of National and Campus Affairs
To observe that, as a group, professors have been more supportive of both liberal national programs and student protests than the public at large is to say little about the structure of their political mind-sets. The most obvious question here involves the intersection of national and campus controversies. What relationships do we find between orientations toward such broad concerns of society as race relations and foreign policy, and toward such intramural issues as how academic governance structures should be changed and the degree to which student views should be considered in university decision making? Are national and campus "liberals" essentially one and the same, or is the composition of these groups sharply different? Answers to such questions require that we consider the concept of ideology, for we are inquiring in the first instance about the ideological character of faculty opinion.
Few concepts widely used in social science have been more variously construed than ideology.1 It is important, therefore, to specify how we understand this concept and will apply it here. Central to an ideology or "ideological thinking" is a property which Philip Converse ( 1964) called "constraint." Anyone viewing the flow of public life encounters a diverse array of issues. These he may respond to "one at a time" or may order by imposing some integrative conceptual dimension. To the extent that he perceives an interconnection among issues and organizes his responses in terms of a larger "package" or system of policy preferences, his thinking manifests constraint. An ideology is a constrained____________________