The New York Times published a fascinating article about the think tanks that have allowed their reputations to be sullied by acting as spokesmen for corporations who contribute to them.
This is very sad. The nation relied on think tanks to be independent of corporate influence, to be able to make pronouncements on public policy based on hard evidence, not corporate donations.
In recent years, we have seen the emergence of think tanks with an ideological/political agenda. No one is surprised to learn that the Heritage Foundation supports conservative policies, the CATO Institution supports libertarian and conservative policies, the American Enterprise Institute support free-market policies, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute supports school choice and free-market policies, and the Economic Policy Institute supports policies that favor working people.
But the Brookings Institution stood alone as a source of independent and informed thinking. Now we find that policymakers at Brookings are catering to corporate donors.
This is especially sad for me because I was associated with Brookings for many years. I was in residence there from 1993 to 1995, and then became a Nonresident Senior Fellow. I served without pay in that role until 2012 when I was summarily dismissed by Grover Whitehurst, who had been George W. Bush’s education research director and then joined Brookings. I wrote about my abrupt dismissal here. I was fired for “lack of activity” on the same day that my article criticizing Mitt Romney was posted by the New York Review of Books. Whitehurst was an advisor to Romney, so I couldn’t help but think that there was some connection. Whitehurst used his position at Brookings to promote school choice, which was odd since Brookings had long been known as a liberal-leaning think tank in the past. Whitehurst is no longer head of the Brown Center on Education, and to my knowledge, no one has been named to take his place as yet.
The Brookings that I knew in the early 1990s was a place of knowledgable scholars, most of whom had had experience in the federal government. They were independent, thoughtful, and always open for a good discussion.
Later, after I left, I heard stories about the pressure on scholars to raise money for their activities.
But I could not have imagined this scenario that was reported in the Times:
As Lennar Corporation, one of the nation’s largest home builders, pushed ahead with an $8 billion plan to revitalize a barren swath of San Francisco, it found a trusted voice to vouch for its work: the Brookings Institution, the most prestigious think tank in the world.
“This can become a productive, mutually beneficial relationship,” Bruce Katz, a Brookings vice president, wrote to Lennar in July 2010. The ultimate benefit for Brookings: $400,000 in donations from Lennar’s different divisions.
The think tank began to aggressively promote the project, San Francisco’s biggest redevelopment effort since its recovery from the 1906 earthquake, and later offered to help Lennar, a publicly traded company, “engage with national media to develop stories that highlight Lennar’s innovative approach.”
And Brookings went further. It named Kofi Bonner, the Lennar executive in charge of the San Francisco development, as a senior fellow — an enviable credential he used to advance the company’s efforts.
“He would be a trusted adviser,” an internal Brookings memo said in 2014 as the think tank sought one $100,000 donation from Lennar.
Here is Brookings’ board of trustees: With all that money, why should scholars be compelled to seek corporate donations?
When I heard that Brookings had named Arne Duncan, a man with zero scholarly credentials, as a Nonresident Senior Fellow, I knew that something important had changed. Arne certainly has federal experience, but I wonder who will write the regular posts that Brookings expects from its senior fellows? It is not a good sign, because it shows a lack of discernment about the failure of Arne’s policies.
The lesson in all this is that money not only corrupts our politics, it corrupts those who are supposed to give nonpartisan advice to policymakers and the public.
If corporations want lobbyists, they should hire lobbyists who are openly identified as such.
Fordham seems to control education policy in Ohio. I suspect they are behind the well coordinated efforts against online schools in an effort to eliminate competition. Then they’ll have a power base big enough to go after public schools. It is pretty obvious Democrats are out wandering in the wilderness and Republican lawmakers haven’t a clue about education.
I agree. I subscribe to two Ohio newspapers. I am tired of reading articles on Ohio public schools where Fordham people are quoted as experts. Often the ONLY quotes in the piece come from Fordham.
I don’t want to read another piece on “Ohio public schools” where a group of people who have never physically entered an Ohio public school are quoted as experts.
I have no idea who funds Fordham. I’m supposed to take their word on it that they’re acting in the best interest of my local school? Why would I do that?
The Goldwater Institute owns the education chatter in AZ.
My guess, “journalists’ ” are incapacitated, can’t dial other phone numbers or type other e-mail addresses, to get responses. And, apparently they either read summaries, written by plutocratic-funded groups or, listen to plutocratic-paid spokespersons and, assume the research, which is the focus of a story, is faithfully described.
