Discussion: Advertising in Education

The most recent comment displays at the top.

Discussion Archive 1

Interesting facts, pity tokens are not given during the summer holidays - there'd be plenty of time to count them then, or perhaps after 2.30 every day :)

Sorry my last comment should be directed to Paddy not Peter, my apologises. By the way- Step raises some really good points.

Along the same lines.... The current Tesco ad states - an apple for the teacher could mean an Apple for the whole class. The other half of that story is you would need to buy 35 apples to get one token (40c each) and would therefore need to buy over half a million apples to get an Apple computer (537,500 apples to be more exact!). It is very telling that nowhere in Tesco's ads or on its website does it state how many tokens need to be collected. Finally, do you have any idea how many teaching hours it takes to collect, count and package 21,500 tokens?(that’s the number needed for one computer)

Paddy, you charge the campaign with being biased and negative - well quite frankly, it isn't any wonder that this may be the case. Up until now only half of the story has been put forward - its about time the other half was given an airing. For example, the school I work in has 675 children, therefore to just enter the Building for the future competition we would need to collect 20,250 tokens, that equates to €32,400 In return for this massive revenue we may receive a digital camera. I would suggest to schools to instead ask parents to boycott for 30 days and give the 1.60 per paper directly to the school

Actually Peter, the Campaign has just added a review which gives a positive response to a scheme- in this case Classmate. So it appears the Campaign does not as you claim see everything in a negative light In fact you are the only one who being negative.

Moderator

why are you guys so negative? You take the Chief Exec's comments in a negative way

no wonder schools are they way they are when people see everything in a negative light!

Moderator, I am not apologising for Tescos, however it will be interetesting to see how much good this actual campaign does

sure if you guys believe in it fair play

Indepedent Newspapers have launched Building for the Future along with CIE.

This competition is accessible only to schools who collect 25-30 tokens per pupil from Independent Newspapers. Schools who buy the wrong newspaper are barred from entering. Sadly, the launch was attended by the Minister for Education who clearly is prepared to turn a blind eye to commercial pressure on young pupils.

When the Chief Executive of Independent Newspapers said - Each year, the hard work invested by schools around the country yields amazing results - it's clear he was thinking in terms of profits and immediate sales.

I think the point is that in the case of this scheme its the fact that goods must be bought in Tesco is what makes it restrictive- not any individual decision of a teacher. Anyway, the only reason for restricting the purchase of ingredients to Tesco is to boost sales of Tesco products and not to aid student learning. So I'd say Come on Paddy open your eyes.

Paddy, Your appologia on behalf of Tesco for their commercially driven scheme is vague and unconvincing - probably, many branches.

The fact is that Tesco require students to buy only the ingredients they stock - that's restrictive from a commercial, culinary and most of all educational point of view. In a school competition, students should be able to use whatever ingredients they want from wherever they want to get them - why should a supermarket dictate otherwise?

come on now lads, looking at the evalution of the young cooks i have to laugh at the biasis shown here:

Students are to be restricted in their choice of ingredients to those available at Tesco outlets - Tesco probably have the largest supply of ingredients in their stores

also excludes students who may wish to produce ethnic or regional dishes - how does it do this, many of the branches of Tescos are stocking more ethnic foods.

Also it is restrictive of the curriculum - if teachers decide to make it thus - this is a negative belief, I am a firm believer that teachers are resourceful and can make any subject as restricitive as they choose

Great site. Delighted to hear some debate on this topic. As a teacher I feel the targeting of children and schools by marketing gurus is a disgrace. It's great to have something concrete to point parents and colleagues towards. The evaluations are hugely helpful in that regard. Hope all teachers visiting the site are bringing up the idea of a Commercial -free school at their staff meetings...every little helps!!

while i take the point that many are making that commercialism in the classroom is a 'win win' situation, i think those who have this attitude are not fully seeing the danger commercialism poses to education and the curriculum. When schools become the mouthpiece for companies, how can they teach children objectively? And does it not bother anyone that their children are being brought up by our social institutions to believe neo-liberalism and commercialism are the only way? How can children grow to think critically if they are indoctrinated into the system at such a young age?

It's a common point-of-view to suggest that advertising in the classroom isn't such a big deal. However, given the significant investment by Companies into research and advertising in schools, aren’t we lucky to have a grass-roots campaign of volunteers providing information and guidance from another perspective? Do we really want only one voice and investment from the corporate sector, and that’s it?

