2008 Simpson Survey

Kedron Bardwell, Ph.D,

with research by:

Nick Blanks, Clayton Bunch, Elizabeth Caballero, Erin Coen, James Doro, Sarah Harl,
Lindsay Harms, Zach Haugland, Kristen Karpan, Jared Kemper, Steve Lovitt, Lindsey Maas,
Tyler Pearson, Max Petersen, Megan Ripperger, Amanda Ruff, Aaron Sewell, Monte Yancey

For more information, contact: Dr. Kedron Bardwell

Department of Political Science, Simpson College
701 North C St., Indianola, IA 50125 / (515) 961-1593
kedron.bardwell@simpson.edu
www.simpson.edu/~bardwell/survey.htm
 2

How was this survey conducted?

The 2008 Simpson Survey is based on student and faculty responses to a political and
social issues survey conducted in May 2008. The survey was written, distributed and analyzed
by Professor Kedron Bardwell and students in POSC 290. The target populations of the study
were: (a) 1,214 students registered for an on-campus course or a May Term trip, excluding the
students in COOP 219/319 internships, and (b) 95 full-time teaching faculty. We circulated a
Scantron-style, self-administered survey in on-campus classes (with data collected on the spot)
and via email to students in travel courses or engaged in work experience or student teaching.
Faculty members who were not teaching in May were sent an email survey.

A total of 838 Simpson students and 66 faculty members returned a completed survey, for
a strong response rate of 69 percent for both populations. Potential sources of error in the survey
results include systematic differences in response rates by subgroup. The response rate for email
surveys was fairly low, raising the issue that students who traveled abroad might be different
politically than the rest of the student population. Comparing the two subgroups, we found no
substantial differences on relevant issue questions. To receive a copy of the survey, contact
Kedron Bardwell at kedron.bardwell@simpson.edu.

What do we know about the politics of Simpson students and faculty?

Before the first installment of the Simpson Survey in 2006, most of what we knew about
the social and political attitudes of the Simpson community was anecdotal. Prior to that time, no
one had conducted a systematic study of the politics of Simpson faculty. What little we “knew”
about faculty politics on campus was gleaned from debates in the hallways, casual conversation,
faculty meetings, and Forum events. The conventional wisdom about the politics of American
faculty is that professors are predominantly liberal and Democratic. Our 2006 report confirmed
that this is an accurate description of Simpson College faculty. The report sparked discussion on
campus about differences in faculty versus student politics, and it placed the politics of Simpson
faculty in context by comparing our responses to data from national studies of college professors
(Lindblom et al 2005; Rothman et al 2005).

In contrast, there is a wealth of information available about Simpson students and how
their political attitudes have changed over time. Thanks to UCLA’s Cooperative Institutional
Research Program (CIRP) annual survey of college freshmen, we know how Simpson first-year
students “stack up” demographically and politically compared to students at other colleges and
universities (Pryor et al 2005). We can also compare current Simpson students to students in
years or decades past. Simpson’s participation in the CIRP survey has produced 30 years of rich
data on who our first- year students are and what they believe about political and social issues at
the time they enter college. But the CIRP data can not tell us how individual students change in
their four years at Simpson (for example, due to faculty influence or new experiences).

Future editions of the Simpson Survey (likely to be repeated each presidential election
year, starting with this report) will highlight “macro-level” changes in the politics of Simpson
students over time. We begin this report with a brief snapshot from the CIRP data, comparing
Simpson students to other American college students. The data include first-year students who
 3

started at Simpson in Fall 2007. We highlight differences between the 2007 data and 2005 data
in noteworthy cases. The right column reports averages for first-year students at other “highly
selective” four-year religious colleges (our comparison group in the CIRP).

