Abstract
Today there are approximately 68,000 private independent foundations that contribute less than 3 % of the total annual revenue to the field of higher education. These groups aspire to use their patronage to transform and reform the structure and practices of higher education, such that their vision for American society takes hold. Since society is once again in an era of mega-foundation activity, this synthesis considers the evidence describing how private foundations have pursued their social agendas to shape the field of higher education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Foundation Center, the most prominent clearinghouse for foundation data in the United States, periodically releases reports focusing on foundation funds directed toward the field of higher education .
- 2.
Journalistic accounts were considered judiciously before including them in the literature reviewed.
- 3.
Despite corporate foundations’ also holding the status of being private, it is outside the purview of this analysis to synthesize the literature on corporate foundations given that their relationships to higher education are influenced by different dynamics, motivations , and regulations compared to independent private philanthropic foundations.
- 4.
Within the multi-organizational field of higher education , these external organizations would fall under the classification of ‘Other Non-profits’ as depicted in Figures 1 and 2. Or, in the case of government or state supported research or coordinating councils, they would be located in that sector of society.
- 5.
A professional association of conservative minded faculty and administrators inside the academy.
References
Altbach, P. G. (1970). Student movements in historical perspective – Asian case. Youth & Society, 1(3), 333–357.
Altbach, P. G., & Cohen, R. (1990). American student activism – The post-60s transformation. Journal of Higher Education, 61(1), 32–49.
Alterman, E. (1999). The ‘Right’ books and big ideas. The Nation, 269(17), 16–21.
Anderson, J. A. (1988). The education of blacks in the South, 1865–1930. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Anderson, J. D. (1980). Philanthropic control over Black higher education. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: Foundations at home and abroad (pp. 147–177). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Andrews, F. E. (1950). Philanthropic giving. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Andrews, F. E. (1956). Philanthropic foundations. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Andrews, F. E. (1958). Legal instruments of foundations. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Andrews, F. E. (1961). Growth and present status of American foundations. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 105(2), 157–161.
Arnove, R. F. (1980a). Introduction. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 1–24). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Arnove, R. F. (1980b). Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Austin, A. (2007). Key facts on family foundations. New York, NY: The Foundation Center.
Bachetti, R. (2007). Many motives, mixed reviews. In R. Bachetti & T. Elhrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting education and foundations: Turning good intentions into educational capital (pp. 251–281). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Bachetti, R., & Ehrlich, T. (2007). Foundations and education: Introduction. In R. Bachetti & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting education and foundations: Turning good intentions into educational capital (pp. 3–20). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Barnhardt, C. (2006). Ideological conservative activism on campus: A case study of a federated social movement. University of Michigan.
Beckham, E. F. (2007). Working through intermediaries: The New Jersey campus diversity initiative. In R. Bacchetti & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting education and foundations: Turning good intentions into educational capital (pp. 283–302). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Beilke, J. R. (1997). The changing emphasis of the Rosenwald fellowship program, 1928-1948. The Journal of Negro Education, 66(1), 3–15.
Berkowitz, B. (2007). Ward Connerly’s ‘Equal rights’ con. Media Transparency. Retrieved from http://www.mediatransparency.org/storyprinterfriendly.php?storyID=210
Bernstein, A. R. (2003). Is philanthropy abandoning higher education? The Presidency, 6, 34–37.
Bernstein, D. S. (2005). Buying the campus mind: Ideologues are paying big bucks to influence the college experience-but you won’t hear that from your school. The Boston Phoeniz. Retrieved from http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/multipage/documents/04998793.asp
Binder, A., & Wood, K. (2012). Becoming right: How campuses shape young conservatives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bishop, M., & Green, M. (2015). Philanthrocapitalism rising. Society, 52, 541–548.
Bjork, R. E. (1962). Foundations, universities, and goverrnment: A pattern of interaction. The Journal of Higher Education, 33(5), 270–276.
Blackburn, T. E. (1995). Right-thinking conservative think tanks. National Catholic Reporter, 31(41), 18.
Bloom, A. (1987). The closing of the American mind. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Bosworth, D. (2011). The cultural contradictions of philanthrocapitalism. Society, 48(5), 382–388.
Bothwell, R. (2003). The decline of progressive policy and the new philanthropy. The On-Line Conference on Community Organizing and Development, 9. Retrieved from http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers2003/bothwell/
Boyce, B. A. (2013). Philanthropic funding in higher education: Carrot and/or stick. Quest, 65(3), 255–265.
Breneman, D. W. (1996). Boards can’t pass the buck. Trusteeship, 4(2), 26–29.
Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1991). Institutional origins and transformations: The case of American community colleges. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 337–360). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Broad, W. J. (2014, March 16). Billionaires with big ideas are privatizing American science. The New York Times, p. 1. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/science/billionaires-with-big-ideas-are-privatizing-american-science.html
Brooks, C. (2015). ‘The ignorance of the uneducated’: Ford foundation philanthropy, the IIE, and the geographies of educational exchange. Journal of Historical Geography, 48, 36–46.
Bu, L. (1999). Cultural understanding and world peace: The roles of private institutions in the interwar years. Peace & Change, 24(2), 148–171.
Bulmer, M. (1995). Some observations on the history of large philanthropic foundations in Britain and the United States. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 6(3), 275–291.
Calhoun, C. (1998). The public good as a social and cultural product. In W. W. Powell & E. S. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good (pp. 20–35). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Cascione, G. L. (2003). Philanthropists in higher education: Institutional, biographical, and religious motivations for giving. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chaves, M. (1998). The religious ethic and the spirit of nonprofit entreprenuership. In W. W. Powell & E. S. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good (pp. 47–65). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Cheit, E. F., & Lobman, T. E. (1979). Foundations and higher education: Grant making from golden years through steady state. A technical report. Berkeley, CA: Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education.
Cheney, L. (1992). Telling the truth: A report on the state of the humanities in higher education. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Humanities.
Clemens, E. S. (2005). Two kinds of stuff: The current encounter of social movements and organizations. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 351–366). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Clotfelter, C. T. (2007). Patron or bully? The role of foundations in higher education. In R. Bacchetti & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting education and foundations (pp. 211–248). Stanford, CA: Jossey Bass.
Cole, J. W., & Reid, G. F. (1986). The new vulnerability of higher education. Thought & Action, 2(1), 29–40.
