Complete For Merit Promotion Advancement/Career Review: Fill & Download for Free

Let me start with what i feel, whenever thought of joining Navy come in, and over corrective and reactive mind corrects it by adding prefix “WHY” before this thought. In this case, the answer which i come up with is.“Navy is where i was born and bought up,from my childhood i admired and aspired to be part of it. The Camaraderie, team work and latest technologies has always thrilled me. As I grew up and started gaining skill sets, i realized i was good at managing people, doing team work and a perfect team player, and by being a part of Indian Navy, i will be able to use and test this skill sets with right amount of opportunities and challenges which in turn will horn new skills too.”Well, one can surely comment upon as there is nothing impressive about this answer, well in reality it isn’t, because its the TRUTH and suits my background and personality.As Recent PR Tagline, The Navy Offers You More…….and believe me they really do.In terms of Career Objective, i guess for me i would say,“Opportunity to join a Organisation, where Camaraderie and team work are building blocks also where my skill sets, both technical and Managerial are tested under challenging situation and at the same time horn the new skills in me, by complementing each other thrusting towards mutual benefit and above all benefit for nation, further bringing both Pride and Glory in Life.”Well this was My view, or you can say, my objective to Join Indian Navy, lets have a look why it gives more.lets see what Indian Navy has to offer.WHY JOIN?By choosing INDIAN NAVY, you are choosing more than just a job. We offer a unique way of exploring your life and provide ample opportunities to exploit your potential in every sphere of life. We provide a level of security and comfort that is almost unheard of in civilian life.For many people, the greatest attraction of a career in the Indian Navy is the variety or opportunities to make you career challenging. You can face the challenges and develop methods to exploit the full potential in you. A job in the Navy offers you a chance to exploit your true potential as a professional – by learning new skills, acquiring unrivalled experience in the process of applying those skills, and making the most of Navy advancement.In the Indian Navy, you'll find there's much more to be gained than a regular salary. In fact, the experience that you gain in the Navy can help you shape your future through outstanding financial benefits, unparalleled career potential, and the lifestyle of freedom and personal growth that you've been waiting for.Think about it. As long as you have the drive to make a difference in the world – and in your own life – there will be a place for you in the Indian Navy. You can gain valuable sills and build a secure future.If you are starting your career with zero professional experience or seeking to enhance your current skill set and education, the Navy is a sure way to take your career to the next level.In the Navy where you can build a career that thrives. Here your individual thoughts, ideas and skills are given an opportunity to shine. Whether you're looking to build your leadership attributes, learn a skilled trade or rise to the top of your field, the Navy will help you do it.Explore the worldThe ships and submarines of the Indian Navy often visit a number of foreign ports. The men who serve on these platforms get to visit the numerous foreign ports that these ships and submarines visit.Leadership OpportunitiesA career in the Navy will provide ample opportunities to be able to prove your leadership skills. As you propel your career upwards, you'll find yourself with greater responsibility to manage and operate the men and machine under you. You will be a part of the safety and success of those around you. With time you will hone the skills you need to motivate, train and communicate effectively. Skills that will benefit you beyond the Navy and in your everyday life!Ways of Becoming an Officer in The Indian NavyIn today's world, there are so many possibilities for you to choose from, such as high visibility, rapid growth jobs in banking, computers, corporate management, civil services etc. While examining your options, have you considered the Indian Navy? The Indian Navy will give you all the training you need and help you make the most of what you have your talents, your skills, your spirit and your aspirations. Are you in search of a challenge – are you young and bright, just out of school or university, have wide personal interests and hobbies, prepared to work hard and expect fare more from your career than a remunerative pay packet? You need a challenge – a job that grows with you and provides variety and excitement. That is what precisely the Navy offers you. The Navy offers an extraordinary range of exciting career opportunities together with the chance to travel widely, meet new people and to enjoy the warmth & camaraderie that is so special to the service.Selection and EntryOfficers recruitment is advertised through the Employment News and all important National and Regional news papers / dailies. Selection for Permanent Commission through NDA and Naval Academy cadet entry and CDSE (Graduate) entry is through a written examination conducted by the UPSC, followed by an interview by the Service Selection Board (SSB). For all other Direct Permanent Commission entries and Short Service Commission entries there is no written examination. These applications are short listed as per the criteria laid down by the Naval Headquarters, Directorate of Manpower Planning & Recruitment. Selection is through merit alone.Educational & Other QualificationIt is mandatory that all Degrees and educational qualifications are from Educational Institutions recognized by the competent authority in the field. Degrees / mark sheets must be original or attested by appropriate authorities, as asked for in the advertisement. No compromise/relaxation will be made on this issue. All candidates desirous of joining the Indian Navy must be physically / mentally fit as per laid down standards Proficiency in sports, swimming and extra-curricular activities is desirable.Women EntryWomen are granted Short Service Commission (SSC) in Naval Architect, Law, Logistics, ATC, Aviation (Observer) & Education Branches. The government has also given approval for Permanent Commission (PC) in Education, Law and Naval Architect branch on completion of SSC tenure depending upon merit and vacancy.Leadership OpportunitiesA career in the Navy will provide ample opportunities to be able to prove your leadership skills. As you propel your career upwards, you'll find yourself with greater responsibility to manage and operate the men and machine under you. You will be a part of the safety and success of those around you. With time you will hone the skills you need to motivate, train and communicate effectively. Skills that will benefit you beyond the Navy