Part 2/Education project...rately target these “evolving con-sumers.” One company interested in...

CANADIAN CENTRE FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES 1

While the North Americaneducation industry goes far beyondthe use of the school environmentas a marketing medium, some of theclearest examples of business appli-cations to classroom learning may besummarized as, simply, the commer-cialization of public education.

Few individuals—indeed, fewcorporations—are willing to reso-lutely defend blatant advertising inthe classroom. Commercialization ofeducation is unconscionable, theywill maintain. What educationneeds, and what good corporate citi-zens are willing to provide, is non-commercial, educationally-sounddonations. Or computers. Or soft-ware. Or extra-help programs. Orteam uniforms. Or scoreboards. Orcorporate volunteer instructors whowill not replace but only supplementthe teacher and bring the “realworld” directly into the classroom.

However, when public dis-cussion separates “commercial” from“educationally-sound” corporate do-nations, what is ignored are themuch more fundamental questions:why, and to what extent, are edu-cation budgets being slashed (theeffect of which is to provide a “prac-tical incentive” for schools to ap-proach the business community for

handouts)? Which programs aremore readily funded by the corpo-rate sector, and what does this indi-cate about the corporate view ofeducation? How do corporate do-nations potentially change the scopeand direction of public education?And why do we assume that for edu-cation to incorporate, reflect and imi-tate the “real world” of business andthe demands of the corporate sectoris necessarily a good thing?

Children provide a market toadvertisers and the corporate sec-tor, the scope of which has largelybeen ignored until the early 1990s.Consumer Kids conferences andMarketing to Teens and Tweensseminars are occuring at an alarm-ing rate, and are chock-full of inter-esting and innovative ways to accu-rately target these “evolving con-sumers.”

One company interested inschool marketing, and providing cor-porate clients with the means andforum to directly target students, isScreenAd. A powerful incentive,taken from an influential study con-ducted by child marketing guru JimMcNeal of Texas A&M, is provided onthis web site to explain the reasonsfor taking the buying power (directand indirect) of these young consum-ers “seriously.”

IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

2 CORPORATE CONTENT: INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM

Not surprisingly, marketersare advised to “go where the kidsare,” and most of the time this meansschool. According to CunninghamGregory and Company (a self-de-clared educational developmentfirm), “a well-designed educationalinitiative is a vital cornerstone of acorporation’s communication andmarketing strategy. It increases thecorporation’s profile in the commu-nity and it allows the corporation todirectly influence today’s consumerand the future work force.”

Obviously, corporationsstand to benefit a great deal fromtheir involvement in education, bothby improving their social image, butalso by gaining direct access to stu-dents, or, as Elliot Ettenberg main-tains, “evolving consumers” (What!A Magazine Promotional Material).Why the classroom, though? Be-cause it’s an environment “that kidslove and adults trust.” Because these

educational programs “ensure thatvital messages can be deliveredwhere they may most effectivelychange behaviour or attitudes.” It’ssignificant that Cunningham Grego-ry’s description of what constitutesan educational program does notonce mention accurate, unbiased, oreven well-researched information.

The classroom is, clearly, aunique and powerful environment inwhich to target students; for onething, according to What! A Maga-zine promotional material, it’s un-cluttered, so your advertised mes-sage is more likely to stand out. It’san environment of trust and famili-arity, where what the teacher asauthority figure says is likely to bethought of as true by the listeningstudents. What better way to target“future consumers” (as called byProcter and Gamble) than in thisenvironment where the teacher be-comes the most effective corporate

“There are two sources of new business: one involves trying to convince customers toswitch to you over your competitors; the other is children. The former strategy is often short-termand presumes disloyalty; the latter builds for the long term and is based on nurturing customerloyalty...

The A&M University study confirmed what all parents know: toddlers are fussy, and oftenvocal, shoppers. After interviewing 222 moms, the study concluded that children are well on theirway to becoming avid consumers by age two. At that age, children already recognize certain prod-uct names and brand characters, particularly breakfast cereals. By the time they are four years old,kids are making value judgments about these brands, based on input from their parents, playmates,and from television.

The central conclusion of this study is that children begin playing a consumer role longbefore they possess the appropriate language or physical ability: consumer behaviour takes placebefore walking. Parents are preparing their children for consumership almost from day one. Chil-dren start accompanying parents to the marketplace as early as one month old, and begin to makeindependent purchases as early as 4 years old.”

(Screen Ad marketing info, pg 1, http://www.screenad.com/Kids.html)


spokesperson, and where parents (or“gatekeepers”) are not there to moni-tor corporate content?

Several companies havebeen able to capitalize on the risinginterest in the school market. Mar-ket Data Retrieval and QualitativeEducation Data (to name only two)accumulate lists of virtually everyschool in North America, as well asstatistics on staff and students—eth-nic makeup, educational records,curricular and extra-curricular em-phasis, educational “effectiveness”—and sell these mailing lists to com-panies that wish to target theseschools directly. And it’s not onlyAmerican schools are on these com-prehensive lists—QED and MDR havebeen busily compiling informationon schools in Canada, too, at the re-quest of some of their larger corpo-rate clients who are interested in tar-geting the Canadian school market.

QED’s web site includes asection called the QED EducationNetwork which offers Free Market-ing Resources, and asks corporateclients: “Do you have a new productyou want educators to know about?”

To encourage teachers to use thisonline forum often, QED is “offeringwhat they like best—a revolvingmarket basket of free stuff. Andthat’s where you [corporations] comein. [QED] would like to include yourbest free product offer for threemonths on the QED EducationNetwork...We will promote the QEDEducation Network at all major edu-cation conferences, in professionaljournals, and by mail and telephoneas part of our regular research pro-gram” (http://www.qeddata.com/freeprogram.htm).

Corporate intrusion in edu-cation takes many forms, from theblatantly commercial to the moresubtle and arguably much more ef-fective incarnations which are inap-propriately titled and seeminglynon-marketing-oriented “partner-ships.” This report will examine in-school advertising, corporate-spon-sored curriculum and “partner”ships(sometimes called sponsorships), andprovide more intensive analysis ofseveral case studies which reveal theeffects of corporate content in edu-cation.


The search for ad space isreaching monumental proportions.Not content with print or electronicmedia, billboards, clothing and pub-lic transportation, marketers areturning to new and imaginativemeans of reaching their target audi-ences. Zoom Advertising and NewAd have made names for themselvesby putting ads on the backs of wash-room stall doors and above urinals“for the truly captive audience.”

Billboards can be launchedinto the atmosphere to reflect thecorporate logos beamed onto themfrom earth, rivalling the moon.Space shuttles will carry corporatemessages into space. Cows in theBritish countryside will sport ads forthe benefit of passing automobiles.Children’s television programs areentirely built around marketing con-cepts: Strawberry Shortcake, PowerRangers, Sailor Moon. Edible dyesare being formulated to apply cor-porate logos onto eggshells and icecream cones. The quest for innova-

tive ad surfaces is never-ending andever-more intrusive. It was inevita-ble that attention would eventuallybe turned to the school.

The classroom is less clut-tered, according to What! A Maga-zine, so advertised messages aremore likely to stand out, without anycompetiton. And merely by beingassociated with the school, the prod-uct and the sponsoring corporationappear to have additional legitimacy(“tasty, and good for you, too!”) andthe implicit endorsement of the edu-cation system.

The classroom provides anincredibly influential environmentfor marketers—indeed, for anyoneinvolved with the classroom as ameans of promoting a message. Af-ter all, children are in school to learn,and are required to be there approxi-mately 6 1/2 hours a day, five daysa week, nine months a year till theage of 16. They are expected to re-member, and in fact are regularlytested on, the information they are

AdvertisingAdvertisingAdvertisingAdvertisingAdvertising

“The cost of reaching kids through in-school mediamay be competitive with print advertising and cer-tainly lower than TV advertising, but its main ad-vantage is that it provides a targeted opportunity tomarket to kids, through parents and/or to parents,all at once.”

(Selling to Kids. “In-School Marketing Programs Satisfy Marketers’ Appetites” 1)


taught, which is reinforced year af-ter year until graduation.

There are, in addition, au-thority figures—teachers —who haveenormous influence on the students.It is for these reasons that the schoolis an entremely powerful environ-ment, and the messages taughtwithin it carry such weight. And itis for these same reasons that cor-porations are approaching schoolsand inundating them with a barrageof advertising, products, curriculumand enforced relationships under theguise of “school-to-work” training,or “strategic philanthropy” or “win-win agreements”—which can betranslated to mean “lose-win big-ger.”

