Norton 1

Erin Norton
English 250 SD
Ms. Futhey
Assignment #4 Edited
Qualifying Indoctrination
A conservative think tank called Students for Academic Freedom created an interesting
document entitled The Academic Bill of Rights. This document, although undoubtedly created
with good intentions, has instilled anger in many who think it actually restricts freedom for both
students and professors in an interesting attempt to promote freedom, as the organizations title
suggests. The provisions attempt to guarantee students exposure to a plurality of ideas by
limiting the supposed bias in professors. To do so, it incorporates eight controversial principles,
including the hiring and firing of professors in order to promote ideological variety. This
document, which has been proposed in a dozen or so state legislatures yet passed in none, has
been criticized by conservatives and liberals alike the limits it places on speech are
unconstitutional and, in some aspects, counterintuitive. However, this proposal is meant to
combat what many think is a propagandizing experience: attending university.
There is a growing concern about the indoctrination of university students due to the
ideology of professors. A majority of professors identify as liberal or liberal-leaning according to
many survey data. The age cohort to which these students generally belong is to the left;
however, as time spent in university increases, the extent to which students mirror the political
ideology of their professors also increases. It is important to note, nevertheless, the subtleties
involved in this indoctrination process. Although this phenomenon occurs throughout many
different countries and various disciplines, there are other variables that come into play.
Professors do not attempt to pursue a political agenda; rather, simple exposure to professors and

Norton 2

education influence ideology. Overall, the indoctrination process exists yet is not too much a
concern as the effects, although statistically significant, are small those academic freedom
advocates should look at the data to discover all the nuances involved indoctrination.
To begin, it is important to examine the strongest predictions of a citizens ideology.
Statistically, ideology is most easily analyzed through partisanship, which in the United States
generally means a choice between a Democrat and a Republican candidate. Family and
socioeconomic status determine vote choice and partisanship more than any other variable.
However, people undergo socialization through early education and civics classes, which
promote satisfaction in the system of government and the democratic process itself. By the time
an individual begins his or her college education, most viewpoints are set in stone people
generally remain loyal to whatever party their parents belonged to (Dalton and Weldon, 184).
Throughout life, communities such as universities influence individuals in smaller levels.
Higher education is a part of a process that occurs throughout ones lifetime. Socialization
begets change as a person becomes exposed to new ideas whether though education, occupation,
or change of location. Education does undoubtedly, however, contribute to the likelihood that an
individual will vote. Furthermore, those who are more educated tend to have a greater amount of
political efficacy and are more informed. This means that the educated individuals influence and
are represented by government more (Dudley, 178-179).
Liberal students may choose to major in philosophy or another more liberal area because
it suits their preexisting ideas. The reinforcement of ideology causes a move further to the left
due to liberal exposure. The self-selection theory suggests that people are already somewhat
socialized and this influences the pick of major. For example, those who go into the private
sectors of business and sports, tend to be more conservative from the start of university. This

Norton 3

process is summed up nicely in one study that suggests "the choice of a particular subject implies
the formation of views about the nature of the world and further study continues to shape them"
(Halsey & Trow, 29). A students viewpoints are already formed yet become fuller throughout
education. It makes sense when examining data that show conservative-leaning individuals
become slightly more extreme in their education.
A study by Mariani and Hewitt Indoctrination U? also attempts to discredit the
indoctrination process by controlling for various variables such as gender and socioeconomic
status to prove the statistical significance does not actually exist. In fact, it summarizes the study
simply: the findings presented here suggest that faculty political orientation at the institutional
level does not significantly influence student political orientation (Mariani & Hewitt, 779).
However, this article does not accurately depict the process due to a variety of errors. The
students involved were juniors in college at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and this would
have changed political views on a national scale (Mariani & Hewitt, 782). The period effect that
occurred at the time of 9/11 made the country as a whole look differently at military use and
heightened government involvement to root out terrorism in the US, which undoubtedly led to a
greater degree of conservatism. This event could possibly nullify all the results in the study
because it is something that cannot be statistically controlled for.
The study also only looked at small, private, liberal arts colleges and therefore did not
include enough institutions to make it accurate. The fact that the schools were often religious
institutions further skews the data because the attendees were not reflections of the religious
divisions in the country as a whole. To some extent, students choose institutions that reinforce
certain ideologies, which would bias the research. More expensive schools are chosen by
students that are born into more conservative, wealthy backgrounds (Mariani & Hewitt, 782). In

