The marketization of schooling is a contentious issue in
Australia. Corporate sponsorship involves
companies providing selected schools funding, products, equipment and/or
services in exchange for advertising. Though proponents insist the pros
outweigh the cons, many are uncomfortable with the idea of product placement,
promotion and advertising in schools. However, there has been a push for more
companies to partake an interest in schools, with both sides of government
encouraging Australian businesses to “participate in our education system”
(Ricci, 2009). One concern about the endorsement of products in schools is how
far can it go? With increased funding or involvement will companies then have a
right to include their logos in the school emblem? Will students have the “golden
arches” embroidered in their school jumpers? Companies main interests are not
the welfare of the students – they are concerned with profit and influence. Indeed, Paul Harrison (2009) writes that
companies interests in schools, such as McDonald’s, are not altruistic or a
“community service” but rather a marketing ploy. These marketing exercisers
introduce young, impressionable consumers to “brands and influence their
behaviour over the long term”, claims Harrison.
Ricci
(2009) concurs, stating that advertising at schools runs the risk of
“[generating] product loyalty and influence behaviour.” MTV’s Daria had an episode (1)
that explores the detrimental effects of having increased product endorsement
and interference in school environments. When the principal is unable to meet
the profit quota the soda company requires in order to continue its monetary donations,
she is forced to increase product promotion to the point of adverting the soda
on school athletic uniforms and lesson plans. Perhaps this may seem far-fetched
– but I don’t think it’s implausible. After all, only recently did Nick
Xenophon ask for ban of advertising and marketing in schools after it was
revealed that students had been offered prizes by a Coles supermarket manager
if they “sang the chain’s advertising jingle” during a presentation about Coles
Sports for Schools program (The Australian, 2011).
Ricci
(2009) warns that cash strapped schools will become dependent on corporate
sponsorship and thus allow greater "brand" involvement. That said, if
schools fail to embrace marketisation, advertising and corporate sponsorship,
they will lag behind schools that do. That
is, advertising feeds on it’s own momentum (Kenway & Bullen, 2001, p. 127),
meaning the more schools advertise, “the more they become absorbed within a
market culture and the more they have to advertise.” (Kenway & Bullen,
2001, p. 127). Advertising
and corporate involvement in schools may seem inevitable and indeed, some
schools do need and benefit from corporate sponsorship. However, I propose that
some sort of regulation and limitations need to be put in place which controls how much influence
companies can have in the school environment.
If not, we run the risk of de-skilling educators into delivering “canned
programs” (Casey, 2007)
~~~
Casey,
L. (2007, December 8). McDonalization of
Education. EdWize. Retrived from http://www.edwize.org/mcdonaldization-of-education
Harrison, P. (2009, October 22). Schools are a marketer’s dream
venue. The Age. Retrieved from
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/schools-are-a-marketers-dream-venue-20091021-h8xj.html
Kenway, J., Bullen, E. (2001) “Designer Schools, Packaged
Students”. Consuming Children: Education, Entertainment, Advertising.
(pp. 121-150) Buckingham, England: Open UP.
Ricci, C. (2009, November 2). Corporate sponsorship of schools. The Age. Retrieved from
http://education.theage.com.au/cmspage.php?intid=135&intversion=292
The Australian. (2011, September 6). Garrett eyes
school marketing after Coles gimmicks. The
Australian. Retrieved from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/garrett-eyes-school-marketing-after-coles-gimmicks/story-fn59nlz9-1226130055468
Hi Sadaf,
ReplyDeleteI thought your post about advertising in schools was interesting and relevant to the ever increasing marketisation of schools. I think it is unfortunate that schools have to enter into such competitive market strategies such as advertising and that the problem can only be traced back to the governments failure to adequately and equally fund schools.
I am in total agreement with you that endorsements of products in schools is not aimed at improving education but is a 'market ploy' by the business. Another area of the commodification of schools to be considered is the deliberate advertisement of the corporate sponsorships that schools acquire in order to create a certain elitest cultural identity. So not only are corporations exploiting the market by advertising to children but the schools are using desirable corporate sponsorship, like Apple ipads for example, as means for advertising the commodity of the school. The cycle of advertisement in schools and competitive market which forces the schools to advertise diverts funds from the actual education process. I wonder if there is any return from this 'marketing of schools', or like you refer to we could see corporate sponsorship overtaking our schools.
Elle
Hi Sadaf,
ReplyDeleteI too have just been discussing the Marketization of schools and the impact it has on school choice and was drawn to a line in your post where you said " if schools fail to embrace marketisation, advertising and corporate sponsorship, they will lag behind schools that do". What id like to explore further is what exactly will they be lagging? Is it safe to say that we as a consumer society rely so heavily on the 'seductive illusion' of advertising, that if a product doesn't come all wrapped up in a shiny perspective or stamped with the golden arches we deem it to be sub-standard? The problem with schools being treated as commodities now is that so much emphasis is placed on image and face value and that what is really at the core of schooling, that is receiving an education has somehow drifted down the priority Que. If a school opts to keep their premises corporate advertising free, its disturbing to think that parents/students see this as a reflection of the quality of education they provide, if anything it may show certain level of moral order.