Improving Viewpoint Diversity on Campus

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Michael R. Ford
June 27, 2025

John Stuart Mill’s trident states that in any given argument there are three possibilities. First, you are wrong. Second, you are partially right (and partially wrong). Third, you are 100 percent right. In each scenario viewpoint diversity is essential to identifying truth. If you are wrong, someone needs to present a dissenting viewpoint that demonstrates you are wrong. If you are partially right, someone needs to present dissenting views in order to get you closer to truth. If you are 100 percent correct, you need a dissenting viewpoint to discredit so you can demonstrate you are right.

Mill’s argument is a simple yet powerful rationale for viewpoint diversity as an essential element of knowledge advancement. Without viewpoint diversity and the dissent it brings we cannot know we are correct, incorrect or somewhere in between. In a university setting homogeneous thinking will stall progress in understanding the world we all inhabit. A higher education system without viewpoint diversity will be stuck in a moment in time and our collective knowledge will atrophy.

The value of viewpoint diversity is likely fairly obvious to folks in academic Public Administration. The long-established theory of representative bureaucracy, for example, demonstrates the link between diversity in our bureaucratic institutions (like higher education) and performance. To oversimplify a bit, institutions perform better when they are reflective of the populations they serve. It follows that a university should reflect the diversity of views within the population it serves.

Though I find the concept of viewpoint diversity obvious and necessary, I also recognize growing concerns about viewpoint diversity being used as a political weapon to attack and even dismantle public universities. At a time when federal grants are being rescinded and universities are being publicly attacked by government officials it is natural for professors and administrators to question the motives of people (like myself) arguing for more viewpoint diversity on campus. Nonetheless, the future of higher education, in my opinion, demands we attack the challenge of viewpoint diversity in good faith.

How? First, we need to correct the national narrative around the climate on most college campuses. What happens at a handful of elite universities like Harvard and Columbia is not representative of higher education. Yet, so much of the political backlash against higher education is driven by high profile events at a few outlier institutions. It is difficult to improve the culture of higher education when the baseline public understanding of university culture is skewed.

Second, and related, we need to collect data to understand where and how viewpoint diversity exists and impacts culture on college campuses. Existing methods, like looking at political donations from non-representative samples of faculty, paint an incomplete picture at best and a misleading one at worst. Here in Wisconsin we will be conducting a survey of faculty and instructional staff to establish a baseline of data. Collecting data will elevate the discussion around viewpoint diversity by enabling a fact-based discussion as opposed to politicized speculation.

Third, we need to define what is meant by viewpoint diversity and generate buy-in for that working definition. Too often approaches to viewpoint diversity focus on quotas and/or bringing in external speakers. Neither approach, in my experience, builds a culture of viewpoint diversity. Instead, it feeds the narrative that viewpoint diversity is being imposed in a punitive way, generating fear and mistrust as well as a reflexive opposition to any serious efforts to promote viewpoint diversity.

Fourth, and most important, is a sustained effort to build a supportive infrastructure that cultivates a culture of viewpoint diversity. Such infrastructure includes academic centers with faculty that span disciplines and approaches in addressing real world problems. It includes program and college advisory boards that reflect the diversity of political and cultural views in the populations served by the university. Finally, it includes regular opportunities for diverse groups to engage with another in order to build bridging social capital across viewpoint divides.

Of course, no progress can be made on understanding and improving the culture of viewpoint diversity on campus if people do not approach the topic in good faith. I believe faculty and staff are in position to lead a good faith effort of improving viewpoint diversity on college campuses. We cannot control external actors but we can take the issue of campus culture seriously and communicate the diversity that currently exists as well as the ongoing efforts at our campuses.

---

Author: Michael R. Ford is the Director of the Wisconsin Institute for Citizenship and Civil Dialogue at the Universities of Wisconsin. He frequently publishes on the topics of public and nonprofit board governance, accountability and education policy. He is an elected member of the Oshkosh Area School District Board.

(3 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...