Florida: annual surveys of political views of faculty, staff, and students

[arcturus]

According to https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article252283988.html there is a new law in Florida that will require annual surveys of the political viewpoints of faculty, staff, and students at public universities and colleges.

The survey will discern "the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented" in public universities and colleges, and seeks to find whether students, faculty and staff "feel free to express beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom."

The measure, which goes into effect July 1, does not specify what will be done with the survey results. But DeSantis and Sen. Ray Rodrigues, the sponsor of the bill, suggested on Tuesday that budget cuts could be looming if universities and colleges are found to be "indoctrinating" students.

In addition to the survey, the measure DeSantis signed into law will bar university and college officials from limiting speech that "may be uncomfortable, disagreeable or offensive," and will allow students to record lectures without consent for educational purposes or to support a civil or criminal case against a higher-education institution.

While the surveys are not yet written, it is also not clear what criteria will be used to infer whether or not universities are "indoctinating" students. In my view, both the political-views survey and the legal right to record lectures without consent seem like they could result in a major infringement on free speech - the opposite of what the proponents of the law claim to be its purpose.

[Hibush]

In responding to the "survey", I hope Florida student and faculty avail themselves of Chegg in finding the correct answer.

[jimbogumbo]

I would just lie. Pretty sure I know what DeSantis and the legislators want to hear.

[Parasaurolophus]

This isn't anything at all like the McCarthy era, oh no. Free speech!

(If it were me, I wouldn't change a thing. But I would find myself a great constitutional lawyer, because I'd be preparing to sue the state for billions in a collective action suit for violating my first amendment rights. Or at least, I'd like to think that's what I'd do. I'm pretty sure they'd decide I was indoctrinating students, even though I take pains to show them several sides of an argument. It's not my fault some sides are pitifully weak!)

[Volhiker78]

Just another idiotic thing coming out of our state government in Florida.  As a faculty member in a public university, I could care less about myself although I would be happy if someone sues the state government and wins over this.  This state can't  build a competent online unemployment website.  Problems with their Covid reporting are well documented.  By the time they figure out what the survey will ask,  where the data will go,  and who will have access to it,  I'll be dead and gone.  You can't ask for a better rep of 'Florida man' than Ron DeSantis.   

[marshwiggle]

According to https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article252283988.html there is a new law in Florida that will require annual surveys of the political viewpoints of faculty, staff, and students at public universities and colleges.

The survey will discern "the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented" in public universities and colleges, and seeks to find whether students, faculty and staff "feel free to express beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom."

The survey, in itself, could be useful. My suggestion would be to make the *width of the distribution for every institution public. Perhaps even two values; one for faculty and one for students. The point is, if people are actually interested in diversity of thought, then the centre of the distribution for an institution is less important than the width.

Then people can vote with their feet and wallets.

*Or even better, the width and shape of the distribution; if it's not bell-curved, that also tells you something.

[apl68]

According to https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article252283988.html there is a new law in Florida that will require annual surveys of the political viewpoints of faculty, staff, and students at public universities and colleges.

The survey will discern "the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented" in public universities and colleges, and seeks to find whether students, faculty and staff "feel free to express beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom."

The survey, in itself, could be useful. My suggestion would be to make the *width of the distribution for every institution public. Perhaps even two values; one for faculty and one for students. The point is, if people are actually interested in diversity of thought, then the centre of the distribution for an institution is less important than the width.

Then people can vote with their feet and wallets.

*Or even better, the width and shape of the distribution; if it's not bell-curved, that also tells you something.

A survey of political beliefs of college profs could be useful and interesting, all right.  A survey of political beliefs of college profs who are state employees, mandated by state law, at a time of intensely partisan politics, is problematic for reasons that really ought to be more than a little obvious.

[marshwiggle]

According to https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article252283988.html there is a new law in Florida that will require annual surveys of the political viewpoints of faculty, staff, and students at public universities and colleges.

The survey will discern "the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented" in public universities and colleges, and seeks to find whether students, faculty and staff "feel free to express beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom."

The survey, in itself, could be useful. My suggestion would be to make the *width of the distribution for every institution public. Perhaps even two values; one for faculty and one for students. The point is, if people are actually interested in diversity of thought, then the centre of the distribution for an institution is less important than the width.

Then people can vote with their feet and wallets.

*Or even better, the width and shape of the distribution; if it's not bell-curved, that also tells you something.

A survey of political beliefs of college profs could be useful and interesting, all right.  A survey of political beliefs of college profs who are state employees, mandated by state law, at a time of intensely partisan politics, is problematic for reasons that really ought to be more than a little obvious.