I would encourage comment on specific evaluations and how companies suggest schools participate. Review the online evaluations and comment on whether you think a given scheme is responsible or not.

I've been lurking on this board, i am amused by it. I do see peoples point, but i think you guys are being a bit too down on the schemes, if you shop in Tescos anyway why not pick up th voucher. it's win win, school gets computers tescos may see an increase in revenue, we all know that people get handful of vouchers from friends on the checkout lighten up guys

The point is schools are being put under pressure to turn children into consumers. Parents want their child to go to a school with the best facilities, and the school which says 'no' will not have the facilities that the school which becomes as commercial as possible will have.

The result is the schools which say 'no' will be closed down, and those students whose parents have principle and do not want their child to be educated to be a consumer will be at a disadvantage in terms of education because of the poor facilities in the non-commercial school. The point of this debate is that schools should not be put under this pressure which filters down to the children who are unfairly exploited. [Edited by moderator to conform to guidelines, 700 char limit]

The Campaign's review of Computers for Schools and press release on same has now been posted on this site.

We have challenged Tesco to defend the inequalities and overt commercialism of their latest marketing strategy.

Also posted are details of upcoming information meetings - more on these to follow.

I fully agree with you Mary. I think the Classmate magazine is great. It's full of relevant and topical information and activities and the kids love it - without any branding needed to endorse it. It would be great to see more of this kind of thing in schools and in the campaign!

Anyone see the Class Mate Magazine by Dublin City Council. The entire magazine manages to cover a huge ammount of topics which fit the new curriculum and yet contains not one single piece of corporate advertisment. This is where the campaign needs to be going. Just shows education without advertisment is possible!

apathy noun [U] when someone lacks interest or energy and is unwilling to take action especially over a matter of importance(Cambrige Dictionary)

Peter, I have read you messages carefully and your overriding message seems to be - this is the way things are, get over it. however the message of the campign seems to be - this is the way things are, we deserve better. You wanted facts? Fact - Tesco is owned by shareholders Fact - Shareholders demand profit. Fact - unprofitable schemes and promotions are dropped.

Moderator, thank you for your response, however to say the following helplessnes on the part of schools to protect their educational mission is just an unbelievable comment, schools have a choice, from that point it could be infered that they have no choice, surely a board of management/principal staff protect their educational mission.

Schools can say NO. they can write to parents saying why etc..

Apathy i believe is the wrong word to use. that would imply Apathy is a psychological term for a state of indifference i am not indifferent, please read my post clearly as i attempting to show things from both sides

Peter, I believe the apathy Allan refers to is your ready acceptance of : - underfunding in education in time of plenty - marketing and advertising in school - helplessness on the part of schools to protect their educational mission.

This campaign is not resigned to any of these and is actively campaigning for change. You're welcome to disagree but I'd suggest that this forum is not the place to engage in exhaustive exchanges on these fundamental points.

apathy? the campaign to change this lamentable situation, which situation is this? lack of computers/funding? I am confused here Allan, because a scheme is running 9 years means it is a success, this can be for both parties.

This campaign needs hard facts, to indicate that Tesco have increased profits due to the computers for schools

The campaign need to have a report comissioned to show proof.

Fact - People shop in Tescos Fact - People collect vouchers Fact - School get equipment those are the facts we can work on.

How a school tackles the issues that might be brought up is up to them. If they get sucked into competions etc that is the fault of the school not tescos.

You confuse me Peter, on the one hand your apathy is staggering;-no matter where you look kids will be exposed to brands and the Dept of Ed won't give money for such things as ICT -but then you become animated in response to a campaign that wishes to, in some small way, change this lamentable situation. You want proof that these schemes effect spending? Tesco have launched its computers for schools for the 9th year in a row - is that proof enough for you?

hum think to assume companies are seeing a social need and acting out of a sense of altruism is slightly misguided and is certainly what the PR people would like people to believe

again it seems you are assuming that my assumption is incorrect, perhaps you are being cynical about it

i really do think it's a big fuss over something quite small, milk it for what it is worth

Peter I have to disagree with ur evaluation that the govt. can only give small grants and companies are just trying to help.I think to assume companies are seeing a social need and acting out of a sense of altruism is slightly misguided and is certainly what the PR people would like people to believe.They are trying to get more people to shop in their stores. Market research shows that if a child has a preferred brand between the ages of 4 n 9they will still be buying that product20years later. I think that the government, which is shamelessly pro-business, is working with business when it comes to school funding;we will cut funding in certain areas, and industry can fill the void”.

