This is the authors version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source:

Doherty, Catherine A. (2013) Making a point of difference : the glocalised

ecology of the International Baccalaureate Diploma in Australian schools.
Globalisation, Societies and Education.
This file was downloaded from: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/57531/

c Copyright 2013 Taylor and Francis

This is a preprint of an article submitted for consideration in the Globc 2013 [copyright Taylor & Franalisation, Societies and Education
cis]; Globalisation, Societies and Education is available online at:
www.tandfonline.com

Notice: Changes introduced as a result of publishing processes such as

copy-editing and formatting may not be reflected in this document. For a
definitive version of this work, please refer to the published source:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2012.761809

Makingapointofdifference:theglocalisedecologyoftheInternational
BaccalaureateDiplomainAustralianschools.

CatherineDoherty
CentreforLearningInnovation
FacultyofEducation
QueenslandUniversityofTechnology
VictoriaParkRoad
KELVINGROVE4059
BRISBANEAUSTRALIA
Email:c.doherty@qut.edu.au

Abstract
TheInternationalBaccalaureateDiplomaisanindependent,globallyavailable
curriculumcurrentlyenjoyingrapiduptakeingovernmentsystemsasanalternative
curriculum.Thispaperexploresthelogicofitsconsumptioninthreecasestudy
schoolsacrossdifferentstatesofAustralia,andtherelationalpointsofdifferenceit
createsineachlocalcontextanditscurricularmarket.Theanalysisusesatypology
ofgoodstodescribethenatureanddynamicsoftheIBDsglocalisedecologyofin
eachsite.TheconclusionarguesthesuccessoftheIBDasacurricularalternative
riskserodingitsappealasapositionalgood.

Keywords
Curricularmarket
Glocalisation
InternationalBaccalaureate
Positionalgoods
Australia

Bionote
CatherineDohertyisaSeniorLecturerandResearchFellowintheFacultyof
Education,QueenslandUniversityofTechnology,inBrisbane,Australia.Sheworksin
sociologyofeducationwithparticularinterestsincurriculum,mobility,
marketisation,familyandidentityissues.

Acknowledgment:
ThisstudywasfundedbytheAustralianResearchCouncil

Makingapointofdifference:theglocalisedecologyoftheInternational
BaccalaureateDiplomainAustralianschools.

The'quality'ofschooling,ineffect,existsintwodimensions.Thereisanabsolute
dimension,inwhichqualityisaddedbyreceptivestudents,goodteachers,good
facilities,andsoon;butthereisalsoarelativedimension,inwhichqualityconsistsof
thedifferentialovertheeducationallevelattainedbyothers.(Hirsch,1976,p.6)

Introduction
TheInternationalBaccalaureatesDiploma(IBD)isaseniorsecondarycurriculum
administeredandexaminedbyaninternationalnonprofitorganisation,theInternational
BaccauleateOrganisation.TheIBDisaprototypicalglobaleducationalproduct.Sinceitsfirst
trialexaminationsin1968,ithasbecomethecurriculumofchoiceinmanyinternational
schools.Morerecentlyhowever,theIBDhasflourishedunderneoliberalchoicepoliciesas
analternativetolocalcurriculumingovernmentsystems,mostnotablyintheUSwhere684
(88%)ofthe777schoolsofferingtheIBDarepublicschools,theUK(57%ofthe188
schools),Canada(83%ofthe147schools)andAustralia(17%ofthe63schools)
(www.ibo.org,accessed13December2012).

Thephrasepointofdifferenceinthetitlecomesfrommarketingdiscoursewhereitrefers
totheuniquefeaturesofaproductorbrandthatdistinguishitfromitscompetitors.The
conceptrequiresrelational,comparativeanalysisreferencingcompetitorsinaspecific
market.Aproductspointofdifferenceinonelocality/marketmaybedifferenttoitspoint

ofdifferenceelsewhere,ascapturedinthetitlesideaofecology.InAustralia,sixstates
andtwoterritorieshaveadministeredtheirowncurriculumandeducationalsystems,hence
howtheIBDasaglobalproductisultimatelyembeddedintheselocalmarketsand
consumedasanalternativebecomesafunctionofitspointofdifferencetoeachstates
particularcurriculumi.