ScreenAd was one in-schooladvertising endeavour which tried toset itself up as a partnership, but itsintent was clearly to sell ad space(of a sort which had previously beenunavailable) to corporate clients.ScreenAd would provide screen sav-ers bearing corporate logos and mes-sages to schools in Ontario. Accord-ing to ScreenAd’s mission statement,the goal of the project was:

“To provide the best means ofreaching the students of Canadathrough our partnership withEducational Institutions.To constantly work to improveour product and service to meetthe needs of the Advertisingcommunity and the Institutionswe serve.To become a truly broad basedadvertising medium and not al-low our ideals or those of the In-

stitutions we support to be in-fluenced in any way by our Cor-porate Clients.”(ScreenAd’s Mission Statement,http://www.screenad.com)

But this data reflect only thebackground information forScreenAd’s sales pitch. It is themarketing literature for ScreenAdwhich is most interesting, becauseit clearly and enthusiastically ex-plains the benefits of ads-as-in-school-screen savers. Benefits tomarketers, that is. On the “market-ing to kids” web page, ScreenAd in-cludes a section called “some inter-esting facts about our smallest con-sumers” which include sub-sectionscalled “you grow your consumersfrom childhood” and “born to shop,how children develop into consum-ers.”

ScreenAd’s literature contin-ues: “Wouldn’t you like to exposeyour brand identity to over 1.5 mil-lion students in Ontario classroomsevery 15 minutes of their school day?Well, you can, we are pleased to in-troduce this exciting new and inno-vative way to capture the minds ofthe dynamic Student market inOntario...Our interesting program-ming, a mix of Trivia, Information,Motivation, and of course your Ad-vertising Message make ScreenAd anirresistible visual medium perfect forreaching the media savvy studentpopulation. It’s a silent, behind thescenes innovative way to place yourcampaign in front of these eagerconsumers.” If one were to judgefrom the grammatical errors, spell-


ing mistakes, questionable punctua-tion and typos in their marketing in-formation, academic excellence isclearly not a priority of ScreenAd’s.

But ScreenAd is only one ofthe more recent attempts to use theschool environment for commercialpurposes. Selling to Kids is a bi-weekly newsletter which providesup-to-the-minute marketing infor-mation for those interested in tar-geting the youth market; this pastSeptember’s issue contained an ar-ticle elaborating on some recent in-school ad campaigns we may verywell see in the near future. CoverConcepts is a Massachusetts-basedfirm which provides ad-laden bookcovers to students, often completewith free samples. The January1997 Education Supplement of theNew York Times described coversfeaturing Calvin Klein models; stu-dents were also provided with CKtattoos (Stead 33).

School Marketing Partnersoffers marketers the opportunity topitch to kids in the cafeteria throughcustomized “Tooned-In Menus,”—colourful booklets with advertisingand product coupons as well as the

school menu. Marketers pay $34,000to $88,000 and up, depending onwhere the ad is positioned in themenu. “A vehicle such as the in-school menu also offers other ben-efits, such as minimal clutter (thereis a maximum of 10 ads in eachmenu) and category exclusivity”(Selling to Kids 5). In addition to theactual menus, a web site (http://www.schoolmenu.com) was alsolaunched to reinforce the corporatemessages, or, in marketing-lingo,“provide kids with extra entertain-ment value,” and its effectiveness iscurrently being evaluated by GapKids and Kelloggs who are runningads on this site. One menu adver-tiser explained the benefit of in-school marketing programs: “With[kids] TV viewing declining and be-coming more fragmented, advertis-ers have to look for other ways toreach children. It’s a new vehiclefor us. Certainly, we look at redemp-tion [of coupons] as an indicator [ofeffectiveness], but you temper thatwith the knowledge that you arereaching kids” (Selling to Kids 5).


In-school advertising takeson a very different significance whenit is disguised as curriculum. Not onlydo the corporate products and adsappear to be endorsed by the schoolenvironment, but the corporate mes-sages—some more blatantly com-mercial than others—are actuallytaught as a classroom lesson, andoften accompanied by product sam-ples. As explained by one educa-tional development firm, involve-ment with the classroom, and par-ticularly the production of curricu-lum, is an increasingly popularmeans for corporations “to increase[their] profile in the communityand [to]...directly influence today’sconsumer and the future workforce” (Cunningham Gregory and Co.1).

Several companies havemade the creation of curriculum —Sponsored Educational Materials(SEMs)—on behalf of their corporatesponsors an actual business, as inthe case of Modern Educational Serv-

ices, Lifetime Learning Systems andVideo Production Worldwide (whichpromises that corporate videos canfind “new life in the classroom”).Cunningham Gregory assures poten-tial clients that they will find thelinks between the corporate mate-rials and the classroom lessons, sinceteachers do not have the time or ex-pertise to do so.

All SEMs are not createdequal, and there are times when itis painfully clear how far the limitsof one’s imagination must stretch inorder to consider sponsored curricu-lar supplements remotely “educa-tional.” Hunt-Wesson’s “Kernels ofKnowledge” salutes great scientistsand inventors who “made a differ-ence”— George Washington Carver,Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur...andOrville Redenbacher.

Prego’s contribution to theclassroom was a science experimentin which children were asked to testthe thickness of the competition’sspaghetti sauces compared to

CurriculumCurriculumCurriculumCurriculumCurriculum

“Teachers face a crowded curriculum, and are onlyare onlyare onlyare onlyare onlycapable of dealing with information once it has beencapable of dealing with information once it has beencapable of dealing with information once it has beencapable of dealing with information once it has beencapable of dealing with information once it has beentranslatedtranslatedtranslatedtranslatedtranslated to meet their curriculum needs... (C)orporateinformation must undergo a process which finds theundergo a process which finds theundergo a process which finds theundergo a process which finds theundergo a process which finds thecurriculum links.curriculum links.curriculum links.curriculum links.curriculum links...and provide activities for teachers andstudents alike to make use of it.to make use of it.to make use of it.to make use of it.to make use of it.”

(Cunningham, Gregory and Co. 4)


Prego’s by forcing them all throughslotted spoons. Presumably the sci-ence component of this unit was pro-vided by the use of words like ‘hy-pothesis,’ ‘theory’ and ‘prove.’ However, while those examplesare evidence of corporate use of theclassroom to promote product useand familiarity, there are more prob-lematic examples of corporate biasdisguised as classroom lessons. Re-cently, Canadian and Americanteachers received a kit fromDreamworks, a Steven Spielbergcompany. This kit coincided with therelease of Spielberg’s movie“Amistad.” This kit was intended foruse in history classes where studentswere encouraged to think of the rolefamous actors played in the civilrights movement, directly incorpo-rating Spielberg-invented charactersinto the history curriculum...and pro-moting the movie at the same time.

Included in the package wasa postcard addressed to LifetimeLearning Systems asking teachers ifthey would like to continue to re-ceive FREE (corporate-sponsored)lessons from LLS. One of LifetimeLearning Systems’ industry ads was,significantly, an image of a crowd ofstudents clutching fistfuls of moneyunder the heading “They’re ready tospend and we reach them.”

The Bank of Montreal’s “MyMoney Investment Kit,” designed to“help students understand not onlythe value of saving and investingsome of their money, but how to goabout it in a fun way” (Bank of Mon-treal 1) is also purported to improve

math skills. Over 14,000 kits weredistributed across the country. Ap-parently, the Bank of Montreal feelsthat children—in grade school, re-member—need to “understand theimpact of their money managementdecisions. [The kit] teaches themwhich investments pay interest ordividends, how to minimize invest-ment risk while also maximizingtheir returns, and where taxes mustbe paid” (1).1

The Bank of Montreal hookedup with the Junior Blue Jays to dis-tribute this kit (which includes “easy-to-teach in-class lessons, a boardgame, and other educational mate-rials that reinforce the fundamentalsof money management”). The Jun-ior Jays is an extremely well-re-ceived feel-good in-school programwhich has garnered a great deal ofattention from marketers because ofthe many products which are dis-tributed directly to kids in a schoolenvironment with the positive asso-ciation of the Canadian Associationof Chiefs of Police and the Blue Jays.Clearly, the Bank of Montreal haschosen its partners carefully, as isalso evidenced by the departmentwhich developed this kit—the mar-keting department.

