Abstract

AbstractThe Gates Foundation invokes a third way in education reform debate by appealing not to government regulation or market competition but to philanthropic investment as a catalyst for improving educational equity. While the foundation praises this investment as transcending the conventional polarities of debate, I argue that this praise assigns a familiar form of blame toward public education and educators, for it declares philanthropists the only reformers whose commitments to educational civil rights remain uncompromised by political-economic self-interest. In light of this analysis, I qualify the deliberative potential of praise as a rhetoric of education reform.

Journal
Rhetoric & Public Affairs
Published
2020-06-01
DOI
10.14321/rhetpublaffa.23.2.0293
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (4)

  1. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
  2. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
  3. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
  4. Rhetoric & Public Affairs
Also cites 8 works outside this index ↓
  1. 4. Hlavacik, Assigning Blame, 67; and Holly G. McIntush, “Defining Education: The Rhetorical Enactment of Ide…
  2. 5. Rebecca A Kuehl, "The Rhetorical Presidency and 'Accountability' in Education Reform: Comparing the Presid…
  3. 7. Asen arrives at a similar conclusion when he argues that “an education market dispenses with deliberation.…
  4. 14. Hirschman, The Rhetoric of Reaction (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1991), 170.
  5. 44. Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution (New York: Zone Books, 2015), 137.
  6. 48. Peter Frumkin, On Being Nonprofit: A Conceptual and Policy Primer (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Pres…
  7. 55. Bradford Vivian, “Neoliberal Epideictic: Rhetorical Form and Commemorative Politics on September 11, 2002…
  8. 99. Amy Brown, A Good Investment? Philanthropy and the Marketing of Race in an Urban Public School (Minneapol…
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network →