Tesco have just launched Computers for Schools 2006. See www.tesco.ie

This is the company's 3rd scheme aimed at Irish schools since September. A review will shortly be posted on this site. Get in touch if you have any comments.

hum not sure where i said shame on schools, unless we have schools, and children live in a bubble there will always be commercialism, sometimes you just gotta decide what is best for the school, let each school decide

In 2002 schools had a PE grant to implement the curriculum

In 2003 we had McDonalds' bibs on students during PE lessons. In 2005 we had Tesco tokens. In 2006 we have SuperValu vouchers and a Free football for schools who show €4000 worth of shopping.

What about the small schools? What about the poorer schools? What about parents who want to support local producers or who shop in ALDI or LIDL? What about a commitment to tackle childhood obesity?

Yet, after all the underfunding, celebrity ads on tv and radio, and clever marketing tactics, you say shame on the school? It is school communities and education in general which are the victims of all this commercially driven flim-flam.

To be honest guys, I think all your points are fair, but to be honest, let's look at a few things.

Schools are underfunded, the government can only give a small grant (if any) which really does not go along way. So companies see they can help. Now I think it is the way the school handles the collecting of vouchers that is important (i am just taking this as one point).

Is there proof to actually say that from doing this scheme Tesco or the like have substantially increased their profits? Really many people shop in a handful of supermarkets, Dunnes, Tescos, SuperValu, M&S, therefore you were going to spend the money anyway so why not help your school?

I would have to say that if the day came where the teacher was saying and now children we'll move on to maths, which today is sponsored by Tesco, remember every little helps then we have a bad situation.

Let's not focus all our energy on the problem let's look at solutions. At the moment one solution for more ICT equipment is to fund raise, or collect vouchers. The governement won't provide any extraordinary amount of money (of course the other question is should they, but that's for another forum)

With regard to companies sending in CDs etc and then offering them at a discount price. The merit of the CD needs to be considered, like when evaluating any software. However if it is good, and parents can use it with their children at home then this can be seen as a positive.

John, you talk about large companies in the pursuit of profit in essence they are not charging the school, the schools should not be doing any blatant advertising them, the parents are more than likely shopping there anyway, so the way i see it the schools get some free gear, parents do what they normall do, so it seems to be a win win.

If a school make it a compeition to collect the vouchers like said in an earlier post well then shame on the school

I'd also like to point out that the curriculum guidelines (referred to on this web site) specifically require teachers to education children on what advertising is and how it works. It seems that to have teachers promoting products and companies diminishes their ability to be impartial when teaching children how to evaluate advertising.

Well actually Peter all computers that come from Tescos do have a large sticker on the cpu saying this is a Tesco Computer for Schools computer. In addition, I pay my taxes and expect that my child will be educated to the best of our economies ability. Yet we have some of the lowest funding in Europe- yet we are one of the world's richest countries. Therefore what the campaign is asking for is very little- that money created in the economy be used for the benefit of all with a properly funded education system. Plus, if you want to talk about the 1999 curriculum- Go read the PE curriculum which speaks of swimming in one strand -where are the swimming pools?? Secondly, there is no PE grant to implement the PE curriculum. Finally, I reject your suggestion that a gap in government funding be EXPLOITED (and thats what it is) by companies like Tesco who as a matter of fact one of the richest supermarket chains in the Europe. Do they never stop in the pursuit of profit to prey on underfunded schools? Campaign is not about NO No No. Its saying YES to proper funding of Irish Education and fair play to them.

unless this campaign decides to produce and give out non branded goods to all schools, children will always be exposed to brands. After all if you buy Dell PCs you will see their logo on the computer, how about copy books or pencils, should we not buy these from companies any more, no matter where you look kids will be exposed to brands, it's a fact, we have to get on with and work with what we have.

Katherine, thanks for your reply you ask is it fari on children to see their names on a list in the classroom which compares how many tokens they have collected.

Honestly now, you can not blame the companies for that, that goes down to school policy. If a school are making this into a competition well then that is a reflection on their school, not the companies, but it is an interesting view.

