issues that are seen as defining political correctness. He finds a set of issues that produce this cohort.

The views are the belief that gender gaps in math and science fields are largely due to discrimination; support for affirmative action; and belief that discrimination is a key cause of racial inequities in American society. Generally, members of this cohort see race and gender as fundamental - and share that belief much more than beliefs about the curriculum or scholarship, such that the study says that "multiculturalism trumps postmodernism."

In an interview, Simmons acknowledged that many people use "politically correct" to imply more than just shared political beliefs, but also an intolerance of other views. He said that his definition did not attempt to group people together beyond their shared political beliefs.

[Jenn! 918]

I'm not sure I follow what they mean by a professor who is more politically correct....does it mean a professor who is more sensitive to words or phrases used in his lectures that are discriminating towards one group or another?

The first thing that Simmons does in the study with the database - which covers a range of disciplines and institution types - is to identify a politically correct cohort, reflecting largely common views on a set of issues that are seen as defining political correctness. He finds a set of issues that produce this cohort.

The views are the belief that gender gaps in math and science fields are largely due to discrimination; support for affirmative action; and belief that discrimination is a key cause of racial inequities in American society. Generally, members of this cohort see race and gender as fundamental - and share that belief much more than beliefs about the curriculum or scholarship, such that the study says that "multiculturalism trumps postmodernism."

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There seems to be a pattern among the Right leaning, that they are victims of discrimination and intolerance from liberal views and policies, which ironically, could be seen as adhering to political correctness. For all the talk about personal responsibility and not blaming others for being excluded, they sure don't live up to that rhetoric when complaining about liberal views and policies.

[nowhereman 1]

There seems to be a pattern among the Right leaning, that they are victims of discrimination and intolerance from liberal views and policies, which ironically, could be seen as adhering to political correctness. For all the talk about personal responsibility and not blaming others for being excluded, they sure don't live up to that rhetoric when complaining about liberal views and policies.

That's an excellent point. I would also argue that the term "political correctness" has been used & abused so much that it has lost meaning. There are certain inequities in life and that's a reality, but at the same time you should take responsibility for your actions. If you are born into a really poor family, live in a crime-ridden neighborhood, etc. you were dealt a pretty crappy hand in life, but that's doesn't give you the right to resort to crime (lets say drug dealing) to survive.

In this situation the person could for example enlist in the Army, get the college fund & go to college after his/her enlistment is up. After serving just 2-3 years in the military they would have wiped out the crappy hand they were dealt, have money for college & go on to get a degree and a good job. This is just an example so please don't get wrapped around the fact that I used the military as an example. My point is a person can overcome adversity if they were willing to work at it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There seems to be a pattern among the Right leaning, that they are victims of discrimination and intolerance from liberal views and policies, which ironically, could be seen as adhering to political correctness. For all the talk about personal responsibility and not blaming others for being excluded, they sure don't live up to that rhetoric when complaining about liberal views and policies.

That's an excellent point. I would also argue that the term "political correctness" has been used & abused so much that it has lost meaning. There are certain inequities in life and that's a reality, but at the same time you should take responsibility for your actions. If you are born into a really poor family, live in a crime-ridden neighborhood, etc. you were dealt a pretty crappy hand in life, but that's doesn't give you the right to resort to crime (lets say drug dealing) to survive.

In this situation the person could for example enlist in the Army, get the college fund & go to college after his/her enlistment is up. After serving just 2-3 years in the military they would have wiped out the crappy hand they were dealt, have money for college & go on to get a degree and a good job. This is just an example so please don't get wrapped around the fact that I used the military as an example. My point is a person can overcome adversity if they were willing to work at it.

Well I was thinking more along the lines of....some who lean to the right politically believe that discrimination exists in college classrooms where, according to them, there is a disproportionately large number of professors who lean to the left politically. They are so adamant about it, that they wish to invoke some kind quota, which is ironic to say the least. It's also absurd because for one, it isn't discrimination unless a student can specifically bring forward a claim that their liberal professor grades that student differently. Even then, it's presumptuous that political viewpoints can be so neatly divided into left and right and that a person follows those viewpoints religiously as if opposing views and contradicting ideas should not exist in a college classroom...which is absurd.

[IAMX 3,055]

I've certainly seen throughout my college years professors being or teaching PC -- one of which was a overly zealous environmentalist English professor I switched away from on the first day. The teaching of political correctness is fine and all for public workers who need to cater to everyone, but trying to suggest we should all be politically correct or enforcing PC standards in our private lives as an ethical code is ridiculous. Political correctness is akin to language control, as you have to be overly conscious of every little thing you say, and I just don't care to be that way. I tell it how it is, and if people don't like it, too bad.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

There seems to be a pattern among the Right leaning, that they are victims of discrimination and intolerance from liberal views and policies, which ironically, could be seen as adhering to political correctness. For all the talk about personal responsibility and not blaming others for being excluded, they sure don't live up to that rhetoric when complaining about liberal views and policies.

Who's supports the Fairness Doctrine? I believe there is a liberal bias in most media but don't want to do anything legislatively about it. People just need to be aware. But the left loves to attack Fox news.

* John Gizzi, the Political Editor of Human Events, wrote that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters that the Democratic caucus was interested in bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.[12]

* Senator Richard Durbin has said "It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine.”[13]

* Senator John Kerry has said, "Well, I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there..."[14]