Education Research by Conservative Think Tanks

[Richard Hake <rrhake@earthlink.net>]

*********************************************
ABSTRACT: I quote excerpts of Arthur Levine's critique of education 
research emanating from conservative think tanks, give URL's for 
lists of conservative and liberal think tanks,  quote Andy Guess's 
Inside Higher Ed report of the responses of conservative think tank 
leaders to Levine's criticism, and suggest that conservative think 
tanks are more effective than their liberal counterparts in 
disseminating and publicizing their work,  thus having a greater 
impact on educational policy.
*********************************************

Conservative think tanks such as the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation 
<http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/global/index.cfm>, champions 
of  "direct instruction" [Carnine (2000)], are, in my opinion, prime 
targets for the Gerald Bracey's "Education Disinformation Detection 
and Reporting Agency" (EDDRA) <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra/>.

Arthur Levine (2007) in his report "Educating Researchers," in 
addition to his dour assessment of education research emanating from 
schools of education, criticizes the education research done by 
conservative think tanks, writing: [bracketed by line "LLLLL. . . . 
."; my inserts at ". . . . .[insert]. . .  ."; my CAPS]:

LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
There certainly is a good deal of truly terrible stuff in circulation 
that is called education research. But education schools are just one 
of a multiplicity of research producers. The others include think 
tanks; non-profit research firms such as the American Institutes for 
Research . . . . [<http://www.air.org/>]. . . . , the Education 
Testing Service . . . . . [<http://tinyurl.com/cadxe>]. . . . , Rand. 
. . . [<http://www.rand.org/>]. . . . and SRI International. . . . 
[<http://www.sri.com/>. . . .; corporations like McGraw-Hill . . . . 
[<http://tinyurl.com/2pj69l>]. . . .; professional associations; 
foundations, government and more . . . . [Levine, like most of 
academia,  appears to be unaware of education research within 
university departments of mathematics and science]. . . . .

Of this group the worst offenders have been the growing number of 
ideological think tanks, overwhelmingly conservative. For the most 
part, they have not engaged in disinterested research, but rather 
have collected data to support the policy positions they advocate. 
THEIR PUBLICATIONS ARE AMONG THE MOST VISIBLE IN EDUCATION BECAUSE 
THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE BEEN REMARKABLY SUCCESSFUL IN DISSEMINATING, 
PUBLICIZING, AND GETTING THEM INTO THE HANDS OF POLICYMAKERS. [Ref. 
32]
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

Levine's Ref. 32 is [bracketed by lines 32-32-32-32. . . . .]:

 32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32
The Heritage Foundation. . . .[<http://www.heritage.org/>]. . . . , 
founded in 1973 as a "research and educational institute whose 
mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies," 
has a Web site listing over 200 conservative think tanks and policy 
organizations engaged in research on education. . . . [search the 
Heritage Foundation's site 
<http://www.policyexperts.org/organizations/organizations.cfm> for 
Policy Issue: "Education" -  "All States,"  "All Organizations" for 
202 hits as of 11 Jun 2007 08:00:00-0700]. . . . . Exemplary of the 
listings is the New Mexico Independence Research Institute. . . . . . 
. . [<http://www.zianet.com/nmiri/>]. . . .which seeks to advance 
education by providing "high quality scientifically based policy 
research which fosters personal responsibility, limited government, 
and free market economics."
32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32-32

Andy Guess (2007), reported the reaction of several leaders of 
conservative think tanks to the above comments by Levine, writing:

GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Rick Hess, the director of education policy studies at the American 
Enterprise Institute. . . .
[<http://www.aei.org/ >]. . . . . .  (and a possible target of the 
report), said he agreed that mostly conservative think tanks were 
filling that void, but not necessarily because of a preexisting 
ideological slant. "Certainly in the case of schools of education, 
that there is a relatively homogeneous body of thinking about what 
are appropriate ways to improve schools, to professionalize teaching, 
to manage the business of schooling," he said.

