Beyond Jefferson - The Rhetoric of Meritocracy and the Funding of Public Education

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by moss~

Beyond Jefferson examines how rhetoric shapes policy debates about education and challenges the assumption that objective research methods alone can deliver progress. Drawing on the funding of public education as a case, the analysis critiques “evidence-based” initiatives that rely on contested premises and argues that scholars often deny their own rhetorical dimension. It traces rhetoric’s marginalization from classical philosophy through later developments, showing how shifts in inquiry affect action and institutional education.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages20

Reading Time50 min

AccessFree to download

Beyond Jefferson

Education, ideology, and evidence-based reform

Rhetoric, persuasion, and the “scientific method” debate

The marginalization of rhetoric from classical inquiry to later theory

Rhetoric’s value for scrutiny and meaningful educational change

Beyond Jefferson: The Rhetoric of Meritocracy and the Funding of Public Education By Barbara Nicholson Barbara Nicholson is a professor in the Department of Leadership Studies ofthe GraduateCollege of Marshall University, South Charleston, West Virginia. Unlike medicine, agriculture, and industrial production, thefield of education operates largely on the basis of ideology andprofessional consensus. As such, it is subject to fads and is incapable of the cumulativeprogress thatfollowsfrom the application of the scientific method and from the systematic collection and use of objective information in policymaking. We will change education tomakeitan evidence-basedfield. We will accomplish this goal by dramatically improving the quality and relevance of researchfunded or conducted by the Department, by providing policymakers, educators, parents, and otherconcernedcitizenswithreadyaccesstosyntheses of research and objective information that allow more informed and effective decisions, and by encouraging the use of this knowledge. (2002) This declaration from the United States Department of Education’s Strategic Plan: 2002-2007 signifies in no uncertain terms that the battle waged by critics of alternative research methods continues, and is likely to intensify. As insulting as the language of Strategic Goal Four (“Transforming Education Into an Evidence-Based Field”) is, however, it is the normative assumption on which it is predicated, a classic example of the kind of“begging the question” that often underlies such initiatives, which is most troublesome. The denigration of research methods which decline to adhere to the trappings of logical positivism may have begun with Rene Descartes, but the origins ofthe dispute between positivists and post-positivists reach much further into history. This analysis examines the dimensions of one such method of classical inquiry, rhetorical criticism, and, taking as an example the funding of public education, demonstrates the value of attending to the language of persuasion. Judging from the excerpt above, it is a skill conservative policymakers practice all too well and one which the social foundations community may find beneficial in efforts to effect meaningful reform. “Facts Are Precisely What There Are Not” It would seem a reasonable enough claim to note that scholarship involves the use of persuasion, as researchers must necessarily explain their findingsin language which is convincing to those who read their work. Such as assertion, however, always finds opposition from those who argue, as does the Department of Education, that adhering to the “scientific method” ensures a level of objectivity which eludes other approaches to research. Modern scholars usually deny their rhetoric. Wearing the masks of scientific methodology first donnedin the seventeenth century, they have forgotten about the rhetorical faces underneath. Their simple repetition of official rhetoric against rhetoric serves mainly to dampen anxieties about how things really happen in the labor library. (Nelson, Megill, & McCloskey, 1987, 3) This observation raises two important and interrelated issues pertaining to the status of rhetoric: the history of its marginalization as a practice and its potential value to those seeking to replace the unquestioned neutrality of scientific methods with an insightful scrutiny of the premises which ground them. The origins ofthe exclusion of rhetoric as an integral element in the pursuit of knowledge extend to the Classical Period, serving to center many of themetaphysical debates between Plato and his student Aristotle on the varied distinctions between philosophy and rhetorical theory. While Aristotle shared his mentor’s reverence for human knowledge, derived through the syllogistic properties of the dialectical process (in philosophical engagements), it was his sentiment that the full value of knowledge is realized only when it is applied in the broader realm

FAQs

What central claim does the text make about education policy and research methods?

Education operates largely on ideology and professional consensus, and reforms often rely on contested assumptions about objectivity. The text argues for making education evidence-based by improving research quality and access to objective syntheses.

Why does the document focus on rhetorical criticism in the context of public education funding?

It treats rhetoric as a key dimension of persuasion in scholarship and shows how attending to the language of persuasion clarifies how policymakers and initiatives work.

How does the text explain the historical exclusion of rhetoric from knowledge-seeking practices?

It traces rhetoric’s marginalization from classical debates between Plato and Aristotle through later changes associated with thinkers like Peter Ramus, culminating in conventions that split research from teaching and narrow rhetoric to stylistic delivery.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by moss~