How to Market Your Literacy or Language Program (Free 5-part video series)

May 30, 2011

I’m happy to share this 5-part video series that was recorded live at the 2010 Spotlight on Learning Conference, held in Toronto, Canada by the Ontario Literacy Coalition.

I did a one-hour presentation on how to promote literacy and language programs. The conference organizers videotaped the session and are sharing it publicly. You can consider this a one-hour crash course in marketing:

Low-cost High-Impact Marketing for Literacy Programs – Part 1

Low-cost High-Impact Marketing for Literacy Programs – Part 2

Low-cost High-Impact Marketing for Literacy Programs – Part 3

Low-cost High-Impact Marketing for Literacy Programs – Part 4

Low-cost High-Impact Marketing for Literacy Programs – Part 5

Related posts:

______________

Share this post: How to Market Your Literacy or Language Program (Free 5-part video series) http://wp.me/pNAh3-Gq

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Hate the idea of marketing education? There’s an alternative…

May 9, 2011

Alberta Languages Initiative - Language Learning - Second LanguagesWhen I was starting my PhD program in 2005 I was planning to research the marketing of a new government initiative in Alberta that would have brought in mandatory second language students for all students in grades four to nine across the province. The Ministry of Education had prepared a “Tool Kit” for schools, which was a set of advertisements to be included in school newsletters, stock articles that could be printed and sent home to parents, slide presentations that could be given at information sessions and a few other resources for schools they could use to promote the new initiative. My research was going to involve working with schools to find out how they implemented this Tool Kit and marketed the languages initiative.

The second edition of 101 Ways to Market Your Language Program had just come out and I was excited to start my research.

A conversation with one of the Russian professors at the university changed everything for me. She asked what I was going to research and when I told her it was the marketing of the soon-to-be-rolled-out Languages Initiative, she said, “This isn’t marketing. It’s propaganda. Trust me, we Russians know all about propaganda. When the government tells you that you must do something and they make all kinds of posters and do news articles to try and convince you it is a good thing, that’s not marketing. Don’t get me wrong. I like the idea of the Languages Initiative. I believe that everyone should learn a second language… But make no mistake. What you’re studying is the propaganda around a new government program.”

She was right.

I was so excited about the thought of second language learning coming to all Alberta schools, I lost sight of the very essence of marketing: choice.

The idea of marketing as a business practice today dates back hundreds of years when farmers and other vendors would take their wares to the market in the town square and sell them. “To take items to market” is one of the definitions offered by the Oxford English Dictionary (Eaton, 2009, p. 189). From there vendors would compete for customers’ money in a variety of ways… displaying their products attractively, calling out to customers to buy their wares and so forth. The line between marketing and selling gets blurred at that point. But at the very core of it all is that people have a choice.

Yes, I want this product. No, I prefer that product.

We don’t like the word “propaganda” in the Western world. It has echoes of the Nazi regime and its associated horrors, of foreign governments (and possibly our own) that pit us against one another as human beings as if we were animals, ultimately trying to convince us that “we” are good and “they” are bad; whoever “they” are (it changes depending on which government is issuing the propaganda). It is designed to convince us, not to invite us to question and explore.

Governments, school boards and other institutions mandate policies that require convincing people to “buy into” the idea. Propaganda isn’t always bad. Campaigns promoting the law that people have to buckle their seat belts are essentially propaganda. At the heart of it, people don’t really have much of a choice. There are punishments (fines and possible jail sentences) if people don’t comply. Seat belt laws are designed to protect us and they’re there for our own good. It’s not really open to debate. We may call it “propaganda” or we may call it by its newer, more culturally palatable name, “communications”, but the bottom line is, it’s not marketing.

In terms of education, there are mandatory aspects of education that we generally consider good. You may have read my recent rant against the abolition of mandatory second language learning in Calgary’s elementary public schools. Basically, my point was that our local school board was targeting second language programs in the wake of massive financial cutbacks. They weren’t making all subjects voluntary. Sciences, math and other subjects are still mandatory. Its just the second language programs that are being offered as a “choice”. Having some subjects as mandatory and some subjects as a choice in elementary school setting is not something we have typically done. School boards are charged with the responsibility of providing a solid foundation in important subjects to children that they can build on in later grades. At that age, educational experts are charged with the responsibility of educating them and making that choice on their behalf. It’s never really been open to debate.