and in your everyday life!Health CareHigh-quality health-care is each one of us would want in case of medical emergency. Rising medical costs and skyrocketing insurance premium can make it difficult to afford quality medical care. In Indian Navy, we pride ourselves in providing world-class medical care to each and every sailor and officer – as well as their families. This full comprehensive coverage is available at all military hospitals and dental facilities.Leave and Travel ConcessionsSailors and Officers enjoy generous leave time. As a sailor you are entitled to 60 days annual leave and 30 days casual leave. Officers are entitled to 60 days annual leave and 20 days casual leave. You can also accumulate 30 days of leave in a year which you can en-cash at the time of retirement. The accumulation of leave has a limit which is stipulated from time to time.The officers and their family members are entitled to free rail / air travel on leave once a year. Six travel concessions forms are also authorized to each officer for performing journey by train.The sailors are entitled to free rail travel on leave once a year. Travel concession by rail / air is also provided on other occasion.Group InsuranceThe Navy provides all its serving personnel with superior life insurance coverage at a very minimal monthly premium.Explore the worldThe ships and submarines of the Indian Navy often visit a number of foreign ports. The men who serve on these platforms get to visit the numerous foreign ports that these ships and submarines visit.Recreational FacilitiesSailors and Officers alike have access to free and low cost recreational facilities. As a sailor and officer, working on the ship or a base, it's not just all work and no play. You will have the opportunity to work and live with other service members, as well as rest and relax away from the job.AccommodationOfficers and sailors are entitled to free accommodation. Indian Navy takes pride in providing outstanding living areas and conditions for its Sailors and Officers. Most of the residential areas have markets, ATMs, playgrounds, swimming pool, gymnasium etc. Whether living in a barracks, an apartment or a house, you'll have access to all these amenities. Navy housing is home to many families; moms, dads, kids and even some visiting grandparents. Normally, Navy quarters come furnished with the exception of a stove and refrigerator.ClothingOfficers are granted allowances periodically to stitch their own uniform. All sailors are entitled for free clothing. A kit maintenance allowance is also provided to officers and sailors every month to maintain the uniform.RationAll officers and sailors are entitled to free ration. Sailors can also seek money in lieu of ration while staying with their families.Naval Housing SchemesThe Navy has special housing schemes in almost in major cities. Officers and sailors have an opportunity to acquire a modern, excellent apartment of their own in planned surrounding at a station of their choice of post retirement settlement.TrainingAfter you have cleared the selection procedure, you are sent to one of the Naval training establishments. Here you undergo scientifically planned rigorous physical and academic training that is aimed to gear you for the life in the Navy.All the Naval training establishments are equipped with the state-of-the-art infrastructure and the best of the facilities including clubs, swimming pools, squash courts etc. Once you join the training establishments, Navy will take care of all your requirements like food, lodging etc.Now That you Have Joined Lets see Whats Inside…!!!LIFE AT SEAA far cry from duty ashore. For one thing, while at sea, you will be putting all your skills and determination to the actual test. You will be given all the responsibility and will be doing an important job for which you have been uniquely trained.Of course, sea duty does not mean you will spend all your time at sea. Your ship will have its own ‘home-port’ and you will spend quite a bit of your time in or close to that port. At sea, you will be excited to visiting far flung places in India and abroad which you had only read or heard about.Life at sea is full of challenges and immense satisfaction”. While you are at sea, the Navy looks after the welfare of your family like its own.Whether on a ship or submarine, Sailors are provided with sufficient living spaces. Each Sailor is assigned a “berthing area,” which includes a locker for storage, as well as a “rack” for sleep. The cooks in the kitchen (galleys) constantly prepare food for hundreds of men. There are dining halls for the men to dine. Mess decks are not just areas to sleep, but are also for recreation – Sailors and Officers can kick back and watch television or play games.CULTURAL INTEGRATIONIndia is a large country with diverse religion, culture, tradition and values. The Navy draws its immensely talented personnel from communities of all kinds from all across the country. In the Navy we have an ethos of equality and therefore men from different background and diverse culture who join us are brought together without showing any bias to a particular person or group. We are resolutely committed to ensuring that all personnel are treated equally and equal opportunities are provided at work and training. The advancement in the career is based solely on individual merits and ability.SPORTS & FITNESSPhysical Fitness and team spirit are very important essentials of Indian Navy ethos. The Navy stresses the importance of fitness every day to its members. That is why we provide free access to high quality sports facilities on board ships and shore establishments. Many of our ships have gymnasium facilities on board. Team sports are encouraged and number of sporting championships are organised within the Navy.Social LifeOn board a ship you will live and work in close quarters with other members of your team. Therefore you will have to get along well with other people. There will be ample opportunities for you and your colleagues to unwind onboard a ship or at harbour. In all accommodation areas onboard ship and at shore there are TV and stereo systems. You can take time to wind down and chill out as you watch DVDs or listen to CDs.The officers and men have a physical training programme they have to clear the Physical Efficiency test from time to time. Most of our Naval base stations have state-of-the-art fitness and workout centers in the world. These facilities and programs promote personal, physical and mental excellence, as well as meet leisure needs and help develop positive lifestyle habits. Personnel can also participate in strength and weight training, cardiovascular conditioning and yoga.Some of you may also get opportunity to participate in adventure activities like mountaineering, river rafting, parachuting etc.When your ship, submarine is in its base port and not deployed on exercises or operations, you will be able to spend time with your family and friends. A number of clubs