It's good to see you are using the 1999 Curriculum, as I know many teachers who don't think such new methods of learning will work, after all it's easier to do rote work - and i have this from first hand experience working with teachers

So I suppose its very fair on children to see their name on a list in the classroom/school which compares how many Irish Independent tokens Jamie has collected in relation to the rest of his class? Is that the way that you want this to go? And by the way when you compare what schools get in return for these schemes it is very very little in comparison to the advertising exposure and product sales generated for the companies.

PS Peter I have the 1999 Curriculum here beside me and its referenced regularly, if there's anything you'd like to ask about it

in addition if teachers, actually followed the educational agenda that would be great, however we all know many teachers are not following the 1999 curriulumn at all....

Really guys come on, the Dept of Ed won't give money for such things as ICT, so companies step in, schools get IT, I never saw Tescos ask that banners be hung in the computer area saying this is from Tesco's buy from us. What is interesting is that this site was registered as .com, meaning commercial site, rather than a dot .org, opps was that a slip up?

At the end of the day many parents shop in SuperValu or Tescos so why not get something for the school.

Really why do you guys complain so much, if you don't get the resources, you complain, if you do get them thru commericial offerings you complain.....

Why do some people think that its now up to teachers to collect the money to educate the children of Ireland. I signed up for teaching because I wanted to help children grow and develop. I chose not to work for a multinational corporation then so why do I have to now? Why do I have to work for Tescos or any other company? Why can't the government fund education, I thought thats why we pay our taxes???

Evaluation card for Tesco Young Cook of the Year is presented on this site. The scheme appears to be aimed at individual students and their teachers.

is the tesco competition a group effort or a 1 person competition

I disagree with you Susan. For as long as schools and teachers put up with these schemes the Dept. will get away with cutbacks and underfunding. We used to have a PE equipment grant now we have McDonalds, Tesco and SuperValu all marketing in schools to make up the shortfall - you have to say no at some point unless we want to go down the road of the US.

Also, can you describe the correct manner of presenting these schemes? How can we deliver media awareness lessons and then remind the children to shop in Tesco/SuperValu so that we get our vouchers? That's counterproductive, hypocritical and derisory.

I think it is important to keep parents informed and to fully involve them in policy -making around this issue - otherwise the school looks as if 'it is the only one in the town which is not involved in project x,y,z.'. (This happened in our school)

until the department give the necessary funding, schools are not in a position to turn down what many of these schemes have to offer. perhaps teachers should examine how they deliver the material to their children. if they do it in the correct manner, children will be more aware of commercialism, and schools, teachers, children will get what they are very much in need of to provide for their education

Yes, companies have had it their way and have dictated all of the terms of these schemes. The campaign needs to push the counter argument. Businesses have a right to do their thing but not on a teachers time. If they want to be corporately responsible they should pay equitable tax and then we can democratically decide where we want to spend the extra resources. Presently they have their corporate responsibility on their terms. The campaign is a great idea.

My childs school has a policy on this kind of thing after some parents raised the issue with the Board of Management. Now we just don't bother with any commercial schemes, the school runs fine, we fundraise directly and I know my child isn't looking at logos in class. It's not that hard to do!

Liam, I'll tell you why schools take part in these schemes. Firstly they're so stuck for resources that they'll take just about anything. Secondly, the ad campaigns and the marketing brains behind them are very well atuned to schools' needs, they know how to unlock the school gate. Schools, especially the poorer ones, are at the mercy of the ad-men. It's the kids who pay the price.

I've read No Logo about companies targetting kids through their peers and schools. I didn't know there was an Irish company specialising in putting ads into the class - their website makes for depressing reading.

Are you aware that you can buy Tesco vouchers on e-bay? A school here was badly short a few hundred vouchers and were hunting everywhere to find them. Someone suggested e-bay and there they were selling for cash on-line. Companies really have schools by the throat with these schemes.

Why do teachers put up with all this corporate rubbish - who do they work for? I think no self-respecting teacher should have anything to do with promoting brand or products. I know what I'd do if a company asked me to be their salesperson in my workplace.

Our school has only 60 pupils - how do supermarkets expect us to spend as much and collect as many vouchers as bigger/richer schools. I'd like to see this included in your campaign.

We need PE equipment just as much if not more but we can't compete in these commercial schemes. Don't the government care about rising obesity levels? You'd think they'd be throwing money at schools to try and save so much trouble and expense when these children grow up.

Companies seem to come into the school and dictate all of the terms of these schemes. Who is negotiating on behalf of the schools? Would any business ever participate in any deal with another company without first negotiation the best possible terms?