DeSantis signs bill requiring FL students, professors to register political views with state

[Metaphor]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

Nobody's speech is compelled. Nobody is forced to answer any questions. I fill out my annual employee survey every year and it would be insane to call my speech 'compelled'.

Are they Reich-wingers who imply you are probably a biased leftist and then pressure you to give personal political info? Do they threaten to not pay you if not enough of you and your biased leftist colleagues don't fill it out?

Do you think your rhetoric and your insinuations are conducive to constructive dialogue?

It could be, but your response utterly failed to address the relevant gaps in your survey analogy.

If you point out what you believe is faulty in my analogy, using language indicating you have the slightest interest in engaging in dialogue, I will address it.

 

[laughing dog]

I disputet, so your statement is false.

Only in lala land.

I did not handwave it.

That's the 2nd time you failed to actually come up evidence. Give the post number where you believe you did this or reproduce your "evidence" if you wish anyone to believe you.

I'm sure you have select people in your own circle who may think that and indeed wish it were true that 'liberal' was not associated with the left-right spectrum.

As usual, you have no clue of what you speak.

But it is. You are simply wrong.....

Whether you like it or not, there are those who classify themselves as "liberal" who are not left. It is that simple.
You are free to use your reactionary definitions to buttress your opinions. But no one is required to accept them.

I can't help but notice that none of your fellow leftists are trying to defend your minority reading of the word 'liberal', or disputing that in the HERI survey it is indeed an indicator of being part of the left.

Thereby proving you have no clue what a leftist is.

I have already explained the HERI survey question and I have linked to it.

Non-responsive to the issue of self-identification,

I reject your unverified personal gnosis of the true meanings of the HERI respondents.

Fine, but that does not mean your personal unverified gnosis of the true meanings of the HERI respondents is correct, no matter how hard you wish it to be true.

 

[Metaphor]

I disputet, so your statement is false.

Only in lala land.

Evidently you don't even know what 'undisputed' means, either.

That's the 2nd time you failed to actually come up evidence. Give the post number where you believe you did this or reproduce your "evidence" if you wish anyone to believe you.

I linked to the AEI article, and the HERI survey (multiple times), and an Atlantic article. Read them or don't.

Whether you like it or not, there are those who classify themselves as "liberal" who are not left. It is that simple.

So what? There are those who would classify themselves as 'left' who are not left. Your unwarranted skepticism that all the professors responding 'liberal' to these surveys are actually as likely to think of themselves and be on the right is absurd. It contradicts the understanding of the word 'liberal' as it is used in America. A usage and understanding I have also linked to.

Fine, but that does not mean your personal unverified gnosis of the true meanings of the HERI respondents is correct, no matter how hard you wish it to be true.

No. You see, when I say 'liberal' and 'liberalism' is associated with the left part of the left-right political spectrum in the United States, I am correct. When you deny the association, you are simply wrong, and I've linked to why you are wrong.

But, I've shamefully allowed you to obfuscate and derail. Your absurd, false, dishonest, and laughable rejection of the association of 'liberal' and 'conservative' on the left-right spectrum in America is a complete furphy. Liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia.

Ironically, your objection might actually have a spark of plausibility if the survey had been conducted in Australia with Australian academics, where the Liberal Party is the main right-wing party (though academics--even left-wing Australian academics--are not generally morons who don't know the difference between small-l and large-L liberal.

 

[laughing dog]

I linked to the AEI article, and the HERI survey (multiple times), and an Atlantic article. Read them or don't.

3 times you have had the opportunity to actually produce the data that substantiates your claims, and 3 times you have refused to do so. Saying "I linked to something and go look it up" is not producing evidence. So far, nothing but handwaved assertions from you.

So what? There are those who would classify themselves as 'left' who are not left. Your unwarranted skepticism that all the professors responding 'liberal' to these surveys are actually as likely to think of themselves and be on the right is absurd.

I never said or even hinted at "all".

It contradicts the understanding of the word 'liberal' as it is used in America.

It contradicts the reactionary understanding. There are many shades of liberalism. People who consider themselves "classical liberals" get insulted if one thinks of them as a modern liberal.

No. You see, when I say 'liberal' and 'liberalism' is associated with the left part of the left-right political spectrum in the United States, I am correct. When you deny the association, you are simply wrong, and I've linked to why you are wrong.