Norton 4

order to more accurately identify whether this process is due entirely to self-selection or actually
is due to liberal professors, a larger study is needed.
Cardiff and Klein analyzed schools in California and claimed that no previous survey or
voter-registration study is nearly as broad as our coverage here (Cardiff and Klein, 242). In
California, the proportion of tenure-track faculty that identified as Democrats was 46% with only
9% identifying as Republicans. At Berkeley and Stanford, the amount of Democrats per
Republican was 8.7 and 6.7, respectively. There is certainly a regional effect California is quite
liberal and certain areas of California are more liberal than others. However, compared to less
prestigious schools, these top-tier institutions have significantly more Democrats on staff than
Republicans (Cardiff and Klein, 243). The more prestigious the school, the more liberal it tends
to lean.
There are inherent political leanings within departments that teach ideological concepts.
Some majors simply teach more politically than others due to the subjects included in the
curriculum. Political science, philosophy, and sociology all have a disproportionate amount of
liberal professors and teach liberal concepts. In the humanities area itself, 10:1 is the overall
ratio. On the other hand, it is important to point out that the subjects that are more apolitical are
still liberal. There is a 4.2:1 ratio in physics and a 13.1:1 ratio in neurosciences (Cardiff and
Klein, 253). Assuming that faculty ideology actually changes the way students are affiliated, the
liberalizing effects are much more widespread than the self-selection theory suggests.
Along with the department variations, all majors do not have the same political leanings.
This has to do with not only the students, but the professors as well. The ratio of left-leaning
professors to right-leaning professors depends on the area of study. Political science professors
are 6.2:1 while business is overall more conservative at 0.8:1, according to a study on

Norton 5

indoctrination. Furthermore, 27% of students, upon leaving college, moved left while only 16%
moved right (Cardiff & Klein, 247). This could be because the professors have similar political
leanings. The students become more like the individuals who teach them. It is important to note,
however, that these professors received the same education as the students and went through the
same process. Therefore, the fear that professors are promoting a particular political agenda is
somewhat absurd. It could possibly be about the education and exposure to more ideas that
causes a change in political views. Since the students become more like professors, it could be
because they have all gone through the same life experience that is a university education.
Simple education seems to do more than meets the eye. This is seen in universities
worldwide. According to an international study by Brianne Hastie at the University of South
Australia, liberalization outside the US generally is characterized by increase[d] tolerance for
minority social groups and attitudes, low authoritarianism and dogmatism and more, including
economic positions. The solution for poverty changes from being individual philanthropy to
systemic, governmental involvement Hastie, 261-262). This definition fits in well with the
studies conducted, although a problem with the comparison between American universities and
those abroad is the differing definition of liberalization. However it is defined, students move
to the left in at least one of these areas. There are two possible explanations: informational and
normative influences. Simply acquiring more information and learning different views people
have of the world can liberalize. When exposed to fellow students and instructors, this effect is
amplified.
The fact that this is seen across countries suggests that the regional differences thought to
be seen in the California study are as negligible as those seen across the entire world. A study
done in Norway, for example, showed that the higher the education, the more tolerant, the less

Norton 6

authoritarian, the more leftist, the more modern and idealista person becomes (Jacobsen,
354). Although this study focuses only on one particular institution, it is interesting to examine
effects in a region that has a multiparty system. Going more in-depth instead of focusing on one
left wing party Democrat and one right wing Republican allows for an analysis of specific
viewpoints. The largest decrease in party support among these students was in the Progressive
Party, which has the highest degree of authoritarianism (Jacobsen, 365).
Clearly, it is impossible to go through all the intricacies of political party platforms and
the exact place on the political spectrum for each in a paper about simple indoctrination.
University changes students. It occurs in many countries yet does more than just change party
affiliation (many countries outside the US have low amounts of membership with parties.) There
are people who are fiscally conservative yet socially liberal. People are individuals and it is
unfair to place university students in one specific category. However, the nature of statistics and
students on voting behavior look at aggregates to find trends. The labels of liberal and
conservative mean something different in the United States than in other countries. Nonetheless,
by taking data from many locations, a trend can be seen that is most likely attributed to
education. This disproves any sort of agendas that professors as a whole are thought to have a
theory pursued by think tanks like Students for Academic Freedom. A move to the left is simply
a change in any one of the areas that is associated with liberal ideology.
In conclusion, other factors influence the socialization process more than education does.
It is important not to discredit the influence of family, peers, and early education. Significant
effects of attending university do include better feelings about government in general and an
increase in voter participation (Dudley, 351). In some ways, this change that occurs during
education can actually be beneficial to society as a whole. Education makes individuals feel

Norton 7

more confident that government is able to improve a country as a whole. It also allows people to
realize that they can actually change the way government is run. Those who attend university
will vote more, read more, and spend more time engaging in political activities.
So, even if the results are statistically small, it is clear that there is a small role that
college plays in the socialization of students. Whether or not teachers are actively trying to
indoctrinate students does not affect whether views change. Exposure and education lead to a
more informed individual. The mere fact that this skews students slightly to the left is
unimportant when looking at the fact that indoctrination is a small part of a process that is lifelong. The qualification is this: although students tend to leave university more liberal than
entered, the experience actually has a large degree pluralism which leads to a formation of
unique ideas. This makes the Academic Bill of Rights completely unnecessary. A small change
to the left is a small expense to an informed, efficacious public.