Procter and Gamble (cur-rently in partnership with severalOntario schools) has produced anattractive and extensive packagecalled Decision: Earth to enlightenstudents on the relationship be-tween consumerism and the envi-ronment. This supplement, pro-duced by Modern Educational Serv-


ices, was discontinued in the UnitedStates because of glaring inaccura-cies, but it is still distributed free onrequest to Canadian schools. In thissection, Grade 7 students learn aboutP&G’s version of clear-cutting:

“Clear-cutting removes all treeswithin a stand of a few speciesto create new habitat for wild-life. P&G uses this economicallyand environmentally soundmethod because it most closelymimics nature’s own process.Clear-cutting removes largetracts of timber, just as a forestfire would, except in a more con-trolled manner. Clear-cuttingalso opens the forest floor to sun-shine, thus stimulating growthand providing food for animals.”

Some time ago, a reporterfrom the progressive magazineMother Jones played the part of apotential client and held the follow-ing discussion with a representativefrom Modern which clearly illustratesthe intentions of the “educationaldevelopment” firm:

Mother Jones: This is the compa-ny’s pet project. They’re very con-cerned about putting out materialthat will correct the anti-nuclear biasin most educational materials. So wedon’t want much tampering with thematerial. Is that a problem?Modern: I understand exactly whatyou’re saying. We wouldn’t want towrite anything our client didn’t wantus to. It would have to be factual, ofcourse.

MJ: Of course.M: But we try to be sensitive to ourclient’s aims...We wouldn’t want towrite anything that makes the spon-sor unhappy.MJ: Now, we’re talking national—wewant to get this into every school inthe country. Can you handle that?M: We’ve done that for a lot of ourcorporate clients—Procter and Gam-ble, IBM...We know how to get ma-terials into the hands of educators.MJ: I understand there’s quite a de-mand for these kinds of materialsnow.M: Educators just eat them up.MJ:...And, by the way, we’re look-ing at distribution in Third Worldcountries: Mexico, South America,part of Africa...M: I’m sure we could help you. (“Kiddie Corps,” MotherJones, July-Aug. 1992, 14, qtd. inMolnar 37)

With slashed budgets,schools and teachers are finding itincreasingly difficult to provide stu-dents with basic learning materials,so donations—particularly deluxe,pre-packaged and multi-faceted—are increasingly welcome. I am notimplying here that all teachers useall the sponsored educational mate-rials sent to them, or that they usethem uncritically. But, with the gov-ernment and corporate sector’s in-sistence that teachers are alreadyunderworked, that prep time is littlemore than time wasted, and withgrowing class sizes, there will beless and less time to spend critically


analyzing supplemental material forbias. And this reality is reflected inthe names of web sites providinglinks to curriculum sources, such as“The Busy Teacher’s Web Site.”

The corporate creation of

curriculum as standard policy is notfar-fetched or a rarity. In fact, it isclear that private sector involvementin the development of curriculum—not just supplements, but entire sub-ject areas—is going to increase in fre-quency in the very near future. 2


In the spirit of what MaritaMoll (Research and Technology, Ca-nadian Teachers’ Federation) hasdubbed “techno-optimism,” whereanything can be improved merelythrough the application of technol-ogy (the “if something is broken, tryapplying technology; if it’s still bro-ken, try more technology” philoso-phy), curriculum and delivery ofservices (read: learning) is beingsubjected to the Internet, to comput-ers, and to the World Wide Web.

“The information super high-way cannot be outside the curricu-lum, it must be integrated into theactivities of the school,” maintainsthe Information Technology Associa-tion of Canada (ITAC). And this tech-nology delivery model has manymanifestations, from providing cur-

riculum on a global scale, courtesyof Viacom in the case of EducationManagement Group in Arizona, todownloading curriculum which isself-correcting and self-marking—freeing up teachers to monitor stu-dents’ emotional well-being. EDEN,(the Electornic Distance EducationNetwork) made these claims in aToronto Star article, and mentionedthat then-Minister Snobelen was“very interested in some of the pos-sible repercussions of [EDEN’s] work,particularly as they fit in with plansto restructure the high school sys-tem (White K3). When we considerthe restructuring plans that havetaken place not just in Ontario butacross the country, including in-creased emphasis on computer in-struction, technology in the class-

On-line curriculumOn-line curriculumOn-line curriculumOn-line curriculumOn-line curriculum

“Already there are many signs of the coming mar-riage between education and entertainment, with com-puter and telecommunications technology serving asmatchmaker. The two cultures that dominate chil-dren’s lives—education and entertainment—are merg-ing, as entertainment companies seek to legitimizetheir products in the eyes of parents and educator bymaking them ‘ educational, ’ while educational tech-nologists strive to incorporate the magical motiva-tional ingredient of video games into their lessons.”

(Noble 18)


room, reduced teacher prep time andfewer teachers, it becomes clear whyendeavours like EDEN pique the in-terest of Ministries of Education.

ScreenAd’ s marketing litera-ture makes it abundantly clear howuseful the emphasis on technologyin the classroom is to in-school ad-vertising campaigns. “Digital Bill-boards reach students where theyspend most of there (sic) time, rightin the classroom. Whether it is avast open lab or an intimate librarycorner students are never far froma computer. We allow you to takeadvantage of the fact that schoolshave made it a priority to put moreand more computers into thehands of their students” (http://www.screenad.com p. 1).

The Internet offers studentsaccess to innumerable and previ-ously non-existent sources of “infor-mation,” and computer familiarity, aswill be examined in greater detaillater in this report, is becoming syn-onymous with education. Accord-ing to Dr. Douglas Noble, “Educa-tional materials and instruction arenow viewed by corporate Americaas one small category of ‘software’or ‘content’ on the informationsuperhighway, alongside computergames, electronic mail and bulletinboards, news, books, magazines,movies, pornography, televisionshows, interactive TV, consumer ad-vertising, gambling and home shop-ping capabilities” (Noble 18).

And so, with “a computer onevery desk” ringing in my ears, Ilogged on to several of these sug-

gested educational sites. The M&Mslesson plan requires teachers to di-rect students to the M&M web site,lead students on a tour of the M&Mfactory, and encourage students tocreate a flow-chart “showing theprocess involved in making M&Ms.”It is unclear to what subject area this“educational activity” actually be-longs. The MacMillan/McGraw-Hill“new mathematics program” (subtlytitled “Crayola*Crayola*Crayola”)tours through the Crayola factory(where students are encouraged tothink of ways that math might beused in the crayon manufacturingprocess) and also requires a visit tothe Crayola web-site by clicking onthe Crayola logo. The Hershey FoodCorporation’s lesson plan avoids anypretense and simply instructs stu-dents to “click Gift Catalog andHershey’s Chocolate Gift Items....Have students select items from theon-line catalog that they wish toorder and fill in the order forms.” Theeducational component, apparently,is met by students calculating howmuch they have spent.

But technology is also thecorporate donation of choice. Ofcourse, this relies on the belief thattechnology is synonymous with edu-cation, which marketers refer to asthe “if it’s on the computer, it mustbe educational” syndrome of par-ents. Mind you, marketers aren’tcomplaining about this—far from it,in fact. Business/education relation-ships and technology are two of thetop 10 “Hot Marketing Areas” formarketing to kids. And convincing


the public of the importance of tech-nology in their children’s livesshouldn’t be too difficult, explainsSue Edelman of the marketing firm“Big Blue Dot”—parents are alreadyfrantic that if their child isn’t on acomputer by age two they’ll neverget into Harvard.

The Great Chocolate Experi-ence II begins with telling teachersto purchase enough packages ofM&Ms for their class—students willlearn how to graph the results ofhow many M&Ms of each colour arein each package. And M&M/Marsand Hershey both have packageswhich correspond with the GreatChocolate Experience, complete with“really cool stickers and coupons.”Hershey also has a cross-disciplinaryteaching unit about Milton Hershey,as well as a history supplement thatexplains the history of Hersheychocolate in relation to the historyof the United States—bear in mindthat this package and lesson planswere also distributed in Canada dueto our “overwhelming response” tothe Great Chocolate Experience. Allschools involved in the program willreceive a certificate of participation,and all students will be involved increating a recipe book of favouritechocolate concoctions, no doubt per-fect to try on mom and dad. Thelesson plans, recipe ideas and visu-als are all available on the corre-sponding web site: http://www.iceberg.org/~gbequette/gce2.html.