And yet it was a journalist who wrote this article. I always get the feeling that the NYT tests the political air until they find the climate allows them to venture out safely with a bit of real journalism.
Though Krugman was grievously wrong about Bernie he was right on target concerning these libertarian/Randian/corporate think tanks. Krugman referred to them as entities that take the think out of think tank. And what’s with the Grovers? Grover Norquist and Grover Whitehorse, the evil twins of free market solutions, privatization, limited government and personal responsibility. Things that are great for the billionaire class but toxic sludge for ordinary folks. C-SPAN gives massive amounts of time to Cato, Heritage and AEI. One or the other of these phony baloney so called think tanks are on one of the C-SPAN channels almost every day.
Nothing new here, perhaps Brookings was an exception. But if your old enough to remember the Cold War. You will remember the Rand corporations role as the think tank of the Military Industrial Complex.”Dr Strange Love” could have been its director.
Does anybody think that The Council On Foreign Relations thus the research they fund,was funded by collections of Boy Scouts going door to door. This has been the reality since post WW2. The Powell Memo in 71, just put it on steroids, with the goal of total domination of University Research in the Social Sciences.
Those center left think tanks like EPI or CERP are at a definite funding disadvantage. Time to make a Bernie sized contribution to Dean and EPI. The telling part of this story they are asking for reader support.
You’re
CSPAN – I stick to gavel-to-gavel coverage & the Washington Journal. The first has no talking heads. & in the daily Wash Jnl we get to watch talking heads respond to ordinary citizens.
“Think tank executives reject any suggestion that they are tools of corporate influence campaigns and say they are simply teaming up with donors that have similar goals, like helping cities with economic development.”
Just like EdWeek denies that editorial content is not shaped by the contributions of more than a dozen foundations that pay for coverage of specific topics.
Brookings seems to have become not much more than a marketable brand, and it costs a minimum of $2 million to co-brand with Brookings. That is one of the disclosed arrangements in this splendid example of investigative journalism. Johns Hopkins School of Education offers tiers of studies conducted to produce evidence for marketable education projects. The Dean who started this was a darling of the Education Industry Association. He has moved on, and so has that association not merged with marketers of technology for schools
If you go to almost any .org website that includes a long list of “partners” stop and think about who is really responsible for the aims and activities. Also be aware that a .org can be set up so it leases visitor data for a profit and can steer visitors to other websites for a fee.
One of the best examples is greatschools.com. It is the destination for school data where algorithms “massage” the incoming informatio. The end result of this process is one score for “school quality” based on a 10 point rating system. Success Academy schools are awarded a perfect ten.
Greatschools.org is supported by many of the same foundations and think tanks that produce the bogus ratings of teacher education programs from the National Center on Teacher Quality. The latest version on NCTQ ratings will discredit a university program if it fails to use specific textbooks and fails to teach specific methods called “best practices.” One of these “best practices” is making sure that students are tested and tested, over and over again until they pass the test. (I kid you not).
Both Great Schools and Zillow contribute to real estate redlining practice and segregation. http://www.alternet.org/education/educational-redlining-how-zillows-school-ratings-help-segregate-communities
The presidential candidates of the DNC and GOP = NYC banker types. After all, politics is just business. Good luck, America!
You said it all: Money corrupts. Every level of government and higher education, as well as PBS, has fallen.
Where did places like Brookings get money when they were more independent of donors? Did the intensified influence of money coincide with reduced governmental grants?
Roy,
Brookings had a very effective fund-raising operation. There were Brookings “councils” in every major city. Scholars visyed their annual meetings, and there was a prestige in having the connection. Brookings did not promote corporations in exchange for contributions.
I cross-posted this at Oped
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/D-C-Think-Tanks-Independ-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Corporate-Contributions_Corporate-Manipulation_Diane-Ravitch_Government-160808-492.html#comment611761
You ask:” With all that money, why should scholars be compelled to seek corporate donations?”
and you ANSWER CORRECTLY “:The lesson in all this is that money not only corrupts our politics, it corrupts those who are supposed to give nonpartisan advice to policymakers and the public.If corporations want lobbyists, they should hire lobbyists who are openly identified as such.”
You and I both know, Diane, that the oligarchs are running the show.