4-yr. religious
Profile of Students Entering Simpson in Fall 2007 (CIRP) highly selective

• 92 % were white [vs. 96% in 2005] 89%

• 57% reported a high school GPA of A- or above [vs. 63% in 2005] 54%
• 43% say their father obtained a 4-year college degree 64%

• 27% report discussing religion frequently in the past year 40%

• 22% report discussing politics frequently in the past year 33%
• 41% volunteered one hour or more per week in the past year 52%

• 51% characterize their politics as “middle of the road” 39%

• 69% say wealthy people should pay a larger share of taxes than they do now 57%
• 79% agree a national health care plan is needed to cover everyone 71%
• 38% say it is “very important to improve my understanding of other cultures” 57%
• 21% say marijuana should be legalized 33%
• 55% agree same-sex couples should have the right to marry 56%
• 78% say the government is not doing enough to control pollution 78%

These figures are a snapshot of the Simpson first-year class in terms of demographics,
academic experiences, civic engagement, ideological leanings, and opinions on policy issues.
The Simpson student population is not very diverse (but is slightly more diverse than in 2005)
and has lower levels of civic and political engagement than students at other colleges. Most
students performed at a high level in high school; many are first-generation college students.
Incoming Simpson students are, on average, political centrists with a mix of conservative and
progressive views on cultural issues, but they lean slightly left on economic or environmental
issues (for more information see Simpson’s 2005 CIRP Institutional Summary, available from the
Office of Student Affairs). This sketch matches key findings in our 2008 survey.

We now turn to the results from the 2008 Simpson Survey. The first section introduces
the demographics of our students and faculty. The second section explores civic engagement.
The third section explores partisanship, ideology, and voting, including evaluations of the two
parties and participation in the 2008 presidential nomination process. The fourth section tracks
respondents’ attitudes about the Iraq War and presidential job approval. The fifth section takes a
look at domestic policy (i.e. economic and social issues).

1. Demographics of Simpson Students and Faculty

The table on the next page lists the demographics of our sample of Simpson students and
faculty, including characteristics like gender, race/ethnicity, family income, class year, and major
or academic division. The demographic data for this sample of 838 students and 66 professors
closely reflect institutional data for these groups (not all columns add to 100% due to rounding).
 4

2008 Simpson Survey:

Basic Demographics
STUDENTS FACULTY

Gender
Male 43% 61%
Female 57% 39%

Race
White 92% 94%
Black 3% 0%
Hispanic 2% 5%
Other/Multiracial 4% 2%

Family Income
< $25,000 8% 1%
$25,000-$49,999 28% 9%
$50,000-$74,999 31% 20%
> $75,000 34% 70%

Class Year
Senior 26%
Junior 23%
Sophomore 24%
First Year 26%

Academic Division
Education & Social Science 32% 20%
Humanities 10% 21%
Natural Sciences 21% 26%
Policy Studies 29% 18%
Visual & Performing Arts 9% 15%

As in 2006, juniors and sophomores are slightly underrepresented in the survey sample (probably
due to their high rates of participation in internships and May Term trips).

2. Political Interest and Engagement

In light of the steady decline in political participation in the U.S. in the last three decades
(Putnam 2000), the role of younger voters in this decline, and the surge in turnout among all age
groups in 2004 (Patterson 2004) and in 2008 primaries and caucuses, we tried to gauge political
interest, attention, and engagement at Simpson College. Not surprisingly, our survey finds big
differences between students and faculty in political interest, media consumption, and political
activity. We measured political interest by asking students and faculty how often they discuss
 5

politics outside the classroom. A majority of professors (55%) talk about politics with family or
friends daily, and most of the rest have these discussions weekly (see below). Among students,
daily political discussions are rare, although the share of students who discuss politics weekly
has improved slightly (from 30% to 37%) since 2006.

60%

Faculty member
Student
50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Daily Weekly Monthly Rarely or
never
How often do you talk about politics with family
or friends?

The same patterns show up in student-faculty differences in attention to political news.

When asked how often they follow politics in the media (online, in newspapers, on television),
more than 80 percent of professors say they do so daily. Less than one quarter of students can
say the same.1 Unfortunately, many Simpson students are disengaged from any kind of political
news or information. A quarter of students say they “rarely or never” (that is, not even monthly)
follow politics in the media, and another quarter do so only monthly.

So it is not surprising to find that many of these same students are not very confident in
their knowledge of U.S. politics. In the survey we asked: “How informed do you think you are
about current politics and political issues?” Less than a quarter of students say they are very well
informed or well informed. About 50 percent say they are fairly informed, and 24 percent judged
themselves as not well informed (but win points for honesty). On the other side of the spectrum,
two-thirds of Simpson professors claim to be very well informed or well informed about current
politics and issues.