M&Ms are apparently inter-disciplinary, and have been used asthe subject of a variety of lesson

plans. 3rd Planet Science Kits andExperiments provides information forK-3 students on how to construct a“candygraph” for math class: “Meltsin your mouth not on your graph.Count and sort M&Ms by color.Record the data on a chart, nibblingas you go....”( h t t p : / / m e m b e r s . a o l . c o m /C3rdplanet/math.html). And Sciencestudents in K-3 are asked “Can youfind prehistoric M&Ms and bringthem home? Discover howpaleontologists work.” (K-3) http://members.aol .com/C3rdplanet/games.html.

The Plastic Bag Associationhas produced a board game and“Grime Fighters poster” on waste gar-bage disposal, with a correspondinginteractive game on their web site:http://www.plasticbag.com.

And Coca Cola has a seriesof links on their educational site(http://tqjunior.advanced.org/4501/).Students can make a musical instru-ment out of a soda bottle (http://www.menc .o rg / I H W E / ins t s /splash.html), answer the Coca ColaCryptoQuiz (who created Coca-Cola,and how much did the first bottlecost?) and complete the Cola Cross-word which includes words such as“olympics,” “deliciousandrefreshing”and “alwayscocacola.”

Increased teacher and stu-dent use of the internet is also anincentive for marketers to advertisemore intensely on educational websites. Video Production Worldwide(discussed earlier in this report asproviding corporate videos to the


classroom for “new life”) trumpets ina recent press release that “Theworld’s leading distributor of freesponsored educational materials”has just won the Web MarketingAssociation Award for PartnerPages.PartnerPages allows “sponsors tospeak with teachers directly. It is

this targeting of specific audiencesthat makes PartnerPages so effective.Teachers are both consumers andopinion leaders, and by sponsoringa PartnerPage companies can reacheducators with their message in acomfortable and impressive environ-ment” (VPW).


Technology is a pet projectof our federal and provincial govern-ments, as evidenced by the TIPPSproject and the former Ontario Edu-cation Minister’s “computer on everydesk” vision—of course, there isn’tenough money for desks, but that’sanother one of those mysterious con-tradictions like the Ministry’s sug-gestion to improve literacy by cut-ting English.3 ITAC actually insistedthat “we need an education systemthat supports the rapid developmentof technologies” (ITAC press release),

a vision in which students are notmentioned once.

But the mythic proportions oftechnology continue to grow. Com-puters as instructors are actuallybeing cited as “superior to their hu-man colleagues” because they’renever too tired or harried to answera question or spend extra time witha student (Cetron 19).

So, given the superior natureof computers over the human com-ponents in the classroom, in orderto make full use of what technology

TechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnology

“When are the schools going to stop treating our kids as equals?All children may have been created equal in the eyes of God.But once they get into a classroom, it’s another story. As anyteacher can tell you, students don’t learn the same things at thesame speed....There’s a tremendous need for individualized in-struction, say our educators. And thanks to some modern newlearning aids, schools are beginning to get help in thisarea.....Each student sits in front of a closed-circuit TV set witha pair of earphones. What he sees and hears is a lesson. Noteverybody’s lesson—his lesson.... Meanwhile (and this is an im-portant meanwhile), the teacher is free to work with each stu-dent on a one-to-one basis. So far, more than half a millionstudents in more than 400 schools are using our new system.Which means it’s a success. But then, how could the ideamiss? Doesn’t every mother and father think their kid belongsin a class by himself?”

(General Telephone and Electronics advertisement)


has to offer, we must restructureeducation so that the technologyprovides the curriculum and deliv-ers the education students receive.Evidently, the fact that computer usehas not been proven to enhance lit-eracy is unimportant in this discus-sion of academic excellence. Con-sider the draft document leaked fromthe Ontario “Minister’s Round Tableon Technology in Learning” whichdreams of the day when there willbe a single Ministry of Education andEconomic Development and envi-sions paperless, blackboardlessclassrooms where teachers are“freed-up” to be facilitators, not“downtrodden” content experts.

It seems that there is no suchthing as too much technology, par-ticularly where school is concerned,and not just in the politicians’ pipedreams. State education officials inTexas are considering a proposal thatwould see money for textbooks in-stead put toward leasing laptop com-puters.

“‘There’s been no definitedecision made yet, but the boardfeels this is an idea that bears con-sideration,’ given the rising costs oftextbooks and the vital need for K-12 students to become computer lit-erate,” explained a board spokesper-son. The board of education wouldhave to change the way in which“curriculum updates” would be de-livered to students, probably over theInternet. In anticipation of approvalof this concept, the legislature hasbroadened the definition of “text-book” in the state education code to

include electronic devices (ZDNet,“Texas may trade schoolbooks forlaptops.” Nov. 19/97).

In the spirit of such techno-optimism, the “Anytime AnywhereLearning Summit” was held this pastFebruary in the U.S., sponsored byMicrosoft, Toshiba, Compaq, Acerand AT&T’s Learning Network(ZDNet, “Teacher’s new pet isn’t abrownie...it’s a laptop” Feb. 19/98).

It is significant, as ITAC hasillustrated in its press release, thatcorporations dedicated to techno-logical development have been suchvocal and avid proponents of edu-cation restructuring. It seems thatthere is no problem that cannot besolved by technology, and accord-ing to the rhetoric of the day, theeducation system is rife with prob-lems that require immediate atten-tion. But there are those who areconcerned with the suggestion thattechnology provides the antecdoteto any and all crises—and if it doesn’tappear to, we simply haven’t usedenough technology. “Companiesmarketing computer-based educa-tion have typically invested them-selves in a rapid series of strategicoverhauls in attempting to attainaccess into schools. Technology isdressed up in one guise after anotherin order to appear as [the] perfectsolution to the latest educationalfashion, whether it be remediation,accountability, individualized in-struction or special education. Morerecently, this list of fashions hascome to include school restructuringand authentic assessment, as firms


stumble over themselves to demon-strate that computers are the per-fect solution both to portfolio assess-ment strategies and to the overallreinventing of school organization”(Noble 17).

Marketers aren’t the onlypeople excited about the potentialfor the new markets offered by IT.In this climate, it’s not only schoolsand students which are hot com-modities: it’s knowledge itself. Ac-cording to ITAC, we are living in a“knowledge economy” in which“business cannot simply offer tech-nology but they must also be con-cerned with the bottom line. Invest-ing in education is investing in the

future of business.”The coveting and commodi-

fication of knowledge has seriousimplications. What does it mean forknowledge to become part of themarket economy? Who will be ableto “afford” to learn? Of course, onecan argue that there have alwaysbeen some economic restrictions onaccess to information, but it is thepublic infrastructure we have inplace in our libraries and schoolswhich has attempted to guardagainst this knowledge segregation.This is what is being privatized. Thisis what is being taken from all of us—a society with access to knowledgeas a basic right.


Virtually all segments of so-ciety have lauded greater interactionbetween the private sector andschools; business itself is among theloudest proponents of this trend. In1994, the Information TechnologyAssociation of Canada (ITAC) re-leased its education statement, inwhich it stressed the importance ofpartnerships in education from notjust an IT perspective, but from asocial and democratic context aswell: “Working together all govern-ments, educators, businesses andsociety must develop a new ap-proach to education. The separa-tion of schools from society, (family,work and community) combine toundermine the best efforts of en-lightened leaders.”

This is mirrored by the po-litical rhetoric, as illustrated in formerOntario Education Minister John

Snobelen’s address to the Third An-nual Partnership Conference: Weneed “the cultivation of innovativepartnership between schools andtheir communities...When I use thatterm ‘community partners’ I’mspeaking of business” (Hill andMcGowan).

Accountability to the outsidecommunity, then, really means ac-countability to the corporate sector.But should accountability to a sys-tem based purely on profit and fi-nancial efficiency be the goal of ourpublic schools?

According to several diction-aries and the Conference Board ofCanada, the requirement of partner-ships is that both parties benefitequally. So, if these so-called part-nerships are by nature “win-win,”let’s see who wins what. Schoolsget the goods: the computers, pen-

Partnerships/RestructuringPartnerships/RestructuringPartnerships/RestructuringPartnerships/RestructuringPartnerships/Restructuring

“Business-education partnerships are mutually beneficial rela-tionships between employers and educators that are designedto enhance learning for students and other learners....Most busi-ness-education partnerships are co-operative relationships inwhich partners share values, objectives, human, material or fi-nancial resources, roles and responsibilities in order to achievedesired learning outcomes.”

