Case Study: Marketization and Privatization of Education

Introduction

Marketization and privatization entail the complete introduction of a principle that would allow free-market for any interested parties to control any activity in a given place. Marketization and privatization of the education system give different people a mandate to control education institutions. With the acquired mandate, these people will be able to run the facilities. Marketization is also known as endogenous privatization which is simply a form of privatization that takes place within the framework of the system of education in place. Privatization itself ensures greater control within the facility or from outside the institution as it is exogenous. Many governments uplifted privatization and marketization through the enactment of different laws. The enacted policies promoted individual control of education systems. An example of the applied approaches entail; allowing parents and guardians to choose schools for their kids to study, giving a free environment for schools to compete for new students and provision of funds to the schools according to their performance rates. Marketization and privatization of education can have both positive and negative influence on the state depending on their outcomes and intentions.

Instances where Marketization and Privatization Represent a State Crisis

When It Causes Status Difference

Privatization of education in some cases has increased the gap between the poor and the rich. Rich people enroll their kids in private schools, and poor people enroll their kids in public schools. In the US, it is suggested that all kids studying in the public schools are from poor backgrounds while those from private schools are rich (Ndimande & Lubienski 2017). By comparison, students studying in the public sector have insufficient learning materials. On the other hand, kids in public schools feel neglected, and their performance in college is also deficient (Lubienski 2016). In the United States, kids studying in private schools are provided with everything by the authorities while students in other schools are not. Privatization works best if the government provides resources equally as seen in the private institutions.

With privatization of education, a gap emerged in the sector based on the learning standards.  Private schools often provide their students with high standard equipment. The teaching conditions in private schools are mostly aimed to meet the parent’s preferences regarding what they expect the school to be like for their kids to study efficiently (Hursh 2016). Private schools in the US under the administration of individual companies are built according to recently established standards with the use of high-class equipment. Students in these private schools will acquire more skills and experience as compared to those studying in the public schools. Privatization of education will thus create a gap between those who know and those who know more, making a nation suffer from an education crisis.

When People Use It Wrongly

Marketization and privatization have been used purely for business purposes. Influential people in the US own the private schools to use them for soliciting money from the citizens exclusively (Palfreyman & Tapper 2014). Due to the high demand of private schools, owners took advantage of it by raising the fee amounts. Some management types are just a business strategy that is supposed to change the class into an in-for-profit enterprise. Some companies sponsoring schools end up concentrating more on marketing their brand instead of promoting better education. Company officials who run schools in the US do not possess the administrative skills but instead have the business skills which will not work at all in the sector. Students tend to be misguided hence not acquiring the necessary skills and experience as required by the existing form of learning (Mok & Neubauer 2015). Australian students in the private sector have many times completed schools without acquiring the set of necessary skills since they do not have any missions. The policy of privatization will remain doomed if the individuals are running it with money-oriented motives.

In some schools, marketization has resulted in a high rate of failures. The government introduces new policies in public schools with the aim of marketing them only to cause another crisis. In case of the American goverment, the US Ministry of Education added modern methods of education for the public schools to look like private schools (Eley & Clark 2017). The state allowed open enrolment of students, encouraged any successful college to assist the other ones and increased the amount of funding given to the schools in place. These steps attracted many students to the government schools. Open enrollment in many instances led to some schools having a maximum number of students hence some students could be left out. Learners who were left out could end up being school dropouts. Marketization in many instances made a school famous thus attracting even the excessive number of students (Hursh 2016). Many governments that allowed open enrolment have chosen to change the styles due to the looming failures of the new system.

If It Limits Innovation                     

Endogenous and exogenous privatization sometimes limits innovation spirits amongst the stakeholders. Teachers employed in the private sector often find themselves adhering to the rules assigned by their bosses. Some tutors may be willing to advise their bosses on some new things or introduce different learning procedures but may find it difficult due to the strict private school administration. In the US, teachers employed in the private sector are often controlled regarding what the kids should be taught by the administrators (Ndimande & Lubienski 2017). In some instances, certain company owners who own the private schools encourage teachers to teach their students business education stricter. These directives will not allow students to learn more skills and gain more experience. Students in colleges that are owned by business tycoons in the US often graduate with only business degrees as directed by the owners. Privatization has a high rate that gives owners of a school a right to determine what the kids will learn hence disadvantaging them from gaining any other knowledge. These steps of privatization have deprived the country from having resourceful minds in place.

