Blog Post #1:  What organizations influence higher education?

This blog post will discuss three influencers in higher education including the Pew Research Center, the College Board, and the Lumina Foundation. The mission, funding, highlighted reports/programs, and criticisms will be reviewed for each organization.

Pew Research Center

Mission: The Pew Research Center is a nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization with a mission of generating information that “enriches the public dialogue and supports sound decision-making” (Pew Research Center/About, 2015).  The purpose of the organization is to conduct and share research in the following areas:  U.S. politics and policy; Journalism and media; Internet, science and technology; Religion and public life; Hispanic trends; Global attitudes and trends; and, Social and demographic trends. 

            The Pew Research Center is an independent organization that does not advocate for specific issues but instead uses neutral data and analysis to deliver objective and accurate social science research facts to the public.  The organization strives to be transparent in its methodology so that decision-makers “understand and solve the world’s most challenging problems” (Pew Research Center/About, 2015). 

Funding: The organization is funded primarily by The Pew Charitable Trusts, a nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization dedicated to creatively improving people’s lives and communities in practical and tangible ways by providing information to inform policy decisions (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2015).

Highlighted reports:  The topic of Education spans all of Pew Research Center’s research areas and as such, there are a variety of analyses and reports that speak to trends about higher education.  The higher education work of the Pew Research Center is prolific. From one dataset alone, the Higher Education, Gender and Work 2013 survey, the following publications about higher education were written: Public and private college grads rank about equally in life satisfaction (2014); Young adults, student debt and economic well-being (2014); 6 key findings about going to college (2014); and, The rising cost of not going to college (2014). 

Criticism about Pew Research Center:  The Pew Research Center is viewed as exactly what it states itself to be…nonpartisan and neutral.  I had to work hard to locate criticism about the organization, and what little information I could find were opinion blogs stating that the Pew Research Center has a liberal bias.  Two of the critiques that I located were from Susan Shelley, “How the Pew Research Center makes conservatives sound like jackasses,” and from Don Irvine, “P.U. to Pew media bias survey.” 

Shelley’s critique was that the questions on a political attitude survey were written in a way that were biased toward a liberal viewpoint.  The report, “Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology” divided Americans into distinct political clusters through the use of survey questions with scales for social and political values.  She wrote:

“The language of the survey questions subtly, and not-so-subtly, slants the results to make conservatives look like cruel, callous, intolerant warmongers who want children to breathe poisoned air. Here’s an example. Choose between these two statements:

“Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.”

“Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost.”

Observe the trick: “Stricter” than what? Stricter than they are today? Stricter than they were in 1920?  Maybe you’d like to choose this statement instead: “It’s important to balance environmental protection with economic growth and job creation.” Sorry, the Pew Research Center doesn’t list that statement on its quiz. Choose “worth the cost” and enjoy mental images of pristine beaches, or choose “cost too many jobs” and have nightmares about oil spills and asthma inhalers” (Shelley, 2011).

Irvine’s critiqued the Pew Research Center study titled “Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism,” which reported more favorable media coverage of Republican 2012 presidential candidates than the favorable media coverage of President Obama.  His critique centered on the survey methodology surrounding the selection of media outlets surveyed and the computerized algorithm that was created to analyze the positive, neutral, or negative angle of the stories reported. Irvine wrote:

“If Pew was really looking for an accurate study of how the media have covered the presidential candidates then they should have used a more focused group of the top newspapers based on circulation, news sites based on web visitors and the broadcast and cable networks, which combined are far more representative of the mainstream media than the extremely broad definition they used. But that probably would have given them far different results and defeated their intended goal of making it look like the media have been far more favorable to Republicans — even to the point of being anti-Obama — which would only serve to help the President explain his low poll numbers and other struggles as he seeks reelection.” (Irvine, 2011).