for officers and institute for sailors have been set up to get together with your family and friends.Now you have lived a life less Ordinary, lets see how you can still continue to do so After Retirement…..!LIFE AFTER NAVYNever underestimate the value of time that you served in the Navy. Your naval career will have stood you in very good stead for civil employment. The industry recognises the high level of training, responsibility, reliability and management skills of service personnel. The leadership skills that you acquire will give you a distinct advantage over others in the civil world.If you decide to pursue your career in the Navy for 15 years as general sailor or 20 years as Artificer or 20 years as Officer then you qualify for a generous pension.Think about it: By the age of 35 to 45 you could choose to retire from service with an assured monthly pay check for the rest of your life. This will supplement what you will receive as pay in your second career.You will continue to enjoy the canteen and medical facilities as you did whilst in serviceFound some videos over YouTube, which can watch to have more clear insight.Indian Navy Training at Indian Naval AcademyInternational Fleet ReviewAnd in case if you are wondering its all work and no fun, well Last Beating Retreat Indian Naval Band, combined fun and music in there best style. Have a look.Note:- All the above Information is taken from Join Indian Navy , to keep the Information best in every regards.All The Best to Future Naval Warriors.Thank You.!

'What are some ways to encourage pharmaceutical companies to share their data? Who will be the key stakeholders involved and what roles do they play?'Why is clinical trial data transparency and sharing important? Regulators use this data to approve new drugs and only relatively recently has the general public become aware of the extent to which such decisions hinge on handpicked data sets while an unknown amount remain unpublished, in both clinical trial registries as well as in peer-reviewed scientific journals. If a drug's approved based on part, not all, of the data on it, how could we be sure it's as effective and safe as claimed?This answer addresses the roles, responsibilities and incentives of both academia and biopharma since both are involved in the discussion on clinical trial data sharing and data transparency. Key stakeholders in clinical trial data include both decision makers as well as hapless participants who still aren't part of the decision making process.Decision makers are regulators, scientists, academia, biopharma and science publishing, all of whom have in recent years fostered the notion through regulations and abundant posturing that the entire biomedical research ecosystem from individual investigators on to entities that fund and publish their research is in favor of data transparency and keen to share clinical trial data with peers, partners and maybe even the general public (1).Unfortunately, studies continue to find that a substantial portion of data from completed clinical trials never see the light of day (2, 3). Such analyses also show the rule-makers themselves to be big-time rule-breakers.IMO understanding the main obstacles that prevent clinical trial data sharing from becoming the norm helps understand the kind of policy prescriptions necessary to bring about change.Perverse incentives and absence of tangible incentives for data sharing keep scientists chained to a hyper-competitive, publish-or-perish, winner take all attitude to the scientific data they generate. Their promotions, tenures and grants are decided by their publication, not their data sharing, record (4).Regulators (FDA, EMA, etc.), employers (research institutions, universities) and funders (governments, foundations, academia, industry) remain stubbornly blind to how data sharing remains antithetical to what it takes to forge a successful scientific career.In a scientific culture that prizes originality and novelty above all, scientists currently do not benefit from sharing their data or by mining other people's data to glean new insights simply because funders, journals and employers presently do not similarly reward them as they do those who publish original and novel data generated from their own studies.Total data transparency weakens incentive for drug repurposing, Drug repositioning - Wikipedia, which has increasingly become a lifeline that sustains biopharma revenue in an age where new products have become increasingly expensive and time-consuming to roll out (5, 6).Proposed regulatory solutions fail to adequately address need to protect trade secrets and proprietary information, and do not provide requisite relief and mitigation. Rather, they ignore the real constraints that both academia and biopharma face today and instead exhort them to share data by paternalistically highlighting obligations to volunteer participants. Ignoring such real constraints might instead serve to foster a backlash in the form of inventive expansions of what actually constitute trade secrets and proprietary information, a reaction that would end up helping no one.A systematic review found 85 opinion pieces on the importance of developing incentives for researchers to share their data but fewer studies, 76, that actually tested approaches to increase data sharing (7). Most of the approaches tested entailed mere tinkering around the edges and nothing substantive.Clearly, a substantial gap exists between stated intent and actual actions. Data sharing needs to become part of clinical trial design and a critical aspect for scientific career progression (1). Typically, researchers plan a study with the intention of analyzing the data and publishing a peer-reviewed report upon completion. No thought is given to how the data will be stored such that it's easy to share so others can re-analyze it and neither is data sharing deemed merit-worthy for a scientist's career progression.Clinical trial participants are MIA in these discussions. No clinical trial participants, no clinical trial, no results, no new drugs. As simple as that. Given they're so central to this issue, why are trial participants nowhere to be seen or heard in this debate (8)?Paternalism continues to dominate the biomedicine culture but the general public's passivity and apathy makes it equally culpable.In recent decades, patient and disease advocacy groups have started notching impressive wins and gained accelerated access to new therapies, HIV/AIDS and cancer being cases in point. However, the weakness inherent to the tactics these groups have used thus far is to focus not on the totality but rather narrowly only on enhancing the speed of the drug approval process. Doing so ended up with regulators and drugmakers both cutting corners in the decision making process whereas fighting to get a seat at the table through legislative and regulatory means would have had a far more consequential and beneficial effect with respect to data sharing and transparency.Rest