FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE:
Contact: Anne D. Neal, 202-467-6787
IN INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY
New Report Shows Only “Lip Service”
is Being Paid
ACTA Outlines a Working Solution
Washington, DC, (December 12, 2005) -- In spite of a statement by 30 higher education organizations recognizing the importance of intellectual diversity, a recent survey by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni shows that not a single institution has taken concrete steps to further that goal.
On June 23, 2005, the American Council on Education and 29 other institutions of higher education issued a “Statement on Academic Rights and Responsibilities” affirming support for “intellectual pluralism and academic freedom.” The statement responded to growing national concern, underlined by a number of studies, about the one-sided political and ideological tilt of many college and university campuses. The groups hoped to head off legislative intervention by pledging that the universities would fix the problem themselves.
In September 2005, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni sent a letter to all 30 signatories, heads of the major public universities in each state, as well as the presidents and chancellors of the top 25 National Universities and the top 25 Liberal Arts Colleges ranked by U.S. News & World Report, asking them to document statements made about the important ACE statement. ACTA also requested information about any steps taken to implement the principles of the ACE statement.
Not one of the more than 100 institutions who received
ACTA’s letter reported specific concrete steps to implement the principles. Instead, most respondents cited existing
policies as already satisfactory. The
most proactive was the
“It’s all talk and no action,” said ACTA president Anne Neal. “Higher education simply can’t have it both ways. Colleges and university presidents say they, alone, are able to correct the situation in the classroom, but then they refuse to do anything but offer lip service to the idea of intellectual diversity. If the academy were faced with just one study showing racism or sexism in the classroom, they would take immediate actions to address the problem. Here we see study after study pointing out a breathtaking lack of intellectual diversity on campus and nothing is done about it. The double standard is outrageous.”
In a report made available today entitled, Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action, ACTA outlines steps universities could take to encourage a mix of ideas on campus and to respond to the growing public concern about the lack of intellectual diversity. The report recommends adoption of the ACE Statement of Academic Rights and Responsibilities and urges administrators and faculty to undertake an institutional self-study on academic freedom and intellectual diversity.
“Education happens only when students are presented with a variety of perspectives and encouraged to think for themselves. Yet this report is the first serious effort to begin thinking about ways to achieve greater intellectual diversity that are consistent with academic freedom and other academic norms,” Neal said.
The report warns that if trustees fail to ensure a robust exchange of ideas in the classroom they will abdicate their fiduciary responsibility.
Numerous trustees of major universities welcomed ACTA’s report and recommendations.
“ACTA deserves great credit for highlighting the critical issues of intellectual diversity and pluralism in American colleges and universities, and for doing so in a way that scrupulously safeguards academic freedom,” said Benno Schmidt, chairman of the City University of New York Board of Trustees.
“I
applaud ACTA for tackling this tremendously important issue that goes to the
very heart of a modern liberal arts education,” said Todd Zywicki, trustee of
“It isn't fair to students to bring them to campus for four
years and expose them to only one point of view,” said Tom Lucero,
“In my state, young people and their parents sacrifice so
they can go to college,” said Drew Miller, regent of the
“Universities have been aware of the growing lack of intellectual diversity and, for the most part, looked the other way,” said former Harvard Corporation member Judith Richards Hope. “This report has the right idea—it is indeed the time for action.”
“Universities should not neglect the diversity most
important to education—the diversity of ideas,” said Velma Montoya, former
regent of the
Survey results and the report are being sent to college and university trustees, state legislators, and Members of the higher education committees of the U.S. Congress.
The American Council of Trustees and Alumni in a national nonprofit dedicated to academic freedom, academic standards and accountability in higher education. ACTA works with hundreds of college and university trustees and alumni across the country. For more information, contact Anne Neal at 202-467-6786 or go to www.goacta.org.
Highlights from
Intellectual
Diversity: Time for Action
A Report by the American Council of
Trustees and Alumni
– The most serious challenge for higher education
today is the lack of intellectual diversity. It is serious … because it lies at the heart
of what education is all about. [I]t
has been made much more serious because for decades higher education leaders
refused to acknowledge the problem. They
were simply in denial. … There still is little thoughtful discussion about
proper remedies. This publication seeks
to change that. …
– In simplest terms, intellectual diversity
means a multiplicity of ideas. In
the college setting, it is the foundation of a learning environment that exposes
students to a variety of political, ideological, and other perspectives.
As the American Council on Education, in a statement joined by 29 other
higher education organizations, has acknowledged: “Intellectual pluralism
and academic freedom are central principles of American higher education.”
