In a recent article in the New York Times, Patricia Cohen discusses the overwhelming tendency toward liberalism among university professors, citing a study undertaken by sociologists at the University of British Columbia.

The findings of that study suggest that self-selection is a crucial factor in explaining why our nation's campuses are dominated by liberals. Should we be surprised that students,who receive their undergraduate education from a predominantly liberal faculty and who become liberals themselves, are more likely to pursue advanced degrees in an environment supportive of their ideology? By contrast, conservative or libertarian students may decide not to go to graduate school thinking that they will find only little faculty support or outright hostility toward their philosophical views.

Another point made in the study is that liberal students will self-select into academic fields that define themselves by or primarily address liberal concerns. For instance, "sociology has increasingly defined itself as the study of race, class, and gender inequality—a set of concerns especially important to liberals—and this means that sociology will consistently recruit from a more liberal applicant pool than fields like mechanical engineering, and prove a more chilly home for those conservatives who manage to push through into graduate school or the academic ranks" (p. 52).

What is most disconcerting is the tendency of elite institutions to hire professors not only on the basis of scholarly productivity, but also on the basis of whether they will be regarded as "embody[ing] the qualities and virtues definitive of the academic role. To the extent that that role has been socially defined as tied to liberal politics, elite institutions—simply in offering positions to scholars who are seen as exemplary—will end up with a more liberal professorial workforce" (p. 53).

The predominantly liberal professoriate has led to ideological homogeny within academia; those who do not sing the same tune as the establishment are turned away at its doors, marginalized or ostracized. And, since liberals believe that everyone should have access to education regardless of ability to pay and that such broad access could only be supplied by the government, they have effectively shielded education from the competitive forces of the free market.

The question is: Would the liberal dominance in academia survive if higher education was subjected to the free market test? Or would it end up like Saturn or Saab? Better yet, would the current model of education even survive?

Given the myriad of ways in which universities and colleges are dependent on the government—through tax breaks, federal student loans, research grants—Americans may not be at liberty to find out.

Still, let’s do our best to challenge the academic "establishment." Surely, liberals can appreciate that, right? Ruffle some liberal feathers with our Library and Take Action resources, and fight for true intellectual diversity and true freedom of thought in higher education—and everywhere else.