Over the past 20 years, market-based choice initiatives have become a popular approach to education reform. Since 2002, the New York City Department of Education has opened over 250 high schools, creating a marketplace so widespread that many students no longer have a zoned or neighborhood school. This article uses two New York City–based case studies to examine branding or marketing practices at new small schools. It explores how and to whom schools market themselves and the nature and type of information provided to students and parents. The article raises questions about the implications of marketing and branding practices for public education.
AakerD. A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. New York, NY: The Free Press.
2.
AdnettN.DaviesP. (2005). Competition between or within schools? Reassessing school choice. Education Economics, 13, 109-121.
3.
AncessJ.AllenD. (2006). Implementing small theme high schools in New York City: Great intensions and great tensions. Harvard Educational Review, 76(3), 401-437.
4.
AndersonG. L. (1998). Toward authentic participation: Deconstructing the discourses of participating reforms in education. American Education Research Journal, 35, 572-603.
5.
ArumR. (2000). Schools and communities: Ecological and institutional dimensions. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 396-418.
6.
BellC. A. (2005). All choices created equal? How good parents select failing schools. National Center for the Study of Educational Privatization, Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP106.pdf
7.
BellC. A. (2009). All choices created equal? The role of choice sets in the selection of schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 84, 191-208.
8.
BoweR.BallS.GewirtzS. (1994). “Parental choice,” consumption and social theory: The operation of micro-markets in education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 42, 38-52.
9.
CarpenterB. L. (2008). Measurement: The key to charter school marketing. Mt. Pleasant, MI: The National Charter Schools Institute.
10.
ChubbJ.MoeT. (1990). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
11.
CreswellJ. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
CubanL. (2004). The blackboard and the bottom line. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
DiMartinoC. (2009). Public-private partnerships and the new schools movement: A new form of educational management. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, New York.
14.
FoskettN. (2002). Marketing. In BushT.BellL. (Eds.), The principles and practice of educational management (pp. 241-257). London, England: Sage.
15.
FriedmanM. (1962). Chapter VI: The role of government in education. In Capitalism and freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
GewirtzS. (2002). The managerial school: Post-welfarism and social justice in education. New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
GewirtzS.BallS.BoweR. (1995). Markets, choice, and equity in education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
18.
GriffinK. A.ReddickR. J. (2011). Surveillance and sacrifice: Gender differences in the mentoring patterns of Black professors at predominantly White research universities. American Educational Research Journal, 20(10), 1-26.
19.
HarveyJ. A. (1996). Marketing schools and consumer choice. The International Journal of Education Management, 10(4), 26-32.
20.
HastingsJ. S.Van WeeldenR.WeinsteinJ. (2007). Preferences, information and parental choice behavior in public school choice. New Haven, CT: Yale University.
21.
HemphillC.NauerK. (2009). The new marketplace: How small-school reforms and school choice have reshaped New York City’s high schools. New York, NY: Center for New York City Affairs, The New School.
22.
JamesC.PhillipsP. (1995). The practice of educational marketing in schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 23, 75-88. doi:10.1177/174114329502300202
23.
JessenS. B.DiMartinoC. (2011). Corporate style schooling: Marketing for private gain rather than the public good. Teachers College Record, 16556.
24.
KimelbergS. M.BillinghamC. M. (2013). Attitudes toward diversity and the school choice process: Middle-class parents in a segregated urban school district. Urban Education, 48, 198-231. doi:10.1177/0042085912449629
25.
LabrooA.DharR.SchwarzN. (2008)., Of frog wines and frowning watches: Semantic priming, perceptual fluency, and brand evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(6), 819-831.
26.
LoebS.ValantJ.KasmanM. (2011). Increasing choice in the market for schools: Recent reforms and their effects on student achievement. National Tax Journal, 64(1), 141-164.
27.
LubienskiC. (2005). Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of Education, 111, 464-486.
28.
LubienskiC. (2007). Marketing school: Consumer good and competitive incentives for consumer information. Education and Urban Society, 40, 118-141.
29.
MaringeF. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20, 466-479. doi:10.1108/09513540610683711
30.
MeyerH.-D.RowanB. (Eds.). (2006). The new institutionalism in education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
OplatkaI. (2002). The emergence of educational marketing: Lessons from the experiences of Israeli principals. Comparative Education Review, 46, 211-233.
33.
OplatkaI. (2007a). The Place of the “Open House” in the school-choice process: Insights from Canadian parents, children, and teachers. Urban Education, 42, 163-184.
34.
OplatkaI. (2007b). The principal’s role in marketing schools: Subjective interpretations and personal influences. Planning and Changing, 38, 208-221.
35.
OplatkaI.Hemsley-BrownJ. (2004). The research on school marketing: Current issues and future directions. Journal of Educational Administration, 42, 375-400.
36.
OplatkaI.Hemsley-BrownJ. (2007). The incorporation of market orientation in the school culture. The International Journal of Educational Management, 21, 292-305.
37.
OuchiW. G. (2003). Making schools work: A revolutionary plan to get your children the education they need. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
38.
QuintJ. C.SmithJ. K.UntermanR.MoedanoA., E. (2010). New York City’s changing high school landscape: High schools and their characteristics, 2002-2008. New York, NY: MDRC.
39.
Research for Action. (2010). Uneven playing field: Demographic differences and high school choice in Philadelphia. Philadelphia, PA: Author.
40.
RubinA. (2004). Branded environments: Defining the restructured high school campus. New Visions for Public Schools. Retrieved January2009 from http://www.newvisions.org/node/313/10/1/49
41.
SengeP. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday Business.
42.
SilkA. (2006). What is marketing?Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
43.
StakeR. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
WeinsteinM. G.JacobowitzR.MaguireC.SaundersT. B.FruchterN. (2007). Stability in student and teacher characteristics in the first ten years: A study of small high schools in New York City. New York, NY: Institute for Education and Social Policy.
45.
WellsA. S. (1996). African-American students’ views of schools choice. In FullerB.ElmoreR. (Eds.), Who chooses? Who loses? Culture, institutions, and the unequal effects of school choice (pp. 25-49). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
46.
WellsA. S.LopezA.ScottJ.Jellison-HolmeJ. (1999). Charter schools as postmodern paradox: Rethinking stratification in an age of deregulated school choice. Harvard Educational Review, 69(2), 172-204.
47.
WhittyG.PowerS. (2000). Marketization and privatization in mass education systems. International Journal of Educational Development, 20, 93-107.
