<p>I agree with everyone else: this is a baseless fear. Unless your daughter is simply a tinder box of untapped political activism waiting for nothing more than a spark to set it off, the most she’s ever likely to do in college is go to a rally or two. This is unlikely to distract from her studies, certainly far less than if she decided to spend lots of time partying. And if what you’re worried about is that she’ll adopt political beliefs that aren’t really her own simply because charismatic people of whatever stamp persuade her into it, then most likely she will abandon those beliefs once she’s out of reach of their influence. </p>
<p>Frankly, I would have said that the greatest risk to her studies and her single-minded pursuit of learning is not infatuation with a cause, but infatuation with a person. That first college love affair can send students off the rails pretty thoroughly.</p>
<p>If you can find a copy of “Choosing the Right College”, it addresses and ranks political leanings of most of the major US colleges (written by two conservative, right-wing authors so take it with a grain of salt.) </p>
<p>I wonder if some parents with this concern are really more worried about religion than they are about politics. I think it’s true that many, many colleges will challenge a student’s religious upbringing, especially if the student has not been around people who don’t share that religion, and if that religion is particularly dogmatic. Being around a lot of people of different religions (and of no religion) can create that challenge, without any need for help from professors. I think this is inevitable, unless you send your kid to a college affiliated with your own religion.</p>
I have read the book at I would describe the limitations slightly differently … it has a lopsided intolerance. In many ways I think it is a lot like the USN rankings … the background data is pretty good … in this case, how they then developed grades is a bit suspect (and biased). So if a prospective student wants to know about the governance and political climate on a campus I actually think the book is a pretty good source … for example, the student can decide if the schools rules governing speech on campus are a positive or negative ignoring the ratings the book provides … (which are from a conservative viewpoint). For me, where the book goes of the rails and I agree with you is when it rates schools … and it gives “conservative” schools brownie points for the exact same thing it downgraded “liberal” schools … having a singular outlook on these issues … enforcing conservative attributes is a positive … in essence the desire for an open dialog seems to only extend one direction.</p>
<p>PS - for my one other interesting benny was the the belief in a classic liberal arts education … the dead white guys stuff. So the book loves the core at Chicago and Columbia and not so big on the open ended choices at Brown or Amherst, for example. Again while the book judges core = good and open = bad for the reader having a source that investigate and documents which approach various schools use is very helpful (and the judgement can be ignored).</p>
<p>Though I agree with much of the comments here regarding the almost nonexistent chance of your daughter becoming a gun toting abortion clinic bombing undergrad, I thought I’d post the list of some if the least political schools in the country according to the Princeton Review.
-Becker College
-University of Tampa
-Ohio Northern University
-University of Scranton
-Indiana University of PA
-Alfred University
-Wagner College
-Duke University
-Marywood University
-University of Montana
-College of the Ozarks
-Salisbury U
-UC Davis
-Monmouth University (NJ)
-University of South Dakota
-University of Nebraska - Lincoln
-Loyola University Maryland
-Villanova University
-Allegheny College
-Westminster College (PA)</p>
<p>Despite being in the news for very ugly and terrible events lately (the shooting being off campus by an unrelated individual), in general the campus has a live and let live attitude. They had an incident with a porn/feminist professor losing it and berating and physically attacking a pro-life protester you’d be hard pressed to find anyone much interested anymore. The biggest reaction was to the letter sent by a the administration to the students - basically excusing the behavior.</p>
<p>Cal Poly -SLO. There is a reason it’s known as having the happiest student body. It’s located in the happiest town in the US. Not a protest or bull horn to be found. Hey the entire SLO OWS effort consisted of about 10 people, half of whom were asleep at any given point and the other 3/5 were busy trying to score some medical marijuana :)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Whenhen’s list includes Duke? I think there’s plenty of political activism at Duke, as well as some very activist faculty.</p></li>
<li><p>Many of the colleges on Whenhen’s list (and others’ lists) are in fact intensely political, but it is the politics that we pretend not to see of supporting the status quo. I think it’s a far greater risk that a student will be seduced into conformism to a set of questionable values than that she will be seduced into joining an armed revolution (or anything remotely similar, like, say, a state PIRG).</p></li>
<li><p>I engaged in pretty much no political activism in college. My wife – whom I met in college – was (and has remained) a committed political activist practically 24/7. It did not stop her from graduating summa cum laude or having a good career; it certainly did not make her into some kind of sheep following other people’s direction without critical thought of her own. She has accomplished far more in life than I have, and it’s precisely because of that. She has always believed that it was in her power to have a meaningful impact on the world, and has gone out to do it. I really admire that quality in her. I would be a better person if I had more of it.</p></li>