1
To see full data for all of the questions not depicted graphically here, see http://www.simpson.edu/~bardwell/survey.htm.
 6

The results are a bit better for Simpson students when we move from news consumption
habits to actual political activity. Bucking the trends among their peers, a decent percentage of
Simpson students were politically active in the last two years (see below). About 20 percent of
them participated in politics online (maybe on myspace.com or facebook.com, or on a political
weblog). Two-fifths of students say they attended a political speech, a number that could stand
to be higher given how many presidential candidates visited the Indianola area in 2007 or 2008.
Just over ten percent volunteered their time and labor on behalf of a campaign (probably in the
presidential caucus or a state legislative race).

For all types of political activity, however, professors participate at nearly double the rate
of students. Despite fears that Simpson students lag behind in civic engagement, and some real
evidence to back up this claim, it is clear that professors have a wealth of experiences they can
share to help model and teach students about civic responsibility. This is a solid foundation on
which to build a more engaged campus.

80% In last 2 years, have you

written about or
discussed politics online?
In last 2 years, have you
attended a political
speech?
In last 2 years, have you
volunteered for a political
campaign?
60%

40%

20%

0%
Faculty member Student

A final measure of political activity is the simple act of voting. Best estimates place the
national turnout rate for 18-24 year olds in the 2004 presidential election at between 42 and 47
percent. Similar estimates place turnout for this same age group of Iowans at about 60 percent.
Iowa is one of several states in the Midwest (including Wisconsin and Minnesota) with turnout
rates higher than the U.S. average. Did this hold true for the Simpson community in the 2008
caucuses, and will it in the November election?
 7

According to our 2008 survey, about 65 percent of Democratic-leaning students voted in

their state’s primary or caucus (versus 53 percent of the Republican “leaners”). Although this
indicates an “enthusiasm gap” that Republicans will need to work to overcome, this is still an
impressive number for college students. As a comparison, 70 percent of Simpson students voted
in the general election in 2004, and general election turnout is always much higher than primary
turnout. The college should be proud of its strong participation rates in the nomination, and this
bodes well for Election Day. Indeed, when asked whether they plan to vote in the fall election,
nearly three-quarters of Simpson students say they are very likely to do so.

Among faculty members, turnout rates typically are very high. Earlier this year, more
than 85 percent of Democratic-leaning Simpson professors and about a quarter of Republican
“leaners” showed up to vote in the Iowa caucuses. And a full 100 percent of faculty members
say they are very likely to turn out to vote in November. Although Simpson students did not
exhibit high rates of participation in the time-intensive civic activities discussed earlier, they
turned out in droves in 2008 to engage in the “easy” act of voting.

3. Partisanship, Ideology, and Voting

Based on the 2008 Simpson Survey, we find that this gap between Simpson students and
professors in political activity is matched by big differences between the two groups in political
affiliation, ideology, and candidate choice. As shown below, Simpson students are only slightly
to the left of the U.S. population in party affiliation. For example, a 2008 Pew poll finds that 36
percent of Americans identify as Democrats, 15 percent as Democratic-leaning independents, 12
percent as “true” independents, 10 percent as Republican-leaning independents, and 27 percent
as solid Republicans (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans).

Party affiliation (STUDENTS)

Republican
Independent,
Leans Rep
Independent, No
21% Leaning
Independent,
35% Leans Dem
Democrat
11%

10%
23%
 8

Party affiliation (FACULTY)

Republican
Independent,
12% Leans Rep
Independent, No
Leaning
8% Independent,
2% Leans Dem
Democrat
65%
13%

Simpson professors have a very different partisan profile than Simpson students and the
larger U.S. population. More than 75 percent of professors identify as Democrats or Democratic
leaners. Almost none fall in the true independent mold, and less than a quarter are Republicans
or Republican leaners. While professors tilt strongly to the Democrats if compared to the U.S.
public, their partisanship mirrors academia. One recent national poll of 1,643 faculty members
at four-year schools found that 50 percent identify with Democrats, 11 percent are Republicans,
and the rest are independents or independent leaners (Rothman et al 2005).

Interestingly, the U.S. population has shifted slightly toward the Democrats since 2006 in
terms of party affiliation, perhaps due to the Iraq War and President Bush’s low approval ratings.
This trend is visible on Simpson’s campus as well. In the last two years, party affiliation among
faculty has moved nine percentage points (and student affiliation has moved eight points) in the
Democratic or Democratic-leaning direction.