It is associated by some. That is not the issue. You claim that self-identified liberals are necessarily left. Your claim allows you to lump the left and liberals to some monolith to support your reactionary views.

Liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia.

In your opinion.

Anyone familiar with the governance trends in US academia would know that institutions are being operated and governed more like profit-seeking entities than institutions of higher learning - definitely not leftist. Especially public institutions who have experienced ever-dwindling public support (as a share of total operating expenses).

Of course there are leftists in academia. But to think they are the overwhelming majority or that they have a lot of sway is simply untrue. But it makes a nice narrative for reactionaries and the US GOP to take some anecdotes to rile up their dupes.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And is this actually a bias at universities or is it just a reflection of what happens with education? People with more education tend to be more liberal.

Before we even get to the question of bias, it seems I can't even get people to agree on the zeroth premise: "the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia".

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Until you and the others denying this comes to grip with this basic fact, there can't be any further conversation.

You utterly missed my point--what's the yardstick?

So far you haven't excluded the possibility that the stupid lean right.

 

[Metaphor]

I linked to the AEI article, and the HERI survey (multiple times), and an Atlantic article. Read them or don't.

3 times you have had the opportunity to actually produce the data that substantiates your claims, and 3 times you have refused to do so. Saying "I linked to something and go look it up" is not producing evidence.

I am not re-linking evidence because you skipped it the first time. I am not going to enact that labour for somebody whose intentions are not genuine.

I have linked to the HERI survey multiple times, as well as quoted parts of it for you more than once. Read my posts. Or don't. But understand I am not going to enact that labour for you any more.

So what? There are those who would classify themselves as 'left' who are not left. Your unwarranted skepticism that all the professors responding 'liberal' to these surveys are actually as likely to think of themselves and be on the right is absurd. It contradicts the understanding of the word 'liberal' as it is used in America. A usage and understanding I have also linked to.

I never said or intimated "all".

Irrelevant. 'Liberal' is associated with the left in America, and specifically and especially in America.

In the HERI survey, some small percentage of people who picked 'liberal' might have considered themselves 'not left wing'. Irrelevant. Some of the people who picked 'conservative' might have considered themselves 'not right wing'. Irrelevant.

No. You see, when I say 'liberal' and 'liberalism' is associated with the left part of the left-right political spectrum in the United States, I am correct. When you deny the association, you are simply wrong, and I've linked to why you are wrong.

It is associated by some. That is not the issue. You claim that self-identified liberals are necessarily left. Your claim allows you to lump the left and liberals to some monolith to support your reactionary views.

In the framework of the HERI survey (an indeed, in American society), the self-described 'far left' and 'liberals' are on the left part of the left-right spectrum. This is not hard to understand. Except, apparently, for you.

Liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia.

In your opinion.

Non. I have evidenced this fact multiple times.

 

[Metaphor]

And is this actually a bias at universities or is it just a reflection of what happens with education? People with more education tend to be more liberal.

Before we even get to the question of bias, it seems I can't even get people to agree on the zeroth premise: "the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia".

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Until you and the others denying this comes to grip with this basic fact, there can't be any further conversation.

You utterly missed my point--what's the yardstick?

So far you haven't excluded the possibility that the stupid lean right.

Before we even get to the question of bias, it seems I can't even get people to agree on the zeroth premise: "the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia".

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Until you and the others denying this comes to grip with this basic fact, there can't be any further conversation.

 

[laughing dog]

I am not re-linking evidence because you skipped it the first time. I am not going to enact that labour for somebody whose intentions are not genuine.

I did not skip anything. You simply have not made a discernible argument as to what constitutes "heavily weighted".

I have linked to the HERI survey multiple times, as well as quoted parts of it for you more than once. Read my posts. Or don't. But understand I am not going to enact that labour for you any more.

I am not going to do your work for you. You could link to the post number where you do your work. But you haven't. Your refusal is an indication of your unwillingness to engage in honest discussion.

Irrelevant. 'Liberal' is associated with the left in America, and specifically and especially in America.

In the HERI survey, some small percentage of people who picked 'liberal' might have considered themselves 'not left wing'. Irrelevant. Some of the people who picked 'conservative' might have considered themselves 'not right wing'. Irrelevant.