Condliffe Lagemann, E. (1983). Private power for the public good: A history of the Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Condliffe Lagemann, E. (1999). Introduction: Foundations in history; new possibilities for scholarship and practice. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. ix–xviii). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Condliffe Lagemann, E. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Conley, D. J. (1990). Philanthropic foundations and organizational change: The case of the Southern Education Foundation (SEF) during the Civil Rights era. (Vols. I and II, Doctoral Dissertation). Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/pqdweb?did=745650981&Fmt=7&clientId=17822&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Corrigall-Brown, C. (2016). Funding for social movements. Sociology Compass, 10(4), 330–339.
Covington, S. (1997). Moving a public policy agenda: The strategic philanthropy of conservative foundations. Retrieved from Washinton, D.C.: National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy
Covington, S. (2005). Moving public policy to the right: The strategic philanthropy of conservative foundations. In D. R. Faber & D. McCarthy (Eds.), Foundations for social change: Critical perspectives on philanthropy and popular movements (pp. 89–114). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing.
Cress, D. M., & Snow, D. A. (1996). Mobilization at the margins: Resources, benefactors, and the viability of homeless social movement organizations. American Sociological Review, 61(6), 1089–1109.
Cross, T. (1999). African-American opportunities in higher education: What are the racial goals of the center for individual rights? Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 23, 94–99.
Culleton Colwell, M. A. (1980). The foundation connection: Links among foundations and recipient organizations. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 413–452). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Cuninggim, M. (1972). Private money and public service: The role of foundations in American society. New York, NY: McGraww-Hill Book Company.
Curti, M. E., & Nash, R. (1965). Philanthropy in the shaping of American higher education. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Curtis, R. L., & Zurcher, L. A. (1973). Stable resources of protest movements: The multi-organizational field. Social Forces, 52(1), 53–61.
D’Souza, D. (1991). Illiberal education: The politics of race and sex on campus. New York, NY: The Free Press.
D’Souza, D. (1995). The end of racism: Principles for a multiracial society. New York, NY: Free Press.
Denvir, D. P. (2003). Reluctant foot soldiers: America’s undergraduates rebuff opponents of academic freedom. Academe, 89(3), 36.
DeRussy, C. (1996). In defense of activisit trusteeship. Trusteeship, 4(6), 6–10.
DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing and organizational field as a professional project: U.S. art museums 1920–1940. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 267–292). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
Douglas, J. (1987). Political theories of nonprofit organization. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 43–54). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Ealy, L. T. (2011). Justice, beneficence and the modern age. Society, 48, 403–406.
Edwards, M. (2011). Impact, accountability, and philanthrocapitalism. Society, 48, 389–390.
Faber, D. R., & McCarthy, D. (2005). Introduction. In D. R. Faber & D. McCarthy (Eds.), Foundations for social change: Critical perspectives on philanthropy and popular movements (pp. 3–32). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publiishers.
Fain, P. (2006, March 10, 2006). Renegades shake up trustee elections: At Dartmouth and Hamilton colleges, petitions by insurgent candidates signal a new front in the culture wars. The Chroncile of Higher Education, A25.
Fiore, M. (1997, July 11). 12 conservative foundations shift agenda for policy research, report says. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A29–A30.
Fisher, D. (1980). American philanthropy and the social sciences: The reproduction of a conservative ideology. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 233–268). Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.
Fisher, D. (1983). The role of philanthropic foundation in the reproduction and production of hegemony: Rockefeller foundations and the social sciences. Sociology, 17(2), 206–233.
Fisher, D. (1984). Philanthropic foundations and the social sciences: A response to Martin Bulmer. Sociology, 18(4), 580–587.
Fisher v. University of Texas 579 U.S. (2016).
Flaherty, C. (2015, October 16). New paper details extent of BB&T Bank’s Ayn Rand-inspired grant program. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/10/16/new-paper-details-extent-bbt-banks-ayn-rand-inspired-grant-program
Fleishman, J. L. (2007). The foundation. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Flexner, A. (1910). Medical education in the United States and Canada (Bulletin 4). The Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. Boston, MA: The Merrymount Press
Flexner, A. (1952). Funds and foundations. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers Publishers.
Foundation Center. (2011). Foundation giving trends: 2011 edition. New York, NY. Retrieved from: http://foundationcenter.org/gainknowledge/research/pdf/fgge11.pdf
Frickel, S., & Gross, N. (2007). A general theory of scientific/intellectual movements. American Sociological Review, 70, 204–232.
Frumkin, P. (1999). Private foundations as public institutions: Regulation, professionalization, and the redefinition of organized philanthropy. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 69–100). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Frumkin, P. (2002). On being nonprofit: A conceptual policy primer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Fuentes, A. (1998). Trustees of the right’s agenda. The Nation.
Giugni, M. G. (1998). Was it worth the effort? The outcomes and consequences of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 371–393.
Giugni, M. G. (1999). Introduction how social movements matter: Past research, present problems, future developments. In M. G. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. xi–xxxiii). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Giugni, M. G., McAdam, D., & Tilly, C. (1999). How social movements matter. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Gose, B. (2013, July 14). Strategic philanthropy comes to higher education. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Strategic-Philanthropy-Comes/140299/
Grant, J. (1999). Constructing the normal child: The Rockefeller philanthropies and the science of child development. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 131–150). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244. (2003).
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306. (2003).
Guess, A. (2007). Board rights vs. alumni rights. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2007/10/05/trustees
Hall, C., & Thomas, S. L. (2012). ‘Advocacy Philanthropy’ and the public policy agenda: The role of modern foundations in American higher education. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC. .http://chronicle.com/items/biz/pdf/Hall%20&%20Thomas%20AERA%202012.pdf
Hammack, D. C. (2006). American debates on the legitimacy of foundations. In K. Prewitt, M. Dogan, S. Heydemann, & S. Toepler (Eds.), The legitimacy of philanthropic foundations: United State and European perspectives (pp. 49–98). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Harrison, S. M., & Andrews, F. E. (1946). American foundations for social welfare. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Hart, J. (1972). Foundations and social activism: A critical view. In F. Heimann (Ed.), The future of foundations (pp. 43–57). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Havighurst, R. J. (1981). Philanthropic foundations as interest-groups. Education and Urban Society, 13(2), 193–218.
Healy, P. (1997, March 21). Members of virginia boards are urged to become activists. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/che-data/articles.dir/art-43.dir/issue-28.dir/28a03501.htm
Hebel, S. (1999, February 19). How liable are trusttes in affirmative-action suites? The Chroncile of Higher Education, A35.
Hechinger, F. M. (1967). The foundations and education. In W. Weaver (Ed.), U.S. philanthropic foundations: Their history, structures, management, and records (pp. 410–427). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York, NY: Free Press.