So once Diane changed her tune about NCLB and high stakes testing she was fired. At least you learned what the “reform” crowd is really about.
Is there such a thing as “pure research” in the universities anymore? Programs that do not generate money seem to be disappearing in favor of the money making departments. I suspect that nowadays we could use a list of post secondary institutions that actually see their primary mission as providing an education and show it by their actions. I’m guessing that colleges may do better than universities.
The accrediting bodies fail universities. A new system is needed before all university research is summarily dismissed as nothing more than vested interest. The new system would evaluate independence of work product and personnel from funders.
This, my dear Linda (and anyone else who follows me) is how the Pew national Standards research VANISHED when the NCLB act came along — and the money dried up.
I mean, my NYC District (2) got over a hundred million dollars when they picked me as the cohort. The top brass had been wooing Pew– so that Dist. 2 could be the 12th district to be included in the Pew study, based on THE EIGHT PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING. Lots of $$$ coming in, and ‘mucho’ prestige, for Chancellor Alvarado and the staff developers..
‘They’ walked into my class just before Easter… ‘they’ — being Pew, the district brass, plus Harvard and the LRDC folks, and when they walked out, I heard one saying, “How old are these kids?” They were 12 & 13. The district got the news that day!
So, at the end, the superintendent who would take me down as a parting act, got her name in lights (The American Educator celebrated our wonderful district where learning was the objective, and credited her… LOL!
She left District 2, and went on to be a chancellor (for a short time) in San Diego!
She was sent packing, fired.
I heard the San Diego school board president speaking to her, “we don’t treat our people like that,” was what he said. I fell off the sofa, where I had been channel surfing while on a trip. She was Mrs. Alvarado by then. LOL!
This woman, after Pew left, accused me of ‘corporal punishment’, and when that failed
(I filed a lawsuit) she decided it would be a good idea to charge me with ‘incompeptetnce’— at the very moment that NYS English Council had AWARDED me the EDUCATOR OF EXCELLENCE. Then I could wait for years for a hearing.
I ended up in a district office closet, no longer on my double wide classroom on York Ave. near the mayor’s mansion.
And on the shelves in the closet — that was the rubber room— were thePRINTED VOLUMES of PERFORMANCE STANDARDS… the RESULTS of the research — here were the indicators and the EVIDENCE for effort-based learning.
EFFORT BASED! PERFORMANCE BASED not standardized, multiple choice test-based — the AUTHENTIC rubrics for GENUINE ASSESSMENT.
Of course, the long and short of it, is that a teacher like me had to GO. HOW…well THAT story is for my blog, when I open “Speaking As A Teacher.”
Here is what is crucial to ‘take-away’ from my story:
I , THE CLASSROOM EXPERT wrote the curriculum, chose the materials and activities, and evaluated the performance with STUDENT portfolios begun in September and completed in June. The LRDC provided a very special folio for each student.
I xeroxed them… a good thing, because that June, as I was passing on the records to the 8th grade teachers, they suddenly were empty.! The student work had disappeared that June.By the following March, I had disappeared, too, into that aforementioned rubber room.
But —GOOD NEWS—-I have the volumes FROM THOSE SHELVES, and I have the RESEARCH THAT I DID, and all the ‘stuff’ that the Learning & Research Development Center, (LRDC) had given me while I was the cohort… and the letters from Vicki Bill (the ‘TOOLs’ researcher, at the LRDC raving about my work.) So, I guess I was not
Oh, did I ever mention that I was one of SIX teachers in the research whose work was featured in seminars, because what did, was UNIQUE. hallucinating.
I would love to show them to somebody.
I would be happy to show them to anybody.
I had hoped to PRESENT THEM at the NPE, but that didn’t pan out.
I would love to sit with Diane and Carol and Tony and say, ” Well, here’s ‘what learning looks like in the best of the 20,000 classrooms,’ (WLLL) the standards jargon for the research objectives.
Now, Linda, you know why GATES AN COMPANY GOT RID OF TEACHERS LIKE ME.
It is impossible to mandate the ‘how-to’ in a real profession , like pedagogy.
The genuine professional knows HOW TO DO IT…. It would be like telling the surgeon to use only the instruments and procedures that the management said was permissible, OR forbidding an attorney from using procedures that guarantee a beneficial result.
But what do I know. I was just a mere teacher!
To Susan, my spirit sister:
You are the greatest teacher. Your students acknowledge and they become educated parents. Hopefully, they will join in the OPT OUT MOVEMENT today.