ThispaperreportsoncasestudiesofhowthreeschoolsindifferentAustralianstatesoffered
theIBDasanalternativecurriculum.Thefieldworkaskedfourkeyquestions:whochooses
theIBDwhy;whatdistinguishestheIBDexperiencefromthelocalcurriculumexperience;
howdoteachers,managersandstudentscompareandcontrastthecurricularalternatives;
andwhateffectshastheIBDofferinghadmorebroadlyineachschoolcommunity.This
paperwillsummarisetheecologyoftheIBDineachsite,thatis,howlocalinterpretations,
motivesandmeaningsattachedtothisglobaleducationalproduct,andhowitsenactment
necessarilyinteractedwithcontextualfeaturesoftheseschools,theircommunities,andthe
localcurriculum.ThepaperthusoffersasituatedandrelationalanalysisoftheIBDslocal
consumption,ratherthanastudyofitsinternaldesignorinherentproperties.

Thepaperfirstlyreviewsthelimitedresearchliteraturegivingcontextualisedaccountsof
theIBDspresencein,andeffecton,localsystems.Thenextsectionbuildsatheoretical
framedrawingontheconceptofglocalisation(Robertson,1994)andeconomictheory
aroundmarketdynamicsfordifferenttypesofgoods,withaneyetounderstandinghowthe
IBDoperatesinthequasimarket(Whitty&Power,2002)oflocaleducationalsystems.The
methodologicaldesignandanalyticalschemaoftheempiricalstudyaredescribed,thenthe
ecologyoftheIBDineachcasestudysiteisdescribedthroughtheanalyticalvocabulary.The
4

conclusionreflectsonhowcurricularmarkets,likeanymarkets,operateonalogicofpoints
ofdifferencebetweencompetingbrandsandproducts,andhowthelocalreputational
stratificationservestodifferentiateboththestudentandtheschoolintheirlocalmarkets.

Literaturereview
Tarcs(2009)historicalreviewoftheIBDidentifiesthreeongoingtensionsintheIBOs
missionaround:thecitizenshipsitprojects;elementsofitscurriculardesign;and
operationaltensionsbetweenitsintentionsanditslocalimplementation.Itisthislast
tension,thecontradictionsatworkbetweenthewidernormativeaimsinthedreamsofIB
(internationalism,makingamoremodern,peacefulworld)andhowIBactuallyoperatesin
theworld(p.23)whichthispaperexploresfurther.Tarcdescribesthecurrentstageinthe
IBOshistoryasoneofbrandingandimpact,markedbycorporateexpansion,curricular
influenceandboomingenrolments.HeidentifiesablindspotintheIBOsself
representationregardingitsrelationalimpactonlocalsettings:
nowherehasIBwrittenaboutthe'exiting'process:theremaybesignificant
negativeeffectsfeltbytheschoolsfromwhichtheacademicallyablestudentsexit
tochoosetheIB....TheIBOhasbeencontent,ifnotactivelyexploiting,the
recognitionofits'highstandards'despiteanyconsequencesforthewiderterrainof
publicschooling.(pp.105106)
Accordingly,thisliteraturereviewconsidershowotherresearchershavemadesenseofthe
IBDasarelationalproduct,thatis,howitinteractswithotherconsiderationsinlocal
settings.

Phillips(2002)arguesthatschoolsofferingtheIBDaredemanddrivenoutliers(p.176)in
whichinnovationandtheproductionofmobile,globalworkerscanproceedwithoutbeing
constrainedbynationalcurriculardemands.Phillipspredictsthisdemandwillgrowand
arguesthattheir'socialcapitalturnsouttobebothaprivateandapublicgood,asthe
studentscontributebothtotheirownandtogeneraleconomicwelfare'(p.174).Culrossand
Tarver(2007)offerasimilarlycelebratoryaccountfromastudyinaUSlabschoolofhow
theIBDisunderutilizedasacurriculumforthegiftedandtalented.However,theyalso
reporttherelationaleffectsofanexcessiveworkloadforstudentsandteachers,andthat
thebiggestidentifiedareaofconcernistheinteractionbetweenIBandnonIBstudents
(p.57).Cambridge(2002)reportsthattheIBObrandhasstretchedtoserveother
markets,particularlythetransientprofessionalsorglobalnomadsandtheindigenous
populationsinsomecountrieswhoseekanalternativetotheirownnationaleducation
systems(p.235).Cambridgeinterpretsperceptionsofstratificationbetweenthelocaland
theimportededucationalproductasaneffectofbrandpositioning(p.232),morerelianton
symbolicdifferenceandemotionalconnotationsthanutility.
Bagnalls(2005)commentaryonthespreadoftheIBDinAustraliaandNewZealanddespite
thepresenceoflocalcurriculaconstruestheIBDasmorethanacurriculum(p.115),and
moreaboutthepursuitofindividualadvantage:TheacademiccapitalenjoyedbyIB
Diplomaholdersisthemorepotentforthisscarcityvalue(p.114).Dohertys(2009)studyof
newspapercoverageoftheIBDinAustraliaarguedthatthegoodnewsstoriesoftheIBD
brand,itsgraduatesandprogramsevokeanimplicitcritiqueanddevaluingoflocalstate
curriculum,andthatsuchdiscursiveeffectscontributedtotheCommonwealth
governmentsinterventioninstatecurriculum.Inlaterwork,DohertyandShield(2012)