of this answer detailsA recap of regulations mandating clinical trial data be reported and published.Efforts to change the status quo by Ben Goldacre - Wikipedia, the reigning enfant terrible in the clinical trial space, and his collaborative initiative, AllTrials - Wikipedia.Quick recap of recent regulatory developments in the US clinical trial space as well as important global players1997: Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 - Wikipedia is passed. The FDAMA led to the creation of ClinicalTrials.gov - Wikipedia, currently the world’s largest online clinical trial registry.2000: ClinicalTrials.gov - Wikipedia comes online, maintained by United States National Library of Medicine - Wikipedia (NLM), a permanent institute within the US NIH.2007: Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 - Wikipedia is passed. The FDAAA mandates the following (9),All applicable clinical trials to be prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov - Wikipedia.Data should include information on study participants, summary outcomes, particularly adverse events.Mandatory publication of trial results upon completion.Section 801 of FDAAA establishes penalties for non-compliance. For example, US $10000 per day if trial results not posted within 12 months of completion.Applicable trials entail those other than Phase I and with at least one study site in the US.Limitations of FDAAA that end up excluding data on vast majority of treatments in use today,Excludes clinical trial results obtained pre-2007.Only requires publication of trials completed after 2008.Not to mention strikingly unenforced.In response to poor compliance with these reporting requirements, US regulators tightened perceived ambiguity and issued what is called the Final Rule in September 2016 (10).Also note that the US FDA has dismantled patient protections with regard to international clinical trials. Declaration of Helsinki - Wikipedia is the international code of medical ethics which stresses that everyone involved in a clinical trial has a duty to make the findings public. Specifically, in 2009 after years of insisting that companies applying for marketing authorization for a drug in the US needed to provide evidence that all foreign trials had been compliant with the Helsinki declaration, the FDA diluted its position by pegging such trials to the much lower standard of the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines (11). As Goldacre points out,These guidelines are only voted on by members of the EU, USA and Japan.They are more focused on procedures while Helsinki focuses on moral principles.Over the years, GCP has become the main ethical regulation of trials in the developing world, a sign of expediency trumping Informed consent - Wikipedia.This kind of thinking is penny-wise, pound-foolish since no matter the experimental drugs in question get initially tested on non-US populations, once approved in the US, they'd be consumed by Americans, no?The WHO. Mainly soft not hard power. On May 18, 2017, major research funders across the world, now numbering 21, released a statement on the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform pledging to implement self-avowed policies and impose audits to ensure trials they fund are reported (12). US regulators notably MIA in this statement. As the global public health organization of record, the WHO has substantial soft power it could bring to bear in mediating or nudging organizations that fail to measure up during periodic audits.The ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors): ICMJE recommendations - Wikipedia. It announced in 2005 that (see below from 13),'The ICMJE member journals will require, as a condition of consideration for publication, registration in a public trials registry. Trials must register at or before the onset of patient enrollment. This policy applies to any clinical trial starting enrollment after July 1, 2005. For trials that began enrollment before this date, the ICMJE member journals will require registration by September 13, 2005, before considering the trial for publication.'With 16 journal members In 2017, up from 11 in 2004, ~3300 journals now reportedly follow ICMJE recommendations. To neutralize a perceived barrier to publication, ICMJE allows trial results to be posted to clinical trial registries (14, 15).Ben Goldacre - Wikipedia & The AllTrials EffortA physician by training who morphed into a journalist, writer and activist, Ben Goldacre is well-known in his native Britain for his two polemics, Bad Science (book) - Wikipedia and Bad Pharma - Wikipedia. His energizer bunny-like advocacy wedded to a keen sense of the fierce urgency of now makes him a compelling figure while his writing, though often hyperbolic, manages to remain engaging even when analyzing hard science or posting trenchant criticisms of prevailing policies and pervasive conflicts of interests among the deciders in the clinical trial space.Through the collaborative launch of AllTrials, Goldacre is expending yeoman effort to upend the inimical status quo of cherry-picked clinical trial data often serving as the basis for new drug approval, leaving the rest hidden and unpublished.Unlike the FDAAA, AllTrials calls for registration and publication of all clinical trials on all treatments in current use. AllTrials' definition of publication includes full reporting of methods as well as publication of negative data.As of December 2017, a total of 735 organizations from all over the world have joined AllTrials while 91006 people have signed the AllTrials petition (16). On the one hand, this seems promising.OTOH, 622 organizations and 87956 petitioners as of 24 April, 2016 (see page 7 of 17) means over 20 months, 113 organizations but only 3050 additional individuals signed a petition supporting this initiative.Clearly, there's a sharp contrast between institutional and individual participation in the AllTrials effort. Such an anemic individual participation rate only underscores how passive and apathetic even patients and disease advocacy groups remain about one of the most critical aspects of biomedicine, namely, transparency of clinical trial data.Bibliography1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK269030/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK269030.pdf2. Tirumalai Kamala's answer to Why are some clinical trials finished, but the results not reported?3. Tirumalai Kamala's answer to Why are some clinical trials finished, but the results not reported?4. Friesike, Sascha, and Thomas Schildhauer. "Open science: many good resolutions, very few incentives, yet." Incentives and Performance. Springer International Publishing, 2015. 