Open in iTunes  |   Subscribe via RSS

 

March 25, 2008

Consumerism in the classroom

Download the audio file

[Transcript]

Is consumerism controlling your child’s education? Deron Boyles, professor of educational policy at Georgia State University, says school-business partnerships are having a negative effect on their learning environment.

BOYLES: “I try to make a distinction between major corporations that I do think are exploiting students, just because of their sheer size and the way that they can gain entree into schools, and I’ll call them mom and pop shops in local and small towns. I’m not complaining or concerned or worried too much about a family owned jewelry store putting an advertisement in the local football program or the yearbook. That’s not really my concern. My concern is when major corporations define for teachers and students what it is they’re suppose to be doing in their school, both in terms of things like character education, science learning labs or English as a second language projects. Those sorts of things seem to me to be stepping on the toes of educators, students and parents. And it’s in my view it’s awfully arrogant of them to presume that they know better than the teachers and better than those in the schools what their students should be doing.” (length 0:54)

Boyles is concerned with companies, such as Pizza Hut, who developed a book club, “BOOK IT!” giving children the incentive to read and earn a free pan pizza.

BOYLES: It’s a free pan pizza if you read a certain number of books or whatever it is. But the problem is that it’s based on consumerism, but it’s also based on what I will call again the exploitation of children because these are not high school students that it’s geared to. It’s geared to children who are in typically third through fifth or third through sixth grade. Let’s say that they read the books and that’s a totally different story to who is going to monitor checking off what they read, whether that they understand it, or is it the case that they just flipped the pages in class or are they are not actually reading. So let’s presume that the child has actually checked off him or herself the number of books that they’re suppose to read, they get their coupon. Well, what’s the fourth-grader suppose to do with the coupon? Do they live near a Pizza Hut? Well, maybe some do, but most people are going to and the corporations understand this. The parents have to come take the child to the Pizza Hut in order to redeem the Pizza Hut pan pizza. Well, the research that we’ve done has shown for each free pan pizza a family will spend an average of $15 to $16 per visit. So the free pan pizza turns out actually to cost families on average $15 dollars and some odd cents. It’s not free anymore is it? (length 1:05)

Corporations are benefiting from bringing their products into the classroom, but Boyles says children have not developed the critical thinking skills necessary to yet separate themselves from consumerism and classroom education.

BOYLES: “They’ve got these programs, and it’s an example is from Clorox. And it provides the teacher with the teacher’s guide and the teacher’s manual in terms of how to introduce to the children how germs spread. And so it gives its sort of legitimacy or its cache in terms of science and what have you. But throughout it’s product latent and they’re suppose to use Clorox products and they’re suppose to have Clorox products readily available for students to use. And as a result, as with most things, including computers and other things, if you can get the students acclimated to using a particular product you may actually start a process for them to be a continual user of that product. So it’s a life long consumer sort of thing, which I’m arguing is the ulterior motive behind all of this. It has nothing to do with their concerns of germs in the classroom, it has more to do with their bottom line. (length 0:47)

From his research, Boyles has found that corporations see schools as markets rather than learning institutions.

BOYLES: “The whole purpose behind the research that I’ve been doing is to raise a kind of critical awareness about what’s going on so that individuals can not only recognize in what I’m hoping is clearer relief what is going on, but can be more critical of it, more thoughtful of it. And interestingly enough I’ve encouraged teachers and educational leaders not to dispense with these school business partnerships necessarily out of hand, what I’ve argued for is sort of a trick of my own. Exploit those exploiters that are coming into your school. Take what it is they are trying to give, but then give a further kind of critical analysis agenda in the school so that students can see through this. A number of students do by the way, but they are typically in junior high and high school. They’re not typically those who are in the younger grades. And the younger grades are a perfect place for individuals to start thinking critically about the world around them and how this sort of external influence can be negative rather than positive.” (length 0:40)

Boyles is apprehensive of business partnerships that could step on the toes of educators and teach children consumerism.

BOYLES: “Some folks who do school-based marketing would say that it’s not unethical. They think that it’s a way for them to get out their message or their product. But those of us who look so critically at this issue, wonder in terms of ethics, why it’s the case that profit making companies go to public institutions where they effectively have a captive audience. And it’s that captive audience thing that I think triggers questions. I’m not sure that it very clearly says it’s over the line in terms of not being ethical. But, I think it certainly raises some questions into how it’s the case that you can go into a school, have a captive market, exploit that market and then some how make it off as though it’s the American way. It strikes me as very, very strange.” (length 0:56)

For Georgia State University Radioline, I’m Michelle Handelman