reporthowtheIBDsinternalandrelationaldemandsimpactonallteachersworkinschools
offeringboththeIBDandthelocalcurriculum.

VidovichandYap(2008)reportonSingaporescautiousstepstowardsmoreneoliberal
policyintheeducationsector,andthecarefullyrestrictedofferingoftheIBDinprivately
fundedschoolsasanexperimentinwideningchoiceofschoolandcurriculumtoboth
attractinternationalenrolmentsandinternationalisethecurriculumforlocalstudents.Their
interviewswithteachersrevealeddifficultyinattractinghighachievinglocalstudents,given
themeritocraticselectionoperatingingovernmentschools.

Halicioglu(2008)describeshowtheIBDisenactedthroughtheparticularitiesofTurkey
schools,wherethereisgrowinginterestintheIBDwithinthenationalschoolsystem,
despitetherelativelyinflexiblenationalgovernanceofschoolingandtertiaryentranceand
markeddifferencesbetweenpedagogicaltraditionsinTurkishschoolsandtheIBD.Her
focuswasonhowlocalconditionsimpingedonthequalityoftheIBD,ratherthanitsimpact
onthelocalcurriculum.Herbilingualsurveyof154teachersin12schoolsofferingboth
curriculadocumentedsomediversityinopinionsastowhethertheembeddedIBDhad
impactedonthewiderschool.Turkishteacherswerereportedtohavebenefitedlittlefrom
IBOprofessionaldevelopmentopportunitiesgiventhecostinvolved.

Poonoosamy(2010)describestheIBDsuptakeinMauritius,wherethereisnolocal
curriculumassuch,ratherthechoicebetweenthecolonialinheritanceofFrenchorBritish
systems.PoonoosamysuggeststhatwiththeneocolonialpracticeofprivilegingWestern
staffinsuchschools,theIBDspotentialtoincludelocalknowledgesisnotrealised.Ina
7

similarpostcolonialframe,Drake(2004)warnsofculturaldissonancesastheIBDfinds
itselfindifferent,nonEurocentricsettings.
IntheUK,Bunnell(2008)arguesthattheIBDhasachievedcriticalmassinthewakeof
publicdebatesurroundingthelocalAlevelcurriculum,replacingthelocalcurriculumin
somesites.BunnellpredictstheIBDwillbecomeadivisiveandcompetitivepresence
(p.152)andexertinfluencebeyonditsowncurriculum.IntheUS,Bunnell(2009)describes
howtheIBDanditsinternationalistvisionattractedvociferouscritiquefromultra
conservativegroupswhoresentthepresenceofthiscurriculuminpublicschools.

Resnicks(2012)studyof26IBsitesinfivenations(Israel,UK,Argentina,FranceandChile)
usesaglobalcomparative,multiscalardesigntoexplorehowtheIBbrand,organisation,
curriculum,andpracticesinteractwithlocalsystems,inwaysthatarenotbenign.She
illustratesthetransformativeprocessesofincursion,adaptation,percolationand
metamorphosis(p.252)toshowhowthefrontierzone(quotingSassen,p.251),produced
whenaglobalenterpriseisembeddedinlocalinfrastructure,transformsboththeIB
programandthenationalsystemsthathostit.UsingtheIBasacasestudy,shearguesthat
thegrowingtasteforinternationaleducationmorebroadlyisdenationalisinganderoding
nationalsystems.

