The history of international schools is long, but very little is known about this largely unregulated sector. Yet over previous decades, the issue has attracted renewed interest as more schools define themselves as ‘international’, either in regard to setting or the adoption of international curricula choices. Many schools do this under the premise that offering internationally recognised certificates and syllabus choices will augment the opportunities of learners, but it is also important to consider the lack of regulation of elite systems of schooling and other motives that drive schools to adopt international curricula and accreditation with international education bodies. This paper is premised on the notion that international systems of schooling often have outcomes that can both support learners but also drive inequity and instil advantage for the already privileged members of the education system. Although there are many contributing factors to inequality and hierarchies of privilege within international systems and settings, this paper will focus upon two key element as a means by which to explore the field of English-medium, international schooling in Australia: the importance of economic and cultural capital within the education system, and the related concept of marketing and market orientation in international school settings. Market orientation is defined as an orientation towards the market, putting focus on the customers, and past studies have shown a positive link between market orientation and organizational performance. However, little research has examined market orientation as a means by which to understand inequity in schooling.

The relationship between power and the various forms of capital, as theorized by Bourdieu (1986), is a seminal area of discussion with regard to inequality within the education system. As Bourdieu (1986) notes, it is “impossible to account for the structure and functioning of the social world unless one reintroduces capital in all its forms and not solely in the one form recognized by economic theory”. Building upon the work of Marx (Dimitriadis & Kamberelis, 2006, p.70), who outlined the importance of economic capital for the individual and society, Bourdieu explored different forms of capital as a contributing factor to social stratification. Furthermore, his conceptualizations of symbolic and cultural capital (Elliot, 2010, p. 235), in relation to interrelated structures of power, class, hierarchy and privilege and educational achievement, retain relevance today, particularly in regards to the education system (Dimitriadis & Kamberelis, 2006, p.70). As Bourdieu (1986) argues, the differences in academic achievement between students from different social classes directly relates to their access to capital. Although educational achievement or failure is often attributed entirely to motivation and ability, the importance of economic and cultural investment in the student must not be underestimated (Elliot, 2010, p. 235). Subsequently, as Bourdieu (1986) concludes, scholastic achievement depends largely on the “cultural capital previously invested by the family” and that the “relationship between academic ability and academic investment show that they [students] are unaware that ability or talent is itself the product of an investment of time and cultural capital” (Becker, 1964, p. 63). Further, as Bourdieu (1986) explains, the investment of capital within the education system is a deciding factor in the ultimate achievement levels of students. Furthermore, in a world influenced by globalization, parents and students are now able to invest in the education sector across a number of differing spaces.

The central research questions of this study are:  

1) In what ways do the marketing processes of ‘international English-medium schools’ enact discourses of global education and support transnationalising spaces of education

2) To what extent are constructs of capital reflected and developed by and within school marketing, curricula and planning documents?

Apple, M., Ball, S. and Gandin, L. (Eds). (2010). The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Education. New York: Routledge Angus, L. (2012). ‘Teaching within and against the circle of privilege: Reforming teachers, reforming schools’. Journal of Education Policy 27(2), 231-251. Bourdieu, P. (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (New York, Greenwood), 241-258. Rizvi, F. (2009). ‘Global mobility and the challenges of educational research and policy’. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 108(2), 268-289 Tarc, P. (2009). Global dreams, enduring tensions: International Baccalaureate in a changing world. New York: Peter Lang Vertovec, S. (1999). ‘Conceiving and Researching Transnationalism’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 1-26 Waters, J. & Brooks, R. (2011). ‘International/Transnational Spaces of Education’. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(2), 155-160