Hess, F. M. (2005). With the best intentions: How philanthropy is reshaping K-12 education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Hess, F. M., & Kelly, A. P. (2005). An innovative look, a racalcitrant reality: The politics of principal preparation reform. Educational Policy, 19(1), 155–180.
Heydemann, S., & Toepler, S. (2006). Foundations and the challenge of legitimacy in comparative perspective. In K. Prewitt, M. Dogan, S. Heydemann, & S. Toepler (Eds.), The legitimacy of philanthropic foundations: United States and European perspectives (pp. 3–26). New York, N.Y: Russell Sage Foundation.
Himmelstein, J. L., & Zald, M. N. (1984). American conservatism and government funding of the social sciences and the arts. Sociological Inquiry, 54(2), 171–187.
Hinsey, J. C. (1967). The role of private foundations in the development of modern medicine. In W. Weaver (Ed.), U.S. philanthropic foundations: Their history, structure, management, and record (pp. 260–271). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Hollis, E. V. (1938). Philanthropic foundations and higher education. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Hopwood v. Texas, 78 F.3d 932 (5th Cir. 1996)
Horowitz, I. L., & Horowitz, R. L. (1970). Tax-exempt foundations: Their effect on national policy. Science, 168(3928), 220–228.
Houppert, K. (2002). Wanted: A few good girls. The Nation, 16(25), 11–16.
Husock, H. (2011). Disaggregating public purposes. Society, 48, 391–392.
Hutchings, P. (2007). From idea to prototype: The peer review of teaching. In R. Bacchetti & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting educaction and foundations: Turning good intentions into educational capital (pp. 303–322). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jackson v. Phillips, (1867) 96 Mass. 539.
Jaschik, S. (2007). ‘Fundamentally inconsistent’ with university values. Inside Higher Ed, (November 7). Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2007/11/07/illinois
Jenkins, J. C. (1983). Resource mobilization theory and the study of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 527–553.
Jenkins, J. C. (1987). Nonprofit organizations and policy advocacy. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 296–318). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Jenkins, J. C. (1989). Foundation funding of progressive social movements (revisited). In J. R. Shellow & N. C. Stella (Eds.), Grant seekers guide (3rd ed., pp. 1–13). Mt. Kisco, NY: Moyer Bell Limited.
Jenkins, J. C. (1998). Channeling social protest: Foundation patronage of contemporary social movements. In W. W. Powell & E. S. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good (pp. 206–216). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Jenkins, J. C., & Eckert, C. M. (1986). Channeling Black insurgency – Elite patronage and professional social-movement organizations in the development of the Black movement. American Sociological Review, 51(6), 812–829.
Jenkins, J. C., & Halcli, A. (1999). Grassrooting the system? The development and impact of social movement philanthropy 1853–1990. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 229–256). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Karl, B. D. (1985). Philanthropy and the social sciences. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 129(1), 14–19.
Karl, B. D., & Karl, A. W. (2001). Foundations and government: A tale of conflict and consensus. In C. T. Clotfelter & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Philanthropy and the nonprofit sector in a changing America (pp. 52–72). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Karl, B. D., & Katz, S. N. (1981). The American private philanthropic foundation and the public sphere 1890–1930. Minerva, 19, 236–270.
Katz, S. N. (1985). Grantmaking and research in the U.S. 1933–1983. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 129(1), 1–3.
Katz, S. N. (2012). Beware big donors. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(30), B6–B9.
Kimball, R. (1990). Tenured radicals: How politics has corrupted our higher education. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc..
Kohler, R. E. (1985). Philanthropy and science. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 129(1), 9–13.
Kriesi, H. (1996). The organizational structure of new social movements in a political context. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 152–184). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Kumashiro, K. K. (2012). When billionaires become educational experts. Academe, 98(3), 10–16.
Laprade, W. T. (1952/1953). Funds and foundations: A neglected phase. Academe, 38(4), 559–576.
Lawrence, S., & Atienza, J. (2006). Foundation yearbook: Facts and figures on private and community foundations. New York, NY: The Foundation Center.
Lawrence, S., & Marino, L. (2003). Update on funding for higher and graduate educational institutions. New York, NY: The Foundation Center.
Lazere, D. (2005a). The contradictions of cultural conservatism in the assault on American colleges. Cultural Studies, 19(4), 415–422.
Lazere, D. (2005b, July 20). Money and motives. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2005/07/20/money-and-motives
Lee, J. (1994, December 9). The Republican brain trust. USA Today, 8A.
Lenkowsky, L., & Piereson, J. (2007). Education and the conservative foundations. In R. Bacchetti & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Reconnecting education and foundations: Turning good intentions into educational capital (pp. 347–378). San Francsico, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Levinthal, D. (2014a, March 27). Inside the Koch brothers’ campus crusade. The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved from http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/03/27/14497/inside-koch-brothers-campus-crusade
Levinthal, D. (2014b, September 12). Koch foundation proposal to college: Teach out curriculum, get millions: Documents show group sought control over hiring at Florida State. The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved from http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/09/12/15495/koch-foundation-proposal-college-teach-our-curriculum-get-millions
Levinthal, D. (2015a). How the Koch brothers are influencing U.S. colleges. Time.
Levinthal, D. (2015b, November 4). Koch brothers’ higher-ed investments advance political goals: Boost in school funding builds free-market ‘talent pipeline’. The Center for Public INtegrity. Retrieved from http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/10/30/18684/koch-brothers-higher-ed-investments-advance-political-goals
Levinthal, D. (2015c, December 15). Koch brothers supersize higher-ed spending: In 2014, billionaire undsutrialists’ foundations donated to more colleges than ever. The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved from http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/12/15/19007/koch-brothers-supersize-higher-ed-spending
Lewin, T. (2007a, September 8). Battle over board structure at Dartmouth raises passions of alumni. The New York Times, 8.
Lewin, T. (2007b, October 4). Dartmouth alumni sue over changes. The New York Times, 27. Retrieved from http://infoweb.newsbank.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/iw-search/we/InfoWeb/?p_action=print&p_docid=11C125DD160A8C30&p_queryname=2&p_product=AWNB&p_theme=aggregated4&p_nbid=W5EH5CLQMTE5NDk4MDg4NS44NzY5ODc6MToxNToxNDEuMjExLjE3NS4xMzk
Lewin, T. (2007c, September 10). Dartmouth expands board, reducing role of alumni. The New York Times, pp. 16.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Cannella, G. S. (2004). Qualitative research, power, and the radical right. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 175–201.
