Faculty Engaging in Self-Censorship

A New Survey from the AAC&U and AAUP

Back in my administrative days, I was a huge fan of the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). They were committed to the development of the liberal arts. Even though they were dominated by liberal arts advocates in large public universities, there was much of value to smaller liberal arts institutions like Christian Universities.

They were responsible for the development of the VALUE assessment rubrics now used by institutions across the country. They celebrated high-impact strategies to promote student learning. They advocated for a meaningful approach to general education (one of my institutions was part of a multi-year project they supported).

My post-administrative position did not have the professional development resources for me to keep up with them. But I’ve always had a soft spot for their work.

So when both Inside Higher Ed and the Chronicle of Higher Education¹ led yesterday’s daily news updates with a survey conducted by AAC&U² and AAUP (American Association of University Professors), it caught my attention. Interestingly, the survey was modeled after one conducted by sociologist Paul Lazersfeld during the McCarthy era.³

The survey was conducted between December 2023 and January 2024. It was no doubt influenced by reactions to campus protests over Gaza, anti-DEI efforts in many states, and the general critiques of higher education as indoctrination. Still, both liberal and conservative faculty were cautious about sharing their views with others.

In the full report, they break faculty respondents into groups based on the type of institution, tenure, rank, age, and minority status. The distinguish between faculty with low, medium, and high “security and influence”. The former were younger, non tenured, and disproportionately at two year institutions. They made up 45% of respondents, and were likely to be female, younger, and untenured (if it was even available). The high security group (41% of respondents) have tenure, associate or full professor rank, and are in their late 40s or older.

The finding that caught the attention of Inside Higher Ed and the Chronicle was that faculty were engaging in self-censorship.

I’d never thought about the impact of sharing thoughts on a campus computer as a particular problem, but perhaps that was just naive. (Also, I’m not sure what is gained by including the don’t know responses, which they do throughout the report).

But 45% have “refrained from expressing an opinion” and over half had worried about response to something they had written. In a subsequent question, they were asked if they ever “modify or refrain from using particular terms” with various groups. Nearly 60% said they either often or occasionally did this when talking to administrators and over 62% did so when talking to students. Similar patterns hold for faculty colleagues and staff members.

I feel very fortunate to have come along in the more luddite period of higher education where I didn’t have to worry about students taking cell phone videos of my classes or that something I said online would get to the attention of donors or trustees. I made it all the way to my fifth institution before a parent wrote the president and provost asking that I be fired.⁴

But let me be clear: I spent half my career teaching sociology in Christian liberal arts institutions. I self-censored on a daily basis. People already thought I was a liberal (Christians can’t vote for Democrats). I had students from conservative churches and homeschool families who had been through their own type of indoctrination. It was simply a matter of compassion to find the kindest, most gentle, oblique way of introducing the subject matter of my discipline.

If I was asked a direct question, I was honest but still hedged in my use of language. Some of this was self-protection, but it was also to not overly shock the sensibilities of my students or colleagues.⁵

This is part of the imbalance of the Christian university. I knew economics professors who were full-on Frederich Hayek fans bordering on Ayn Rand. They didn’t pull their punches. I knew Bible professors who were more than willing to weigh in on controversial topics, pointing out that there was only one Christian answer.

But for those of us with a more critical bent, who feel like we need to address economic inequality, racial injustice, toxic masculinity, or Christian Nationalism, that’s not a choice that’s available. One could, of course, simply turn sociology classes into guidelines for a healthy family or economic well-being. That never seemed true to the discipline or my own sense of calling.

I feel for those young professors early in their career. Maybe they don’t have tenure or it’s not even offered on their campus. They are already looked at as troublemakers for raising difficult issues in faculty meetings.

I’m glad to have the luxury of sharing these thoughts (without self-censoring!) from the safety of retirement. But for the rest of you, stay on guard.

The next few years are going to be particularly tough for higher education. And for those in Christian universities, I think the Trump years are going to push the institutions farther to the right (if that is even possible).

If I can be any help, please reach out.

1. The Chronicle might be paywalled. Let me know if you need access.

2. The full report is available to download from the link.

3. He’s certainly not alone but Lazersfeld was sort of the father of public opinion research.

4. It was because of something the social problems textbook had said about abortion that the student said came from me. The parent ambushed me after class one day and demanded that I renounce Roe v. Wade. I didn’t.

5. One notable exception happened while driving a group of students back from a conference. We were all tired and somehow I wound up on a rant about civil religion and military night at sporting events. Thankfully, nobody informed the administration!