Ideology is closely linked to party affiliation, even more so now that the parties have
realigned regionally and are more ideologically pure and internally consistent (Paulson 2000).
Unexpectedly, the movement toward Democrats in party affiliation is not matched by a move
toward self-identified liberalism. About 35 percent of Simpson students say they are liberal or
very liberal (see graphics next page), the same as 2006, although this is a larger share of self-
identified liberals than among the U.S. public (21 percent). As in 2006, political moderates
comprise the largest group of students on campus (44 percent), and professors tilt to the left of
both the U.S. public and students. Professors here are also more liberal than college faculty
nationally. Two-thirds of Simpson professors say they are liberal or very liberal, versus 50
percent of professors from other private four-year colleges (Lindholm et al 2005).
 9

The fact that Simpson faculty and students have become more Democratic, but not more
liberal, gives some hope to Republicans. Many voters have ditched the Republican “brand” but
not conservatism in general. We will see if the anti-Republican tide is a short-term revolt against
President Bush and Iraq (or, for some, a punishment for Republicans’ desertion of conservative
principles), or whether it is a long-term party realignment favoring the Democrats.

Ideology (STUDENTS)

Very liberal
3% Liberal
9% Moderate
16% Conservative
Very
conservative

27%

44%

Ideology (FACULTY)

Very liberal
3%
Liberal
Moderate
11% Conservative
21% Very
conservative

18%

46%
 10

These partisan trends were reflected in campus preferences in the 2008 presidential race.
As noted earlier, turnout was slightly higher for Democrats than for Republicans. Among those
who voted in the 2008 caucuses, faculty had a solid preference for the progressivism of Senator
Barack Obama (43%) over the more moderate Senator Hillary Clinton (29%) and the blue-collar
appeal of former Senator John Edwards (14%). Democratic students went wild for Obama (with
67% in a multi-candidate field!). On the Republican side, students and faculty divided. Students
favored the grassroots campaign of Governor Mike Huckabee (39%) over Senator John McCain
(29%) and former Governor Mitt Romney (18%). Graphs on the next two pages show candidate
preference, as well as turnout rates, to illustrate the “enthusiasm gap” between the parties.

Democratic FACULTY (or Independents who Lean Democratic):

Which candidate did you vote for in the 2008 nomination race?

Obama 37%

Clinton 24%

Did not 15%

vote

Other 13%

Edwards 11%

0 10 20 30 40

Democratic STUDENTS (or Independents who Lean Democratic):

Which candidate did you vote for the in 2008 nomination race?

Obama 45%

Did not 34%

vote

Edwards 11%

Clinton 8%

Other 2%

0 10 20 30 40 50
 11

Republican FACULTY (or Independents who Lean Republican):

Which candidate did you vote for in the 2008 nomination race?

McCain 42%

Huckabee 25%

Did not
vote 25%

Other 8%

0 10 20 30 40 50

Republican STUDENTS (or Independents who Lean Republican):

Which candidate did you vote for in the 2008 nomination race?

Did not
vote 47%

Huckabee 20%

McCain 16%

Romney 9%

Other 8%

0 10 20 30 40 50

Even within the Republican Party, a sharp drop in enthusiasm for Republican politicians
is evident. For example, a full three-quarters of Republican professors and almost 50 percent of
Republican students rated their party’s performance as either fair or poor (not excellent or good).
Democrats were ten to 15 percentage points more positive about their party. When asked which
party does a better job on policy issues, respondents picked the Democratic Party for every issue
except terrorism. Finally, when asked which party they expect to vote for in November, almost
80 percent of professors and two-thirds of students are leaning toward the Democrats.
 12

4. Iraq and the “War on Terror”

Our survey included an extensive battery of policy questions, including issues like the
Iraq War, terrorism, economics, and moral issues. We also studied President Bush’s approval
ratings in light the Iraq War because many analysts see them as inextricably linked.2 We begin
with the Iraq War, one of the most controversial U.S. military engagements in recent memory.
Although it is sometimes difficult to measure retrospective views, we wanted to see how many
Simpson students and professors have changed their positions on whether the decision to use
military force in Iraq was right or wrong. Public support for the Iraq War at its 2003 inception
stood at 70 percent (see archive at http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm). We asked the “right or
wrong decision” question twice: once asking respondents to recall their position on the issue in
2003, and then asking about their position today.