If they are to be more than just empty
words, however, principles must lead to policies. The fact remains,
that in the world of higher education, diversity has come to mean a preference
for a diversity of backgrounds,
but not a diversity of views.
When it comes to social, political,
religious, and ideological matters, academe has shown a pronounced preference
for only one end of the spectrum.
– Faculty imbalance, combined with the idea
that the "politically correct" point of view has a right
to dominate classroom and campus discussions, has had fearful consequences
for university life.
– Many of our campuses have become, as one observer put it, islands of oppression
in a sea of freedom. There is no way
this kind of one-sided, coercive atmosphere can be conducive to a solid education.
Students are not empowered to think for themselves by being given only
one side of the story. The lack of
intellectual diversity is depriving an entire generation of the kind of education
they deserve.
– Based on social scientific evidence as well as discussions with professors,
administrators, trustees, and higher education experts, it is clear that:
(1) Today's college faculties are overwhelmingly
one-sided in their political and ideological views, especially in the value-laden
fields of the humanities and social sciences; and
(2) This lack of intellectual diversity is undermining
the education of students as well as the free exchange of ideas central to
the mission of the university; and
(3) It is urgent that universities effectively address
the challenge of intellectual diversity. Some ways of addressing it are explored below.
– A major obstacle to change has been a fear
that any effort to encourage intellectual diversity would violate one or
another academic norm. ACTA has
been sensitive to this concern and has discussed it with professors, administrators,
and trustees. Based on these discussions,
we have pulled together a set of concrete, practical ideas that provide a
starting point for discussion for universities looking for ways to address
the problem. Hopefully, discussion on each campus will
develop and refine these ideas and also explore other avenues for improving
intellectual diversity.
1. Conduct
a self-study to assess the current state of intellectual diversity on campus
and identify areas for improvement.
…
2. Incorporate
intellectual diversity into institutional statements and activities on diversity.
…
3. If
the university has a speech code, eliminate it. …
4. Encourage balanced panels and speaker series. …
5.
Establish clear campus policies which ensure hecklers or threats of violence
do not prevent speakers from speaking. …
6. Include
intellectual diversity concerns in university guidelines on teaching. …
7. Include
intellectual diversity issues in student course evaluations. …
8. Amend
hiring, tenure, and promotion guidelines. …
9. Amend
student grievance guidelines. …
10. Use
visiting professors to achieve greater diversity. …
11. Encourage
departments to diversify. …
12. Establish
new academic programs. …
13. Ensure
student press freedom. …
14. Prohibit
political bias in student-funded groups. …
15. When
hiring, seek a commitment to intellectual diversity. …
16.
Create a university ombudsman. …
… [T]hese suggestions should be sufficient
to demonstrate that intellectual diversity is not just something desirable
in theory. The means are there to encourage
it. Is there the will?
– Trustees may be told that any proactive steps
by the board would violate academic freedom. That is not the case. Academic freedom is essentially the right of
professors to pursue knowledge in their fields and to share the results of
that inquiry with their students and the public.
It is a right granted to professors in exchange for a sacred trust—that
they will use the freedom they are given over the classroom and over academic
policy, for valid educational ends, not to pursue their own pet causes or
personal politics. The board has not only a right, but a duty, to ensure that the faculty
lives up to these responsibilities, and to insist on remedial action when
it does not. It is a duty, in fact,
that has been affirmed strongly by the higher education community and raised
as the critical reason why legislative intervention is unnecessary. … Any
board that fails to guarantee the free exchange of ideas and the student’s
right to learn on its campus is simply not doing its job.
Where
should the board begin?
– First, it could endorse the American Council
on Education's statement on academic freedom and intellectual pluralism.
– Second, it could adopt the first of the
suggestions in the previous section and ask for an institutional self-study
of the condition of intellectual diversity on the campus, leaving it to the
faculty and administration to determine the details. It might say, for example:
“The board
endorses the American Council of Education statement on Academic Rights and
Responsibilities and directs the administration and faculty to conduct an
institutional self-study to determine how well the university is living up
to the principles of intellectual diversity enunciated therein.”
– Third, it
should set a reasonable timetable for such a study and review information
provided in the self-study. If the
self-study is a whitewash or omits critical issues, the board should ask for
a follow-up study. …
– The law is a blunt instrument and state legislatures
and the federal Congress are not well-positioned to prescribe specific remedies.
But state and federal legislators can provide a valuable service
by holding hearings to educate the public and making it clear to the universities
that they are expected to ensure the free exchange of ideas and classrooms
free of political abuse.