"Most defenders of position diversity, however, have a more controversial policy in mind. They urge the appointment of faculty who hold certain opinions. For instance, if all the current members of a department are atheists or agnostics, position diversity calls for the next appointment to be a theist. Similarly, if all are political liberals, then preference should be given to appointing a political conservative."
"First, the assumption appears to be that professors defend particular claims and seek to convince others to share their point of view. The aim of teaching, however, is not indoctrination but education. For a teacher to defend personal beliefs is appropriate, but regarding disputed issues, students should be provided with the strongest reasons in support of opposing positions, then encouraged to develop their own views. Forcing anyone to accept the teacher's opinion regarding a debatable matter is professorial malpractice."
Viewpoint diversity can mean curricular breadth, such as hiring faculty to cover neglected subfields. A more controversial interpretation treats viewpoint diversity as appointing faculty who hold particular personal opinions to balance department ideological composition. Hiring to secure specific opinions is problematic because teaching aims to educate rather than indoctrinate; instructors should present the strongest reasons for competing views and encourage independent judgment. Classifying candidates by single ideological labels oversimplifies actual beliefs, since individuals often hold a mix of positions across issues. Reliance on label-driven hiring risks misunderstanding intellectual complexity and the value of exceptional thinkers who defy categories.
Read at Apaonline
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]