(Conference Board of Canada, Ethical Guidelines for Business-Education Partnerships)


cils, paper, sponsored curricular sup-plements, textbook covers, gym uni-forms, scoreboards, sports equip-ment, screen savers—more oftenthan not with some tasteful (or bla-tant) corporate logo as recognitionfor this generous gift. And the cor-porate donor gets: enormous publicrecognition, a captive student audi-ence made up of present and futureworkers and consumers, the use ofthe teacher as corporate spokesper-son, the benefits of a legitimizingschool environment, and last butcertainly not least, a tax receipt.These benefits are all well-docu-mented in industry literature as in-centives for taking an “interest” ineducation.

But according to “pragma-tists,” schools will have to set limits,learn how to say No. They’ll haveto police these gifts and make surethe school environment and studentsare not being compromised. Afterall, these new relationships are theway of the future.

So let’s think about this.What happens if the “free market”philosophy is extended, and allschools are encouraged to enter themarketplace of corporate partners?There are many more schools thanbusinesses, which would require the“laws of the market” to come intoeffect: schools would be forced to“compete” for sponsors. And busi-nesses would be able to choose fromthe schools which promised to pro-vide the best “deal”: the most cus-tomers, the least anti-commercialstipulations, the fewest guidelines.

According to the govern-ment, the business community, themedia, and a barrage of partially-analyzed tests and their results,schools are simply not doing theirjob. Evidently, the “job” of schoolsis to teach what students need foremployment in today’s global mar-ketplace, but there is currently a gap“between skills taught and skills re-quired by the corporate sector,” ac-cording to the National Alliance ofBusiness. This presupposes threefundamental, yet questionableclaims: 1) there is a “problem” withour system of education which haspotentially crippled virtually everysector of society; 2) skills = knowl-edge; and 3) the primary purpose ofeducation is to provide jobs forgraduates.

All three of these claims areapparent in the following educationstatement by the Information Tech-nology Association of Canada: “Thevast majority of the young peoplewho pass through Canadian schoolsare ultimately destined for the labourmarket. There are, however, grow-ing concerns that our children arenot learning the skills and acquiringthe knowledge they will need in to-morrow’s global economy. Employ-ers are worried about finding quali-fied workers; the government linkseducation to the economic prosper-ity of our country and the ability toremain internationally competitive;municipal governments link prob-lems in schools to drugs, dropoutsand crime.”


ITAC is quite clear in its Edu-cation Statement on the directiongovernments should take to restruc-ture education and “prepare learn-ers for life in the 21st century; “theCMEC should develop joint educa-tion/industry/parent bodies to makedecisions about the role of schools,skill sets, knowledge requirements,and curriculum needed to take stu-dents into the 21st century, includ-ing the accelerated use of IT in theschools and emphasis on foundationskills.” As if directly in response tothe IT lobby, the CMEC assures thepublic, “We are well aware of thechallenges to the education systemsposed by our rapidly changingworld: globalization of the economy,openness with regard to their cul-tures, pressing needs for skilled la-bour, and technological advancesthat are having an impact on ourdaily lives as well as in the job mar-ket. These changes require con-stant adjustments to our educa-tional practices to ensure highquality, accessibility, mobility, andaccountability” (CMEC Joint Decla-ration).

The editor of one Ontariobusiness magazine put this in plainerterms for me. Apparently, the busi-ness community feels that we’vebeen educating 100% of students togo where only 30% will end up—post-secondary institutions. Whynot educate all students to go wherethe majority will end up—theworkplace—because those whowant to go to university—the 30%—will probably end up there anyway

because their backgrounds are morestable and more financially secure?We’ve been teaching them Shake-speare and Plato, they complain,when what we need in the corpo-rate sector is for kids to know howto read a spreadsheet and work 9 to5 without complaining or thinkingthey might have other career choices(Kelly).

As may be predicted frommultinational corporations applyingto MERX for their chance to developOntario curriculum, we are experi-encing a global corporate push toblur the lines between educationand training. While McDonald’sCanada provides curriculum supple-ments on nutrition and sponsorsphys-ed departments, in AustraliaMcDonald’s is already in schools ascurriculum and for course credit.Students who work for McDonald’sin Victoria can now do a Year 12 sub-ject while they work for the Victo-rian Certificate of training. Andwhile students get credit for the in-house training (including courseslike food preparation and hygiene),schools can’t find out what is actu-ally taught because this course isonly available in the store, and isassessed by the McDonald’s staff, notby teachers.

Questions have been raisedas to whether McDonald’s can claimthat the students are officially clas-sified as trainees, which means thatthe corporation is eligible for a gov-ernment subsidy (Thompson). In ad-dition to this practice, students atMcDonald’s can earn points towards


their college entrance score merelyby having their performance as-sessed by the McDonald’s bosses(Cheney).

This practice is not so far re-moved from the Canadian experi-ence as one may think. Welcome tothe Canadian Institute ofHamburgerology in Toronto, Ont.,where McDonald’s personnel learnthe procedures in virtually every as-pect of the business through class-room and lab equipment instruction.In July of 1987, McDonald’s Restau-rants of Canada Ltd. reached anagreement with George Brown Col-lege for the accreditation toMcDonald’s employees upon suc-cessful completion of the in-housetraining (McDonald’s “The CanadianInstitute of Hamburgerology”).

And this sort of “partnering”between schools and the corporatesector is on the increase. With theincreasing insistence that the role ofschool is to provide trained employ-ees for the workforce (and thereforethe direction and emphasis of schoolmust be flexible to the demands ofthe global marketplace), we can ex-pect even more examples like theone below. “To meet the demand fora skilled, trained and experiencedwork force, new educational, co-opand job-related opportunities foryoung people in the travel and tour-ism field must be created. In re-sponse, the Canadian Tourism Hu-man Resource Council, with the cor-porate support of AmEx and otherpartners, will launch a new Acad-emy of Travel and Tourism at

Northview Heights SecondarySchool” (CNW).

“Partner”ships in educationare increasingly characterized by anemphasis on technology. Twoschools considered to be highly in-novative—predominantly because oftheir large number of corporatesponsors and their technological fo-cus—are River Oaks and GordonGraydon, both in the well-heeledcities of Oakville and Mississauga,Ontario, respectively. In the frenzieddiscussion surrounding educationreform, these are two of the very fewschools receiving any positive me-dia attention.

Gordon Graydon MemorialSecondary School has an astonish-ing 78 corporate partners for the In-ternational Business and Technology(IBT) program. And they arguablyget their money’s worth for theirdonations of software, training andmoney. At Graydon, “executives areconsulted about what business andtechnology skills students should belearning. The executives are alsoinvited to participate in the interviewprocess through which students areselected to join the IBT program” (Ca-nadian Business 37). Again, the con-cerns of the marketplace are frontand centre as the corporate donorsset the terms of what constitutes aGraydon education, and participatein the selections process where thedonors can determine which stu-dents will attend the program. Theschool selecting the students is di-rectly at odds with the philosophyof public education.


In a recent article entitled“Computers in the Classroom: open-ing the realm of possibilities,” RiverOaks principal Gerry Smith provideda ringing endorsement of Apple com-puters, but also clearly spoke to therole of education in the new globaleconomy. According to Smith, “theultimate role of education is to helpstudents learn the skills necessaryto play a productive role not only inthe workplace but also in thecommunity....Glance through theclassified ads and you will realize thenumber of jobs that require knowl-edge of computers. We as educa-tors have the responsibility to pre-pare students for their future and

help them learn the skills necessaryto be productive members of our so-ciety” (Florence Guily Communica-tions 1). This quote provides a suc-cinct encapsulation of virtually everyrationale behind restructuring edu-cation along business lines, and in-corporating more technology into theclassroom. The purpose of school isto train future workers. Societyneeds computer operators—justcheck the classifieds. Preparing stu-dents for the future means givingthem job skills. Productive citizensare determined by their pay stub.What business wants, business gets,and if these demands are not met,schools and educators are not ful-filling their roles in society.


“Investing in OurYouth, Investing inOur Future: JuniorAchievement”

JA intends to provide its ownspecial blend of business instruction,volunteers, motivation and practical,hands-on training to “100% of [its]market, some 218,000 students, bythe year 2002” (5). That’s quite areach, but apparently not a pipedream. Already, over 47,000 stu-dents have been “reached” by thecorporate sponsors of JA, so theymust be well on their way to trueself-sufficiency.