"So I think folks who have been open proponents of choice-based 
reform, of paying effective teachers more, of encouraging 
entrepreneurship and innovation, have often felt uncomfortable in 
conventional education schools." He added, "What we want is an 
interesting heterogeneous mix. I don't think many education schools 
have done a very good job of supporting that kind of research 
environment."

Chester E. Finn, Jr., president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. . 
. . [<http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/global/index.cfm>]. . . 
. , which supports charter schools, and like Hess a former faculty 
member at an education school, was more blunt. Despite generally 
supporting Levine's reports, he said, "There is no more ideological 
place in the universe than the education schools," implying that 
criticizing think tanks for being ideological is, for that reason, 
misplaced.
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

Are there any counters to the political clout of conservative think tanks?

 The University of Michigan Library Documents Center lists think 
tanks at <http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/psthink.html>, including 
"liberal" think tanks at
<http://www.movingideas.org/content/en/member_organizations.htm>. At 
the latter, a search for the issue "education" yielded 33 hits, among 
them the Annenberg Institute for School Reform 
<http://www.annenberginstitute.org/>, and the Institute on Education 
and the Economy <http://www.tc.columbia.edu/iee/>.

But few of the 33 appear to be as active in education research and in 
"disseminating, publicizing, and getting their publications into the 
hands of policymakers" as the conservative think tanks (please 
correct me if I'm wrong). 

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>


REFERENCES
Carnine, D. 2000. "Why Education Experts Resist Effective Practices 
(And What It Would Take to Make Education More Like Medicine)," 
online as a 52kB pdf at the Fordham site <http://tinyurl.com/2uhdg2>. 
The Fordham's Chester Finn eulogizes Carnine's paper thusly: "After 
describing assorted hijinks in math and reading instruction, Doug 
devotes considerable space to examining what educators did with the 
results  of 'Project Follow Through,' one of the largest education 
experiments  ever undertaken. This study compared constructivist 
education models  with those based on direct instruction. One might 
have expected that, when the results showed that direct instruction 
models produced  better outcomes, these models would have been 
embraced by the  profession. Instead, many education experts 
discouraged their use."

Guess, A. 2007. "Filling the Void," Inside Higher Ed, 7 May; online 
at <http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/05/07/edresearch>. A 
report on Levine (2007).

Hake, R.R. 2007. "Arthur Levine's Report on Educating Researchers," online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0706&L=pod&F=&S=&P=3963>. 
Post of  6 Jun 2007 21:50:32-0700 to AERA-D, EdResMeth, PhysLrnR, and 
POD. ABSTRACT: I present excerpts from Andy Guess's "Inside Higher 
Ed" report on Arthur Levine's "Educating Researchers," and indicate 
that Levine's criticism of the average level of education research 
coming from education schools and think tanks omits mention of the 
considerable education research performed within the disciplines of 
e.g., astronomy, biology, chemistry, geoscience, engineering, 
mathematics, and physics.

Hake, R.R. 2007b. "Arthur Levine's Report on Educating Researchers 
#2," online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0706&L=pod&O=A&P=4744>. Post 
of 9 Jun 2007 20:58:13-0700 to AERA-D, EdResMeth, PhysLrnR, and POD. 
ABSTRACT: In response to a POD post by Nic Voge,  I (a) indicate that 
it's Arthur Levine, not I, who is suggesting that education research 
conducted by those in education schools is, on average, of poor 
quality, (b) indicate that I did not state that that education 
research in mathematics, engineering, and some sciences is better or 
more rigorous than that coming from education schools, and (c) quote 
Levine as to why he thinks ed schools prepare poor researchers and 
generate poor research.

Levine, A. 2007. "Educating Researchers," online at
<http://www.edschools.org/EducatingResearchers/educating_researchers.pdf> 
(532 kB). For an Inside Higher Ed report see Guess (2007). See also 
the discussion of Levine (2007) by Hake (2007a,b) .