If It Encourages Misuse of Resources

Devolvement of education in some countries has greatly allowed misusing resources allocated. When the government gives independent powers to head teachers in some schools, they tend to misuse the funds provided to them. After the development of new schemes by the US federal government, local management of schools reported frequent cases of schools closure due to the unavailability of resources. Many schools in New York closed just a few months after being given self-management powers (Lubienski 2016). The main reason behind this closure was due to the head teachers misusing funds allocated to them. Schools in the US often used to face closure due to the poor management skills of the administrators. The managers of schools were often not trained having no other interest than to make money on the schools. The state faced closure of schools due to the high rate of mishandling of funds. The scheme of local management of schools introduced by the government was reportedly failing in places where the head teachers misappropriated the allocated funds (Eley & Clark 2017).Some head teachers used funds for self-benefits. Devolvement of education only worked if the sponsor funds were properly used.

Instances where Marketization and Privatization Does not Represent a State Crisis

If Used to Mitigate Rising Expenditure

Some nations take this route to save on their spending. In the US, labor laws were enacted to allow private sectors to start their schools. The segments could also fund the existing public education systems that were initially funded by the government. The state government legislated laws that enabled private companies to support any institution of their choice. The authorities claim that this move influenced the education sector in a number of ways. Funds meant for the education sector could now be used to boost other areas like health and transport sectors. Most of the companies funded the building of institutions, and in return, they expected building and maintenance contracts (Verger, Fontdevila & Zancajo 2016).  Education authorities of the state employed these steps as a way of controlling resources used. Schools were extensively funded by the authorities and no follow up was made on how resources were allocated (Whitty & Power 2000). The states that encouraged such kinds of marketization and privatization grounded their arguments on the insufficient budget available to run all the public sectors.

The states could also use this process to cope with problems associated with poor planning whose upshot affect expenditure. Governments often face a high rate of poor planning regarding the allocation of resources. States may presume the number of students in a public school to be lawful, but that is not the case most of the time. Education sectors in some countries often face management difficulty due to poor planning by the government in charge. In the USA, public schools received funds based on government policies in place (Whitty & Power 2000). However, the funds received from the state showed no consistency due to poor planning. The nation had often budgeted for an approximated number of students only to realize that the value increased. Marketization and privatization made the government reduce pressure on the planning failures that kept occurring.

When It Helps to Solve Unemployment Problems

Endogenous and exogenous privatization in some countries relies on the state of employment. A high number of teachers have graduated from colleges and universities but are faced with lack of employment opportunities (Mok & Neubauer2015). Some governments are unable to employ all these individuals due to a limited number of public schools. The states believe that this was a platform to create more job opportunities for the unemployed teachers and any required staff members to work in the private schools. According to Whitty & Power (2000), the US local educational authorities in the 1980s developed new schemes, which encouraged privatization of institutions. Many private schools emerged, and this has led to the employment of jobless teachers. American government used this as a step to curb the rising level of unemployment. Privatization helps to tame the issue of unemployment in many states.

If It Raises State of Economy

Marketization and privatization in some countries were used to raise the economy of the nation. Private schools in many instances attract investors and contractors for their further development. In some major towns, private companies often used contracts to fund the private school’s activities. In the USA, Edison Company took deals from many public institutions. These agreements made the revenue of the company rise from $68 million to an approximate of $127million in 1999 (Whitty & Power 2000). Companies used the sponsoring privileges to market their brands within the institution, and this helped to attract more stakeholders. Private schools also pay taxes to the government for their services. The government promoted the education system as the history of their existence made resources readily available. This increase of resources facilitated the rise of the country’s economy. Private institutions mostly helped students to acquire necessary skills which were later used to boost the performance of the public sectors after being employed.