One important satisfaction, that you should acknowledge and be proud of your talent and teaching skills, is to see those greedy and ignorant business tycoons are afraid of you and all other conscientious educators like you who can EXPOSE their spoliation.
These greedy business tycoons cannot LOOT American Public Education Fund if you, teacher Rafe Esquith, teacher Sarah Leman (? whose husband is lawyer) and many other teachers in LAUSD are still teaching and being well.
Please smile if you agree with me. Love. May.
Dear May,
I am smiling, although it is going to be 100 degrees today. Thanks your for the kind words.
By the way, from LAUSD, comes news of a victory.
It is very sad that such things have to go to court, as most people do not have that kind of money to fight.
As Mr Zeltzer says in the end:
“The lack of coverage of this important trial on the systemic corruption of the Commission On Teacher Credentialing and the big effort by Attorney General Kamala Harris and Governor Jerry Brown to defend the criminals at the agency while trying to fight Carroll speaks volumes about the corruption and criminality at the top.
It is likely that the Harris and Brown will appeal Carroll’s court victory and those who are concerned with protecting not only whistleblowers but want accountability need to focus on these top officials and their own culpability in this serious corruption that threatens the children and people of California.”
http://www.perdaily.com/2016/08/whistleblower-kathleen-carroll-wins-lawsuit-against-ctc-part-1.html
http://www.perdaily.com/2016/08/whistle-blower-kathleen-carroll-wins-lawsuit-against-ctc-part-2.html
Be well, spirit sister, in cool Canada,
Love, Susan
To all of conscientious educators:
After reading a list of all corporate in Brookings’ board of TRUSTEES, it occurred to me that experiences, credentials, scholars and nobility are JUST DECORATION to the present policy in Brookings Institute.
The truth is that it is all about THE CONNECTION and CORRUPTED DARK MONEY = massive web of deceit and corrupted power between the rich and the academe.
We should not expect a lot from CURRENT politicians. However, we should follow Dr. Ravitch’s advice that we MUST build a NEW CROP of all grassroots politicians from:
“to elect people who share OUR values from the city council to the state legislature to the Congress to the governor”
as well as:
“”WE advance one step at a time. Sometimes WE make a strategic retreat, so WE live to fight another day.”
Our mentality of “Hope for the best” is to nurture our souls to live and to fight for our grandchildren’s lives so that they can enjoy learning and living in a harmonious and JUST society that we have fought and built today. Back2basic
Well-stated, May.
The NYTimes article on the Brookings Institute made no mention of the impact of “think tanks” (sic) on the “school reform movement” (sic). The Times article made no mention of this because it contradicts THEIR story-line of magnanimous donors launching charter schools for the good of mankind as opposed to the good of their shareholders. Maybe a future edition of the newspaper will detail some of the shenanigans of other “think tanks” funded by billionaires who issue reports calling for schools to operate like businesses in an open market. And maybe a unicorn will come to my bird feeder….
Very disappointing news, particularly since Brookings enjoyed a reputation for disinterest and the integrity in confers.
It gets worse:
“An examination of 75 think tanks found an array of researchers who had simultaneously worked as registered lobbyists, members of corporate boards or outside consultants in litigation and regulatory disputes, with only intermittent disclosure of their dual roles.
With their expertise and authority, think tank scholars offer themselves as independent arbiters, playing a vital role in Washington’s political economy. Their imprimatur helps shape government decisions that can be lucrative to corporations.
But the examination identified dozens of examples of scholars conducting research at think tanks while corporations were paying them to help shape government policy. Many think tanks also readily confer “nonresident scholar” status on lobbyists, former government officials and others who earn their primary living working for private clients, with few restrictions on such outside work.”
“They can make a very deceptive and false claim to credibility that is totally lacking,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, who said he had become increasingly disturbed by the role of think tank experts on Capitol Hill. “I think about it every time there is a witness now from a ‘think tank,’ putting that term in very boldface quotes.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/think-tank-scholars-corporate-consultants.html?_r=0
The part that amazes me is there so much money sloshing around- political donations, purchasing think tanks- but none of this corporate largess ever seems to trickle down to wage increases.
Verizon says they can’t pay employees a living wage, yet they can buy a think tank?
Do not question the spending of the god’s of our capitalist system.