<li><p>I actually know (or knew) a handful of people who became radicalized in college during the 60s or 70s and did things like join armed revolutionary groups. A couple became fugitives; one went to prison for a number of years. Three things stand out: First, even in that intense period, these people were a tiny minority. What happened to them was about as likely as being hit by lightning. Second, not one of them was “recruited” or “seduced,” by faculty or others. Most came to their radicalism themselves, against all sorts of pressure from family, friends, and mentors. One was a football player at the sort of suitcase school that is usually safe from such things, but he happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and his school was Kent State. Watching National Guardsmen shoot his classmates changed his life for awhile. Third, looking back, they all, every one of them, have had good lives (and in all but one case pretty comfortable lives, too). All of them grew up and moderated their views, although most are still on the left fringe of the American political spectrum. Their radicalism definitely affected their lives, but I think each of them became who he or she was going to become anyway, and even the one who spent years in prison would have a life much like the one she has now even if she turned back time and didn’t participate in criminal activity.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I don’t think the OP is worried about politics per se. I think she’s worried about the wrong kind of politics. Probably the best place for her D is one of the evangelical schools. Those are pretty much the only places where she is assured of virtually no liberal influence. </p>
<p>Well, that’s a reasonable assumption since most college activism happens to be left-leaning, but perhaps she just wants a school that is not activisty at all. The evangelical schools probably fit that bill but most students are married by graduation so that could also be an issue, I guess. </p>
<p>I don’t know about you specifically, but being from a family of radical hippie liberals is no guarantee one may not be sheltered from the larger world, politically or otherwise by parents or one’s lifestyle. </p>
<p>In fact, some of the most sheltered people I encountered were a few radical hippie parents of HS classmates and moreso, several college classmates. It was a flipside of what I’ve seen from the heavily socially & politically conservative fundamentalist religious folks.</p>
<p>It was especially telling among the few radical hippie parents of HS classmates when they didn’t know what to make of their kids pulling Alex Keatons and going all hardcore right-leaning libertarian/conservative on them when they became young teens. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not necessarily. Many activists for fundamentalist evangelical causes such as being anti-abortion or being against anti-discriminatory laws against LGBTQ folks can and have been encouraged by such colleges to participate. </p>
<p>That is a compelling story, JHS. Youthful errors in judgment, criminality, and redemption are part of the US narrative. Yet, that does not mean that one cannot be concerned about our colleges when our academic world finds no issues in allowing unrepentant criminals such Ayers to be part of our education system and spread his poisonous views with glee. As you mentioned, they are who they were. Zebras are not horses with stripes. The chances to have a direct contact with Bill Ayers are slim, but increase when considering his fans and disciples, or his political cronies. </p>
<p>Further, there is a difference between fearing nefarious presences on campus and enjoying spending years in an environment that has embraced the contributions of such individuals. </p>
<p>We love to pretend that freedom and tolerance are the staple of our society. Many swear by the Beaty of an open mind and see themselves as models of understanding. Yet, if this thread is a microcosm of our society, the accusations and dismissive posts by many here are simply tangible proof that the OP might have reasons to be concerned about environments that are hostile to the minority views. </p>
<p>And only the blind and deaf can ignore what minority views are in our colleges. Conservative colleges are derided and viewed with scorn. Left of center colleges are THE mainstream. Part of the problem stems directly from generations of apathy in voicing … concerns and fears. Apathy or lack of desire to be called a nut by the good folks! </p>
<p>Once you venture into the evangelical colleges, you will likely discover that the target market for those schools have their own views of most-to-least liberal/permissive. It all has to do with perspective. I know Christian families who think Wheaton (IL) is too liberal! I also know a huge contingent of pierced/tattooed evangelical college students whose appearance would likely scare the beejezus out of your average Christian conservative. Many of those “weirdos” are pro-life activists, however. </p>
<p>Is that too “activisty” for the OP? I’m guessing it is.</p>
<p>I disagree. There’s TONS of activism at Liberty! From a macro perspective everyone may appear to be on the same page, but there’s always plenty to disagree about within a political movement.</p>
<p>College activism isn’t confined to campus, either. Groups of students who agree with one another can always try to bring about change in the community. This tradition goes back to Ancient Greece, but really took off after the Enlightenment. Think Les Miserables.</p>
I don’t quite get your point, considering the rest of your post. Aren’t you a supporter of deriding colleges with scorn if they represent political views with which you disagree?</p>
<p>They just as likely to play the “more evangelical Christian than thou” game just as much as many folks at my LAC enjoyed playing the “more leftier/radical/hippie than thou” game. </p>
<p>It is even embodied in one political party’s mode of infighting where they label those they feel aren’t sufficiently committed to their perception of party ideals as RINOs. :D</p>