Politics, Ideology, and Evidence: The New York Times/AFT Charter School Controversy

When The New York Times published the results of a study by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) showing that students in charter schools had lower test scores than children in traditional public schools, it sparked a battle in the ongoing war over the future of American public education. Diane Schemo, the article’s author, suggested that the Bush administration sought to conceal this information because it would detract from its adamantly pro-charter school policy line. In retaliation, the pro-market Center for Education Reform took out a protest ad in the Times that featured the signatures of economists and other experts in support of another report which declared the exact opposite. Because this issue continues to generate conflict, Columbia political scientist Jeffrey Henig views it as an ideal opportunity to examine the way educational research is used and abused in public policy discussions. With Russell Sage funding, Henig will research and write a volume on the politics, ideology, and evidence under-pinning the charter school debate in order to illuminate the broad role research plays in policy discourse. Henig plans to interview 22 key actors in the AFT charter school controversy, and will focus on three themes. First, Henig will discuss the idea that social research in general has become more politicized, leading to more ideologically-driven funding for research. Second, Henig will argue that education research is easily exploited or manipulated in partisan disputes because education research is perceived as lacking scientific rigor. Finally, Henig will compare the overlap between privatization debates in education reform and other policy areas like Social Security.