Accurate measurement is not irrelevant to honest discussion.

In the framework of the HERI survey (an indeed, in American society), the self-described 'far left' and 'liberals' are on the left part of the left-right spectrum. This is not hard to understand. Except, apparently, for you.

That is your reactionary definition which may not have been shared by all of those who self-identified.

Non. I have evidenced this fact multiple times.

In your opinion.

Outside of the issue of accurate representation of reality, your claim is pretty much irrelevant to the actual OP. After all, if all of these "leftist" professors are not indoctrinating students, why would anyone care about their political leanings?

 

[Jarhyn]

So I might ask in any given university...

How many economics professors are liberal?

How many of those industry reps who give courses on finding a job near the end of a program are liberal?

How many socialists are in the accounting department I wonder?

I bet if you were to look at departments beyond that one bit of the college of arts and specifically the humanities, the "leftist" hue quickly falls away.

My experience is that I noticed some liberals in the environmental sciences, maybe a liberal or two in the "woke" class, and everyone else was just normal students, some liberal asshats, some conservative asshats, but mostly just asshats.

Now excuse me while I go function as a weather covering for this posterior end of a donkey over here...

 

[Metaphor]

I am not re-linking evidence because you skipped it the first time. I am not going to enact that labour for somebody whose intentions are not genuine.

I did not skip anything. You simply have not made a discernible argument as to what constitutes "heavily weighted".

Ah, I see. You've abandoned your dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the semantics of the left-right spectrum, and you are now engaging in a dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the use of a subjective adjective.

HERI found that 60% of the faculty identified as either far left or liberal compared to just 12% being conservative or far right.

I find a 5:1 ratio justifying of the adjective 'heavily weighted'. Your mileage may vary.

I have linked to the HERI survey multiple times, as well as quoted parts of it for you more than once. Read my posts. Or don't. But understand I am not going to enact that labour for you any more.

I am not going to do your work for you. You could link to the post number where you do your work. But you haven't. Your refusal is an indication of your unwillingness to engage in honest discussion.

If you are talking about the use of the adjective 'heavy', I have done so above. If you are talking about the survey responses, I have linked to them a number of times and I won't do it again.

Irrelevant. 'Liberal' is associated with the left in America, and specifically and especially in America.

In the HERI survey, some small percentage of people who picked 'liberal' might have considered themselves 'not left wing'. Irrelevant. Some of the people who picked 'conservative' might have considered themselves 'not right wing'. Irrelevant.

Accurate measurement is not irrelevant to honest discussion.

The kind of 'inaccuracies' you are talking about would be vanishingly small, but I can nullify them completely for you.

"The far left and liberals outweigh conservatives and the far right in US academia".

In the framework of the HERI survey (an indeed, in American society), the self-described 'far left' and 'liberals' are on the left part of the left-right spectrum. This is not hard to understand. Except, apparently, for you.

That is your reactionary definition which may not have been shared by all of those who self-identified.

It is the dictionary definition, it is not 'reactionary', and it is the definition used by wikipedia and in the literature describing political difference in America.

Non. I have evidenced this fact multiple times.

In your opinion.

Outside of the issue of accurate representation of reality, your claim is pretty much irrelevant to the actual OP. After all, if all of these "leftist" professors are not indoctrinating students, why would anyone care about their political leanings?

We've moved on to stage 2!!!! "Yes, it's true, but who cares?"

I didn't think we'd get there. I honestly did not think we'd get past Stage 1: denial. But you did it!!

Okay, so, back to some bad news. I reject the dishonest premise of your question. I did not say that professors were 'indoctrinating' students (though, of course, some could be). "Indoctrination" of students could be a concern about an imbalance of political views, but so could many other things. Therefore, it is false to imply that the only reason you would want to understand the political climate of a university is because students could be 'indoctrinated'.

 

[Metaphor]

So I might ask in any given university...

Wait. You are curious about the political climate of universities?

And, pray tell, how does one gather information about attitudes and opinions about people?

If there are problems caused by the political climate at a university, how can one help discover those problems?

I've never witnessed bullying in my current workplace. Never. Yet every year I am surveyed and my organisation asks me if I've been the victim of, or witnessed, bullying. Are they wrong to attempt to discover a problem if there is one?