Marketing, by its very nature (and if it is held true to form) involves research, exploration and questioning… What will people choose? Why will they choose it? What do they want? Why do they want it?

Marketing of education is a tricky thing… There’s a fine balance between what’s mandatory (or what should be) and what governments, school boards and institutions of higher learning decide to give people a choice about. Olga, the Russian professor who cautioned me about confusing “propaganda” with “marketing” was right.

As it turned out, in 2006 there was a change of Ministers and the Alberta Languages Initiative was canned. The Tool Kit was all but shelved and although a few school boards kept the mandate of second language learning, many did not. Learning a second language in Alberta continues to remain optional in many areas. People debated whether language learning should be optional or not… This debate has always fascinated me.

Nevertheless, the implosion of the mandatory second languages initiative meant the end of my proposed research project. Instead I went back to the original idea of studying marketing of language programs and conducted a case study looking at how English as a Second Language (ESL) programs at the University of Calgary were marketed. I looked at programs that were truly marketed… students had a choice between programs and schools. They could attend any program they chose, anywhere in the world. Marketing of ESL programs is a global business.

At that point, I became more convinced than ever that marketing, when it’s done right and held true to its purest form, is a good thing. Marketing involves choice, lots and lots of research and a long and arduous process of thinking things through. It’s that last bit about thinking things through that some organizations forget to do… Once you take the thinking out of the equation, you’re not marketing any more.

The alternative to inviting people to think, to question and to make decisions on their own is to make things mandatory and bombard them with propaganda convincing them to comply.

Education isn’t really been clear about which way it wants to go.

_____________________

Share this post: Hate the idea of marketing education? There’s an alternative… http://wp.me/pNAh3-EC

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


My Calgary Includes Both Official Languages in Schools

April 27, 2011

School girl on stairsI was astounded when I saw the headline tweet from the Calgary Herald: “French classes no longer mandatory in Calgary schools“. I read the article and astonishment turned to dismay.

It used to be that in Calgary, children in grades four to six had to learn French, Canada’s other official language. It seems that the Calgary Board of Education has now made it the choice of each individual school whether or not they choose to teach French to their students. The school may make its decision based on demand and interest. This decision comes just days after another announcement that the school board will cut hundreds of teaching jobs this year.

Is this a coincidence? I hardly think so.

While there is ample research that demonstrates the benefits of language learning on overall cognitive development, including math and problem solving skills, our local public school board has effectively said “if there’s no demand, there’s no reason to have these classes.” Just because I personally had no desire to take math in school, that didn’t make it optional.

Canada is a bilingual country. While many of us may never achieve full bilingual fluency, leaving cultural and linguistic exposure up to “school choice” and “student choice” won’t help us build a twenty-first century global citizenry. Nor will it help those children later in life if they ever want a job with the federal government. A job with the feds requires functional fluency… and our students won’t even get exposure to our country’s other official language.

The idea of making language learning choice-driven is akin to making it market driven. I’m all for marketing of language programs and promoting second language learning. I literally did a PhD thesis on marketing of language programs. In fact, I’m not even a huge proponent of mandatory language learning.

If it was really about “choice” or “market demand”, the board could have hired a market research firm to determine what classes would be among students’ first choice… Would the sciences be among most students’ favorites? Or phys ed? The answer is… no one knows. Because no one in Calgary has actually done any research to find out what students want now… and what skills they will need for their jobs later in life.

But this isn’t really about market demand or choice is it? This is about finding ways to cut programs, cut costs, cut jobs. It’s about balancing a budget in the short term… and doing it slyly and indirectly by making mandatory classes optional. No one’s thinking about making sciences optional here… just our country’s other official language.

And it’s gob-smackingly short sighted.

We don’t ask children if they’d like the choice to study math or English or science when they’re in grades four to six. It’s part of our job as responsible adults, parents and community leaders to provide them opportunities for learning that will serve as the foundation for more learning into the high school years… and later as the foundation for skills that will get them jobs and provide them with critical thinking skills as they then become the guardians of the next generation. It’s our job to get them excited about learning, keep their minds open and their motivation levels soaring so they engage in learning in new and innovative ways.

