Nearly all of them, having majored in Economics.
However, looking back, I'd probably place most of my economics professors in the neoliberal camp. I'd propose that the left/right divide is primarily about nationalism vs globalism now -- my professors would have tended to support international capitalism rather than national capitalism.
Figures like Mises weren't mentioned in my classes, despite his famous prediction that the economic calculation problem would cause the fall of communism. Yet Keynes was discussed thoroughly.
Left/right dichotomies are completely useless when you get to the scale of an individual, so I had profs who had opinions that would be called left and ones that would be called right. Both in the same person.
That said, sure academy leans “left” - but i’d argue that’s because seeking knowledge is inherently liberal. I.e. if the present is good and we should not change (one definition of conservatism), what’s the point of persuing new knowledge/ideas?
Conservatives tend to place more emphasis on earned experience than liberals do. Experience and "book knowledge" are both different aspects of the concept of knowledge, but it's certainly untrue that universities teach everything that could be called knowledge. Indeed they're famous for not doing so, hence the fact that "it's academic" is an insult not a compliment.
Whether this means conservatives value experience more than book knowledge is unclear, it may be that they consider both important whereas liberals consider experience relatively unimportant and thus cluster in academia.