7. Conclusion
The work presented here responds to the need to develop research on the implications of extending school marketing (Oplatka & Hemsley-Brown, 2012). It deals with some of its specific contextual factors (democratization of the educational systems of transition, relation to the socio-historical past, post-totalitarian liberalization) and the consequences generated. Although the growth of marketing and the adoption of a market-oriented approach can be presented as benefits for the development of education (Oplatka & Hemsley-Brown, 2012) with no negative effects for the school culture (see for example the poor perception of promotional films about the school by the public, James & Phillips, 1995), we show on the contrary limits, convergent in both countries.
School marketing has an impact in four educational areas: pathways for pupils with special educational needs, teaching practices, school management and school segmentation. It has emerged that the definition of the special needs of pupils is largely oriented by the neo-liberal logics of education (Torres, 2009). The new democracies have not so far succeeded in placing the singular pupil (considered as a future citizen) at the center of the education system, but have moved from a standardized (and therefore unequal) totalitarian school system to an inegalitarian system, which is openly segregated, liberal, elitist under the guise of pedagogical differentiation. “Reforms succeed in causing schools to behave like private entities, this has the ironic effect of limiting the overall choices available to families, both in terms of institutional type and (…) program options. “(Lubienski, 2006, p. 340). In spite of the changes (democratization of education), school segmentation remains a constant, be it hidden or proven. Teachers and head teachers who play a central role do not seem to be able to place the fight against school inequalities at the top of their agenda. Insofar as they are themselves subject to the dilemmas of competition and the law of the educational market, they are reduced to a certain ambivalence (Ball, 2004).
Our surveys emphasize the points of convergence, however the distinctive characteristics of education, linked to the pre-communist socio-historical and economic context, such as parental emigration and deinstitutionalization in Bulgaria or the segregation of the Czech Roma pupils in specialized schools, should be explored further.