The list of corporate inves-tors in Junior Achievement reads likea Who’s Who of corporate Canada.They are divided into: “Gold Club”investors (Bank of Montreal, BellCanada, IBM and Royal Bank Finan-cial Group); the “Governor’s Club”

(Arthur Andersen & Co., CanadaTrust, Coopers & Lybrand, ManulifeFinancial and Consumers Gas); the“Chairman’s Club” (AmEx, Bank ofNova Scotia, Imperial Oil, KPMG, TD,Shell and Sears); the “President’sClub” (CIBC, Canadian Tire, Deloitte& Touche, Hongkong Bank ofCanada, Kraft, Lucent Technologies,National Trust, Nestle, RBC Domin-ion Securities, Sony, and XEROX),and the more mundane Sharehold-er’s Club which requires only 15-249shares to join.

Just listen to the ringing en-dorsements from students, parentvolunteers and the corporate play-ers. JA has been instrumental inteaching kids that the No. 1 reasonto stay in school is to “acquire theskills necessary for a good job”(Carolyn Sunich, student, 9). JohnLam, JA director and senior VP of theOntario Region Hongkong Bank ofCanada puts the rationale for JA into

Purpose: “To create a dynamic environment through which business and education partner,

inspiring youth to be self-sufficient” (2).

What is Junior Achievement?: “Junior Achievement is a not-for-profit charitable organization

providing curriculum enhancing programs, at no charge, to all school systems within Metro

Toronto and York Region. Available to students from grades 6 through OAC, Junior Achieve-

ment is funded by the private sector and is run by educators and business leaders” (3).

What is JA’s role?: “JA is now being seen in its most significant role ever; as a driver of a

major social trend that is creating a shift in attitude from dependence to self-sufficiency. JA

programs are making students aware that they will have to be self-sufficient as adults while

equipping them with the skills to get there.”

(Junior Achievement, “Vision 2002” 6)


the global market context, and illus-trates the need to teach students thecompetitive skills needed by em-ployers: “They will be living in a verycompetitive and global marketplace.They will have to be the best theycan be to be successful” (16).

But not only students and themarketplace profit from JA in theeducational and employment are-nas—parents benefit, too. Listen tothe glowing endorsement from thisfather, whose relationship (“coach-ing and counseling”) with his sonwas improved enormously when hebecame a parent volunteer with JA,because thanks to the program hecould understand the “needs andinterests [his son] was developingoutside the home.” JA, therefore,provides a significance to parentsthat they may not otherwise havehad: “My time in the classroom wasinstrumental in being able to relateto [my son], his friends and histeachers. By accepting an invitationto enter the classroom, in anynumber of JA programs, we, as par-ents, have a unique opportunity toget better connected to our commu-nities and to be more relevant to ourkids” (Steve Brecher, parent volun-teer, 12).

JA programs, in the words ofthe National Alliance of Business,ITAC and Cunningham Gregory andCo., “bridge the gap between theeducation sector and the community”(11). Of course, here community re-ally means business community.And this is to be achieved by offer-ing JA’s own unique blend of cur-

riculum and programs that are “dis-tinctive and relevant to today’s busi-ness environment” (11). Evidently,the way to bridge the gap betweeneducation and the corporate sectoris for the members of the corporatesector to become the educators.

The benefits for the privatesector with programs like JA areclearly outlined in the section enti-tled “Investment Opportunities —Business Partnering With Educa-tion.” The accompanying visual inthe promotional literature is of adiapered child reaching out towardsa computer screen.4 “[JA] providesbusiness with the opportunity tohelp shape the educational pro-grams that will ultimately yieldfuture generations of employees,suppliers, and consumers.Whether you are a large multi-na-tional corporation, a small neigh-bourhood store, or an individual con-sultant, the [JA] experience gener-ates a wide-range of benefits:• A chance to educate students on

career opportunities within yoursector.

• Positive exposure to students andfamilies on a community level.

• Training and development op-portunities for staff.

• Opportunity to reinforce corpo-rate goals.

• Participation in a full media re-lations program attached to animportant social issue.

• Excellent networking and busi-ness development opportunities”(11).


Programs such as JA are up-held as apparently mutually-benefi-cial examples of “partnership” be-tween the corporate sector andschools. However, the influence isclearly one-sided, and incrediblythorough. Parents, students and theprivate sector work together to re-inforce workplace requirements.Curriculum is developed and taughtby the private sector to reach theseends, but concealed in the rhetoricof “bridging the gap” betweenschools and the community. Andlet’s not forget the positive exposureand media attention harvested bythe corporate sponsors for what is,in their own corporate words, “achance to educate students on ca-reer opportunities within your sec-tor.”

A new role for par-ents in education re-structuring

In the spirit of makingschools and teachers more account-able to the “public” in general andparents in particular, the OntarioMinistry of Education has followedthe example of the Alberta govern-ment in mandating a stronger rolefor school advisory councils. How-ever, as no additional money hasbeen set aside, and with the demandto cut the “fat” out of administrative

spending, we are seeing a very newrole evolve for these councils: fund-raising. This new role, however,goes far beyond bake-sales and sell-ing chocolates door-to-door, al-though we shouldn’t expect the endof these events. What we will seein the near future are these councilssoliciting the corporate sector for do-nations, from computers to in-school-advertising-for-revenue. Thisis particularly good for the corporatesector, which no longer needs to lookas though it is taking advantage ofthe budget cuts to education becauseit is the parent advisory councils, onbehalf of the schools, who are tak-ing the initiative in seeking corpo-rate handouts. And it provides a pre-cursor to charter schools, where theparents are required to raise addi-tional funds to supplement the per-student grant from the governmentin order to provide for both extra-curricular and core supplies and pro-grams.

With this in mind, considerthe following quote, which has beentaken from a form submitted to theSchool Advisory Council from theWaterloo County Board of Education.It not only attempts to naturalizeenforced relationships with the busi-ness community, but also tries to dis-sociate commercialization from anycorporate involvement in educationwithout examining their commonroots.


“The Waterloo County Board of Education and its schools work with the community in manyways to provide the best education possible for students. Several initiatives bring together ourschools, parents, businesses, industry and other members of the community.“Over the years, the Board and its schools have developed hundreds of partnerships and co-operative ventures throughout the community with local businesses, service clubs, social agen-cies, individuals and others.

“The Board strongly supports partnerships that enhance student learning and create importantlinks with the community...“Within this current climate of fiscal restraint, the Board and many schools have also pursuedinitiatives which involve the advertising of products, solicitation of donations and sponsorships toraise funds....“We need the opinion of each Council to help the Board make informed decisions as it developsthe guidelines. The guiding principle must be that any initiative should enhance and supportstudent learning.1. As a School Advisory Council, what is your opinion on schools and the school board encour-

aging donations from businesses and other outside sources to help support educationalprograms? For example, a company donating a creative playground.5

2. As a School Advisory Council, what is your opinion on schools and the school board devel-oping partnerships with businesses for the purpose of supporting student learning? Forexample, a local service club provides a breakfast program.

3. As a School Advisory Council, what is your opinion on schools and the school board raisingmoney through sponsorships from businesses or other sources where the name is promi-nently displayed in the school? For example, a company name/logo on a score board.

4. Last June, trustees approved advertising on the exterior of school buses operated by theBoard. This initiative is part of a shared agreement with several school boards to generaterevenue for each school system. Trustees want to get the opinion of the School AdvisoryCouncils before making a decision about advertising on the interior of school buses. As aSchool Advisory Council, what is your opinion on the school board raising money throughadvertising on the interior of school buses?”

(Waterloo County Board of Education)

In all of these scenarios, in-dividual cases of corporate involve-ment are the foci, while the broaderissues and implications of such en-forced relationships between publiceducation and the corporate sectorare ignored. Partnerships are con-structed as a reality that will by na-ture improve the direction of educa-tion.

Completely ignored is thefact that, if it were not for massive

budget cuts to education, the grow-ing interest of the private sector ineducation, the unprecedented prof-itability of the education industry,and a series of education restructur-ing policies which reshape and re-direct education by mandating closerrelationships with and accountabil-ity to the business community, so-liciting corporate donations wouldnot be necessary. In fact, it wouldbe unthinkable.


The Tale of the GreatBunny

Recently, for the second yearin a row, teachers across Canadareceived packages from CadburyChocolate and Kidsworld Magazineentitled “The Tale of the GreatBunny: A delightful story about themagical underground world ofchocolate.” Approximately 35% ofall students under the age of 9 wereexposed to this classroom supple-ment, which included a poster, ateacher’s kit with suggested lessonplans (“the Choc Board”) and indi-vidual copies of the story, completewith a maze and poem.