Linton, C. R. (1937). Charities: Corporation organized for political purposes as a charitable organization. Michigan Law Review, 36(1), 139–142.
Lipset, S. M. (1967). Student politics. New York, NY: Back Books.
Lipset, S. M. (1968). American student activism in comparative perspective. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
Lipset, S. M., & Altbach, P. G. (1969). Students in revolt. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Litten, L. H., & Hall, A. E. (1989). In the eyes of our beholders – Some evidence on how high-school-students and their parents view quality in colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 60(3), 302–324.
Lorenzi, P., & Hilton, F. G. (2011). Optimizing Philanthrocapitalism. Society, 48, 397–402.
Lounsbury, M., & Pollack, S. (2001). Institutionalizing civic engagement: Shifting logics and the cultural repackaging of service-learning in U.S. higher education. Organization, 8(2), 319–339.
Lubienski, C., Brewer, T. J., & La Laonde, P. G. (2016). Orchestrating policy ideas: Philanthropies and think tanks in US education policy advocacy networks. Australian Educational Research, 43, 55–73.
Lumina Foundation for Education. (n.d.). From the ground up: An early history of Lumina Foundation for Education. Indianapolis, IN. Retrieved from: https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/from-the-ground-up.pdf
Mainsbridge, J. (1998). On the contested nature of the public good. In W. W. Powell & E. S. Clemens (Eds.), Private action and the public good (pp. 3–19). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Markay, L. (2015, November 2). Deep-pocket donors behind campus anti-Koch movement. The Washington Free Beacon.
Martin, J. L., & Neal, A. D. (2002). Defending civilization: How our universities are failing American and what can be done about it. Washington, DC. Retrieved from: http://www.goacta.org/publications/reports.html
McAdam, D. (1983). Tactical innovation and the pace of insurgency. American Sociological Review, 48, 735–754.
McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structure, and cultural framings. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McAdam, D., & Scott, W. R. (2005). Organizations and movements. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 1–40). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social-movements – Partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1987a). Appendix: The trend of social movements in America: Professionalization and resource mobilization. In M. N. Zald & J. D. McCarthy (Eds.), Social movements in an organizational society (pp. 337–391). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1987b). Resource mobilization and social movements. In M. N. Zald & J. D. McCarthy (Eds.), Social movements in an organizational society (pp. 15–47). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
McCarthy, K. (1985). The short and simple annals of the poor: Foundation funding for the humanities, 1900–1983. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 129(1), 3–8.
McClennen, S. A. (2006). The geopolitical war on U.S. higher education. College Literature, 33(4), 43–75.
McDonough, P. M., Antonio, A. L., Walpole, M., & Perez, L. X. (1998). College rankings: Democratized college knowledge for whom? Research in Higher Education, 39(5), 513–537.
McGoey, L. (2015). No such thing as a free gift: The Gates foundation and the price of philanthropy. New York, NY: Verso.
McMillen, L. (1992, January 22). Olin fund gives millions to conservative activities in higher education; Critics see political agenda. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A31, 32.
Mehta, J., Schwartz, R. B., & Hess, F. M. (2012). The futures of school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Meranto, O. J. (2005). The third wave of McCarthyism: Co-opting the language of inclusivity. New Political Science, 27(2), 215–232.
Meredith, M. (2004). Why do universities compete in the ratings game? An empirical analysis of the effects of the US news and world report college rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45(5), 443–461.
Messer-Davidow, E. (1993). Manufacturing the attack on liberalized higher education. Social Text, 36, 40–80.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Miller, A. (1994). The pioneer fund – Bankrolling the professors of hate (Reprinted). Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (6), 58–61.
Miller, K. S., & Bellamy, R. (2012). Fine print, restrictive grants, and academic freedom. Academe, 98(3), 17–21.
Moses, M. S. (2004). Social welfare, the neo-conservative turn and educational opportunity. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38(2), 275–286.
Nally, D., & Taylor, S. (2015). The politics of self-help: The Rockefeller foundation, philanthropy and the ‘long’ Green revolution. Political Geography, 49, 51–63.
Nielsen, W. A. (1972). The big foundations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Nielsen, W. A. (1996). Inside American philanthropy: The dramas of donorship. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
O’Connor, A. (1999). The Ford foundation and philanthropic activism in the 1960s. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 169–194). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Orru, M., Woolsey Biggart, N., & Hamilton, G. G. (1991). Organizational isomorphism in East Asia. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 361–389). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Osei-Kofi, N. (2010). Coercion, posibility, or context? Questioning the role of private foundations in American higher education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(1), 17–28.
Ostrander, S. A. (1999). When grantees become grantors:Accountability, democracy, and social movement philanthropy. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 257–270). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Ostrander, S. A. (2005). Legacy and promise for social justice funding: Charitable foundations and progressive social movements past and present. In D. R. Faber & D. McCarthy (Eds.), Foundations for social change: Critical perspectives on philanthropy and popular movements (pp. 33–60). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Parrish, T. (1973). The foundation: “A special American institution”. In F. Heimann (Ed.), The future of foundations (pp. 7–42). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Parry, M., Field, K., & Supiano, B. (2013, July 14). The Gates effect. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Gates-Effect/140323
People For the American Way. (1996). Buying a movement: Right-wing foundations and American politics. Washington, DC: Author.
Pessen, E. (1971). The egalitarian myth adn American social reality: Wealth, mobility, and equality in the “Era of the common man”. The American Historical Review, 76(4), 989–1034.
Pichardo, N. A. (1988). Resource mobilization – An analysis of conflicting theoretical variations. The Sociological Quarterly, 29(1), 97–110.
Prewitt, K. (2006). American foundations: What justifies their unique privileges and powers. In K. Prewitt, M. Dogan, S. Heydemann, & S. Toepler (Eds.), The legitimacy of philanthropic foundations: United States and European perspectives (pp. 27–48). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Proietto, R. (1999). The Ford foundation and women’s studies. In E. C. Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 271–284). Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.
Quinn, R. E., Tompkins-Stange, M., & Meyerson, D. (2014). Beyond grantmaking: Philanthropic foundations as agents of change and institutional entrepreneurs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(6), 950–968.
Rabinowitz, A. (1990). Social change philanthropy in America. New York, NY: Quorum Books.
Ramdas, K. N. (2011). Philanthrocapitalism: Reflectiosn on politics and policy making. Society, 48, 393–396.
Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Raynor, G. K. (1999). The Ford foundation’s war on poverty: Private philanthropy and race relations in New York city 1948–1968. In E. Condliffe Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 195–228). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Reckhow, S. (2013). Follow the money: How foundation dollars change public school politics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Reckhow, S., & Snyder, J. W. (2014). The expanding role of philanthropy in education politics. Educational Researcher, 43(4), 186–195.