Norton 8

Annotated Bibliography
Cardiff, Christopher, and Daniel B. Klein. 2005. Faculty Partisan Affiliations in all Disciplines:
A Voter-Registration Study. Critical Review 17.
This study involved schools in California and specified that there are two important things to
analyze when considering indoctrination. Region and prestige lead to interesting variations in
the data. I found this extremely useful because it divided the data by specific department, major,
and school. This data would be useful for analyses outside simple indoctrination. Patterns can
be easily sought and found by numerous researches. This article is undoubtedly sighted in many
others.
Dalton, R. J., and S. Weldon. "Partisanship and Party System Institutionalization." Party Politics
13.2 (2007): 179-96.
This article is one that I selected after I went through and edited my essay because I wanted to
include something about how the effects of university education were not as powerful as the
parental socialization process that, when included with life-cycle processes, is known as the
Converse Model. Id learned about this throughout various classes and wanted to make sure that
I had a specific source that I could use for this assignment. This article also went more in-depth
which was quite useful in making my essay stronger.
Dudley, Robert L., and Alan R. Gitelson. "Political Literacy, Civic Education, and Civic
Engagement: A Return to Political Socialization?" Applied Developmental Science 6.4
(2002): 175-82.
Dudley and Gitelsons article goes through the history of the study of voting behavior and
political socialization while pointing to direct influences that can predict such behavior. I found it

Norton 9

useful in analyzing other factors that take away from the changes that occur in university. Most
views are formed before a student even begins higher education. However, it points out some
significant effects of attending university. A greater education in civics leads to better feelings
about government in general. These individuals are more likely to engage in the political realm
as well. This article is unique in that it examines several different methodologies in predicting
ideology. There are countless reasons why an individual has his or her political views. The
complexity of humans makes it far from simple to predict the ideology possessed. Dudley and
Gitelsons article would be useful for individuals trying to figure out the best resources to use
when deciding to analyze political ideology.
Halsey, A.H., & Trow, M.A. (1971). The British academics. Faber & Faber: London.
This book was cited under the Hastie article.
Hastie, Brianne. "Higher Education and Sociopolitical Orientation: The Role of Social Influence
in the Liberalisation of Students." European Journal of Psychology of Education Eur J
Psychol Educ 22.3 (2007): 259-74.
I found this article the best to examine normative and informational influences in the
indoctrination of university students. Normative refers to the fact that exposure to others with
certain political views will change how students think. However, it points out that simple
education will change views because people will discover a plurality of ideas. This article was
also useful in identifying a good working definition of liberalism. It would be useful for
individuals examining non-Western liberalizing processes. I think that it was accurate and
unbiased with few errors.

Norton 10

Jacobsen, Dag Ingvar. "Higher Education as an Arena for Political Socialisation: Myth or
Reality?" Scand Pol Studs Scandinavian Political Studies 24.4 (2001): 351-68.
I found Jacobsens article extremely useful in my argument because it gave an international
perspective on the whole issue of indoctrination of university students. Liberalization has a
negative connotation in the United States which I think is a little unfair. The way in which a
foreign institution described the process makes the argument less about propagandizing and more
about simple changes in viewpoints. This article examined Agder University College in Norway.
The different disciplines were analyzed which was useful in making sure that private and public
sector careers were separated. It found that those in the private sector such as economics were
less likely to become more liberal. There, overall, were only marginal differences. The article
was useful in its definition of liberalization and the way that it used non-Western countries.
Mariani, Mack D., and Gordon J. Hewitt. "Indoctrination U.? Faculty Ideology and Changes in
Student Political Orientation." PS: Political Science & Politics 41.04 (2008).
This article was condensed in the Everythings an Argument textbook so I decided to find all the
data by using the original article published in the Political Science & Politics journal. It overall
stated that the indoctrination of university students is often overstated and isnt actually
statistically significant. This article was useful for qualifying arguments because institutional
control makes a difference. However, the study included many individuals that started out with
higher levels of conservatism which was a bit disappointing and inaccurate when compared to
the population as a whole. The process used in this study would be useful to use for future
researchers who wish to examine the issue using different data