 

[laughing dog]

Ah, I see. You've abandoned your dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the semantics of the left-right spectrum, and you are now engaging in a dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the use of a subjective adjective.

Wrong on all counts. You do realize your admission that “ heavily weighted” is subjective means your claim about the left being heavily weighted in academia is not a fact.

HERI found that 60% of the faculty identified as either far left or liberal compared to just 12% being conservative or far right.

I find a 5:1 ratio justifying of the adjective 'heavily weighted'. Your mileage may vary.

It took five responses to get a relevant answer. What were you so afraid of?

The kind of 'inaccuracies' you are talking about would be vanishingly small, but I can nullify them completely for you.

Only in your opinion.

…<snipped gratuitous ad homs and preening>…
I reject the dishonest premise of your question. I did not say that professors were 'indoctrinating' students (though, of course, some could be). "Indoctrination" of students could be a concern about an imbalance of political views, but so could many other things.
Therefore, it is false to imply that the only reason you would want to understand the political climate of a university is because students could be 'indoctrinated'.

First, no one said anything about your thoughts, so get over yourself and stop flinging hysterical accusations. I realize the may be hard to accept, but not everything is about you.

Second, your response does not answer why anyone would be interested in the ideological and religious diversity of the staff at a public institution of higher learning.

Third,the OP policy under discussion is driven by Florida’s GOP fear of “ leftists” in academia. We know this because of their public statements. If, as you say (and have said), there is no indoctrination then there is no basis for that fear.

Can you link to any evidence that suggests the Florida legislature’ intent is to satisfy its intellectual curiosity or some other benign motive? I am not asking for you to pull rationales out of thin air, but actual statements.

 

[Metaphor]

Ah, I see. You've abandoned your dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the semantics of the left-right spectrum, and you are now engaging in a dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the use of a subjective adjective.

Wrong on all counts.

HERI found that 60% of the faculty identified as either far left or liberal compared to just 12% being conservative or far right.

I find a 5:1 ratio justifying of the adjective 'heavily weighted'. Your mileage may vary.

It took five responses to get a relevant answer. What were you so afraid of?

I was afraid of nothing. I thought you were talking about my evidence that the left outweighs the right, not my reasoning for why I would use the term 'heavily'. You were (are?) still denying that the left outweighs the right.

The kind of 'inaccuracies' you are talking about would be vanishingly small, but I can nullify them completely for you.

Only in your opinion.

Dishonest snipping of my response.

…<snipped gratuitous ad homs and preening>…
I reject the dishonest premise of your question. I did not say that professors were 'indoctrinating' students (though, of course, some could be). "Indoctrination" of students could be a concern about an imbalance of political views, but so could many other things.
Therefore, it is false to imply that the only reason you would want to understand the political climate of a university is because students could be 'indoctrinated'.

First, no one said anything about your thoughts, so get over yourself and stop flinging hysterical accusations. I realize the may be hard to accept, but not everything is about you.

My thoughts? What on earth are you talking about?

Second, your response does not answer why anyone would be interested in the ideological and religious diversity of the staff at a public institution of higher learning.

I can certainly discuss why people, and the government, should care. I'd be happy to discuss it if I thought you were listening in good faith.

Third,the OP policy under discussion is driven by Florida’s GOP fear of “ leftists” in academia. We know this because of their public statements. If, as you say (and have said), there is no indoctrination then there is no basis for that fear.

Non. There are reasons to investigate university cultures along political lines, and 'fear of indoctrination' is one reason but there are others.

It really beggars belief that you appear to believe the only thing someone has to be afraid of is 'indoctrination'. I'm not afraid of leftist indoctrination, but I'm concerned by many leftist policies.

Can you link to any evidence that suggests the Florida legislature’ intent is to satisfy its intellectual curiosity or some other benign motive? I am not asking for you to pull rationales out of thin air, but actual statements.

No. I am telling you the State has a good reason for surveying its institutions, and the hysterical and nonsensical response to this legislation is reactionary and unwarranted.

