Academic Articles on DEI Training Show 1.91 Liberal-Leaning Bias, Reigniting Debate on Scholarly Objectivity

A recent tweet from Daniel Buck, known as the "Youngest Old Man in Ed Reform," has brought renewed attention to concerns about political bias within academic publishing. Buck questioned the landscape for conservative professors, stating, "If publication = tenure & grants, but all publications require you bend the knee to progressivism, conservative profs are low-key currently screwed." This sentiment reflects a growing discussion about ideological homogeneity in higher education and its potential impact on academic careers and research.

Studies indicate a significant leftward shift among university faculty over recent decades. Research from the Independent Review highlights that between 1998 and 2016-17, liberal and far-left faculty members grew from 44.8 percent to 59.8 percent, with some disciplines showing even higher ratios. This trend has led to ongoing discussions about the lack of viewpoint diversity, particularly for conservative scholars, who may face challenges in publishing research that deviates from prevailing progressive orthodoxies.

The perceived bias extends to the publication process itself. A 2025 study in Learned Publishing analyzing over 20,000 academic articles found that articles on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) training were notably liberal-leaning, with a mean bias rating of 1.91 (on a scale where 1 is strong liberal bias and 5 is strong conservative bias). While the study concluded that academic publications are generally balanced, it acknowledged significant ideological differences based on the controversial topic, suggesting potential pressures on what research gets published or even conducted.

Conservative academics often report feeling compelled to conceal their political views, particularly before achieving tenure, to navigate what they perceive as a progressive academic environment. Some studies suggest that conservative professors may work at lower-ranked institutions despite comparable publication records, and that it can be more challenging for them to publish work reflecting conservative perspectives. This creates a climate where self-censorship can become a survival mechanism for scholars.

In response to these challenges, there have been calls for and the establishment of "alternative institutions" to support conservative scholarship. These include religiously affiliated colleges, such as Hillsdale College and Patrick Henry College, which explicitly promote classical liberal arts education and traditional American values. Initiatives also focus on creating civics centers within universities and alternative teacher training programs to foster intellectual diversity and counter perceived progressive dominance in curriculum and pedagogy.

Daniel Buck, a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and director of the Conservative Education Reform Network, is a prominent voice advocating for these institutional reforms. His work frequently addresses what he views as the ideological impoverishment of education, criticizing progressive and critical pedagogies in favor of traditional academic rigor and discipline. Buck argues that even with school choice, genuine alternatives are limited if the broader educational infrastructure remains ideologically uniform.

The debate underscores a fundamental tension in higher education: ensuring academic freedom and open inquiry while addressing concerns about ideological imbalance. Efforts to promote "viewpoint diversity" continue to be a significant focus for conservative groups, aiming to create environments where a broader range of perspectives can thrive without fear of professional repercussions.