277-289.5. Brassington, Iain. "The ethics of reporting all the results of clinical trials." British medical bulletin 121.1 (2017): 19-29. ethics of reporting all the results of clinical trials | British Medical Bulletin | Oxford Academic6. Baghai, Tabassom. "Lack of clinical trial data transparency and current solutions." University of Ottawa Journal of Medicine 7.1 (2017). https://ottawa.scholarsportal.info/ojs/index.php/uojm-jmuo/article/download/2021/18617. Rowhani-Farid, Anisa, Michelle Allen, and Adrian G. Barnett. "What incentives increase data sharing in health and medical research? A systematic review." Research Integrity and Peer Review 2.1 (2017): 4. https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s41073-017-0028-9?site=researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com8. Haug, Charlotte J. "Whose Data Are They Anyway? Can a Patient Perspective Advance the Data-Sharing Debate?." New England Journal of Medicine 376.23 (2017): 2203-2205. http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp17044859. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ85/html/PLAW-110publ85.htm10. National Institutes of Health. "Clinical Trials Registration and Results Information Submission. Final rule." Federal register 81.183 (2016): 64981. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-09-21/pdf/2016-22129.pdf11. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM294729.pdf12. http://www.who.int/ictrp/results/ICTRP_JointStatement_2017.pdf13. De Angelis, Catherine, et al. "Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors." (2004): 1250-1251. http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMe04822514. http://icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf15. Dal‐Ré, Rafael. "The ICMJE trial data sharing requirement and participant's consent." European journal of clinical investigation (2016).16. Supporters17. Breil, Thomas, et al. "An Assessment of Publication Status of Pediatric Liver Transplantation Studies." PloS one 11.12 (2016): e0168251. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0168251&type=printableThanks for the R2A, Jeffrey Brender.

There is a Liberal bias in American Universities, and in some places, including many of the most prominent universities in the country, an extreme Left Wing bias. If you find this hard to believe, the first thing you need to accept is that college isn’t what it used to be 5 years ago.In a few cases, there is a fair explanation for why this could naturally happen. One is the nature of the conservative motivations for education from those on the left. For most conservatives, college is a time to gain skills necessary for employment. While most professors will admit that their conservative students perform just as well as their liberal counterparts and often better, many of the fields they enter into do not require more than a four year degree. Consider Business or Law Enforcement. With many liberals, the fields they are seeking are academic and require much more study. This, I have found, to be a perfectly logical and acceptable explanation for why more students of a liberal persuasion would pursue a life in academia and thereby shift the balance.My friend Ian McCullough, a liberal, also provides a few very good reasons in his answer for why such a liberal lean could naturally and with absolutely no malice or nefarious schemes to bias the system. There are others as well, but with credit to my friends on the left who acknowledge the liberal bias, this doesn’t go far enough to explain the real numbers being reported in the system, nor do they really acknowledge the gravity of the situation current college students are experiencing because of the extreme bias in the system.Samuel Abrams, a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College, did a study in 2014 measuring back over the last 25 years to measure the dispersion of left leaning professors to those of the right. What he found was staggering. In colleges, liberals have always been more embraced, at least since Abrams began his study. Beginning in the mid 90’s, however, conservatives and especially moderates have been replaced by more extreme liberal biases.Figure 1. Ideological Positions of Faculty in American Colleges and Universities: 1989 – 2014. Data courtesy of the Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA, plotted by Sam Abrams.For certain parts of the country, this was far more pronounced. Abrams broke down the disparity geographically and saw that while liberals outnumbered their conservative counterparts throughout the nation in representation in institutions of higher learning, in places like the New England states, the disparity was as high as 28 to 1.28 to 1… Come on. There is simply no rational explanation for a 28 to 1 disparity that is innocent or lacking some major degree of intolerance to opposing points of view. Given that we are talking about the some of the world’s leading intellectual institutions, the level of intolerance that could have created a 28 to 1 disparity. Furthermore, given the outsized influence that these particular universities have over the educational system, it should bother people that they are so repressive towards differing points of view in their hiring practices.Another study Published in Econ Journal Watch, reviewed over 7,000 where they found that Democrats outnumber Republicans by nearly 12 to 1. Compare this to a 1968 study that put the Democrat-to-Republican contrast in history departments at 2.7 to 1. Furthermore, it broke it down by department, where economics was the most friendly to conservatives, at a ratio of only 4.5 liberal professors to every conservative. Another study resulted in only 7% to 11% of faculty members in social sciences and humanities are Republicans, according to surveys. At the extreme, the Econ Journal Watch found that History departments, where the leanings of your old High School teachers were long gone, had liberals outnumber conservatives by a 33 1/2-to-1 ratio. It was even shown within these departments that it was easier to find a Marxist than a Republican. Perhaps now it makes sense that mention of the Gulag Archipelago, Christian genocide in the Soviet Union, artificial famines in China under Mao, or why Communism killed over 100,000,000 people in the 20th century never seemed to make the syllabus, but man… those Americans with their economic imperialism and long history of oppression. Wow. Thank goodness for higher learning.This brings to mind the quote from one of the fathers of Conservative theory, something no one learns about in college, Edmund Burke.Honestly, how many people had no clue who originally said that, and honestly, how many people calling themselves educated have no clue who this man is? Chances are, you didn’t learn about him in college and if you know, you found it out on your own. That should be the first indicator that there is something wrong with this imbalance due to that bias.Some of the excuses being levied for this is that the college experience simply makes conservatives or moderates liberals, as if the institutional process civilizes them from their barbaric or neanderthal ways. Wow, is that arrogant. That certainly doesn’t explain the Burke thing, though. Others, that the filtering process for universities (their costly expense) filters out the poor and the uneducated, which is presumably where most conservatives hail from. Given how radically contradictory this is to the notion that conservatives are all rich and greedy, only interested in maintaining the status quo, I wonder how apologists can possibly rationalize the two competing views. A better (while still incorrect) explanation offered by the New York Times was that Conservatism has simply changed and that no one could bear it any longer, or at least, that it became intolerable to the academic environment.Again, this excuse fails a logical test. If such an evolution took place, then we would have seen some measurable change in the broader culture, but at the same time that the universities became stark and suddenly more left wing, the nation stayed exactly the same, as shown by this graph depicting the ideological positions of America.What the evidence shows is that while the United States has remained remarkably ideologically consistent, the universities have become extremely left/leaning, radically and disturbingly so in the New England states and particularly in the social sciences. So there really isn’t a good reason for 28 to 1. For that sort of dispearity to exist, much more powerful and far more far more complex reasons must exist for than the often levied and extraordinary condescending “because smart people are liberal,” and many of them, aren’t innocent or even accidental.Frankly, there was a few rational reasons for a left leaning influence in the universities, but that has compounded itself many times with those left leaning voices pulling more like themselves in and pushing out all the others on an institutional level. Specifically, the problem with the left wing, let’s call it what it is, radicalization of the universities is that draws from selection biases in the way professors are brought in to teach the “liberal” arts, humanities, and social sciences. Not all, but a fair enough proportion of the professors did not gain their credibility from their early academic fields, but through activism. Look, say whatever you like about activists and the need for them, but they don’t produce unbiased people willing to accept critical analysis that may invalidate the cause they’ve championed for years. Often, after whatever gains are made, they have few employment options beyond pursuing fields in politics or becoming professors of social sciences.A problem with people going into science fields who have an agenda? They don’t produce quality science. A scientist works toward discovery, with no real goal in mind other than to discover what is unknown. They aren’t there to prove a point. These activists turned professors, however, build careers around continuing their advocacy, whether intentionally or not. Rather than a simple quest for discovery and education, they are institutionally encouraged to be fixated on researching topics related to their personal connections to the issues. This has been called by one professor of Psychology, John Ruscio “me-search”. The problem here is that, rather than simply teaching what is needed to understand a fundamental course, or in discovering new relevant truths, courses become grounds for activists turned professors to continue their original work, often at the cost of the actual science in those fields.An example? Women’s studies. When you’ve built your work around decades of theory predicated on the narrative that women are institutionally repressed by society and source as proof for this evidence such as the “Wage Gap”, you really don’t want to deal with arguments that invalidate that data point central to your theory. However, when evidence turns up showing that simply taking the difference between the averages of all women and all men may not be a quality metric with which judge the entirety of American culture to be systemically sexist, we aren’t presented with that argument in the curriculum. Furthermore, saying that factors such as the number of women who choose to leave work to start families as compared to men across the society, the amount of time taken off by women, the fewer average hours worked by women, or the relative unwillingness of women to take on dangerous (and more often higher paying) jobs, or even simply the argument that men are more likely to ask for more money, aren’t taught either. Continuing on, when evidence such that the freer a society gets for women, as defined by the feminists themselves, such as we see in the nordic and other parts of Europe, we see more gender based delineation in the types of work that women choose to take on than those societies which are deemed less free for women, meaning that the freer women are to make their own choices, the more the supposed wage gap increases due to the jobs they choose. All this considered, it becomes clear that whatever wage gap that exists is due far more to the choices and freedoms these women have, than some systemic repression of a tyrannical patriarchy. In fact, when factoring for these choices, the wage gap narrows to almost nothing, and in fact, reverses in many liberal cities for young women without children. This argument really sucks if you’ve built a career proving the Patriarchy, so it’s little wonder that it isn’t thoroughly explored more by students of these professors.And it’s very difficult for professors to adapt to new information when they were not brought into the education via the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, but as activists who continue to believe they fighting for a cause. That’s why these arguments don’t appear in campuses open discussion. Instead, they are labeled “sexist” or that they are “creating a hostile environment for students” where they don’t feel “safe”, and any professor who does allows such discussion might find themselves in a punitive meeting with their school’s ethics and diversity officer.That isn’t hyperbolic, as a similar case to this example took place in Canada last month. At Wilfrid Laurier University, a teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd was branded as “transphobic” and scolded by her supervising professor, Nathan Rambukkana, during a meeting with the Ethics and Diversity Officer of Wilfrid Laurier following the supposed complaint from a student. Her crime? Showing a video of a debate taken from Canadian public television featuring one Canadian professor of Psychology, Dr. Jordan Peterson. Her true crime, however, wasn’t in showing the video, but failing to do so “critically”, making it known that she and the university don’t support his views. That is to say, her job was specifically to not be neutral, which was what she thought her job was supposed to be. During the reprimand, which her supervising professor communicated to her as a simple meeting, the university officials informed her that the video was “problematic” because Dr. Jordan Peterson was a “key member of the Alt-Right” and that he uses the website Patreon “made by