As Kentucky lawmakers push forward with House Bill 4, which mandates an “Intellectual Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity” survey for the state’s public colleges and universities, experts are raising concerns about its validity, cost, and potential political misuse.
In a recent policy brief drafted by the Center for Economic Education (CEE) at the University of Louisville (UofL), survey design experts stress that creating a valid and reliable instrument is a complex process requiring rigorous statistical validation.
“Poorly constructed surveys can lead to misleading data and policy decisions based on unreliable findings,” says Jacob Gross, PhD, associate professor, CEE director, and co-author of the policy brief. “The process of designing a new survey involves multiple steps, including defining clear constructs, testing for question clarity, and conducting statistical analyses to confirm reliability. If a survey does not undergo rigorous testing, it risks producing inconsistent results that do not accurately capture campus climate.”
The financial burden of designing and implementing a new survey is another pressing issue. According to Gross, large-scale survey development can cost anywhere from $500,000 to over $2 million. This includes expenses related to hiring experts, pilot testing, and statistical validation. Beyond initial costs, ongoing administration and analysis would require continuous investment, straining institutional resources.
Using existing surveys, such as the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) or The Freshman Survey, would be a more cost-effective approach. These instruments have already undergone extensive validation and could provide meaningful insights without duplicating efforts or requiring additional funding.
Kentucky’s higher education landscape encompasses large public universities, community colleges, and private institutions. A standardized survey may fail to capture the varied experiences and perspectives of students across these different schools, CEE’s policy brief notes, which could limit the survey’s usefulness in assessing intellectual freedom across campuses.
Moreover, smaller colleges may lack the infrastructure and research capacity to administer and analyze a large-scale survey effectively. This could result in inconsistent data collection and unreliable results.
One of the biggest challenges in survey research is securing high participation rates. Gross highlights that voluntary surveys in higher education often suffer from low response rates, which can distort findings. “If a significant portion of students and faculty choose not to participate, the results may not accurately reflect campus-wide experiences,” he explains.
Self-selection bias further complicates matters. Students with strong opinions on intellectual freedom may be more likely to respond, leading to potential overrepresentation of extreme viewpoints while moderate perspectives remain undercounted. Additionally, research shows that younger, full-time students tend to respond at higher rates than older or part-time students, leading to demographic imbalances in the data.
Beyond methodological concerns, there is growing apprehension about how the survey results might be used.
“There is a significant risk that survey results could be misinterpreted or used selectively to support political agendas rather than to improve campus climate,” says Gross. “Data could be manipulated to justify restrictive policies that impact academic freedom and institutional autonomy.”
To prevent this, CEE recommends strict guidelines on data interpretation and transparent reporting practices. Without these safeguards, the survey risks becoming a political tool rather than a meaningful assessment of campus climate.
Authors of the policy brief, including Gross, James Orlick—researcher and director of grant writing and innovation at UofL—and Casey George, PhD—associate professor and assistant director of CEE—suggest that Kentucky could benefit more from using existing surveys, such as the Student Financial Wellness Survey, which is free for institutions and administered by Trellis Company. This survey already includes validated measures of food, financial, and housing insecurity, making it a valuable tool for addressing economic barriers to student success.
If lawmakers move forward with a new survey, institutions will require financial and administrative support to implement it effectively. Without dedicated funding, under-resourced colleges and universities may struggle to administer a high-quality survey, leading to unreliable data and inconsistent implementation.
As Kentucky debates the future of House Bill 4, higher education leaders and researchers continue to call for a thoughtful, research-based approach to measuring intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity—one that ensures both methodological integrity and responsible data use.