Regents of Univ. of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
Reindl, T. (2006). The culture wars come to campus--again. College and University Journal, 81(2), 43–44.
Rhind, F. M., & Bingham, B. (1967). Philanthropic foundations and the problem of race. In W. Weaver (Ed.), U.S. philanthropic foundations: Their history, structure, management, and record (pp. 428–439). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Rhoads, R. A. (1997). Student activism as an agent of contemporary campus unrest. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American educational research association, Chicago, IL.
Rhoads, R. A. (1998). Student protest and multicultural reform: Making sense of campus unrest in the 1990s. The Journal of Higher Education, 69(6), 621–646.
Rhoads, R. A. (2003). Student movements for multiculturalism: Challenging the curricular color line in higher education. The Review of Higher Education, 26(4), 539–540.
Rhoads, R. A., Lee, J. J., & Yamada, M. (2002). Panethnicity and collective action among Asian American students: A qualitative case study. Journal of College Student Development, 43(6), 876–891.
Rhoads, R. A., & Mina, L. (2001). The student strike at the National Autonomous University of Mexico: A political analysis. Comparative Education Review, 45(3), 334–353.
Rhoads, R. A., Saenz, V., & Carducci, R. (2005). Higher education reform as a social movement: The case of affirmative action. The Review of Higher Education, 28(2), 191–220.
Roelofs, J. (2003). Foundations and public policy: The mask of pluralism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Roelofs, J. (2005). Liberal fondations: Impediments or supports for social change? In D. R. Faber & D. McCarthy (Eds.), Foundations for social change: Critical perspectives on philanthropy and popular movements (pp. 61–88). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Rogers, I. H. (2012). The black campus movement: Black students and the racial reconstitution of higher education, 1965–1972. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Rogers, R. (2011). Why philanthro-policy making matters. Society, 48, 376–381.
Rogers, R. (2014). Philanthropy and higher education. Society, 51(1), 98–99.
Rogers, R. (2015a). Making public policy: The new philanthropists and American education. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 74(4), 743–774.
Rogers, R. (2015b). Why the social sciences should take philanthropy seriously. Society, 2015(52).
Rogers, R. (2016). Linsey McGoey, no such thing as a free gift: The Gates foundation and the price of philanthropy. Society, 53, 329–330.
Rojas, F. G. (2003). Organizational decision-making and the emergence of academic disciplines. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/pqdweb?did=765682621&Fmt=7&clientId=17822&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Saltman, K. (2009). The rise of venture philanthropy and the ongoing neoliberal assault on public education: The Eli and Edythe broad foundation. Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor, 16, 53–72.
Schein, E. H. (1992). Defining organizational culture. In E. H. Schein (Ed.), Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed., pp. 1–15). San Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass.
Schemo, D. J. (2006, June 21). Dartmouth alumni battles become a spectator sport. The New York Times, pp. 10.
Schnabel, T. (2005). Vigilante nonprofits: The Bob Jones rule as applied to the international promotion of the rule of law. Virginia Tax Review, 24(4), 921–954.
Scott, W. R. (1975). Organizational structure. Annual Review of Sociology, 1(1), 1–20.
Scott, W. R. (1991). Unpacking institutional arrangements. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 164–182). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Selden, S. (2005). Who’s paying for the culture wars? Academe, 91(5), 35–38.
Selingo, J. J. (2013). College (un)bound: The future of higher education and what it means for students. New York, NY: Houghton Miflin Harcourt Publishing.
Simon, J. G. (1995). The regulation of American foundations: Looking backward at the Tax Reform Act of 1969. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 6(3), 243–254.
Slaughter, S., & Silva, E. T. (1980). Looking backwards: How foundations formulated ideology in the Progressive period. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 55–86). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Smith, J. A. (2001). The evolving role of American foundations. In C. T. Clotfelter & T. Ehrlich (Eds.), Philanthropy and the nonprofit sector in a changing America (pp. 34–51). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Smith, R. B. (1993). The rise of the conservative student press. Change, 25(1), 24–29.
Southworth, A. (2005). Conservative lawyers and the contest over the meaning of “public interest law”. UCLA Law Review, 52(4), 1223–1278.
Starobin, P. (1996, December 7). Matt Spalding: In town to further conservative ideals. National Journal, 28, 2649.
Stefancic, J., & Delgado, R. (1996). No mercy: How conservative think tanks and foundations changed America’s social agenda. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action – Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 273–286.
Tankersley, J. (2016, June 3). Inside Charles Koch’s $200 million quest for a ‘Republic of science’. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/03/inside-charles-kochs-200-million-quest-for-a-republic-of-science/
Thümler, E. (2014a). Islands of success revisited: Which role for philanthropy? In E. Thümler, N. Bögelein, A. Beller, & H. Anheir (Eds.), Philanhtropy and education strategies for impact (pp. 236–245). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Thümler, E. (2014b). School reform and philanthropy: Theory and literature. In E. Thümler, N. Bögelein, A. Beller, & H. Anheir (Eds.), Philanhtropy and education strategies for impact (pp. 29–46). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Thümler, E., Bögelein, N., Beller, A., & Anheir, H. (Eds.). (2014). Philanhtropy and education strategies for impact. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
University of Chicago. (2000). The John M. Olin center for inquiry into the theory and practice of democracy. Retrieved from http://olincenter.uchicago.edu/about_olin.html
UnKoch My Campus. (2015). Quid pro Koch: The Koch’s secret higher ed agenda. Retrieved from http://www.unkochmycampus.org/koch-campus-funding-whitepaper/
Vogus, T. J., & Davis, G. F. (2005). Elite mobilizations for antitakeover legislation. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 96–121). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Weaver, W. (1967). Early American philanthropic organizations. In W. Weaver (Ed.), U.S. philanthropic foundations: Their history, structure, management, and record (pp. 19–38). New York, NY: Harper & Row Publishers.
Weischadle, D. E. (1980). The Carnegie corporation and the shaping of American educational policy. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 363–384). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Wells, R., & Ramdeholl, D. (2015). The politics of access in the neo-liberal age. In M. Abendroth & B. J. Porfilio (Eds.), Understanding neoliberal rule in higher education: Educational fronts for local and global justice (pp. 57–76). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
West, E. A. (1966). The peabody education fund and negro education, 1867–1880. History of Education Quarterly, 6(2), 3–21.