the Alt-Right to fund hate speech”, and that by showing a video representing him neutrally she was “fostering an atmosphere of transphobia on the campus.” The reprimand even compared what she did to “neutrally playing a speech by Hitler.”I can say this. I’ve followed Dr. Peterson very closely over the last year, and watched a lot of his videos. I’ve also written extensively on the Alt-Right, specifically in creating a book aimed at educating readers on understanding and dismantling their movement. That he would be compared to the Alt-Right is patently absurd. Then to say that representing one of his videos is the same as “neutrally playing a speech by Hitler,” is the sort of accusation which should see heads roll during more rational times. As an additional note, I’ve also used patreon for four years and can say that they have intentionally banned violators such as this campus tribunal has indicated, with most of their creators being creators of music videos and comics. Hardly the pipeline to hate speech described by the “campus diversity officer”. What Peterson is rather famous for is his fight against Canada’s recent Bill C-16, which mandates compelled speech for professors according to the guidelines of extreme left wing narrative board of inquiry over Canada’s education system.What seems clear is that, like at many other campuses, (see Duke LaCrosse Team) judgement was cast down based on the complaint of a single individual who was offended and when that offense met with a far left Progressive narrative of the campus,was acted upon without any investigation other than what the professor had heard through a very biased grapevine, and used to create a repressive, even fearful atmosphere for people who did nothing wrong.What seems equally questionable is the creep of the Humanities into the hard Sciences. By this, I’m referring to Feminist Biology, which isn’t the biology of women, but a program at the University of Wisconsin where the field is viewed through the lens of feminism and the female perspective. To quote one professor, it exists because “in order to do science well, we can’t ignore the ideas and research of people who just so happen to not be male,” though there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that men need to be censored from the field, given that women have far surpassed men at earning Biology degrees and saying that they aren’t respected in the field ignores how many of them are being given Nobel Prizes for their contributions. Historically, men dominate the sciences, but if any quality Biology program is teaching current Biology, then I don’t see how they would be guilty of teaching about only men. Given also that such a program would specifically filter out the “ideas and research of people who happen to be male”, are not these feminist biology student being denied the foundational work of the first scientists in the field that the world of later male or female scientists are built on? The logic of the class is what it is, but what is perhaps most troubling is that this program wasn’t governed by the Biology Department of Wisconsin University, but under the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies. To say nothing else, I should think that hard scientists would find that concerning.This creep can be felt in other ways to students, where more and more of their bloated transcripts are being filled with courses outside their chosen fields to “gain a deeper appreciation in the Humanities”, which is itself becoming more radicalized. Perhaps a little emphasis in economics could have explained the consequences of their rising student loan debt due to these additional classes and given them an appreciation for how hard paying it off will be if you only ever paid attention in humanities courses.Moving on, conservatives also note the problems inherent in the system by way of how professors and graduate students are promoted and advance in their careers, by means of peer-review publications. The process of peer review is fraught with controversy from scientists questioning if the system is valid for the progress of scientific discovery and acceptability, from bias to outright censorship. It can range from committees made of department heads giving the ten ton hammer to articles and manuscripts they find objectionable on any number of issues to the simple process of a journal editor sending an article to a few friends to see if they like it, where two thumbs up mean it gets published and a rejection sends the piece to the Void of Lost and Forgotten Knowledge.There are many unhappy with the system of peer review, so does this process result in censorship for or a lack of advancement for conservatives specifically? According to numerous professors, yes it does.The following was submitted by a conservative professor, Matthew Woessner, whose main work argues against the notion of that conservative views are repressed in the colleges, but here, he must contend the peer-review process, coupled with the extreme diversity problem among educators, makes it difficult for conservatives to find opportunities for advancement.The more pernicious problem occurs when right-leaning scholars submit their work for blind review with prestigious publishers or in peer-reviewed journals. Even if we presume that most journal referees are sincerely trying to judge a work based on its scholarly merits rather than its social or political implications, a jury pool dominated by left-leaning scholars will almost certainly subject right-leaning papers to greater scrutiny, highlighting their methodological shortcomings and challenging their overall conclusions. If the academic universe were evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, the unconscious tendency to challenge dissenting viewpoints would hamper the publication of conservative and liberal work at roughly the same rate. However, with a vast majority of academics falling on the left side of the political spectrum, this is an issue that, in all probability, tends to hamper the publication of conservative-leaning ideas. Thus, professors whose political instincts are right of center must either focus on non-ideological scholarly questions or endure a special degree of scrutiny as they seek to secure publication of their ideas.Richard Vatz, professor of rhetoric and communication at Towson University was less forgiving.For many decades, there has been a stunning — and manifestly appalling — general prejudice against conservatives in higher education, evidenced by curtailments on their academic freedom and freedom of speech.It is difficult for conservatives to get hired, and once hired, it is difficult for them to get promotion and tenure — particularly in the humanities and social sciences, wherein liberal orthodoxy rules.This has resulted in fewer conservatives finding their way into academe as a profession, which liberals disingenuously claim is the result of universities having limited economic attraction for those on the