It’s not just the blatant conflicts of interest, either. It’s the extraordinary access they get!
“Mr. Eisenach has testified before Congress, filed comment letters to the F.C.C. that mention his status as an American Enterprise Institute scholar, and met privately with F.C.C. commissioners, according to emails obtained through an open records request. He has also organized public briefings featuring, among others, Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, the chairman of the Senate commerce committee, which oversees the F.C.C. Mr. Eisenach used his position as a think tank researcher to help rally opposition to net neutrality regulations.”
When is the last time any of you “met privately with FCC commissioners”? 🙂
How could ordinary people possibly compete with this? They’re not even in the room when decisions are made.
Did you see who is running the pro-charter advertising campaign in Massachusetts?
Unintimidated PAC (Scott Walker Super PAC)
Romney for President
Red, White and Blue Fund (Rick Santorum Super PAC)
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
McCain 2000
Dole for President
http://srcpmedia.com/clients/
This is a very important issue. The NYT article (and the Alternet article about Zillow) are going to be, I should think, consequential. Influential. I suspect that 2017 will usher change in education reform. From what we know of corporate modus operandi, there will be a huge rebranding. They will change the name.
Very much on topic
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_shell_game_of_the_economic_elites_hamilton_project_20160809
Just posted this morning.
Eye popping truth dig. Thank you, Joel.
Best link ever. Check out the succinct debunk of the “Education, Skills & Training” ‘solution’ at the ‘useful critique’ link, p2 of article, para headed ‘Skills Gap Trope’.
I want an independent think tank to decide where best to have an independent think tank. But where to have that first think tank?
Maybe not DC, center of national and arguably world politics.
Tibet? Nepal? The moon?
Not Mars, that’s where Arne lives, hence that complaint and resignation over his commute to work.
Not in orbit, that’s where King implements his policies, builds his shuttles and modules.
It is corrupted dark money in all aspects of our living life. For instance:
1) QUOTATION OF THE DAY (Monday, August 8th, 2016)
“It’s hugely disappointing. A trial is the one place where the system really gets tested. Everything else is done behind closed doors.”
JUDGE JED S. RAKOFF, a 20-year veteran of the Manhattan federal bench, on the sharp decline of jury trials.
2) Here is evidence:
Jury Trials Vanish, and Justice Is Served Behind Closed Doors
By BENJAMIN WEISER
Far fewer cases in recent decades are going to jury trials, as prosecutors are increasingly negotiating plea deals, a trend that some say disrupts a foundation of the American justice system.
3) How an Iranian’s Spy Saga Ends, 6 Years Later: He’s Executed [imho, PLAY FIRE, GET BURN]
By DAVID E. SANGER
In 2010, Shahram Amiri, a scientist, claimed on YouTube that the C.I.A. had kidnapped him. A subsequent video changed the narrative. Missing his son, he returned to Iran and disappeared.
In short, we now face the biggest and the most dangerous battle of 21st CENTURY.
WHY?
1) Because most of GLOBAL authoriies, FAKE civic leaders are VERY GREEDY but NOT noble, talent, credentials, trustworthy, scholars and wise enough to acknowledge that they are plainly ignorant with a motto of living for one life so that they are willing to corrupt their souls for dark money.
2) Every bad or good countries have a small. average and gigantic amount of nuclear.
3) the survival out of the NUCLEAR world war WILL SUFFER DISEASE FROM RADIATION.
4) People will live in the Dark Age with their POLLUTED brain.
I hope that all veteran educators will have a strategy to co-operate with film maker to cultivate GLOBAL MOVEMENT to awaken human spirit in all devious and talent-less leaders.
I always pray to Lord so that some musicians, poets, writers and film makers can cultivate a peaceful emotion in people on Earth. Back2basic
Whenever I watch the News Hour I wonder who these people are…and often they are from one or another think tank…but this is never explained.
Ryan Collay Director Education by Design Former SMILE director OSU
>
The mother of all education think tanks is the Aspen Institute, which until a few weeks ago, had David Koch in the array of Board member photos. (Madelyn Albright, too. Reportedly, Paul Singer is a client of her firm.) The Gates Foundation funds Aspen education programs like the Senior Congressional Education Staff Network.
Really? When Pearson and Microsoft have a deal to create products for Common Core and Bill Gates co-owns the largest retailer of schools-in-a-box.
Aspen is the most egregious because it implements through the executive and legislative branches.