Thoughonlyaminorityofthesepapersreportsystematicempiricalresearch,thisemerging
literaturedocumentingtheIBDsspreadsuggeststhatitdoesnotsitinlocaleducational
marketsasabenign,neutraladdition,butratherwillinsertandassertitselfwithina
hierarchyofofferings,forbetterandforworse.Eachsitetellsadifferentstoryintermsof

whattheIBDoffersasitslocalpointofdifference.Thesestudiesalsohighlighttherolethe
IBDhasplayedinprogressingneoliberalpolicyinmultiplesettings,itspresenceoften
becomingiconicanddisproportionatelyinfluential.Thenextsectiondevelopsaconceptual
frameusingbotheconomicandsociologicalconceptswithwhichtofurtherunpackthe
dynamicsofsuchlocalcurricularmarkets.

Theoreticalframe
Glocalisationemergedasaconceptearlyinthe1990sflurryofglobalisationtheoryasa
critiqueofpredictionsofinevitableculturalhomogenisation,andasawaytounderstand
howglobalandlocaldimensionsnecessarilyarticulate,embeddingandanimatingglobal
universalisminlocalparticularity.Ratherthanpittingglobalandlocalasbinary
opposites,Robertson(1992)describedthesescalesasnecessarilyentangled,
interpenetratingandmutuallyconstitutive,inanincreasinglyrelativisedandinterconnected
world.Theprocessofglocalisationhelpsunpackthedynamicsoftheproductionand
reproductionofdifference,and,inthebroadestsense,locality'(Robertson,1994,p.37).The
enactmentoftheIBDoffersagoodexampleofagloballyavailableproductthatcanonlybe
animatedthroughtheparticularitiesoflocalschoolsystems.Inturn,theselocalitiesand
schoolsaretransformedanddistinguishedbyparticipatingintheglobalIBOnetwork.
DifferenceisproducedbothbetweenIBDofferingsgivenitscustomisationindifferent
localities,andinthedistinctionaffordedtheIBDschoolorstudentsincomparisontoothers
bydintofbeingpartoftheglobalIBOcommunity.

Thenationanditsinstitutionsshouldnotbeunderstoodasvictimsbutratherascomplicitin
allowingglobalagenciesandproductsintolocalfields,andenablingtheirlocalinstantiations
9

(Sassen,2006).Inthissense,stateandCommonwealthgovernmentshaveactively
encouragedmarketisedcompetitioninAustraliaseducationsectors(Campbell,Proctor,&
Sherington,2009).Moreparticularly,someAustralianstateshaveactivelyadjustedlocal
legislationandprotocolstoallowtheIBoperateinpublicschools(Doherty,2009),thushave
beeninstrumentalindenationalising(Sassen,2006,p.7)whatwaspreviouslyunderstate
control.Educationalresearchhastrackedtheglobalmarchofsuchneoliberalpolicy,and
developedrelevanttheoreticalandempiricaltreatmentsofeducationalmarketsandtheir
effects.
Labaree(1997,p.53)describescompetingethicsbehindeducationalreformandthe
ascendancyofthesocialmobilityvaluesetpromotedbyeducationalelitesasafactor
generatingdifferentiatededucationalproducts:

studentswhowanttogetaheadthroughschooling(andtheirparents,whowantto
createpossibilityofsuccessforthem)havesoughttotransformcommonschooling
intouncommonschooling.Theyhaveactivelypursuededucationaladvantageand
spurrededucatorstomeetthisdemandbydevelopingsuchopportunities(p.66).

Hearguesthatsuchstratificationofeducationalofferings,bothbetweenandwithin
educationalinstitutionsproducestheeffectandrewardsofreputationaldifference(p.52).
WhittyandPower(2002,p.99)reflectontheironicisomorphismbetweeneducational
choicesintheUK,producingmoresimilarpedagogyandcurriculum,butinamore
verticallydifferentiatedandsegregatedmarket:farfromintroducinghorizontalformsof
differentiation,alltheevidencethusfarsuggeststhatmarketisationofeducationleadstoan

10

increaseinverticaldifferentiationexaggeratinglinearhierarchiesthroughtraditional
ratherthanalternativecriteria.Thusthepointofdifferencecreatedcanbemoreamatter
ofsymbolicstatus,thansubstance.

