Flickr photo by nojhan
I’ve been reading a great deal to gather context for the next issue of MCF’s Giving Forum, which will focus on philanthropy in education.
Something stood out when I came across “Lessons in Education Philanthropy: Proceedings from BHEF’s Inaugural Institute for Strategic Investment in Education (PDF),” held in April 2008, at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. (BHEF is Business-Higher Education Forum.)
Acknowledging that private philanthropic dollars in education are small compared to overall educational financial support, the report goes on to say that “strategically targeted philanthropic resources can serve as a vital catalyst for positive, lasting and high-impact change in public education.”
Strategy 3 in the report is: “Use information, research and data to make decisions and assess outcomes.” Within this strategy, the report recommends, “Practice transparency.” I was drawn to this recommendation because one of MCF’s eight “Principles for Grantmakers” is the Transparency Principle.
All this being said, I was still struck by this paragraph in the report:
“Unlike business, where failure is a necessary part of learning and improving the product, in education, failure generally is unacceptable. While a lost profit or a failed product isn’t desirable, discontinuing an unsuccessful venture is an option for business. Failing to educate students has much more dire consequences, and culturally is not considered a viable outcome of an educational improvement effort. … Because the ‘bottom line’ is student achievement and the future workforce and economy, transparency and the ability to build on past efforts is crucial to success.”
Join the conversation: How difficult is it for educational improvement efforts to build on lessons learned – whether they be successes or something less? What can we do to enhance our commitment to providing transparent information, so that others can learn and build on our work?
- Chris Murakami Noonan, MCF Communications Associate
