While think tanks are a global phenomenon, their role in shaping US policy offers an instructive example of think tank influence on policymaking due to the immensity of resources directed towards those ends, with education policy serving as a prime example. Focusing on a distinct set of “incentivist” education policies, this analysis describes the think tank-philanthropy linkage in US education policymaking. We offer examples of how philanthropists provide financial, empirical and political resources to advance think tanks’ policy ideas through advocacy networks; describe the multiple functions performed through advocacy networks of intermediary organisations, noting the diffusion of form and function around tasks such as knowledge production, political and media support; and we highlight the ways in which US venture philanthropists and think tanks connect around “idea orchestration” in order to advance ideas in policy processes. We suggest that, especially in the realm of incentivist policies, think tanks do not appear to produce or incubate but rather promote ideas, and actually often only a single idea. The concluding discussion considers advantages evident in idea orchestration and the implications of private control of public policymaking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
The Heartland Institute is not legally required to disclose its funders, and thus has a policy of privacy to shield them from potential criticism. However, SourceWatch reports that the Walton Foundation has donated some $400,000 (USD): http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute.
Neither of these think tanks discloses funding sources.
American Enterprise Institute. (2014). Senators lamar alexander and tim scott unveil ambitious proposals to expand school choice [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.aei.org/events/senators-lamar-alexander-and-tim-scott-unveil-ambitious-proposals-to-expand-school-choice/.
Au, W., & Lubienski, C. (under review). The gates foundation and the role of the philanthropic sector in shaping the emerging education market. In A. Verger, C. Lubienski & G. Steiner-Khamsi (Eds.), The global education industry. New York: Routledge.
BAEO. (2014). Louisiana Teachers’ Union Is Wrong for Suing to Reduce Education Al Options in the State [Press release]. Retrieved from http://scoter.baeo.org/news_multi_media/20140930-BAEO-Response-to-LAE-Lawsuit-in-Louisiana_9.29.14%5B1%5D.pdf.
Ball, S. J. (2009). Academies in context: Politics, business and philanthropy and heterarchical governance. Management in Education, 23(3), 100–103. doi:10.1177/0892020609105801.
Barr, S., Hess, F., Kirsch, V., Klein, J. I., Vander Ark, T., & Tough, P. (2008, March 9). How many billionaires does it take to fix a school system? New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/magazine/09roundtable-t.html?pagewanted=all.
Bergner, D. (2014, September 7). The battle for New York Schools: Eva Moskowitz Vs. Mayor Bill De Blasio. New York Times, p. MM60. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/magazine/the-battle-for-new-york-schools-eva-moskowitz-vs-mayor-bill-de-blasio.html?_r=0.
Centre for Education Reform. (2000). Charter school highlights and statistics (pp. Retrieved Dec. 1,2000 from the WWW: <http://www.edreform.com/pubs/chglance.htm%3E). Washington, DC: Centre for Education Reform.
Centre for Education Reform. (2001). What the research reveals about charter schools. Washington, DC: Centre for Education Reform.
Centre for Education Reform. (2010). Annual survey of America’s charter schools. Washington, DC: Centre for Education Reform.
Centre for Education Reform. (2013). Charter School Primer. Washington, DC: Centre for Education Reform.
Coleman, J. S. (1966). Equal schools or equal students? The Public Interest, 4, 70–75.
Coons, J. E., & Sugarman, S. D. (1978). Education by choice: The case for family control. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Davies, H. T. O., & Nutley, S. M. (2008). Learning more about how research-based knowledge gets used: Guidance in the development of new empirical research. New York: William T. Grant Foundation.
DeBray, E., Scott, J., Lubienski, C., & Jabbar, H. (2014). Intermediary organizations in charter school policy coalitions: Evidence from new orleans. Educational Policy, 28(2), 175–206. doi:10.1177/0895904813514132.
DeBray-Pelot, E., Lubienski, C. A., & Scott, J. T. (2007). The institutional landscape of interest group politics and school choice. Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2–3), 204–230.