College Board

Mission:  The College Board is a nonprofit organization that “connects students to college success and opportunity” and serves as an advocate for the education community (College Board/About, 2015).  The organization has a long history as it was created 1900 when a group of 11 higher education institutions formed the College Entrance Examination Board (CEEB).  The intended goal was to increase access to higher education.  Today, the College Board serves as a membership organization, and most notably develops and administers the SAT among other standardized tests geared toward college-readiness.  The organization assists students to prepare for the college admissions process and provides services and research to the K-12 and higher education community. The College Board owns, provides, and evaluates the following assessments:  Standardized testing for college admission including the SAT, SAT subject tests, and AP tests; Practice tests for middle school and high school students including the PSAT/NMSQT (a qualifying test for National Merit Scholarships), PSAT 10, PSAT 8/9, CLEP, and SpringBoard (preparation for AP tests); Assessments used by higher education institutions to place students in appropriate classes and determining financial aid packages including ACCUPLACER and CSS/Financial Aid PROFILE. The College Board provides college-planning resources for students and parents as well as higher education services for admissions, financial aid, and retention professionals.

Funding:  The College Board is a self-sustaining nonprofit that charges fees to students and institutions for use of their services. The organization’s research efforts are partly funded by grants from foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Lumina Foundation, among others.

Highlighted programs: The College Board’s advocacy efforts are geared toward providing recommendations to “improve and simplify the financial aid system so that enrollment and full participation in college is possible for all students” (College Board/Advocacy, 2015). College Board provides research and data-based solutions for critical issues surrounding equity and efficiencies for low and middle income students to complete their higher education.  Some research is specifically geared for recommendations for the Pell Grant and federal student aid programs, while others are geared toward improvements to current assessments (College Board/About Research, 2015). Notable research publications include the Trends in Higher Education Series (Trends in Student Aid 2014, Trends in College Pricing 2014, Education Pays 2013-The Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society, etc.), and a wealth of research briefs such as: “How does institutional grant aid impact college choice?”, “Simplifying student aid: What it would mean for states,” and “Cracking the student aid code: Parent and student perspectives on paying for college.”

Criticism about the College Board:  The College Board has been criticized about being a monopoly for assessment testing, for its unfair questions on the standardized tests that result in lower scores for African-Americans and other groups, and for violating its nonprofit status because the organization’s profits are excessively higher than its operating expenses, as well as undue influence in American curriculum. 

            The main area for criticism is that the College Board owns the SAT, Subject tests, and AP tests and charges fees from students who are required to submit their test scores for the college admissions process. The ACT is a direct competitor to the College Board and in some cases, can be considered an alternative assessment, but not for all institutions. Because the admissions process is competitive, many students also pay for preparatory classes, workbooks, etc. to make a higher score on the test, which also adds to the revenue line. Blogger and head of the Calhoun School, Steve Nelson, wrote: “It is inarguably true that wealthier students can "buy" test points through expensive test prep courses. If the College Board ever intended to create equity in college admission, its effect has been the opposite. It advantages the already advantaged. The disproportionate weight given to SAT scores in admission further magnifies the many advantages already enjoyed by privileged kids” (Nelson, 2013). In addition, IvyGate blogger Dan Haley (2009) wrote: 

“To keep its nonprofit status, an organization must pass an IRS review every five years, which means it needs to execute its charitable mission appropriately. The College Board’s charitable mission was summed up by its president in 2006: “to connect students to access and opportunity, to prepare more and more students to be ready to go to college and succeed.” The quote’s logic is circular. In order “to go to college and succeed,” you have to get into college. And to do that, you have to prepare for and take the SAT. Certainly, the College Board can help you do that. But if the College Board didn’t exist, there would be no need for it to happen in the first place.

There you have it: the College Board wants you to do well on your SATs. But probably not so well you don’t take them again for a higher composite score”

            Another criticism is that the SAT is racially and ethnically biased.  Contributing writer for Education Week, Caralee Adams (2010) wrote:  “The controversy over the SAT possibly having a racial bias against African-American students has been reignited in the wake of a new study published in the Harvard Educational Review. The article by Maria Veronica Santelices and Mark Wilson in the Spring 2010 issue confirms research in 2003 by Roy Freedle that questions in the verbal section of the college- entrance test do function differently for black students than from whites. This may mean that the average test scores of black students lag behind their white counterpart not just because of economic disparities or school quality”

            The College Board been accused pushing their curriculum agenda and the Advanced Placement U.S. history exam has been widely-criticized.