Inearlyworkonmarketsineducation,Marginson(1997)describedhowthecommongood
ofpubliceducationwasbeingreconfiguredasprivatepositionalgoods,whichprovide
studentswithrelativeadvantageinthecompetitionforjobs,income,socialstandingand
prestige(pp.3839).Adnett&Davies(2002)developthislineofenquirythrough
considerationofhowparentalchoicesentailpositiveornegativeexternalities,thatis,
effectsonothers,giventhezerosumgameofwinnersandlosersproducedbytherelative
scarcityofpositionalgoods.Theseinsightsfromeconomictheorywarrantfurther
developmentintermsofdifferenttypesofgoodsandtheirsupply/demanddynamics.
Educationalresearchishoweverconsciousofhoweducationalsystemscanbecharacterised
asmarketsinsomeways,butnotinothers,thusalerttothelimitstoapplyingeconomic
modelsandmetaphorstoeducationalmatters.Thetermquasimarket(e.g.,Marginson,
1997;Whitty&Power,2002)servestorefertothosecharacteristicsofeducationalchoices
thatreflectmarketdynamicsandbehaviours,whileremainingmindfulofeducationsnon
marketqualities,suchasgovernmentsubsidy,thesafetynetofuniversalpublicprovision,
andtheroleofstudentcapacity/effortineducationaloutcomes.Moresubtly,where
economicsprivilegesrationalselfinterestedchoicebyindividuals,educationisamorally
infusedfieldrivenwithcompetingconsiderationsofequityandcommunalbenefit(Levin&
Belfield,2003).Withthesecaveatsinmind,thenextsectionassemblesatypologyof
goods/serviceswithwhichtodescribemarketisedaspectsoftheIBDsecology.

11

Attheirmostbasic,marketsareorganizingdevicesthatpermitindividualstopursueself
interestinaprocessofexchange(Hoag&Hoan,2002).Marketshelpestablishbothsupply
quantitiesandpricingofgoods/servicesinresponsetodemandfrombuyers.Inanother
sense,marketsareasocialscriptformanaginganddistributingdifferenceinproductionand
consumption.Consumerswillconsiderpricenotonlyindollartermsbutalsointermsof
whethertheyarepreparedtotradeonegoodforanotherandthroughthesatisfaction
foregoneinanychoice,thatis,theopportunitycost.Priceisalsodeterminedbythe
elasticityofdemandforgoodsandservices,thatis,whengoodsorserviceswithina
particularclassareconsideredtobeeasilysubstitutedforoneanother(Harvey,1988).In
simpleterms,agoodorservicewillfallinpricewhencheaperalternativesbecomeavailable.
Thisneednotmeanthatthedemandforoptionalorluxurygoodsiselasticandthedemand
forthenecessitiesoflifeisinelastic.Harvey(1988)citestheexampleofluxuryvehicles:
demandcouldstillbeinelasticforacertainsocioeconomicsubsetifthoseconsumerswill
notconsideralternatives,thatis,thereisnosubstituteonthemarketthatcouldoffer
similarprestigevalue.Consumersfromdifferentsocialbackgroundsmayholddifferent
valuesorperspectivesandinturnhavedifferentexpectationswithregardtogoodsand
services.Anotherdeterminantofconsumerdemandisscarcity.Ashortageofparticular
goodsorservices,leadstoincreasedcompetition,whichinturncanleadtoincreasedprices
orprestige.

Amarketinganalysiswouldsuggestthatpriceisnotthesole,noreventhemajorconcern,
whenchoosingaparticularproduct/service.Thedeterminantsofdemandcanbequite
broad:achangeintasteforagood,achangeinincome,anexpectationofachangeinthe
priceofagood,andachangeinthepriceofarelatedgood(Hoag&Hoan,2002,p.53).This
12

shiftsthefocusfromnotjustunderstandingthesupply/demanddynamicforasingular
good,butratherfordifferenttypesofgoodsthatcanbehavedifferentlyinmarkets.Taking
goodstoincludebothtangibleitemsandservices,thefollowingtypeshavebeendefined
amongstothersinmarketingparlance:

Normalgoodsarethoseforwhichthereisadirectrelationshipbetweenchangesin
consumerincomeandthedemandcurve.(Layton,Robinson&Tucker,2002)

Substitutegoodsarethosethatcompetewithanotherwithadirectrelationship
betweenapricechangeforoneandthedemandforitscompetitor.(Laytonetal.,
2002)

Aninferiorgoodisanygoodorserviceforwhichthereisaninverserelationship
betweenchangesinincomeandthedemandcurve(Laytonetal.,2002).Lessisspent
oninferiorgoodswhenincomeincreasesbecausepeoplepreferother
goods/servicesiftheycanaffordthem.Thiscategoryinvokesitscounterpartthe
superiorgood.