 

[fromderinside]

So here is some background on HERI

Links – HERI

heri.ucla.edu

These organizations have worked with HERI on various surveys and research projects.​

American Council on Education (ACE)
Atlantic Philanthropies — ‘Life After College: The Survey of Former Undergraduates’
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Hillel — The Foundation For Jewish Campus Life
John Templeton Foundation — ‘The Spiritual Lives of College Students’
Kellogg Foundation — The Will Keith Kellogg Foundation
National Institutes of Health — Promoting Diversity: Access and Engagement in Biomedical and Behavioral Science Research Preparation
National Resource Center — National Resource Center on First Year Students and Students in Transition
Policy Center at Brevard College — Co-developer of the Your First College Year (YFCY) Survey
The Spencer Foundation
University of Southern California (USC) — Our Partner for the Transfer and Retention of Urban Community College Students (TRUCCS) Project

These are membership organizations whose focus is to foster the professional development of researchers and practitioners in the discipline of higher education.​

AIR — Association for Institutional Research
ASHE — Association for the Study of Higher Education
ACPA — American College Personnel Association
NASPA — National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
AERA — American Educational Research Association

These organizations are repositories of information about colleges & college students.​

The Chronicle of Higher Education — America’s weekly news source for higher education
IPEDS — Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
NCES — National Center for Education Statistics

A quick scan suggests these are essentially a representative listing of the liberal biased organizations and educators. If their purpose is to adjust education they would be constituted differently.

My conclusion from the above and results of studies and supported education that this organization is a secular left biased proposition where the future is emphasized more than past and new data is valued more than discredited old data.

If the God guys wanted to influence they would have added noticeable theological elements to their clients.

What I'm saying is by their reports these guys are saying it's working.

 

[laughing dog]

….. <snipped ad homs, false accusations and general obtuseness>...

Non. There are reasons to investigate university cultures along political lines, and 'fear of indoctrination' is one reason but there are others.

It really beggars belief that you appear to believe the only thing someone has to be afraid of is 'indoctrination'. I'm not afraid of leftist indoctrination, but I'm concerned by many leftist policies.

No one said there was only one reason so please stop pulling these straw men out of your ass. Given statements from the the Florida legislature and Governor there is reason to think they fear leftist indoctrination. We are not discussing some policy in the abstract, but the Florida law.

That is non-responsive. I am not interested in theoretically possible explanations for some State policy. I am asked for an empirically-based explanation for the Florida state law. Do you have any actual evidence that indicates the Florida legislature rationale for this legislation? If you don't, a simple "no" will suffice. If you do, please provide a link to the evidence. I certainly hope this won't take another 4 responses from you to get something actually on point.

 

[Toni]

Ah, I see. You've abandoned your dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the semantics of the left-right spectrum, and you are now engaging in a dishonest and fruitless quest to dispute the use of a subjective adjective.

Wrong on all counts.

HERI found that 60% of the faculty identified as either far left or liberal compared to just 12% being conservative or far right.

I find a 5:1 ratio justifying of the adjective 'heavily weighted'. Your mileage may vary.

It took five responses to get a relevant answer. What were you so afraid of?

I was afraid of nothing. I thought you were talking about my evidence that the left outweighs the right, not my reasoning for why I would use the term 'heavily'. You were (are?) still denying that the left outweighs the right.

The kind of 'inaccuracies' you are talking about would be vanishingly small, but I can nullify them completely for you.

Only in your opinion.

Dishonest snipping of my response.

…<snipped gratuitous ad homs and preening>…
I reject the dishonest premise of your question. I did not say that professors were 'indoctrinating' students (though, of course, some could be). "Indoctrination" of students could be a concern about an imbalance of political views, but so could many other things.
Therefore, it is false to imply that the only reason you would want to understand the political climate of a university is because students could be 'indoctrinated'.

First, no one said anything about your thoughts, so get over yourself and stop flinging hysterical accusations. I realize the may be hard to accept, but not everything is about you.

My thoughts? What on earth are you talking about?

Second, your response does not answer why anyone would be interested in the ideological and religious diversity of the staff at a public institution of higher learning.

I can certainly discuss why people, and the government, should care. I'd be happy to discuss it if I thought you were listening in good faith.

Third,the OP policy under discussion is driven by Florida’s GOP fear of “ leftists” in academia. We know this because of their public statements. If, as you say (and have said), there is no indoctrination then there is no basis for that fear.

Non. There are reasons to investigate university cultures along political lines, and 'fear of indoctrination' is one reason but there are others.