Whipple, E. G., & O’Neill, K. B. (2011). Student activities. In N. Zhang & Associates (Eds.), Rentz’s student affairs practice in higher education (4th edn, pp. 359–395). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, LTD.
Williams, R. H. (1995). Constructing the public good – Social-movements and cultural resources. Social Problems, 42(1), 124–144.
Williams, W. H. (2001). The White architects of Black education: Ideology and power in American, 1865–1954. New York: Teachers College Press.
Wolpert, J. (2006). Redistributional effects of America’s private foundations. In K. Prewitt, M. Dogan, S. Heydemann, & S. Toepler (Eds.), The legitimacy of philanthropic foundations: United States and European perspectives (pp. 123–149). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Yeakey, C. C. (2015). Education for the public good? The influence of privatization in American higher education and society. In R. T. Teranishi, L. B. Pazich, M. Knobel, & W. R. Allen (Eds.), Mitigating inequality: Higher education research, policy, and practice in an era of massification and stratification (Vol. 11, pp. 85–125). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Ylvisaker, P. N. (1987). Foundations and nonprofit organizations. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp. 360–379). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Zald, M. N., & Berger, M. A. (1978). Social movements in organizations: Coup d’etat, insurgency, and mass movements. American Journal of Sociology, 83(4), 823–861.
Zald, M. N., Morrill, C., & Rao, H. (2005). The impact of social movements on organizations: Environment and responses. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 253–279). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Zald, M. N., & Useem, B. (1987). Movement and countermovement interaction: Mobilization, tactics, and state involvement. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 247–272). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendices
Appendix A
Social Agenda Tendencies of Philanthropic Foundations Acting in the Field of Higher Education
Foundation | Evidence of agenda, cited in: |
|---|---|
Progressive Foundations | |
Peabody Education Fund | Cuninggim (1972), Curti and Nash (1965), Flexner (1952), Hammack (2006), Hechinger (1967), Hollis (1938), Roelofs (2003), and Smith (2001) |
John F. Slater Fund | Conley (1990), Cuninggim (1972), Curti and Nash (1965, Hollis (1938), Rhind and Bingham (1967), Roelofs (2003), and Smith (2001) |
Rockefeller Foundation (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, General Education Board, Laura Spelman Memorial Fund)a | Curti and Nash (1965), Douglas (1987), Fisher (1980), Fleishman (2007), Flexner (1952), Grant (1999), Hammack (2006), Havighurst (1981), Hechinger (1967), Hollis (1938), Kohler (1985), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), McCarthy (1985), Nielsen (1996), Proietto (1999), Rabinowitz (1990), Rhind and Bingham (1967), Roelofs (2003, 2005), Williams (2001), Kumashiro (2012), and Osei-Kofi (2010) |
Anna Jeanes Fund | Conley (1990), Cuninggim (1972), Curti and Nash (1965), Nielsen (1996), Rhind and Bingham (1967) |
Carnegie Foundation (Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching)a | Brooks (2015), Condliffe Lagemann (1983), Fleishman (2007), Hammack (2006), Havighurst (1981), Hechinger (1967), Hollis (1938), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), McCarthy (1985), Proietto (1999), Rhind and Bingham (1967), Roelofs (2003, 2005), Williams (2001), Kumashiro (2012), Osei-Kofi (2010) |
Russell Sage Foundation | Fleishman (2007), Flexner (1952), Hammack (2006), Havighurst (1981), Hechinger (1967), Hollis (1938), Lazere (2005a, b), McCarthy (1985), Proietto (1999), Rhind and Bingham (1967), and Roelofs (2003, 2005) |
Ford Foundation (Fund for the Advancement of Education (FAE))a | Brooks (2015), Conley (1990), Fleishman (2007), Havighurst (1981), Hechinger (1967), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), McCarthy (1985), Proietto (1999), Raynor (1999), Roelofs (2003, 2005), Rojas (2003), Rhind and Bingham (1967), Williams (2001), and Kumashiro (2012) |
Twentieth Century Fund | Flexner (1952), Hechinger (1967), Hollis (1938), and Roelofs (2003) |
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation | |
Conservative Foundations | |
John M. Olin Foundation | Binder and Wood (2012), Cole and Reid (1986), Fiore (1997), Houppert (2002), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), Lincoln and Cannella (2004), McMillen (1992), Messer-Davidow (1993), People for the American Way (1996), Roelofs (2003), Selden (2005)), Smith (1993), Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Richard Mellon Scaife (Sarah Scaife Foundation, Cart hage Foundation)a | Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), Houppert (2002), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), Lincoln and Cannella (2004), McMillen (1992), Messer-Davidow (1993), People for the American Way (1996), Smith (1993), and Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Salvatori Foundationa | Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
H. Smith Richardson | Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), Kumashiro (2012), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), McMillen (1992), Messer-Davidow (1993), Roelofs (2003), Smith (1993), Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation | Binder and Wood (2012), Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), Kumashiro (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), Lincoln and Cannella (2004), Messer-Davidow (1993), McMillen (1992), People for the American Way (1996), Roelofs (2003), Selden (2005), and Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Coord Foundation (Castle Rock Foundation)a | Binder and Wood (2012), Lazere (2005a, b), Messer-Davidow (1993), People for the American Way (1996), Smith (1993), Selden (2005)and Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
F.M. Kirby Foundation | Messer-Davidow (1993), Stefancic and Delgado (1996), and Binder and Wood (2012) |
The Earhart Foundation | Covington (1997, Fiore (1997), Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007), Smith (1993), Selden (2005)Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Charles G Koch Foundation | Binder and Wood (2012), Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), People for the American Way (1996), and Starobin (1996) |
David H. Koch Foundation | |
Claude R. Lambe Foundation | |
Phillip M. McKenna Foundation | Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), Messer-Davidow (1993), and Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
J.M. Foundation | Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), Messer-Davidow (1993), People for the American Way (1996), and Stefancic and Delgado (1996) |
Henry Salvatori Foundation | Covington (1997), Fiore (1997), People for the American Way (1996), and Starobin (1996) |
Pioneer Fund | |
M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust | |
Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation | |
Lilly Endowment of Indianapolis | Lenkowsky and Piereson (2007) |
Radical Social Reform | |
Rosenwald Fund | Beilke (1997), Conley (1990), Curti and Nash (1965), Flexner (1952), Hechinger (1967), Nielsen (1996), Ostrander (1999, 2005), Rabinowitz (1990), and Rhind and Bingham (1967) |
Stern Fund | Hechinger (1967), Ostrander (2005), Roelofs (2003), and Rabinowitz (1990) |
Schwartzhaupt Foundation | Andrews (1958), Jenkins and Halcli (1999), and Rabinowitz (1990) |
Wieboldt Foundation | Cuninggim (1972), Jenkins and Halcli (1999) and Rabinowitz (1990) |
Neoliberal Strategic Foundations | |
Eli & Edythe Broad Foundation | Katz (2012), Kumashiro (2012), Lubienski et al. (2016); Quinn et al. (2014), Rogers (2015b), and Saltman (2009) |
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, ‘Gates’ | Broad (2014) Edwards (2011), Hall and Thomas (2012), Husock (2011), Katz (2012), Lorenzi and Hilton (2011), Lubienski et al. (2016), McGoey (2015), Osei-Kofi (2010), Quinn et al. (2014), Ramdas (2011), Rogers (2011, 2015b, 2016), Saltman (2009), and Wells and Ramdeholl (2015) |
