{"id":424015,"date":"2025-12-04T11:50:53","date_gmt":"2025-12-04T11:50:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/424015\/"},"modified":"2025-12-04T11:50:53","modified_gmt":"2025-12-04T11:50:53","slug":"phoenix-poll-reveals-faculty-perspectives-on-campus-issues-controversies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/424015\/","title":{"rendered":"Phoenix Poll Reveals Faculty Perspectives on Campus Issues, Controversies"},"content":{"rendered":"

On Nov. 25, The Phoenix sent its inaugural faculty survey to Swarthmore\u2019s 310 faculty members (all lecturers, as well as visiting, assistant, associate, and full professors). The survey asked faculty to indicate whether they approved, strongly approved, disapproved, strongly disapproved, felt neutral, or didn\u2019t know of eight campus institutions, programs, and practices: the \u201cSwarthmore Forward\u201d strategic plan, The Phoenix, the honors program, consideration of legacy in Swarthmore admissions decisions, college hiring and retention practices, President Val Smith\u2019s Office, the Provost\u2019s Office, and the Board of Managers. These approval ratings are depicted in the graphic above.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Beyond these institutions, the survey also asked faculty (with results shown in the text and graphics below) for their analysis of many relevant college topics, including generative artificial intelligence (AI), admissions testing, grade inflation, the federal government\u2019s attacks on higher education, response to pro-Palestinian activism, the sense of faculty community and collaboration, faculty governance and college decision-making, allocation of tenure lines, and ideological diversity within the faculty.<\/p>\n

Of the survey\u2019s 115 respondents (a response rate of around 37%), 40% primarily teach in the social sciences division, 31% teach in arts and humanities, and 29% teach in natural sciences and engineering. Per The Phoenix\u2019s calculations, this constitutes an overrepresentation of the ~27% of total faculty who teach in the social sciences, an underrepresentation of the ~43% that teach in the arts and humanities, and a proportional representation of the ~30% that teach in the natural sciences and engineering.<\/p>\n

\"Sample<\/a><\/p>\n

1.7% of respondents were lecturers, 19.1% visiting professors, 15.7% assistant professors, 32.2% associate professors, and 31.3% full professors. According to The Phoenix\u2019s analysis of the distribution of the faculty by position, assistant professors were proportionately represented in the poll, given that they comprise ~16% of the overall faculty population. However, full and associate professors, who each make up 26% of all faculty, were overrepresented in the poll, and visiting professors and lecturers were underrepresented, given that they comprise ~21% and ~10% of faculty, respectively.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It is important to note that many factors, including tenure protections, amount of institutional knowledge and memory, and degree of motivation, may influence a faculty member\u2019s comfort and ability to share their perspectives.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The results show strong approval of The Phoenix (+68% net approval) and the college\u2019s honors program (+66). President Val Smith\u2019s Office was viewed favorably overall (+22), with 47.3% approving or strongly approving and 25% disapproving or strongly disapproving. Respondents were less positive about Swarthmore\u2019s Board of Managers, which received a net approval of -5%.<\/p>\n

After years of turnover, during which the college has seen four different provosts over four years, faculty expressed approval (+36) for the Provost\u2019s Office, currently led by Rich Wicentowski, a computer science professor. 53% of respondents approved or strongly approved of the office, and 17% disapproved or strongly disapproved.<\/p>\n

\u201cSwarthmore Forward,\u201d the strategic plan<\/a> that the college is currently attempting to implement, received equal (22% each) approval and disapproval, with 35% of respondents saying they were neutral. Notably, another 22% of respondents said they didn\u2019t know how they felt about the strategic plan, the highest such response for any of the institutions or practices.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Overall, faculty slightly approved (+9) of the college\u2019s practices regarding the hiring and retention of faculty, a subject of some recent contention<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Another controversial college practice, the consideration of legacy in admissions decisions, received the lowest net approval rating (-43) of any of the institutions and practices asked about by the poll.<\/p>\n