In Calgary, we seem to have forgotten that. Mon dieu…. Père, pardonne-leur car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font.

______________________

Share this post: My Calgary Includes Both Official Languages in Schools http://wp.me/pNAh3-DJ

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


15 Marketing Tips for Educators

April 21, 2011

A printable file on Scribd:

View this document on Scribd

___________________

Share this post: 15 Marketing Tips for Educators http://wp.me/pNAh3-D4

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Petition Saves Second Language Programs at University of Saskatchewan

April 14, 2011

A recent news release from the Academia Group gave highlights from this article in the Star Phoenix by Sean Tremblath: “U of S language program cuts re-examined after petition“. The article starts with this punchy first line:

“A University of Saskatchewan language program is being overhauled after speculation of major cutbacks sparked a student petition with almost 2,000 names.”

The article goes on to talk about scheduled cuts to language programs at the University of Saskatchewan, and in particular to the German program. The result was a petition to save the program that received 2000 signatures – in 3 days. The article quotes David Parkinson, Vice Dean of Humanities and Fine Arts, a man I’ve met in my professional travels and have a great deal of respect for. He can see “the big picture” and can balance students’ needs with high level administrative pressures. I’ve admired his work for a long time… and don’t envy him one bit right now.

Language programs are being cut or having their funding reduced at alarming rates in North American schools and universities. Really, it’s shameful.

Here’s my response, in the form of a Letter to the Editor of the Star Phoenix:

I’m writing in response to Sean Tremblath’s article “U of S language program cuts re-examined after petition”, published on April 13, 2011.

Three cheers for the students at U Sask, who evidently know the value of learning languages in the 21st century and were willing to petition to keep language courses alive and well.

Cutbacks to second and modern language programs in North American universities is very troubling – particularly when all of Europe, as well as countries on other continents are encouraging – even mandating – the study of additional languages.

I’ve met David Parkinson, Vice Dean of Humanities and Fine Arts, who is quoted in the article and I have a great deal of respect for him. He’s a man who can see “the big picture” and can balance students’ needs with high level administrative pressures.

I’ve admired his work for a long time… and don’t envy him one bit right now. He now faces a situation that language program administrators across North America face: Advocating for the viability of modern language programs in a system that has changed its criteria for what it will support based on bottom-line numbers and a philosophy that says “bums in seats = program success”.

Across Canada and the US, we seem preoccupied with cutting programs that have lower enrolments or those for which there is less financial justification. As a specialist in the integration of business practices and philosophies into higher education management, and in particular, the marketing and management of language programs in Canadian universities, I am saddened when I see this. My own research in this field has shown me that the bottom line is not the only indicator of success in education. In fact, it’s probably one of the least powerful indicators of success of an educational program. Better questions to ask are: What skills are needed by 21st century professionals and leaders? How do we, as educational institutions, ensure that we are building the capacity of our students to set them up for success as global citizens in a digital age?

Language learning programs don’t need to be cut from educational institutions. They need to be updated. Get away from literature-based programs that revolve around faculty interests and focus on the students. It’s time to incorporate real-world language skills that students can carry with them into their future professional and personal lives. Focus on global citizenship, technology, mobile language learning (MALL), and other aspects of learning that actually make sense and are relevant for language learners of today.

If we updated the programs with a focus on making them truly learner centred, rather than focussing on the traditional literature-based programs that reflect the specializations of current or soon-to-retire faculty, then we might be better at engaging our students and increasing our enrolments.

Kudos to the students and all those who signed the petition at U Sask for having the vision to see the benefits of language learning in the 21st century. The challenge goes back to the institution to create relevant programs that keep learners engaged, provide them with real world skills and develop courses that fill the seats because they’re so darned interesting and relevant that students will beat down the doors to get into them.

I encourage you to read the original article and send your own Letter to the Editor to support the continuation and growth of second language programs at Canadian universities!

____________

Share this post: Petition Saves Second Language Programs at University of Saskatchewanhttp://wp.me/pNAh3-Ck

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.