I like Andrew Russo and I definitely appreciate the post in This Week in Education, but the claim that I've "transformed the notion of education think tanks... into nothing more than well-dressed sales assistants who are, on behalf of their funders, selling fancy-sounding ideas in tiny little high-priced shops" is a caricature. This is the third in a series of essays on the education "think tank." To get the most out of it, I urge you to review the first two (here and here) first. It is a bit of a read for a the blog consumer, but I hope it will help the reader understand that my intent is serious, and I do think these organization play an important role. They just aren't "think tanks".
Organizations are what they do. What they do is determined by how they spend time and money.
If we look at the so called “think tanks” working on education policy inside the Beltway, and set aside the non-trivial costs of putting a roof over their heads and providing back office support, it’s no surprise that the vast bulk of funds are spent on professional staff and consultants with policy backgrounds. The balance involves conference and other event planning, publications – including electronic publications, travel, and possibly public relations. If we turn our attention to staff and consultant time, in most cases we will see the bulk of an organization’s human resource devoted to writing editorials, articles, newsletters, memos, white papers and reports and doing the research behind it.
Continue reading "Not "Think Tanks", But "Policy Marketing Shops"" »