Fang, L. (2014, September 25). Venture capitalists are poised to ‘disrupt’ everything about the education market. The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/venture-capitalists-are-poised-disrupt-everything-about-education-market/.
Forster, G. (2007). Monopoly versus markets: The empirical evidence on private schools and school choice. Indianapolis, IN: Friedman Foundation.
Forster, G. (2009). A win–win solution: The empirical evidence on how vouchers affect public schools. Indianapolis, IN: Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.
Friedman, M. (1955). The role of government in education. In R. A. Solo (Ed.), Economics and the public interest (pp. 127–134). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Friedman Foundation for Education Choice. (2012). The abcs of school choice. Indianapolis, IN: Friedman Foundation.
Glass, G. V. (2014). The strangest academic department in the world. Retrieved from http://ed2worlds.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-strangest-academic-department-in.html.
Goldie, D., Linick, M., Jabbar, H., & Lubienski, C. (2014). Using bibliometric and social media analyses to explore the “echo chamber” hypothesis. Educational Policy, 28(2), 281–305. doi:10.1177/0895904813515330.
Jabbar, H., Goel, P., DeBray, E., Scott, J., & Lubienski, C. (2014). How policymakers define ‘evidence’: The politics of research use in new orleans. Policy Futures in Education, 12(8), 1013–1027.
Kaestle, C. F. (1973). The evolution of an urban school system: New York City 1750–1850. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Klein, J. I. (2014). Lessons of hope: How courage, grit, and accountability can save our schools (1st ed.). New York, NY: Harper.
Kopp, W., & Farr, S. (2011). A chance to make history: What works and what doesn’t in providing an excellent education for all. New York: Public Affairs.
Ladner, M., & Myslinski, D. (2013). Report card on American education: ranking state k-12 performance, progress, and reform. Washington, DC: American Legislative Exchange Council.
Layton, L. (2014, June 7). How Bill gates pulled off the swift common core revolution. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-bill-gates-pulled-off-the-swift-common-core-revolution/2014/06/07/a830e32e-ec34-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html.
Libby, K. (2010, March 8). How to buy a candidate: Gloria Romero for CA superintendent of public instruction: Schools matter. Retrieved from http://www.schoolsmatter.info/search?q=How+to+Buy+a+Candidate%3A+Gloria+Romero+for+CA+Superintendent+of+Public+Instruction.
Lubienski, C. (2001). Redefining “public” education: Charter schools, common schools, and the rhetoric of reform. Teachers College Record, 103(4), 634–666.
Lubienski, C. (2014a). Re-making the middle: Dis-intermediation in international context. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(3), 423–440. doi:10.1177/1741143214521594.
Lubienski, C. & Brewer T.J. (2014). Review of “pluck and tenacity: How five private schools in Ohio have adapted to vouchers.” Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-pluck-and-tenacity.
Lubienski, C., Scott, J., & DeBray, E. (2011). The rise of intermediary organizations in knowledge production, advocacy, and educational policy. Teachers college record, http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 16487.
Lubienski, C., Scott, J., Rogers, J., Welner, K. (2012). Missing the target? The parent trigger as a strategy for parental engagement and school reform. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Available at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/pm-trigger-2012.pdf.
Lubienski, C., Weitzel, P., & Lubienski, S. T. (2009). Is there a “consensus” on school choice and achievement? Advocacy research and the emerging political economy of knowledge production. Educational Policy, 23(1), 161–193.
Malin, J. R., & Lubienski, C. (2015). Educational expertise, advocacy, and media influence. Education Policy Analysis Archives,. doi:10.14507/epaa.v23.1706.
McGann, J. G. (2013). 2014 Global go to think tank index report. Philadelphia, PA: Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, University of Pennsylvania.
Miller, R. (2011, July 21). How stand for children snuck into the statehouse. Illinois Times. Retrieved from http://illinoistimes.com/article-8899-how-stand-for-children-snuck-into-the-statehouse.html.
Miller, K. S., & Bellamy, R. (2012). Fine print, restrictive grants, and academic freedom. Academe, 98, 17–21.
