THE COLEMAN REPORT: A CASE STUDY OF THE LINKAGE BETWEEN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH AND PUBLIC POLICY.

摘要

The general theoretical concern of this thesis is the relationship between the men-of-ideas and the men-of-action. Theorists who have addressed this issue can be grouped into two major camps. One perspective asserts that the relationship can and should be a dialectical one with the men-of-ideas maintaining a detached, aloof, and critical stance toward government policy. The second perspective - a critique of the first - questions whether this critical stance has ever been maintained, and even more important, whether it is possible. Instead, they argue that the men-of-ideas are creations of the system, "beholden" to it, and therefore, participate in the process of maintaining it. However, few theorists in either camp attempt to describe the process by which scientific products are used in the policy arena; nor do they investigate the consequences of the direct contractual contact between government/policy makers and academic researchers.;Sundquist's model was applied to a case study of the Equality of Educational Opportunity Survey (EEOS) - better known as the infamous Coleman Report. Up to a point, Sundquist's model is appropriate: the policy makers expressed a need for information; the need was relayed to the research broker together with ;However, three major flaws were found with Sundquist's model. First, he assumes that once there is a request for information from the government, normal research will occur without interference from the brokers or policy makers. However, there was political intervention throughout the production of EEOS - not only from the research brokers, but also from the policy makers. In other words, when the researcher is called upon to do policy-oriented research, he or she risks political intervention and possibly political tampering with the product or its results at any stage of the production process.;The second flaw in Sundquist's model is his assumption that research impacts on, or serves as, a basis for policy when, in fact, it does not, as demonstrated by this case study.;One important exception is James S. Sundquist, who bases his model on the analogy of the marketplace. In both variants of his model, the "research brokers" are the key link in the production and dissemination process. If they fail, there will probably be a break down in the flow of information, and the connection between men-of-knowledge and men-of-power will break down.;The third flaw in Sundquist's model is the failure to recognize the role of the researcher in the selling process, especially to the public. His model assumes that once the researcher has produced his/her product, he or she returns to his or her academic ivory tower. The Coleman Report case study contradicts this assumption. The researcher can play an active and crucial role in the marketplace but only when his/her research endorses established policies of the government. The researcher is often an invaluable asset in selling a policy to the public, that is, in legitimating government decisions.