When It Improves Education Standards

The government in some instances is trying to raise the education standards in place. Privatization in some nations was just a way of devolving the education sector. Many countries have public schools monopoly. As these are the only schools around, people feel bored by attending institutions which do not meet their preferences. Local management of schools in coordination with the local authorities constantly implements policies that cannot be changed regardless of the issues at hand. In 1990, the US parents felt that the form of education in progress does not provide the necessary level of education they want for their kids. Some wanted their kids to be served with high standard skills and meals (Whitty & Power 2000). Privatization of schooling has increased competition between the private schools and those existing in the public sector. The government implemented the independence policy to avoid unnecessary inconveniences in the educational sector.

 If It Tackles Competition Rate

Some states use marketization of education to cope with the rising influence in the private sectors. State schools may feel that the individually owned schools overpower them in popularity and services provision process. Authorities decide upon the possible solutions to these issues. In case of the state schools, education authorities introduce schemes which make the public schools have policies resembling those of the private schools (Whitty & Power 2000). The authorities also allow open enrolment. This step means that a parent can choose what kind of school their child will attend and what services are better for them. The scheme devolved the education sector into the local management of schools (LMS). This process encouraged public institutions to govern themselves and use resources without any monitoring. The US government also enacted such laws in 1990 to devolve the education sector (Eley & Clark 2017). Individual schools obtained the responsibilities of employing teachers and allocating budget. Marketization thus helps solve the growing problem of competition.

If It Solves Overdependence Rate

Many governments encouraged marketization to cope with the rising issue of overdependence. States largely depended on other developed nations to give them funds to run their educational sectors. Public schools funded by the government often depend on the state resources to run their activities. In the USA, local management of schools depends on the state authorities to provide them with the learning equipment (Whitty & Power 2000). The government via the education authorities transfers funds to the school head teachers. In some institutions, student population could sometimes increase dramatically. This increase in the number of students could result in the inadequate funds allocation in the national education sector. When such instances occur, they prevent free service rendering in the learning institutions. Standards of education in the public schools become low as the students cannot access the necessary learning equipment. Devolvement of schools in the states paved the way for sponsor companies that decided to fund the private schools. With the marketization and privatization processes, self-management of schools reduced the overdependence rate.

 If It Improves Infrastructure

Endogenous and exogenous privatization in some states is meant to cope with the high growth of infrastructure in the education sector. New education policies allow individuals to look for best suited funds and sponsors for providing resources to their schools (Costigan & Grey 2015). Private schools receive a lot of support from different stakeholders. Many private schools have installed modern equipment that enables kids to learn and acquire top standard skills. Devolvement of education in some states was just a better method of marketization. The move attracted many companies to provide financial assistance to the institutions. Private enterprises considered funding of private schools necessary. Many US enterprises acquired contracts from schools and supplied them with materials such as books and computers. Most of the firms have built high standard buildings after being awarded construction contracts (Ndimande & Lubienski 2017). Incoming of private companies boosted the US infrastructure. Some enterprise managers became the administrators of the institutions. Devolvement of education in the states enabled head teachers of schools in Birmingham to have a democratic decision-making platform. The head teachers were able to directly improve on what they wanted without any need to consult the governments as it used to be before. The process of privatization and marketization in the education sector enhances infrastructure necessary for students to learn in comfortable premises.

Conclusion

Marketization and privatization of education will not pose a threat of a nation’s crisis if it is used to solve issues at hand. For instance, high rate of employment can only be solved by allowing the establishment of other private schools to provide more employment opportunities. Devolvement of schools in some cases helps solve the problem of the growing expenditure crisis. However, a nation’s image is largely determined by the efficiency of the education sector. The education sector should at all times be handled with care to avoid causing other crises that will lead the nation to failure. Knowledge is indeed power; hence, privatization and marketization should be carried out with caution to avoid any negative outcomes.

Related Free Education Essays

• Changes in Educational System
• Project 3: Educational Goals
• Overcoming Professional Paralysis
• Social Networking Sites and Modern Education
• Multiculturalism and Diversity