National Philanthropic Trust. (2015). Charitable giving statistics. Retrieved from http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/charitable-giving-statistics/.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming (1st U.S. ed.). New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Peterson, P. E., & Llaudet, E. (2006). On the public-private school achievement debate. Cambridge, MA: Program on Education Policy and Governance, Harvard University.
Ratigan, D. (Writer) & MSNBC (Director). (2011). Parent revolution: Taking back Compton schools [Television broadcast]. In Dylan Ratigan Show (Producer). New York, NY: MSNBC.
Ravitch, D. (1974). The great school wars: New York City, 1805–1973; a history of the public schools as battlefield of social change. New York: Basic Books.
Reckhow, S. (2013). Follow the money: How foundation dollars change public school politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Reckhow, S., & Snyder, J. W. (2014). The expanding role of philanthropy in education politics. Educational Researcher, 43(4), 186–195. doi:10.3102/0013189x14536607.
Rhee, M. (2013). Radical: Fighting to Put students first (1st ed.). New York: Harper.
Rich, A. (2004). Think tanks, public policy, and the politics of expertise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rich, A. (2005). War of ideas. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Retrieved from http://ssir.org/articles/entry/war_of_ideas/.
Robinson, G. (2005). Survey of school choice research. Milwaukee, WI: Institute for the Transformation of Learning, Marquette University.
Rogers, J., Scott, J., Lubienski, C., & Welner, K. (2015). Missing the target? The parent trigger as a strategy for parental engagement and school reform. Teachers College Record, 117(6), 1–36. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=17881.
Rouse, C. E., & Barrow, L. (2009). School vouchers and student achievement: Recent evidence, remaining questions. Annual Review of Economics, 1.
Saltman, K. J. (2010). The gift of education: Public education and venture philanthropy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Savage, G. C. (2014). Reconstituting “the public” through national reform: A reflection on the development of the Common Core State Standards. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 11(1), 40–43.
Scott, J., & Jabbar, H. (2014). The hub and the spokes: Foundations, intermediary organizations, incentivist reforms, and the politics of research evidence. Educational Policy, 28(2), 233–257. doi:10.1177/0895904813515327.
Scott, J., Lubienski, C., & DeBray, E. (2015). The ideological and political landscape of school choice advocacy. In B. S. Cooper, J. G. Cibulka, & L. D. Fusarelli (Eds.), Handbook of education politics and policy (2nd ed., pp. 322–342). New York: Routledge.
Scott, J., Lubienski, C., DeBray, E., & Jabbar, H. (2014). The intermediary function in evidence production, promotion, and utilization: The case of educational incentives. In K. S. Finnigan & A. J. Daly (Eds.), Using research evidence in education: From the schoolhouse door to capitol hill (pp. 69–92). New York: Springer.
Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Stern, S. (2008, Winter). School choice isn’t enough. City Journal, 18, http://www.city-journal.org/2008/2018_2001_instructional_reform.html.
Thomas, C. (2006, November 22). Friedman’s greatest legacy: school choice? Real Clear Politics. Retrieved from http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/11/the_other_milton_friedman.html.
Usher, A., & Kober, N. (2011). Keeping informed about school vouchers: A review of major developments and research. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
Watkins, S. (2006, September 1). Are public or private schools doing better? How the NCES study is being misinterpreted. Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, 1–4. Retrieved from http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/09/are-public-or-private-schools-doing-better-how-the-nces-study-is-being-misinterpreted.
Wolf, P. J. (2014). Update on the Milwaukee school choice evaluation dust-up. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/update-on-the-milwaukee-school-choice-evaluation-dust-up/.
The authors thank Professor Bekisizwe Ndimande and the anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper.
About this article
Cite this article
Lubienski, C., Brewer, T.J. & La Londe, P.G. Orchestrating policy ideas: philanthropies and think tanks in US education policy advocacy networks. Aust. Educ. Res. 43, 55–73 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-015-0187-y
- Think tanks
- Venture philanthropy
- Education policy
- United States