What we found is that support for the Iraq War on the Simpson campus, as for the nation
at large, has eroded significantly in the last three years (see below). In 2003, Simpson professors
stood 2:1 opposed to the use of military force in Iraq. In our 2006 survey, they opposed the War
by a ratio of 4:1, and today opposition stands at nearly 8:1.

Conversely, most students (58 percent) supported the Iraq War in 2003. Their support
dropped sharply to under 40 percent in 2006, and then to 32 percent in our 2008 survey. In fact,
Simpson students’ support for the Iraq War is a mirror image of the latest opinion polls (see Iraq
questions at http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm). Digging deeper into the results, we found
self-identified “independents” were the most likely group to switch positions.

In 2003, did
60 you think the
use of military
force in Iraq
was the right or
50 wrong
decision?
vs.
PERCENT SUPPORT

[NOW] in 2008,
40 do you think
think the use of
military force in
Iraq was the
30 58 right or wrong
decision?

20
32
27
10
13

0
Faculty members Students

2
See the CNN analysis: “Iraq Keeping Bush Approval Down” at http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/08/bush.poll/
 13

In view of this public backlash against what President Bush has called a “cornerstone” of
the war on terrorism, his job approval ratings have suffered badly. At the time we distributed the
2008 survey, Bush’s national approval rating was 29 percent (see Gallup poll of May 8-11, 2008
at http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm).

Again, Simpson students are mostly in line with the American public, with presidential
job approval sitting in the upper- 20s (see graph below). Likewise, the fact that only 10 percent
of faculty approve of President Bush’s job performance is not a shock, given that his popularity
among independents (and even some Republicans) has waned. One of the interesting insights in
the data is the extraordinary correlation between the president’s job approval and support for or
opposition to the Iraq War. This indicates that absent improvements on the ground in Iraq, like
political stability, it is unlikely Bush’s long-term presidential legacy will be salvaged.

100%
Faculty
members
Students
80%

60%

90%
40%
73%

20%
27%
10%
0%
Approve Disapprove

Do you approve or disapprove of the

way George Bush is handling his job?

Finally, we asked respondents their views on whether the War in Iraq has helped or hurt
the larger war on terrorism, or whether it has had no effect. Most national polls on this question
show that Americans are split: 43 percent say it has helped, 43 percent say it has hurt, and only
six percent say it has had no effect (Pew Research 2005a). On this issue, the views of Simpson
professors are unequivocal; two-thirds say the war has hurt our anti-terrorism effort. Meanwhile,
Simpson students are conflicted. About one third fall into each category, with a slight plurality
saying the Iraq War has hurt the war on terrorism.
 14

5. Domestic Policy Issues

The 2008 Simpson Survey asked several questions on domestic issues. First, respondents
were asked to rate the performance of the two parties (i.e. which one does a better job) on issues.
Second, we listed statements about these issues, and respondents were asked to answer using the
Likert scale (five options from strongly agree to strongly disagree). Here we highlight the most
interesting findings, such as issues where there were unexpected student-faculty differences, or
where Simpson’s results diverge from overall U.S. public opinion.

Which Party Does a Better Job on Issues?

The domestic issues that we polled were: the economy, education, environment, health
care, Iraq, and terrorism. Simpson students’ responses shed light on how younger adults think
about political issues. In keeping with national data that show youth trending Democratic (see a
2008 Pew report at http://pewresearch.org/pubs/813/gen-dems), our students are less likely than
the public to say Republicans do a better job than Democrats. The Democratic “lead” on issues
ranges from a glaring 42 points on the environment to about 35 points on economics, education,
and health care. On just one issue, terrorism, students say Republicans do a better job. It is also
worth noting that Simpson students are more likely than the U.S. public to think both parties do
an equally poor job. On average, 20 percent of students said this.

Two notes are of interest regarding faculty responses to the “better job” questions. First,
about 30 percent of professors say neither party is doing a good job on Iraq. This is the one issue
where professors have the least confidence in either party to find a solution. The environment is
the most one-sided issue: more than three-quarters of faculty say Democrats do a better job with
environmental policy. This issue, along with health care, is also where the Democratic “lead” is
the largest among the American public (Pew Research 2005a).

Controversial Issues

Next, respondents were asked to strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree, or
plead “no opinion” on various issue statements. Changes between 2006 and 2008 were small;
when they did appear they favored the more “progressive” position.