It really beggars belief that you appear to believe the only thing someone has to be afraid of is 'indoctrination'. I'm not afraid of leftist indoctrination, but I'm concerned by many leftist policies.

Can you link to any evidence that suggests the Florida legislature’ intent is to satisfy its intellectual curiosity or some other benign motive? I am not asking for you to pull rationales out of thin air, but actual statements.

No. I am telling you the State has a good reason for surveying its institutions, and the hysterical and nonsensical response to this legislation is reactionary and unwarranted.

Can you explain what those ‘good reasons’ to investigate university culture along political lines? What might those reasons be?

Note: it is my understanding that universities in the US enjoy greater academic freedom
compared with Australian universities. Indeed, academic freedom, to go where the research/data/evidence leads you is a primary value in US universities. Or public ones anyway.

 

[Bomb#20]

Your posts make it appear that you view this attempt at "meddling" as a nothing burger.

And? I'm not the one who called it a nothingburger. If you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, take it up with Don.

https://iidb.org/threads/desantis-s...al-views-with-state.26299/page-2#post-1026416

And if you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, why did you "Like" his post?

... how about you show why “tmaybe, hey believe that there tenure committees are already demanding that candidate professors take partisan tests, and just want to get in on the game?” isn’t drivel?

Of course what you wrote is drivel; if you're going to try to quote me, try not to introduce a bunch of spelling and grammar errors.

As for whether what I actually wrote was drivel, what did you have in mind? To satisfy your skepticism do I need to send a survey to every Republican in the Florida legislature to find out if, contrary to all your sincerest expectations, they actually agree with what has long been conventional wisdom among conservatives? Here's a typical example...

Yes, Universities Discriminate Against Conservatives

Would you also like me to present a peer-reviewed study to back up the contention that YECs think Darwinism is atheistic?

 

[laughing dog]

And? I'm not the one who called it a nothingburger. If you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, take it up with Don.

https://iidb.org/threads/desantis-s...al-views-with-state.26299/page-2#post-1026416

And if you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, why did you "Like" his post?

His post was ironic.

Of course what you wrote is drivel; if you're going to try to quote me, try not to introduce a bunch of spelling and grammar errors.

As for whether what I actually wrote was drivel, what did you have in mind? To satisfy your skepticism do I need to send a survey to every Republican in the Florida legislature to find out if, contrary to all your sincerest expectations, they actually agree with what has long been conventional wisdom among conservatives? Here's a typical example...

Yes, Universities Discriminate Against Conservatives

Would you also like me to present a peer-reviewed study to back up the contention that YECs think Darwinism is atheistic?

Wading past the usual sarcasm and snottiness, thank you for providing the basis for your drivel. Unfortunately, your basis is drivel as well which is why I gave your response a thumbs up for intellectual consistency.

 

[Metaphor]

Can you explain what those ‘good reasons’ to investigate university culture along political lines? What might those reasons be?

Yes, I certainly can, and I don't even need to use my imagination.

Posts mischaracterize Florida law on college campus surveys

Criticism of the year-old Florida bill has reemerged online this week, with some social media users making misleading statements about the scope of the legislation.

apnews.com

(note that this bill is a year old and news of it was revived)

EDIT 2: Even salon.com--salon.com for god's sake--revised its false headline that the bill requires people to 'register' their political view with the state, because that characterisation is so egregiously false.

The bill requires the State Board of Education and The Board of Governors to create a survey to be administered annually by the 28 schools comprising the Florida College System and the 12 public universities included in the State University System that “considers the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented” and how free members of the college communities feel “to express their beliefs and viewpoints.”

So, for example, there is already evidence that conservative students self-censor their views more than liberal students. But, the only way to know if this is a problem in the Florida system is to survey the Florida system.

Are Colleges and Universities Too Liberal? What the Research Says About the Political Composition of Campuses and Campus Climate

“Is Academe Awash in Liberal Bias?” This is one of many recent headlines trying to grapple with a question that we’ve been debating for decades: are colleges and universities dominated by liberals? Over the past few years, charges that colleges and universities are “about Radical Left...

www.aei.org

The Knight Foundation’s 2019 survey of over 4,400 undergraduates on the state of collegiate student expression shed more light on these troubling trends: 68% felt silenced because “their campus climate precludes students from expressing their true opinions because their classmates might find them offensive.”