The rapid development and growing availability of generative artificial intelligence has brought with it <\/strong>questions about the implications of AI for higher education. Almost half (47%) of Swarthmore faculty surveyed responded that they were limiting, though permitting, the usage of AI in their classes. Another third of the faculty said that their approach was to ban it entirely. Asked separately about whether there should be a college-wide policy regarding AI usage, a plurality of respondents (42.6%) were in favor, though almost a third of faculty (32.2%) opposed such a measure.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Last week, The Phoenix reported<\/a> on the college\u2019s controversial decision to keep its application process SAT\/ACT-optional for the coming years, citing what Vice President and Dean of Admissions Jim Bock \u201990 called \u201cnot worrisome\u201d differences in the success between matriculated students who submitted their scores and those who didn\u2019t. 44.3% of respondents believed that the college should require standardized testing for applicants, 24.3% thought it should not be required, and 31.3% were unsure.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Conversations among faculty about the potential concern of grade inflation in Swarthmore classes have been increasing. In a recent edition<\/a> of The Phoenix\u2019s \u201cOffice Hours\u201d opinions column, multiple faculty members challenged the premise that grade inflation constitutes a concern, with arguments that grades are not necessary or desirable at all, grade inflation does not signal a decline in rigor, and other factors could be behind rising grades and GPAs.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Still, 73% of respondents believe there has been grade inflation at the college in recent years, while only 5.2% believe that there hasn\u2019t been (21.7% were unsure). Of those who believed there has been grade inflation or were unsure, 70% were at least somewhat concerned about this trend.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

While there was limited messaging<\/a> from the college in the spring about its response to the federal government\u2019s recent attacks on higher education, Swarthmore\u2019s administration later directly lobbied<\/a> against Trump\u2019s endowment tax in the halls of Congress and signed several statements in favor of higher education\u2019s independence. Most respondents (53%) think the college\u2019s overall response to these attacks has struck a balance between passivity and opposition that is \u201cjust right,\u201d though 47% felt it has been at least \u201cslightly too passive.\u201d No respondents reported thinking that the college\u2019s response has been at all too oppositional.<\/p>\n

Relatedly, faculty surveyed reported an evenly distributed range of predictions about Swarthmore\u2019s ability to fulfill its mission despite the federal government\u2019s attacks. A plurality (33.9%) were somewhat worried about this ability, but overall, faculty were split nearly evenly between worry and confidence (46.9% and 43.5%, respectively).\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This semester has seen minimal activity from the campus\u2019s ongoing pro-Palestinian protests. But almost all faculty surveyed worked at the college in the 2024-25 academic year, during which the administration called<\/a> law enforcement to campus to end an encampment during finals. The college also issued<\/a> a number of suspensions and sanctions for conduct violations relating to the protests and changed<\/a> its Code of Conduct, restricting certain protest activity. 52.2% of faculty respondents felt that the college\u2019s overall response to pro-Palestinian student activism over the last three years has been at least slightly too harsh, compared with 21.7% who felt it was at least slightly too lenient and 26.1% who considered it \u201cjust right.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In a recent interview<\/a> with The Phoenix, President Val Smith mentioned that it has been hard for the college\u2019s social fabric to recover from the isolation and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Students and faculty have also felt this way, citing a decline in feelings of community, whether due to COVID-19 or other developments. 60% of respondents felt that the current level of collaboration and sense of community among the faculty was somewhat (40%) or very (20%) weak, with only 24.3% thinking it was at least somewhat strong.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Relatedly, 61.8% of respondents said this level of collaboration and sense of community is to some extent worse than it was in the past, compared to only 2.6% who said it was better and 7% who believed it was the same. More than a quarter (28.7%) of respondents, however, said they were unsure how it compared to past levels, potentially because some newer faculty might not have enough institutional memory to make a judgment.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In the interview, Smith also responded to concerns that faculty have regularly raised regarding a decreasing role for faculty governance in college decision-making. She said that, while she knew that viewpoint existed on campus, \u201cI am also aware of the fact that we have colleagues who don\u2019t agree with that.\u201d 43.5% of faculty respondents to the survey described the current amount of faculty governance in the college\u2019s decision-making process as \u201cvery small\u201d or \u201csomewhat small,\u201d versus 20.9% who described it as \u201csomewhat large\u201d or \u201cvery large.\u201d 35.7% described themselves as neutral on the current amount of faculty governance.<\/p>\n