• About 70 percent of professors oppose increased restrictions on abortion. Students

are closely divided: 37 percent favor more restrictions, but 42 percent oppose them.

• Eighty percent of professors (but only 53 percent of students) favor federal funding
for embryonic stem cell research.

• Campus support for the new public smoking ban in Iowa is solid; about 80 percent
of students and faculty favor the new law. Support among Iowans is slightly lower.

• Iowans favor the death penalty by about 2:1 (Roos 2006a), but Simpson students and
faculty are not so sure. Only 30 percent of professors support the death penalty, even
for the most serious crimes. Just under half of students support capital punishment.
 15

• An amendment banning gay marriage has little support on this campus; students
oppose the idea (60 percent to 24 percent), as do faculty (86 percent to 12 percent).
Iowans are split fifty to fifty (http://pewforum.org/news/rss.php?NewsID=15087).

• Americans support federal government funding of a universal health care system by

a 2:1 margin (see http://pollingreport.com/health3.htm). Support for this policy is 3:1
among Simpson students and professors.

• Most Simpson professors (86 percent) and students (67 percent) believe that global
warming is a significant international problem. Yet we are reluctant to personally
sacrifice for this cause: only 11 percent of students and 39 percent of faculty agree
gas taxes should be raised to encourage conservation.

• On immigration, the campus is sharply divided. About 85 percent of professors

favor a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but only 44 percent of students
agree. Support in the U.S. population is 60 percent (http://www.gallup.com/poll/
26875/Public-Still-Supports-Path-Citizenship-Illegal-Immigrants.aspx)

• On poverty, over 80 percent of both faculty and students say the U.S. should spend
more money fighting domestic poverty. Interestingly, students’ concern for poverty
does not have a global reach, despite our emphasis on global citizenship and social
justice. Just 38 percent of students (versus 71 percent of professors) agree the U.S.
should spend more money fighting global poverty.

• On free trade, students and faculty are skeptical. About 35 percent of professors and
41 percent of students agree that free trade generally benefits all the nations involved.
Still, 24 percent of faculty and a whopping 44 percent of students have “no opinion.”

• Negative sentiment on the trade issue is likely driven by our views on the state of the
U.S. economy. The clear message from the Simpson campus: the nation’s economy
is struggling. Only five percent of faculty members and 10 percent of students say
the economy is excellent or good; the rest rate economic conditions as fair or poor.

• On the controversial issue of media bias, we see more of a free marketplace (rather
than a consistent slant) to the mainstream media. Only 10 percent of professors and
students say news coverage is neutral. About double that number say it leans to the
left, but nearly 60 percent of professors and students say media bias varies by outlet.

6. Religious Beliefs and Behavior

In light of Simpson College’s historic relationship with the United Methodist Church, we
asked respondents about their religious beliefs and behavior (personal religiosity). The table on
the next page highlights our major findings on students’ and professors’ belief in God, religious
and denominational affiliation, religious service attendance, and the salience (i.e. importance) of
religion in their daily lives.
 16

A Religious Profile of Simpson

Students Faculty U.S Public3

Which statement about God I believe in a Christian God 77% 53% N/A
comes closest to your belief? I believe in a higher power 7% 14% N/A
but not God
I believe in neither (atheist)* 4% 12% N/A

Religious Affiliation Mainline Protestant 51% 44% 24%

Evangelical Protestant 6% 6% 32%
Catholic / Orthodox 21% 24% 23%
Other religion 9% 6% 7%
Secular / no affiliation 13% 20% 14%

Excluding weddings & funerals, Once a week or more 21% 38% 41%
how often do you attend Once or twice a month 33% 11% 14%
religious services? Seldom 35% 32% 35%
Never 11% 20% 11%

How important is religion in Very important 37% 42% 60%

your daily life? Fairly important 39% 18% 25%
Not very important 24% 40% 14%

* Columns do not add to 100%: the

rest are various forms of agnostics.

Concerning belief in God, the Simpson community holds views similar to the rest of the
U.S. population, although atheists are slightly overrepresented in the Simpson faculty. Mainline
Protestants are by far the largest group among students and faculty. Evangelical Protestants are
few and far between on campus, as is the case at many liberal arts colleges. Catholics and other
groups on campus approximate their size in the U.S. population.