“The College Board set off a national controversy in the summer of 2014 when it put into effect a sharply revisionist, left-leaning curriculum framework for its AP U.S. History (APUSH) course…The background of that framework was an alliance between the College Board and a group of scholars committed to “end[ing] American history as we have known it” by substituting a more transnational narrative for the traditional account. The idea was to cultivate a sense of global citizenship in place of the more usual focus on national identity. Nothing could have been farther from the Founders’ intentions, or from the actual course of American history. America has been the most successful immigration country in the history of the world precisely because newcomers and their children have assimilated” (Fonte & Kurtz, 2015).

Lumina Foundation

Mission:  The Lumina Foundation for Education was created in 2000 as a “conversion” foundation when the USA Group student loans was sold to Sallie Mae and the proceeds were used to create an endowment dedicated to education. Lumina’s only philanthropic focus is higher education, specifically, Goal 2025.  It is an independent, nonpartisan foundation.  “Lumina Foundation is committed to increasing the proportion of Americans with high-quality degrees, certificates and other credentials to 60 percent by 2025.

            Lumina’s outcomes-based approach focuses on helping to design and build an accessible, responsive and accountable higher education system while fostering a national sense of urgency for action to achieve Goal 2025” (Lumina, 2015).  “To effectively implement this new structure will require a shift in current state higher education policy, but the results are worth the effort” (Strategy Labs, 2015). Lumina Foundation focuses on mobilizing policy makers, employers and agencies, and developing learning-based models.  “It is important to note that the completion rates include not only traditional degree programs but also “high-value certificates” which make-up the largest group of the credentialed population” (Michigan State University, 2013, p. 13).

Funding:  The Lumina Foundation has over $1 billion in its endowment (Lumina Foundation/Financials, 2015). The organization serves as more of a “funder” than a “fundee,” and awards grants ranging from $50,000-$250,000 to partners, including other nonprofits and charitable organizations.  The grantees’ initiatives must be geared for nationwide impact and “large-scale systemic change” that fit within the Lumina Foundation’s strategic outcomes:  “1) Increased academic, financial and social preparedness beyond high school, 2) Improved higher education completion rates and 3) Increased higher education productivity that serves more students” (https://granttrainingcenter.com/resources_newsletter/2012/07/12).  Lumina Foundation does not award grants for political lobbying or small-scale programs or equipment aimed at specific communities or institutions such as mentoring, teacher training, or K-12 reform efforts.

Highlighted reports: The annual status report of the Lumina Foundation is called “A Stronger Nation Through Higher Education”. “The metric used by Lumina Foundation to track progress toward Goal 2025 is the higher education attainment rate of the nation’s population of working-age residents — those between the ages of 25 and 64” (Lumina Foundation/A Stronger Nation, 2014). The most recent status report states the U.S. higher education attainment rate is 40%, which is a small increase in postsecondary credentials but the rate needs to increase, especially in nonwhite population segments, in order to reach the 60% goal by 2025.

Criticism about the Lumina Foundation:  The Lumina Foundation openly states that its agenda involves influencing State Public Policy. Critics group the Lumina Foundation in with other “megafoundations” such as the Gates Foundation that focus on short-term outcomes rather than long-term goals.  Parry, Field and Supiano (2013) wrote: “But what if the focus is misguided? "College completion may be the wrong goal," says Stanley N. Katz, who directs the Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies at Princeton University and has written critically about foundations.” Katz (2012) also wrote:

“There has also been some public pushback against the concept of strategic grant-making. A little over a year ago, Susan Berresford, a former president of the Ford Foundation, asked, "What's the Problem With Strategic Philanthropy?" in The Chronicle of Philanthropy. She noted, "Most strategic-philanthropy planning exercises involve using benchmarks to measure progress. But sometimes data miniaturize ambition because they focus on what can be measured in the near-term, not what might be the most important long-term goals.”