49.6% of respondents felt the current amount of faculty governance was less than in the past, whereas a mere 0.9% felt it was at all higher, perhaps challenging Smith\u2019s assertion regarding the trend. 17.4% felt it was the same as past levels, and, again, almost a third (32.2%) of respondents said they were unsure.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Faculty respondents were also asked about the allocation of tenure lines, of which a majority (66.1%) felt their departments had received slightly or far too few. 30.4% felt they had received the right number, while 3.5% believed their departments had been allocated too many.<\/p>\n

Leaders in both politics and higher education from across the political spectrum have long criticized elite colleges and universities for maintaining and fostering only a narrow range of political and philosophical views. Smith also referenced this phenomenon in the interview, though she emphasized that, while the college is aware of this issue, it is not one whose solution requires that higher education be dismantled as some in the federal government have suggested<\/a>. A majority of respondents (60%) felt that ideological diversity among faculty was to some degree important, only 17.3% felt it was at all unimportant, and 22.6% said they were indifferent. <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

While a plurality (42.6%) of respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the amount of ideological diversity within Swarthmore\u2019s faculty, slightly more were at all dissatisfied (30.4%) than at all satisfied (26.9%).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In the context of the survey, many faculty members told The Phoenix their thoughts on the poll itself and more on the topics it asks about. Many noted that respondents might have selected the same response to certain questions (like those asking about ideological diversity and retention) but for different reasons. Others highlighted the extent to which they felt a decline in the power of faculty governance, to be superseded by the Board of Managers and financial motivations. Many also emphasized that the loudest voices were not necessarily representative of the faculty as a whole. A couple of professors voiced their concern about a decline in student rigor and intellectual curiosity in recent times as potential context for questions about AI, grade inflation, standardized testing, and more.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Response breakdowns in descending order of net approval (due to rounding, not all percentages will add up to 100%):<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Swarthmore Phoenix: 71% Approve, 16% Neutral, 3% Disapprove, 10% Don\u2019t Know | +68% Net Approval<\/p>\n

Honors Program: 70% Approve, 19% Neutral, 4% Disapprove, 7% Don\u2019t Know | +66% Net Approval<\/p>\n

Provost\u2019s Office: 53% Approve, 23% Neutral, 17% Disapprove, 6% Don\u2019t Know | +36% Net Approval<\/p>\n

President Val Smith (President\u2019s Office): 47% Approve, 23% Neutral, 25% Disapprove, 5% Don\u2019t Know | +22% Net Approval<\/p>\n

The college\u2019s practices regarding the hiring and retention of faculty: 43% Approve, 21% Neutral, 34% Disapprove, 3% Don\u2019t Know | +9% Net Approval<\/p>\n

Swarthmore Forward (strategic plan): 22% Approve, 35% Neutral, 22% Disapprove, 22% Don\u2019t Know | 0% Net Approval<\/p>\n

Swarthmore Board of Managers: 29% Approve, 24% Neutral, 34% Disapprove, 13% Don\u2019t Know | -5% Net Approval<\/p>\n

Consideration of legacy in Swarthmore admissions decisions: 9% Approve, 28% Neutral, 52% Disapprove, 11% Don\u2019t Know | -43% Net Approval<\/p>\n

What is your approach to the use of generative AI in your classes?: 0% for \u201cRequire\u201d, 3% for \u201cEncourage\u201d, 3% for \u201cPermit\u201d, 47% for \u201cPermit with limitations\u201d, 33% for \u201cBan\u201d, 15% for \u201cDo not address\u201d<\/p>\n

Do you think there should be a college-wide policy regarding the usage of generative AI?: 43% for \u201cYes\u201d, 32% for \u201cNo\u201d, 25% for \u201cUnsure\u201d | +11% Net For \u201cYes\u201d<\/p>\n

Should Swarthmore require applicants to submit their SAT\/ACT results as part of the admissions process?: 44% for \u201cYes\u201d, 24% for \u201cNo\u201d, 31% for \u201cUnsure\u201d | +20% Net for \u201cYes\u201d<\/p>\n

Do you believe that there has been grade inflation at Swarthmore in recent years?: 73% for \u201cYes\u201d, 5% for \u201cNo\u201d, 22% for \u201cUnsure\u201d | +68% Net for \u201cYes\u201d<\/p>\n

[Of those who responded \u201cYes\u201d or \u201cUnsure\u201d as to whether there has been grade inflation] \u2013 If you believe there has been grade inflation in recent years at Swarthmore, how concerned are you about this trend?: 19% for \u201cVery concerned\u201d, 51% for \u201cSomewhat concerned\u201d, 29% for \u201cNot at all concerned\u201d<\/p>\n