And most recently the aforementioned FIRE free speech survey of almost 20,000 college students confirmed that self-censorship on campuses is prevalent: Six out of ten college students say they have kept quiet due to fear of how others would respond. Breaking this down further, the largest group on campus which self-censors is “strong Republicans” (73%) and the lowest is “strong Democrats” (52%). These findings are in many ways a continuation and deepening of trends from 2016 and 2017 when conservative students reported self-censoring more than their liberal counterparts.


Student willingness to use violence and engage in behavior to explicitly stop speech is another area where the FIRE report uncovers disturbing trends. Those identifying as extremely liberal said violence to stop a speech or event from occurring on campus was “always” or “sometimes” acceptable at a rate double than of students identifying as extremely conservative: 13% to 6%. More than a quarter of extremely liberal respondents said it is “rarely” acceptable, compared to 8% of extremely conservative respondents.


One of the most interesting findings in terms of political bias in the FIRE report comes from comparing conservative student ratings of institutions with liberal student ratings. What emerged is that even when conservatives rank a predominantly liberal institution highly in terms of being open to speech, they find themselves self-censoring. University of Chicago was ranked highly by both Liberals (1st) and Conservatives (3rd). Overall less than half of the students report self-censoring (44%). But when broken down by political leaning 82% of Conservatives report holding back their views compared to 53% of Moderates and 40% of Liberals. As one student at Chicago noted: “[I am] afraid to disagree with certain liberal talking points because even if I do not agree with the conservative side either I feel like I will be rejected for not being ‘woke’ enough.”

Beyond self-censorship, in class and in coursework, I would also say that the administration may impose requirements on to students that reflect the political beliefs of the administration.

I assume most people would be aghast if a public university decided to send all students a weekly Christian devotional. Yet universities think nothing of making compulsory courses unrelated to the student's study, courses about white privilege and microaggressions, for example. Some universities withhold your results until you complete such courses.

EDIT: At my current university, there are two short courses, in addition to what I'm actually studying, that I was required to take. An academic plagiarism course (which is fair, that is relevant to whatever you are studying) and a course about consent, illustrated with a range of differently-coloured and sexually-orientated cartoon characters, built on the idea that some rapists don't know when they're raping people, and a consent course will change their minds about raping people.

Note: it is my understanding that universities in the US enjoy greater academic freedom
compared with Australian universities. Indeed, academic freedom, to go where the research/data/evidence leads you is a primary value in US universities. Or public ones anyway.

I'm sure you believe that, but it isn't true. Try being a psychologist who examines the relationship between ethnicity and IQ.

 

[Metaphor]

….. <snipped ad homs, false accusations and general obtuseness>...

Non. There are reasons to investigate university cultures along political lines, and 'fear of indoctrination' is one reason but there are others.

It really beggars belief that you appear to believe the only thing someone has to be afraid of is 'indoctrination'. I'm not afraid of leftist indoctrination, but I'm concerned by many leftist policies.

No one said there was only one reason

Yes, you implied it. "If they're not indoctrinating kids, who cares?"

so please stop pulling these straw men out of your ass. Given statements from the the Florida legislature and Governor there is reason to think they fear leftist indoctrination.

So what? The bill itself says:

“considers the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented” and how free members of the college communities feel “to express their beliefs and viewpoints.”

Neither of those statements are about indoctrination, but about breadth of ideas and political tolerance.

We are not discussing some policy in the abstract, but the Florida law.

That is non-responsive. I am not interested in theoretically possible explanations for some State policy. I am asked for an empirically-based explanation for the Florida state law. Do you have any actual evidence that indicates the Florida legislature rationale for this legislation? If you don't, a simple "no" will suffice. If you do, please provide a link to the evidence. I certainly hope this won't take another 4 responses from you to get something actually on point.

I have provided two reasons, from the bill itself which was linked on the first page, above, and neither of those reasons are 'fear of indoctrination', though that would also be a problem and it is the kind of problem discoverable from a survey.

Your position appears to be: it doesn't matter if universities have bred an environment with limited breadth of ideas and where students and staff are afraid to express their viewpoint; no right-wing government should try to survey people anonymously and voluntarily to discover if such non-problems exist.