Meritgoodsarethoseprovidedbygovernments,suchaseducationandhealthcare,
onthebasisthatdespitebeingneededbyconsumers,theywouldbeinadequately
utilisedifleftentirelytomarketforces(Harvey,1998).

Aluxurygoodisonethatisnicetohavebutnotconsideredanecessity.Astheprice
ofaluxurygoodincreases,demandfallsawayandasthepricefalls,demand
increases(Hoag&Hoan,2002).

Positionalgoodsarethosewhichwillhelpadvancetheconsumerinthefuture,in
termsofhighersocialstatus,fame,orprestige(Hirsch,1976).Themeasureofutility
orsatisfactiongainedfrompositionalgoodsdependsonhowoneisplacedin
13

relationtoothers.Thusthedesirabilityofpositionalgoodsreflectstheirabsolute
scarcity(AdnettandDavis,p.193).Hirsch(1976,p.30)outlinestheriskofcrowding
orcongestionasdemandforpositionalgoodsgrows,whichcandilutethe
positionalstatusofthegood.Toretaintheconditionofsocialscarcity,congestion
canberelievedthroughtheprocessesofauction(raisingthecosttoensure
exclusivityforthehighestbidders),andscreening(intensifyingcompetition,or
lengtheningtheobstaclecourseforaccesstosuchgoods).

Howmightsuchatypologyofgoodsilluminateeducationalmarkets?Hirsch(1976)
considerededucationtobeapositionalgoodsinceitsvaluedependsonboththeabsolute
andrelativelevelsconsumedforitsutilityinthefutureasmuchasinthepresent,andits
consumerstobeseekingstatusbasedonexclusivityorsocialscarcity(p.20).Such
individualisedpositionaloutcomesareperhapsmostpertinenttouppersecondaryand
highereducation.Ontheotherhandthepublicprovisionofuniversaleducationatnoor
minimalcostisthearchetypalmeritgood.Itssupplyisguaranteedbythegovernment,
ratherthanlefttoindividualscapacitytopay,giventheconsiderablepublicinterestand
positiveexternalitiesinhavinganeducatedpopulation.Thuseducationofchildrenislargely
protectedfrombeingtreatedasadiscretionarynormalgood,thoughpostcompulsory
educationmayfitthisbill,beingmorereliantonfamiliescapacitytosupportstudents.In
Australia,lowcostreligiousschoolsmightbeconsideredsubstitutegoodsforpublic
education,accordingnoparticularpositionaladvantage.Incontrast,privateschoolingin
highfeeindependentorreligiousschoolsmaybeconsideredaluxuryitemsomething
parentsaspireto,incomeallowing.Pusey(2003)suggeststhattheneoliberalcampaignto
denigratepublicservicessuchaseducationandhealthinAustraliahasreducedpublic

14

expectations,relegatingpubliceducationperhapstothestatusofaninferiorgood,and
privateeducationtoanormalratherthanluxurygood.

OfferingtheIBDasanalternativecurriculumcreatesanexternalpointofdifferencewith
otherschools,andaninternalpointofdifferencewithintheinstitution,withdirect
competitionforrespectivesharesofenrolmentsatbothlevels.Fromoneangle,theIBD
mightbeseenasasubstitutegoodstudentsneedtochooseaseniorcurriculum,theIBD
servesaswellasthelocal.ItdoeshoweverincurahigherpricetocoverIBOregistration
andexaminationfees(currentlybetweenA$3000andA$5000)whichcanrenderitanormal
goodforsomefamilies,itsconsumptiondependentontheircapacitytopay.Thefactthat
theIBDisnowofferedinmoregovernmentschools,notjusthighfeeindependentschools,
hassomewhatreducedifnoterasedthiseffect.