What about church attendance? Despite the religious history of the College, we attend
services slightly less often than other Americans. Only 20 percent of Simpson students attend
church once a week or more.4 Students may still be spiritually “seeking” but they seem to look
for this in less institutional settings than a weekly religious service. A similar pattern emerges
regarding the salience of religion to individuals’ lives. While 60 percent of adults nationally
agree religion is a very important part of their lives, just about 40 percent of Simpson students
and faculty say so. Simpson faculty members are much more likely than students (or the U.S.
public) to say that religion is not very important in their daily lives.

3
See Pew Research 2005b for a closer look at the comparison data.
4
More specifically, our students are also less likely than other young people to attend church. See Greenberg 2005 (about
36 percent of 18-25 year olds report frequent attendance). Keep in mind that attendance for all age groups is often inflated
because respondents are self-reporting the behavior. It is one of the classic “social desirability” problems in social science.
 17

Conclusion

This survey report is merely a sketch of our findings from the 2008 Simpson Survey. It
summarizes the views of Simpson students and professors, with a minimum of interpretation or
analysis on specific demographic and issue questions. Results for the student subgroup match
closely the available CIRP survey data on Simpson’s first-year students (Lindholm et al 2005),
corroborating the representativeness of our sample. The Simpson Survey reveals key insights
into politics on Simpson’s campus and has important implications for the educational and civic
mission of this liberal-arts college:

• Simpson students’ levels of political attention via the news media, interest, and civic
engagement are relatively low, with the exception of the “simple” act of voting in the
2008 caucus. As is true among younger voters, a substantial minority of students are
disaffected, cynical, and apathetic. There is much work to be done on this campus in
terms of civic education (specifically in areas like political knowledge and activism),
but a highly successful voter registration and mobilization drive in early 2008 gives
us hope that we can build upon these trends into (and well beyond) this November.

• On partisanship, ideology, and issues, Simpson students mirror (or are slightly to the
left of) the American public. Simpson professors are well to the left of students and
the public, and are slightly more liberal than U.S. faculty in general. To maintain a
healthy dialogue on campus, the college should continue to promote engagement with
intellectual and ideological diversity in various forums (both formal and informal) for
open and civil discussion of controversial issues.

In conclusion, this survey gives the college a more detailed picture of who its students
and faculty are socially, politically, ideologically, and spiritually. The data that we collected is
now available online (http://www.simpson.edu/~bardwell/survey.htm) for further examination,
analysis, or interpretation by the campus community.

The analyses and graphics in this report were created using the SPSS statistical package,
and all interpretations of the output are solely the responsibility of Professor Kedron Bardwell.
For questions about the survey, data coding, or any other statistical issues, contact Dr. Bardwell
at (515) 961-1593 or kedron.bardwell@simpson.edu.
 18

Sources

Greenberg, Anna. 2005. “OMG: How Generation Y is Redefining Faith in the iPod Era.”
Reboot. http://www.rebooters.net/poll/rebootpoll.pdf

Lindholm, Jennifer, Katalin Szelenyi, Sylvia Hurtado, and William Korn. 2005. The American
College Teacher: National Norms for the 2004-2005 HERI Faculty Study. Los Angeles:
Higher Education Research Institute.

Patterson, Thomas E. 2005. “Young Voters and the 2004 Election.” Joan Shorenstein Center on
Press, Politics, and Public Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/presspol/vanishvoter/Releases/Vanishing_Voter_Final_
Report_2004_Election.pdf

Paulson, Arthur. 2000. Realignment and Party Revival : Understanding American Electoral
Politics at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Pew Research Center. 2005a. “Economic Pessimism Grows, Gas Prices Pinch: Independents
Back Democrats on Most Issues, Congressional Midterms.” Pew Research Center for the
People and the Press. http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/257.pdf

Pew Research Center 2005b. “Religion a Strength and Weakness for Both Parties: Public
Divided on Origins of Life.” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/254.pdf

Pryor, John H., Sylvia Hurtado, Jessica Sharkness, and William Korn. 2007. The American
Freshman: National Norms for Fall 2007. Los Angeles: HERI.

Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.
New York: Simon and Schuster.

Rothman, Stanley, S. Robert Lichter, and Neil Nevitte. 2005. “Politics and Professional
Advancement among College Faculty.” The Forum 3:1, Article 2.
http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol3/iss1/art2