right, not as a result of unfair practices.He continued in a follow-up to his original piece published in The Chronicle of Higher Education - Anti-Conservative Bias in Academe is Real.Furthermore, over the past five years, outright repression of conservative views has increased to the point of direct hostility against professors and students who harbor them. A book Passing on the Right documented the growing tension and fear many conservatives have in academia. It notes that belief in campus discrimination against conservatives is widespread: 81% of conservative professors say they feel it, and even 30% of liberal professors agree that conservatives face a hostile ideological workplace. The book also lists numerous accounts brought forward to show that this radicalizing process is getting worse and having expressed impacts on the careers of conservative professors and the orthodoxy being pushed to students. Among the examples given were a professor accused of training his students to be Nazis after defending the post-9/11 War on Terror where his door was covered with swastikas, a Jewish historian calling for political diversity on a panel on reparations being called a racist and a Nazi by his colleagues, the ostracism of one professor who accepted a job in the Bush administration by colleagues, and even pro-life sentiment at a Catholic college being viewed as “shocking” and “venomous.”Continuing on, the book details requests for academics seeking to do research on topics controversial or challenging to left -wing narratives, such as reverse discrimination against whites and/or men facing rejection for explicitly political reasons with reaction such as: “The findings could set Affirmative Action back 20 years if it came out that women were asked to interview more often for managerial positions than men with a stronger vitae.” If all this weren’t enough, the book also notes one study finding sociologists were willing to give preferential treatment in offering a job to a communist over a Republican.Altogether, this process seems to have the impact of further increasing the disparity between right and left on college campuses. Most importantly, in recent year, this disparity has manifest as outright intolerance of conservative views and students by extremists allowed to rise through the academic system unchallenged. Noteworthy examples include those gathered by Sankar Srinivasan whereby A professor called students ‘future dead cops.’, another writing reports that Having 'white nuclear family' promotes white supremacy, or when Drexel was forced to suspend a professor after hateful tweets following the Las Vegas shooting. His exact words were “All I want for Christmas is a White Genocide” and “It’s the white supremacist patriarchy, stupid.” An important note, Drexel didn’t suspend him as a form of disciplinary action but because “he was receiving threats,” and that “his and the student’s safety was their top priority.”I’ll make an opinion statement here, Drexel would make a clearer statement that their student’s safety mattered if they fired the professor calling for a majority of them to be murdered. Again, that’s just my opinion.Then, of course, we have the professor who let her class protest Trump instead of taking the final exam and the one who offered extra credit to students who protest against President Trump. No bias here, folks. More recently, there was the masked professor in California who attacked pro-Trump protests with a bike lock (Former professor suspected in Berkeley bike-lock attack enters plea in Oakland court). Wonder what his classes were like. And just this last month, a student newspaper which published the article 'Your [white] DNA is an abomination'.“When I think of all the white people I have ever encountered - whether they’ve been professors, peers, lovers, friend, police officers, et cetera - there is perhaps only a dozen I would consider ‘decent,’” student author Rudy Martinez writes in the University Star.Without much biological explanation, Martinez informs white readers, “You were not born white. You became white… You don’t give a damn.” Later in his rant, he calls the police “fascist foot soldiers” and says a “white supremacist inhabits the White House.”How a student at a major American university, in Texas no less, could come to such conclusions as rational and acceptable to print is the real heart of the matter.Liberals in higher education are so over represented, and conservative voices so marginalized in both hiring and promotion practices, that the theories, ideas, and norms of an ever more left-leaning academia are completely and totally unchecked by dissenting arguments. It is, in fact, reaching a tipping point to the where the very idea of criticism toward these theories and ideas is itself being outlawed on campuses. With the propagation of campus speech codes, to censur both student and professor curriculum, the encouragement of campus courts falsely accusing students of all manner of criminal and non-criminal acts that destroy their future prospects of a career, the acceptance of safe-space mentalities to free students from critical thought and ideas that challenge their orthodoxy, the dogmatic enforcement of political correctness in lectures by campus “ethics and diversity” officers, the banning of conservative lecturers paid for by student donation from entering the campus, and finally the outright tolerance of hate speech such as saying that all Republicans are Nazis and that white DNA is an abomination, liberal schools have lost the right to call themselves institutions of higher learning.They have for too long accepted processes which encourage an ever present left-word shift, to the point that there was no one left to be critical of their ever more apparent radicalization.In the best case scenario, the environment of college campuses is producing a generation of students who are completely unaware of views which contradict mainline Progressive ideology, making them weaker thinkers incapable of dealing with conflicting views, having never experienced their own views challenged in the institution specifically created to do so. This hurts liberal students far more, as the conservative students must grapple with being challenged with every lecture, and those who remain steadfast are empowered with the rationale for their beliefs honest critical analysis offers them, but which is denied to their liberal students. In the worst case, the colleges are evolving into toxic grounds for free thought and becoming a bedrock of poorly vetting theory which borders now on orthodoxy, one which is taken as fact without criticism, and is being used to prop up hateful movements under the guise of their own victimhood.All that to say, well done young lady.Thank you for reading. If you liked this answer, please upvote and follow The War Elephant. If you want to help me make more content like this, please visit my Patreon Support Page to learn how. All donations greatly appreciated!