Dale Hooper, then seniorbrand manager for Cadbury, explainsthat the goal was “to make Eastermore special and more memorablefor kids and families...Cadbury issynonymous with chocolate, and wetried to create a fun package thatpeople will adopt and that addsvalue” (Grange). Considering thecontent of the package, readers maywell ask, value for whom?

The clearly commercial na-ture of the package is evident in vir-tually every component. The mazeto “Find the Great Bunny” is to becompleted in purple and gold ink—

is it a coincidence that these are theCadbury colours? The classroomposter resembles the in-store displaythat students are encouraged to lookfor in neighbourhood stores. Butthese are only two examples of theway that Cadbury is not only incor-porated into the classroom lesson—in fact, the lesson actually becomesa justification for the Cadbury cor-porate literature. And it was rein-forced again, when the YTV Special“The Tale of the Great Bunny” wasaired later in April, with childrenbeing encouraged to watch it.

It was suggested to theteacher that “you start by readingyour instructor’s version of ‘The Taleof the Great Bunny’ out loud to yourgroup. It’s (sic) simple rhyming ca-dence makes it easy for enthusiasticstudents to learn a stanza or two byheart.” Can Cadbury possibly havehad this particular stanza in mind toteach students memorization?

“Let’s call this wondrous chocolateworld

The Land of Cadbury.For ‘Cadbury’ is the bunny wordFor chocolate, don’t you see.”

Then, to reinforce the “Taleof the Great Bunny,” the teacher’s kit

Individual Analyses:Individual Analyses:Individual Analyses:Individual Analyses:Individual Analyses:


suggested several activities: perhapsstudents could put on a puppet showacting out aspects of the Cadburystory.

Students could practice theirletter-writing skills by composing anote for someone who did a gooddeed the way the Great Bunny did.The instructions continued: “In theenclosed material, we learn that theGreat Bunny delivers chocolate tochildren in appreciation of their helpin preventing the world’s chocolatefrom disappearing...By asking thestudents to think about and recog-nize good deeds, we are encourag-ing them to perform such deedsthemselves” (3).

Ah, so Cadbury has more al-truistic lessons other than just purechocolate consumption. But studentsneedn’t stop at letters to people theyknow: “Just like Santa, the GreatBunny writes back!” Consumers—oops, students—can write to theGreat Bunny (1 Chocolate Treat St.,The Land of Cadbury) who will re-spond after Easter with a personal-ized note.

The Great Bunny also helpsstudents with their cutting and past-ing skills. Why not have studentsmake a shoebox world completewith Great Bunny figures, and anunderground world mural illustrat-ing the underground Land of Choco-late?

And no classroom supple-ment would be complete without atechnology component. Cadburyassured teachers that, while studentsmay be a little young, they can have

their introduction to the web throughthe Great Bunny on-line. TheCadbury web site was prominentlydisplayed (http://www.cadbury.chocolate.ca/easter) and studentswere encouraged not only to visit theweb-site to download recipes andcraft ideas (which they could takehome to their parents, the real con-sumers) but to e-mail the GreatBunny himself.

While most parts of theCadbury curriculum cannot be repro-duced, one page in the teacher’s kitcan be photocopied—a game for stu-dents where they decipher Eastercode words including “egg,” “choco-late” and “bunny,” which are allclearly the most significant aspectsof Easter in Cadbury’s Land of Choco-late.

But Cadbury needs its mon-ey’s worth: after shelling out somecash to provide students with thisinvaluable lesson, the corporationwanted to know how effective thisexercise was. In the feedback formon the back page, teachers wereasked several questions: Which ac-tivities did teachers use? How manystudents were exposed to the kit? Forhow long? Did you display theposter? Visit the web-site? How didyou use it? How would you rate thisprogram (children’s interest, age ap-propriateness, visual appeal, organi-zation, overall)? Would you orderthis free program again? And, fi-nally, room was provided for addi-tional comments and personal data.

So, based on the teacher re-sponse, we may or may not see “the


Tale of the Great Bunny” for a thirdyear next spring, a tale which endswith the concise Cadbury analysisof Easter:

So now you know Great Bunny’s taleAnd all the friends he keeps,And where his chocolate comes

from,And why he leaves you treats.6

Youth NewsNetwork

YNN is based on the Ameri-

can commercial news programChannel 1, brainchild of Chris Whit-tle and sold in 1994 to K-III Com-munications corporation for $250million. Whittle would approachschools and offer them free equip-ment (TVs, VCRs, satellite dishes)and wiring—for free. Or almost free.In return, students would have towatch a daily program—Channel 1—10 minutes of “news” and two min-utes of commercials.

If the program is notwatched, the school is found to bein violation of the contract and theequipment is removed from theschool premises. Advertisers payapproximately $200,000 for each30-second spot of carefully directed“stealth advertising,” as Whittle de-scribed it to potential advertisers.Currently, approximately 40% ofAmerican schools—8 million stu-dents—watch Channel 1 each day.In a year this amounts to one weekof school time spent watching tel-evision, and one entire day of eachyear spent watching nothing butcommercials.

Several thorough studies,some commissioned by Channel 1 todemonstrate the educational valid-ity of the program, determined thateducational benefits to studentswere in fact negligible—althoughstudents did overwhelmingly re-member the commercials.

YNN offers a similar programto Channel 1, with an additional 30seconds of commercial time, and hasadded computers and CD-Roms tosweeten the deal, with InteractiveDistance Learning Centres in someschools. According to RodMacDonald, “YNN represents aunique partnership of the public andprivate sectors to provide advancedtechnology that is paid for by com-mercial sponsorships and not tax-payers.”

The 1996 YNN prospectusanticipated that by June of 1998 itwould be reaching “1,000,000 highschool students or nearly 50% of the

“The Youth News Network (YNN) is a privately-owned,Canadian-based enterprise spearheaded byMontrealer Rod MacDonald. At the core of the Net-work’s ambitious proposals is the production of a com-mercial news/current affairs television show targetedat teenagers, that would be broadcast daily across thecountry into the nation’s classrooms. Following force-ful public opposition, the controversial project failed inits initial approach to Canadian schools in 1992-93. Itwas back in the news in early 1996. However, it isbeing closely watched by concerned educators, par-ents and the media.” (Media Awareness Network)


high school population in Canada.”And, by the way, these are not com-mercials that the students would bewatching as part of YNN; rather, theyare sponsored messages. The ac-tual difference between the two re-mains unclear.

In 1996, the CanadianTeachers’ Federation issued a pressrelease reaffirming its opposition toYNN and calling on the Council ofMinisters of Education to do opposeYNN. The Association for Media Lit-eracy, as well as various parent ac-tion groups and Home and SchoolAssociations, have also providedstrong opposition to Youth News Net-work.

Recently, YNN has begunanother attempt to enter theschools—but this time with a newtwist. Seven school boards haveagreed to enter into a pilot project,and research about the results ofYNN in schools is being conductedby Les McLean of the Ontario Insti-tute for Studies in Education. How-ever, though the project was ex-pected to begin last September, itappears to be on hold—whichmeans, presumably, that the re-search has also been deferred.

But, while disturbed at thenegative press and supposed “mis-information” circulating, YNN is cer-tainly not forthcoming in providinginformation—lists of confirmed ad-vertisers, corporate information ormedia kits. The results of this latestYNN endeavour apparently remain tobe seen.

Merx

Earlier this year, the OntarioMinistry of Education announcedthat, like other public sector con-tracts, curriculum developmentwould henceforth be open to bidsfrom the private sector. The MERXweb-site, maintained by the Bank ofMontreal, was set up to allow elec-tronic bids, and to provide some in-formation about the bidding process.However, some of the guidelineswere questionable. “Conflict of in-terest” was defined as “when an in-dividual’s private interests may beincompatible or in conflict with theirpublic service responsibilities. Forinstance, a conflict of interest wouldexist in a situation where an indi-vidual has, or appears to have, con-fidential information that could pro-vide him or her or someone else witha real or potential benefit at the ex-pense of the public interest. Confi-dential information means informa-tion that is not available to the pub-lic and if released to any person ororganization would, or might, resultin loss or damage to the Crown oradvantage to that person or organi-zation in dealing with the Crown orothers” (MERX Opportunity Abstract,3). However, where the publishing

“The MERX service is an exciting new electronic ten-dering system, connecting suppliers of goods andservices to people who purchase on behalf of gov-ernments and public sector organizations acrossCanada.” (“All About MERX”)


industry is concerned, there is noconflict of interest...although theconflict of interest statement “appliesequally to all individuals and com-panies” (4).