Fisher Foundation | |
Kresge Foundation | Wells and Ramdeholl (2015) |
Koch Charitable Foundation | Boyce (2013), Flaherty (2015), Miller and Bellamy (2012), and Rogers (2015b) |
Lumina Foundation | |
Walton Family Charitable Support Foundation | Katz (2012), Kumashiro (2012), Lubienski et al. (2016), Osei-Kofi (2010), Quinn et al. (2014), and Saltman (2009) |
Appendix B
Comprehensive Analysis of the Role of Private Philanthropic Foundations’ Social Agendas in Shaping the Field of Higher Education
Area of activity | Fndt. approach | Field-level intervention | Primary effects | Secondary effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Progressive Social Agendas | ||||
Agenda: Creating a System of Higher Education Free from External Controls | ||||
Endowments | Driver | Direct, to institutions willing to comply with the criteria for eligibility | Structural: Provided a financial basis for institutions, to support growth and stability over time | Cultural: Established foundations as possessing the power to expect institutions to comply with their directives and conditions when gifts are made |
Pensions | Driver | Direct, to institutions willing to comply with the criteria for eligibility | Structural: Established pensions for professors and served to stabilize and professionalize the role of faculty | Cultural: Reinforced the appropriateness of conditional giving, and the acceptability of foundations getting what they want when large sums of money are involved |
Admissions & Accrediting Criteria | Partner | Indirect | Structural: Established College Entrance Exam Board process, and institutionalized a standard system of counting academic units | Cultural: The Carnegie units and entrance exams became the default criteria for high school accreditation: The process of forming interlocking networks of likeminded elites gained prominence as a useful strategy for inciting educational change |
Business Practices | Partner | Direct | Structural: Instituted stable practices in accounting that worked to sustain institutions financially over time; Formalized college business officers into a profession | Cultural: Displayed foundations as able to synthesize expertise that can be used broadly to help higher education |
Agenda: Believing in Education and Research to Solve Major Social Issues | ||||
Medical Education Reform | Driver | Direct: to prestigious select institutions | Structural: Established contemporary medical education model used in U.S.; Formalized partnerships between institutions and teaching hospitals | Cultural: Foundations set precedent of using surveys to diagnose problems m higher education |
Social Work Reform | Driver | Direct: to geographically dispersed institutions | Structural: Established dominant trend on social work curriculum and external knowledge production apparatus; Formalized community mobilization as a part of the work of social work training | Cultural: Stabilized survey methodology as the leading way of conducting social science research; Reified an individualized view of social problems: Professionallized the social work field |
International education | Partner | Direct: to geographically dispersed institutions | Structural: Established area students programs. Formalized International Institute of Education | Cultural: Legitimated the idea that curriculum and education promotes peace through awareness of individual and societal differences |
Development of External Knowledge Organizations | Driver | Indirect | Structural: Established the national coordinating organizations to promote a unified approach to research and knowledge production (Social Science Research Council, etc.) | Cultural: Formalized and legitimated a path for higher education research to have direct ties to government social policy making |
Agenda: Supporting and Assisting Socially Disadvantaged Groups | ||||
Aid to south | Driver and Partner | Direct and Indirect simultaneously | Structural: Helped to institutionalize quality higher education for Blacks despite segregationist policies; Established state level departments of education with a focus on coordination | Cultural: Established precedent for foundations intervening on issues of race in higher education |
Child development studies | Driver | Direct | Structural: Structured the discipline of child development | Cultural: Created a precedent for foundations to translate broad social movement aims into legitimate academic endeavors |
Women’s studies | Driver | Direct, to prestigious select institutions and promising scholars and students | Structural: Structured the discipline of women’s studies | Cultural: Created a precedent for foundations to translate contentious social movement aims into legitimate academic endeavors; Affirmed the strategy of focusing on elite institutions to diffuse into the rest of the field of higher education |
Agenda: Remedying the Problems of Race Relations in the U.S. | ||||
Opportunity to underre-presented individuals | Partner | Direct and indirect | Structural: Directed scholarships to underrepresented individuals based on their racial status; Supported summer programs for pre-college preparation for underrepresented and disadvantaged students | Legal: FAE’s support of Black in higher education was one of many factors that prompted Congressional consideration of the appropriateness of this type of foundation activity; Ford’s collaboration with external funding bodies fueled the perception of the academy being part of a communist plot. Cultural: Congressional response reified the legitimacy of questioning whether foundations should/can be involved in activities that have the potential to alter the present social structure for Blacks |
Black studies | Partner | Direct, to prestigious select institutions and promising scholars and students | Structural: Structured the discipline of Black studies | Cultural: Ford’s giant making tended to dampen the intellectual fervor around Black nationalism; Ford’s involvement stressed the role of foundations in tying academic program promotion to social movement and activist causes; Affirmed the strategy of focusing on elite institutions to diffuse into the rest of the field of higher education |
Legal education | Partner | Direct, to prestigious select institutions and promising scholars and students | Structural: Expanded the ties between law education, legal scholarship, and legal practice | Legal: The expertise of the legal academic apparatus helped allott legal legitimacy to the idea of arguing for rights based advocacy based on individual status, characteristics. Legal & Cultural: Affirmed that foundations work as key instruments in crafting a pipeline strategy to influence the education, training, practice, and interpretation of legal policy in the broader goal of shaping public policy. |
Cultural: The academic expertise in the area of rights based advocacy helped to give creedence to the idea that it serves the public well to have foundations and the academy (both institutions that serve the public good) advocate for rights for groups that are excluded in some way | ||||
Access and Equity | Partner | Direct, to Myrdal study: Indirect, funding to activist organizations | Structural: Foundations helped produce the Brown v. Board verdict | Legal: Foundations’ integrated approach to research and activist funding helped to produce the Brawn v. Board verdict |
Cultural: Demonstrated the use of expert research as an important component to understanding race relations in America | ||||
Conservative Social Agendas | ||||
Agenda: Believing in Ideas and Research to Solve the Problem of Liberal Bias | ||||
External think tanks | Driver | Indirect | Structural: Conservative foundations advanced the external knowledge production and dissemination apparatus, positioning think tanks and other external groups that conduct research as parallel entities to higher education | Cultural: Firmly established the acceptability of employing a system of advice and policy advocacy that was based on expert knowledge produced outside the academy |