"In a democracy, these are arguably the least democratic of institutions," says Scott L. Thomas, a scholar of higher education at Claremont Graduate University who has studied Gates and Lumina. "And they're having an outsized influence on education policy." That influence has yielded its biggest payoff at the state level. As states make deep cuts in higher-education budgets, Gates and Lumina have helped to rechannel the public dollars that states do spend into efforts to raise college completion. The hidden hand of these foundations, felt indirectly through grantees like Complete College America and Jobs for the Future, is pushing new state efforts to tie colleges' budgets to metrics like graduation rates. These efforts have been criticized for bypassing colleges and imposing top-down solutions” (Parry, Field, & Supiano, 2013)

A strategy used by Lumina Foundation is called “convening.”  This is where closed meetings are held between the foundations, lawmakers, and other stakeholders.  “A spokeswoman for Lumina, which hired a director of convening strategy in 2010, says they can provide a "safe space" for lawmakers and stakeholders to discuss ideas” (Parry, Field, & Supiano, 2013). “But the secrecy and exclusivity surrounding the convening on competency-based programs ruffled some feathers. At the Council for Higher Education Accreditation's annual meeting, in late January, Jan Friis, the association's lobbyist, grumbled that foundations were having private meetings with the department” (Parry, Field, & Supiano, 2013).

References

Adams, C. (2010). New study looks at racial bias in SAT. Ed Week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/college_bound/2010/06/new_study_looks_at_racial_bias_in_sat.html

College Board (2015). About research. Retrieved from http://research.collegeboard.org/about-us

College Board. (2015). About us.  Retrieved from https://www.collegeboard.org/about

College Board. (2015). Advocacy. Retrieved from https://www.collegeboard.org/advocacy

College Board. (2015). Higher ed services. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/higher-ed?navid=prof-he

Fonte, J., & Kurtz, K. (2015). AP U.S. history bias still runs deep. National Review.  Retrieved from http://www.nationalreview.com/article/424414/ap-us-history-bias

 

Haley, D. (2009). The analogy racket:  College Board a suspiciously profitable non-profit. IvyGate Blog. Retrieved from http://www.ivygateblog.com/2009/05/the-analogy-racket-college-board-a-suspiciously-profitable-non-profit/

Irvine, D. (2011). P.U. to Pew media bias survey. Retrieved from http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/p-u-to-l-pew-media-bias-survey/

Katz, S.N. (2012). Beware big donors. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Big-Philanthropys-Role-in/131275/

Lewin, T. (2002). College Board to revise SAT after criticism by university. NY Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/23/us/college-board-to-revise-sat-after-criticism-by-university.html

Lorin, J. (2011). Not-for-profit College Board getting rich as fees hit students. Bloomberg News. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-08-18/not-for-profit-college-board-getting-rich-as-fees-hit-students

Lott, M. (2015). College Board to rewrite US history exam after critics blast anti-America language. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/04/criticism-prompts-college-board-to-rewrite-us-history-exam-to-put-america-in/

Lumina Foundation. (2015). About Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/about

Lumina Foundation. (2014). A stronger nation through higher education:  Annual status report of Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from http://strongernation .luminafoundation.org/report/main-narrative.html

Lumina Foundation (2015). Financials. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/financials

Lumina Foundation. (2015). Frequently-asked questions about grant support from Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/grants-faq

Lumina Foundation (2015). Goal 2025. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/goal_2025

Lumina Foundation. (2015). Grants. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/grants/

Michigan State University Corporate and Foundation Research. (2013). Current trends in national foundation funding for education with a focus on ten national foundations.  Retrieved from http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjFFNfZV6xYAHygnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEzZXIxZG5lBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDRkZSQUMwXzEEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1442227653/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.education.msu.edu%2firtl%2fpdf%2fTrends%2520in%2520National%2520Foundation%2520Funding%2520for%2520Education%25202013.pdf/RK=0/RS=PTTxRLZz9G7A.ldHgBkHJRnOvOU-

Nelson, S. (2013). The College Board fails the test. Huffington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-nelson/the-college-board-fails-t_b_2801884.html

Parry, M., Field, K., & Supiano, B. (2013).  The Gates effect. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Gates-Effect/140323/

Pew Charitable Trusts. (2015). Mission and values.  Retrieved from http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/mission-and-values

Pew Research Center. (2015). About Pew Research Center.  Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/about/

Shelley, S. (2011). How the Pew Research Center makes conservatives sound like jackasses.  Retrieved from http://www.extremeink.com/awtk/2011/06/how-the-pew-research-center-makes-conservatives-sound-like-jackasses.html

Strategy Labs. (2015). State policy agenda. Retrieved from http://strategylabs.luminafoundation.org/higher-education-state-policy-agenda/