MERX accelerates the bid-ding process to unprecedentedspeeds. “Curricula that used to takeyears to develop will now be rushedinto production in weeks or months.Bidders will be notified in April ifthey’ve won; their first draft is duein June and the finished productmust be available by next fall, to beimplemented a year later”(Landsberg).

But it appears that not allpotential bidders will have the sameopportunity to bid, as a result of thefinancial restrictions. For one thing,it costs money to place a bid($500,000), and requires $1,000,000in liability insurance. And, as low-

est bid tends to win (at least accord-ing to the laws of the marketplace),those bidders who can best affordto keep their bids low—predomi-nantly the private players—will un-deniably have better luck. Not co-incidentally, KPMG has placed a bidin all areas of curriculum, and theBay Consulting Group has expressedan interest in several areas of in-struction.

Ministry spokespeople dis-miss public concern over the poten-tial multinational involvement in cur-riculum development by insistingthat only Canadian companies willbe able to place bids. However, of-ten this requires little more thanopening a Canadian branch office—and, considering the lucrative natureof the education industry, even thismeager national restriction willlikely be subjected to the terms ofNAFTA.


Endnotes

1 Such educational endeavours by the banking communities appear to be extremelyeffective. Acording to a 1995 survey by Teenage Research Unlimited, a substantialpercentage of American youth owned stocks or bonds. Educators attributed this to“an increased classroom focus on market issues” (Seebacher). Only a generationago, studies showed that high school students “had fundamental misconceptionsabout profits, corporate competition and the effect of government regulation”(Seebacher).

2 For elaboration and analysis, see the MERX case study in the last section of thisreport.

3 See Ontario Ministry’s suggested curriculum changes, 1996, and the OSSTF’s“Secondary Reform Committee’s Background and Briefing Notes on the Latest Draftof the Secondary Reform Document.” Revised May 21, 1996.

4 And let’s not forget the required dose of instructional technology (IT), especiallyconsidering the number of sponsors from the telecommunications sector. JA (spe-cifically the Toronto-based Junior Achievement Metro Toronto York Region) hasbegun to establish itself as its own sort of instructional facility, coupled with theinfluence of IT: “we have developed Information Technology Strategy to ensurethat JAMTYR becomes one of the most technologically advanced teaching organi-zations in the province” (15).

5 Interestingly, although the former PTA and Waterloo County Board of Educationdonated funds to help build the playground, only the corporate donors were rec-ognized and had their names placed on the plaque. (From discussion with memberof Waterloo Councy School Advisory Council, March 13, 1998.)

6 This section on “The Tale of the Great Bunny” was also printed in the CCPAEducation Monitor, Spring 1998.


References

Bank of Montreal Press Release, “Bank of Montreal’s School Program Helps Chil-dren Learn About Money Management and Investment, Feb. 27, 1998.

Cadbury. “The Tale of the Great Bunny: A delightful story about the magical under-ground world of chocolate.”

Canada News Wire. “Media Advisory—First Metro Toronto Travel and Tourism Acad-emy to Open in North York Public High School,” May 9, 1997.

Canadian Business: “Technology, Our New Cyberschools” June 30, 1997.

Cetron. Technos, Quarterly for Education an Technology. “Reform and Tomorrow’sSchools.” Spring 1997.

Cheney, Neil. McLibel electronic mailing list, “McDonalds and Education,” Oct. 26,1997.

CMEC, Joint Declaration, Future Directions for the Council of Ministers of Education,Sept. 1993.

Conference Board of Canada. Ethical Guidelines for Business-Education Partner-ships.

Cunningham, Gregory and Co., Promotional Material.

Fourth Annual Canadian Consumer Kids Conference. November 1996, Toronto, ON.

General Telephone and Electronics advertisement.

Grange, Michael. Globe and Mail C3, Mar 23, 1998.

Hill, Phillip and Brian McGowan. “Corporate Involvement in Ontario’s CatholicSchools.” OECTA, 1996.

ITAC press release and education statement. Aug. 5, 1994.

Junior Achievement (JAMTYR) “Vision 2002: Investing in Our Youth, Investing inOur Future.” 1997-98.

Kelly, Arthur. editor, Biz Magazine. Hamilton, ON. September, 1995. (conversation)

Landsberg, Michelle. Toronto Star. Feb. 5, 1998.

McDonald’s. “The Canadian Institute of Hamburgerology.” Feb. 1997.

Media Awareness Network.

MERX Web site, “All About MERX.” http://www.merx.cebra.com/marketing/about/index.htm.

MERX Opportunity Abstract, Feb. 5, 1998.

“Ministers Round Table on Technology in Learning,” March 24, 1997.


Molnar, Alex. Giving Kids the Business. Westview Press, 1996.

Montgomery Securities. The Emerging Investment Opportunity in Education. 1997.

National Alliance of Business. “Standards Mean Business,” National Education Sum-mit, 1996.

Noble, Douglas. “Selling the Schools a Bill of Goods.” Afterimage. March/April 1996.

Screen Ad marketing information.

ScreenAd’s Mission Statement.

Seebacher, Noreen. “Investments: Young People Put Stock in Capitalism.” The De-troit News. Nov. 9, 1995.

Selling to Kids. “In-School Marketing Programs Satisfy Marketers’ Appetites.” Sept.3/97.

Stead, Deborah. “Corporations, Classrooms and Commercialism.” New York TimesEducation Supplement, January 7, 1997.

Smith, Gerry. “Computers in the Classroom: opening the realm of possibilities,”Florence Guily Communications, 1998.

Thompson, Pat. McLibel electronic mailing list, “McD moves into schools as curricu-lum,” Nov. 11, 1997.

VPW press release. “Video Placement Worldwide wins web marketing award,”Feb. 13, 1998.

What! A Magazine promotional material.

White, Myles. “Breaking down barriers of distance.” Toronto Star. Feb. 20, 1997. K3.

ZDNet. “Texas may trade schoolbooks for laptops.” Nov. 19, 1997.

ZDNet. “Teacher’s new pet isn’t a brownie...it’s a laptop” Feb. 19, 1998.


Web Site Resources

Cadbury/The Tale of the Great Bunny http://www.cadbury.chocolate.ca/easter

Coca Cola http://tqjunior.advanced.org/4501/http://www.menc.org/IHWE/insts/splash.html

Curriculum Sites http://www.TeachFree.com

MERX http://www.merx.cebra.com/marketing/about/index.htm 1

Plastic Bag Association http://www.plasticbag.com

Quality Education Data http://www.qeddata.com/freeprogram.htm

ScreenAd http://www.screenad.com

The Great Chocolate Experience II http://www.iceberg.org/~gbequette/gce2.html

3rd Planet http://members.aol.com/C3rdplanet/math.htmlhttp://members.aol.com/C3rdplanet/games.html

http://www.cccnet.com

http://www.k-12world.com

http://www.kcc.ca

http://childrenscreativemkt.com

http://thechalkboard.com

http://www.younginvestor.com/aboutweb.html

http://teams.lacoe.edu/documentation/places/lessons.html

http://www.electronic-school.com

http://www.valverde.edu/TeacherSites.html

http://www.classroom.net

http://www.gsh.org

http://www.mmhschool.com/index.html

http://www.sselem.com

http://www.cris.com/~Wskills/

http://www.solutions.ibm.com/k12/

http://www.apple.com/education/

http://www.crayola.com/art_education/


Education, Limited.Education, Limited.Education, Limited.Education, Limited.Education, Limited.CCPA Education ProjectCCPA Education ProjectCCPA Education ProjectCCPA Education ProjectCCPA Education Project

VOL. I, NO. 2

CORPORATE CONTENT: INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM

BY ERIKA SHAKER

ISBN: 0-88627-952-6 1998

CAW 567OTTAWA

PUBLISHED BY THE

CANADIAN CENTRE FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES

804-251 LAURIER AVENUE WEST

OTTAWA ON K1P 5J6

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of Contents

Introduction 1.

Advertising 4.

Curriculum 7.

On-line Curriculum 11.

Technology 15.

Partnerships/Restructuring 18.

Individual Analyses 27.

Endnotes 32.

References 33.

Resources 35.

Part 2/Education project...rately target these “evolving con-sumers.” One company interested in...

Documents

Transcript of Part 2/Education project...rately target these “evolving con-sumers.” One company interested in...