Internal research centers | Driver | Direct, to prestigious select institutions and promising scholars and students | Structural: Foundations created research programs in the academy that directly foster scholarship and publication of conservative agendas | Cultural: Foundations created a body of expertise within higher education, that by virtue of its placement their, the conservative research centers can piggy back on the legitimacy of the principle of academic objectivity. |
Underre-presented scholars | Driver | Direct, to scholars and students at prestigious institutions | Structural: Foundations provided scholarships to underrepresented individuals based on their conservative views or research interests | Structural: Foundations helped to increase representation of conservative scholars in the academy and helped to support a training pipeline for fostering conservative views in disciplines and departments in higher education; Cultural: Foundations helped to assert a larger role for conservative ideology in the academy |
Agenda: Changing the Structure of Higher Education so that it Embodies Conservative Views | ||||
Curricula | Driver | Indirect | Structural: Foundations have helped introduce new standards of ‘quality’ that higher education has had to contend with, which include a measure of political or ideological bias | Cultural: Foundations have helped to add salience to the idea that it is proper for higher education institutions to place attention on the political and ideological balance of curricular content in an effort to achieve diversity in the marketplace of ideas |
Agenda: Changing the Culture of Higher Education so Campuses Support Conservative Views | ||||
Student press | Driver/Partner | Direct, to papers at prestigious institutions: Indirect, to support advisory organizations | Cultural: Presence of papers fuels conservative idea dissemination on campus and within student communities | Structural: The field of higher education experienced a proliferation of new conservative campus newspapers; Institutions were forced to deal with the presence of these papers in student organization or speech policies; Legal: Created a welcoming climate to future anti-affirmative action legal and legislative action |
Leadership training | Driver | Direct, funding for on campus events; Indirect, to external organizations | Cultural: Foundation sponsored training helped to produce a well trained groups of mobilized conservative campus activists | Structural: Increased ability of students ready to enact a conserative agenda on campus; Legal: Created a welcoming climate to future anti-affirmative action legal and legislative action |
Faculty organizations | Partner | Indirect, funding to external organizations | Cultural: Foundaton sponsorship helped to mobilize faculty throughout higher education to collectively focus on advancing conservative views and causes | Structural: NAS and Campus Watch organizations began to pop up on campuses with mobilized faculty; Legal: Created a welcoming climate to future anti-affirmative action legal and legislative action |
Alumni organizations | Partner | Indirect, to external organizations | Cultural: Foundation sponsorship helped to create an environment where alumni felt a greater obligation to look deeply into the operations and curriculum of campuses | Structural: Foundation sponsorship of alumni groups helped to increased the salience and acceptability of of activist trustee behavior; ACTA provided training in the field of higher education that gave AGB competition; Legal: Created a welcoming climate to future anti-affirmative action legal and legislative action |
Agenda: Striving for Race-Blind Policies and Practices | ||||
Eugenics | Partner | Direct | Cultural: Foundation involvement helped to translate contentious ideas into ‘so-called’ objective academic research endeavors | Legal: The foundation supported research served as evidence for the segregationists in Brown v. Board, a case with profound implications for education |
Cultural: Foundation supported research helped foster a binary contentious dynamic in the research on race and merit, where the eugenics showcased the ‘other’ side of objectivity compared to the stream of research that grew from the Myrdal report | ||||
Legal Challenges | Driver | Indirect, to external organization | Legal & Structural: Foundation supported anti-affirmative action referenda and case law has forced individual institutions and the field of higher education to rethink its practices and policies for recruiting and retaining underrepresented students | Curlural: Foundation support of anti-affirmative action policies affirmed the individual rights based approach to equality at the expense of other arguments. Foundation involvement helped to promote the idea that any individual rights based approach to equality is essentially a tactic to look out for the ‘public good’ |
Radical Social Reform Social Agendas | ||||
Agenda: Supporting Social Justice and Racial Uplift | ||||
Advance Racial Equity for Blacks (Rosenwald Fund) | Driver | Direct | Structural: Established research centers and fostered graduate training for southern Blacks | Cultural: Foundation funding facilitated the breaking down of cultural barriers to African American academic achievement; Foundation tactic of partnering with activist organizations and other progressive individuals helped create a climate to advance the cause of promoting African American education |
Agenda: Believing in the power of democratic civic participation and social movement ambitions to transform society | ||||
Democratic base building | Catalyst | Indirect | Cultural: Foundations’ promotion of grassroots organizations in the field of higher education affirmed that campus involvement is a piece of the process in fulfilling wide scale social transformation agendas | Structural: Foundations provided assistance for grassroots campus organizations to become more active and advance their progressive ideas |
Neoliberal Strategic Foundations | ||||
Agenda: Create a system of higher education that prioritizes and incentivizes degree completion and supports workforce preparation. | ||||
Degree completion | Driver | Indirect | Cultural: Legitimates the ideas that higher education is the instrumental training ground for economic participation define by the needs of elite capital, and that degree attainment can mend systemic inequities. De-emphasizes other social purposes that education can serve in society, as well as other factors that contribute to systemic economic inequities | Structural: Infuse money across the system of higher education to students, to student support and transition programs within universities, and external intermediary organizations that offer guidance to assist students in persisting towards their degrees. Interact and support external organizations and advocacy groups to emphasize degree completion as a policy framework and metric upon which colleges are evaluated |
Curricular Change | Driver | Direct | Structural: Increase the financial resources of academic departments and programs, and faculty that teach neoliberal economic principles and theories, and adopt corresponding course materials. Build a parallal academic training structure outside of the academy for graduate training adn credentialing for educational administrators | Cultural: Extending legitimacy to external parties exercising influence or control over curriculum and credentialing. Diminishes the autonomy of faculty in shaping content of courses, degree programs, and curricula generally |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barnhardt, C.L. (2017). Philanthropic Foundations’ Social Agendas and the Field of Higher Education. In: Paulsen, M. (eds) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol 32. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48983-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48983-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48982-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48983-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)