The college\u2019s response to the federal government\u2019s recent attacks on higher education has generally been: 15% for \u201cMuch too passive\u201d, 32% for \u201cSlightly too passive\u201d, 53% for \u201cNeutral\u201d, 0% for \u201cSlightly too oppositional\u201d, 0% for \u201cSlightly too oppositional\u201d<\/p>\n

How worried\/confident are you about Swarthmore\u2019s ability to fulfill its mission despite the federal government\u2019s recent antagonistic approach to higher education?: 13% for \u201cVery worried\u201d, 34% for \u201cSomewhat worried\u201d, 10% for \u201cNeutral\u201d, 28% for \u201cSomewhat confident\u201d, 16% for \u201cVery confident\u201d<\/p>\n

The college\u2019s response to pro-Palestinian student activism over the last three years has generally been: 5% for \u201cMuch too lenient\u201d, 17% for \u201cSlightly too lenient\u201d, 26% for \u201cJust right\u201d, 24% for \u201cSlightly too harsh\u201d, 29% for \u201cMuch too harsh\u201d<\/p>\n

How would you describe the current level of collaboration and sense of community among the faculty?: 20% for \u201cVery weak\u201d, 40% for \u201cSomewhat weak\u201d, 16% for \u201cNeutral\u201d, 23% for \u201cSomewhat strong\u201d, 2% for \u201cVery strong\u201d<\/p>\n

In your understanding, is this level of collaboration and sense of community among the faculty better or worse than it has been in the past?: 30% for \u201cMuch worse\u201d, 32% for \u201cSomewhat worse\u201d, 7% for \u201cThe same\u201d, 3% for \u201cSomewhat better\u201d, 0% for \u201cMuch better\u201d, 29% for \u201cUnsure\u201d<\/p>\n

How would you describe the current amount of faculty governance in the college\u2019s decision-making process?: 20% for \u201cVery small\u201d, 24% for \u201cSomewhat small\u201d, 36% for \u201cNeutral\u201d, 16% for \u201cSomewhat large\u201d, 5% for \u201cVery large\u201d<\/p>\n

In your understanding, is this amount of faculty governance over college decisions more or less than it has been in the past?: 21% for \u201cMuch less\u201d, 29% for \u201cSomewhat less\u201d, 17% for \u201cThe same\u201d, 0% for \u201cSomewhat more\u201d, 1% for \u201cMuch more\u201d, 32% for \u201cUnsure\u201d<\/p>\n

Generally, do you think your department has been allocated: 24% for \u201cFar too few tenure lines\u201d, 43% for \u201cSlightly too few tenure lines\u201d, 30% for \u201cThe right number of tenure lines\u201d, 3% for \u201cSlightly too many tenure lines\u201d, 1% for \u201cFar too many tenure lines\u201d<\/p>\n

How important do you believe ideological diversity among faculty to be?: 27% for \u201cVery important\u201d, 33% for \u201cSomewhat important\u201d, 23% for \u201cIndifferent\u201d, 13% for \u201cSomewhat unimportant\u201d, 4% for \u201cVery unimportant\u201d<\/p>\n

How satisfied are you with the amount of ideological diversity among the faculty at Swarthmore?: 13% for \u201cVery dissatisfied\u201d, 17% for \u201cSomewhat dissatisfied\u201d, 43% for \u201cNeutral\u201d, 17% for \u201cSomewhat satisfied\u201d, 10% for \u201cVery satisfied\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"On Nov. 25, The Phoenix sent its inaugural faculty survey to Swarthmore\u2019s 310 faculty members (all lecturers, as…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":424016,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5131],"tags":[5672,5229,5643,1587,24372,197735,5376,1589,4154,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-424015","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-phoenix","8":"tag-administration","9":"tag-america","10":"tag-arizona","11":"tag-az","12":"tag-faculty","13":"tag-faculty-poll","14":"tag-issues","15":"tag-phoenix","16":"tag-poll","17":"tag-united-states","18":"tag-united-states-of-america","19":"tag-unitedstates","20":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","21":"tag-us","22":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115661157040237491","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/424015","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=424015"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/424015\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/424016"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=424015"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=424015"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=424015"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}