If the results are identified, of course. But just showing the distribution makes it easy for people to pick the kind of place they want. (And some people will actually see a narrow distribution at one end or the other as a *feature, not a bug, so there won't be a shape that everyone prefers.) In some ways it would be a win-win for the government; they get to identify the ideological bent of institutions, but without actually interfering in the administration of any of them. If there are trends in what voters want, then it will become apparent over time as students choose where to go.

*For instance, I would imagine the very people worried about indoctrination from the left would not be concerned to see military academies having a distribution which was narrow, and to the right. Which would identify how much of the populace actually wants true diversity, not merely "less of THEM".

[mahagonny]

While the surveys are not yet written, it is also not clear what criteria will be used to infer whether or not universities are "indoctinating" students.

If you have nine professors who favor the liberal view of things (though they may believe they are concealing their personal view) and only one professor who favors the conservative view of things (though he thinks he conceals his bias) no one is being indoctrinated intentionally, but the effect may be pretty close to as if they were.
Academia is skewed far to the left by the numbers, knows that it is, intends to be, and doesn't care what the people paying their salaries think. I'm surprised they haven't had more trouble over it so far.

Just another idiotic thing coming out of our state government in Florida.  As a faculty member in a public university, I could care less about myself although I would be happy if someone sues the state government and wins over this.  This state can't  build a competent online unemployment website.  Problems with their Covid reporting are well documented.  By the time they figure out what the survey will ask,  where the data will go,  and who will have access to it,  I'll be dead and gone.  You can't ask for a better rep of 'Florida man' than Ron DeSantis.   

OTOH, DeSantis was elected by popular vote, and you weren't. So whether or not the whole thing seems idiotic to you: who cares?

[Hegemony]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

[marshwiggle]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

As I indicated above, if the surveys are anonymous, this isn't an issue. It's not about what individual faculty believe that matters; it's whether they basically all believe essentially the same thing, whatever that is.

And if the surveys were anonymous, and there was some campaign for people to lie on the surveys to imply there was more diversity than actually exists, I'd have zero interest of working there or sending my kid there, regardless of what people actually believe. That kind of intellectual dishonesty undermines the idea of an educational institution even more than a groupthink bubble does. It's essentially a cult at that point.

[mamselle]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

I've been saying that since the 1990s.

M.

[mahagonny]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

Not if they were identified with me. But I already have to stifle my moderate or conservative (whatever they should be called) views on campus in order to keep working without unmanageable stress and possibly other negative consequences (like becoming unpopular with colleagues with whom I also work as a freelancer) so the pressure for conformity is currently coming from the academic culture, Biden and Harris and their party. And has always been that way in my long career, but is recently at a fever pitch. I didn't use to mind the pressure but I was a liberal at the time. I was cured of being a liberal by spending all of my time with them.

[marshwiggle]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

I've been saying that since the 1990s.

M.

My experience in all kinds of contexts, politics, church, etc. is that many people say they want "diversity" of opinions when they think they are in the minority; when they're in the majority, they don't. (This from both sides of whatever spectrum of opinion.)
So as I said, the width and shape of the distribution matters more than exactly where the centre is; ideological uniformity form anywhere on the spectrum is unhealthy, aka, a cult.

[mahagonny]

I dunno, mahoganny, do you want to report your political views to a government body every year? Would you want to even if the party in government were the Democrats? I would think that the GOP, whose platform particularly emphasizes smaller government, wouldn't want the government to have even more information on individual citizens. Sometimes I think that Republicans don't really believe in their platform, but just want to do everything they can to stay in power.

I've been saying that since the 1990s.

M.

My experience in all kinds of contexts, politics, church, etc. is that many people say they want "diversity" of opinions when they think they are in the minority; when they're in the majority, they don't. (This from both sides of whatever spectrum of opinion.)
So as I said, the width and shape of the distribution matters more than exactly where the centre is; ideological uniformity form anywhere on the spectrum is unhealthy, aka, a cult.

Diversity, including respecting the right to be mentally off the rails, is fine with me. If someone wants to believe Donald Trump burns crosses on his neighbor's lawns I just avoid him or say 'hi, nice weather, isn't it?' What has been overrated is not diversity, but communication. Not communicating everything you care about is the wise choice, often. Because many of us want to fight. Whatever happened to just leaving each other alone from time to time.

ETA: I would especially not want to report my views to a government this is controlled by democrats today, as they are doing business with cultists.