TherearehoweverotherqualitiesprojectedbytheIBDbrand,thatconstructitmoreasa
positionalgoodincurricularmarkets,conferringdistinctionandrelativeadvantageonits
consumer.Itsreputationforacademicrigourandchallengesuggestslimitedelasticity
betweentheIBDandlocalcurriculumthatis,theIBDwillnotsuitallcomers.This
reputationwillattracttheacademicallyable,anddeterothers,thuslimitingbothdemand
andsupply,producingtheconditionofsocialscarcitythatunderpinsthedesirabilityof
positionalgoods.However,asmoreschoolsoffertheIBDtomorestudents,thisrelative
scarcityiscompromised,andthepositionalvalueoftheIBDmaydiminishaswell:

itisacaseofeveryoneinthecrowdstandingontiptoeandnoonegettingabetter
view.Yetatthestartoftheprocesssomeindividualsgainabetterviewbystanding

15

ontiptoe,andothersareforcedtofollowiftheyaretokeeptheirposition.Ifalldo
follow,everyoneexpendsmoreresourcesandendsupwiththesameposition.
(Hirsch,1976,p.49)

Thisargumenthasselectivelyhighlightedtheexchangevalue(Marginson,1997,p.13)of
theIBD,thatis,therelativeadvantagestudentsandschoolsgainsymbolicallyfromchoosing
theIBDbrandoverthelocalcurriculumbrand,anddoesnotdisputetheusevalueofthe
IBD,andtheundeniablefactthatstudentsderiveotherbenefitsandutilityfromwhatthey
learninthisandothercurricula.WhetherornottheIBOdeliberatelycourtssuchmarket
positioning,itsprogramhasthrivedinmarketconditionsanditsrelationaleffectswarrant
scrutiny.

Intheory,theIBDisenteringalocallysaturatedmarketinAustraliansettingsthereis
alreadyseniorcurriculaoperatingineachstate,publiclysupported,universallyavailable,
relativelycheapandcostefficient.TheIBDasanewcomerhastocreateitsowndemand,
eitherthroughcritiqueofthelocalcurriculum(relegatingittoanotionallyinferiorproduct),
orbyinvokingapointofdifferencethatstakesitsclaimasasubstitute,positionalorluxury
good.ForschoolsthelargerthedemandfortheIBD,themorecostefficientitssupplywould
be,intermsofclasssize,andsustainingsubjectchoice.Earlyofferingscouldbeariskyand
inefficientventureforschools.TheschoolssubsidyofsmallIBDofferingsasanalternative
incursopportunitycoststhatimpingeonthebroaderschoolcommunity,andnegative
externalitiesforstudentsintheothercurriculum(seeDoherty&Shield,2012).Theremay
equallybepositiveexternalitiesfortheschoolthatcompensate,suchasprofessional
development,enhancementoftheschoolreputation,increasedenrolmentsandenrichment
16

ofcurriculum/pedagogyforall.ForIBDstudentshowever,smallerofferingscouldadd
valueforthoseenrolledintermsofmoreexclusiveprovisionandsocialscarcity.AstheIBD
becomesmoreestablishedandbettersubscribed,thispositionaladvantagewillbe
mitigated.ThustherelationshipbetweensupplyanddemandfortheIBDasapositional
goodneedstobesensitivetointernalandexternalcrowding(Hirsch,1976).Inthenext
section,thistheoreticalmodellingistestedthroughcasestudiesofthreeschoolsoffering
boththeIBDandthelocalcurriculumasalternatives.
Methodology
Theempiricalstudydrawsonobservationalandinterviewdatacollectedinqualitativecase
studiesofthreeAustralianschoolsofferingboththeIBDandthelocalgovernment
curriculum.Thesiteswerepurposefullyselectedtosamplediversesettingsincluding:public
andprivateschools;differentstatesthusdifferentlocalcurricula;anddifferenthistoriesof
offeringtheIBD.Eachcaseservesasafunctioningspecific(Stake,1998,p.87),andan
exampleofthephenomenonofaninternalglocalisedcurricularmarket.Thepresentationof
threesuchcasesenablestheanalysistoseekoutbothwhatiscommonandwhatis
particularaboutthecase(p.90)inthewaysupplyanddemandoftheIBDalternativeplays
out.Theresearcherspenttwoseparateweeksineachsiteacross2009,attendingclasses,
staffmeetingsandparentevenings,conductingsemistructuredinterviewswithstudents,
teachersandmanagers,andcollectingrelevantschooldocuments.Theverbatimdata
presentedbelowistakenfrominterviewswitheithertheIBCoordinatororasenior
managerateachschooltosupportandinstantiatethemoregeneraldescriptiondeveloped
fromcasestudyobservations.

17

Theanalysisfirstreportshowschoolmanagersexplainedthelocalstrategybehindtheir
schoolsalternativecurricula,thendescribesthedynamicsbetweensupplyanddemandfor
theIBDovertimeineachsetting.Toexplicatehowthedatawerecodedthroughthe
conceptualframe,Table1mapstheresearchquestionsinformingthefieldworktothe
theoreticalconceptsdevelopedaboveandTable2developshypotheticalexamplesandthen
examplesfromcasestudydataofdifferenttypesofgoods.

Table1.Conceptualisingtheresearchquestions

Researchquestions

Theoreticalcoding

WhochoosestheIBDwhy?

Supplyanddemand,Congestion,screening,auction

WhatdistinguishestheIBDexperiencefromthe

Pointofdifference.

localcurriculumexperience?

Howdoteachers,managersandstudentscompare

Stratificationofgoods

andcontrastthecurricularalternatives?

Typeofgoods

WhateffectshastheIBDofferinghadmorebroadly

Positiveandnegativeexternalities

ineachschoolcommunity?

18

Table2.Operationalisingtypesofgoodsincurricularmarkets

Type

Definedas

Hypothetical

Dataexample

Merit

Public

Defaultcurriculum,publicschooling

SchoolAsenrolments

investment/guarantee

forcompulsoryyears.Schooldoesnt allocatedbygovernment

Normal

Privateinvestmentfor

contemplateofferinganalternative

department,irrespectiveof

curriculum.

desiretoenrolinIBD

Privateschooling, tutoring,

SchoolChastoattractmore

individual,dependingon

IBDenrolmentsorcutsubject

capacitytopay

choicesforefficiencyin
supply.

Inferior

Moveupifpossible

Residualisedschools

Studentsdecidetodrop
downtolocalcurriculum

Substitute

Flexiblealternatives

Luxury

Nonessential

Positional

Advantageousinfuture

EitherIBorlocalprogramsserve

SchoolCsrhetoricofparallel

needs

notstratifiedchoice

schoolsdecidingnottoofferIBD

SchoolCsconsideringcutsto

givencostsinvolved

IBDsubjectchoice

IBDsadvanceplacement;academic

SchoolBsSelective

curriculum

streamingintoIBDoffering
onacademicability

Elasticity

Social
Scarcity

Capacitytoexchange

Selective,limitedplaces

Mutualrecognitionbetween

SchoolAsongoingoptionto

universities.

changeenrolments

Highereducationquotas onpopular

SchoolAsconcernre

courses.

neighbouringschooloffering
IBDaswell.

19

CasestudySchoolA
SchoolAisagovernmentschoolwitharelativelylonghistoryofferingtheIBD,givena
significantenrolmentofchildrenoftransnationalbusinessandgovernmentelites.This
group,whoarekeentopromotetheirchildschancesofhighstatusuniversityentrancein
theircountryoforigin,reflectsthehistoricalnichemarketfortheIBD.Forthem,theIBD
andinternationalschoolingservedasasubstitutegoodfortheirhomecountrycurriculum.
However,implementingtheIBDimmediatelyservedtodifferentiatetheschoolandturned
fallinglocalenrolmentsaround:(whenweopeneduptheIB,andwiththatthenumbers
startedtotakeoffItattracteddifferenttypeofkids).DemandfortheIBDhassince
grown1)amongdomesticstudents,and2)frominternationalstudentsnotresidingwith
theirfamiliesthatis,studentsdrawntothisIBDofferingwithinaninternationalcurricular
market.

Theschoolhasalsodevelopedareputationforexcellenceinotherprogramsdistinguishing
itinitslocalmarketofbothpublicandprivateschools.Beingagovernmentschool,
enrolmentsaremanagedbythegovernmentdepartmenttoprivilegestudentsinthelocal
catchment,treatingschoolingasanundifferentiatedmeritgood.Studentsoutsidethe
catchmentmustarguetheircase,andthechoiceoftheIBDoftenservesasonesuch
rationale,thoughthisisnotnecessarilyendorsedbythedepartmentmakingtheallocations:

ifastudentwholivesoutofourpriorityenrolmentareaswantstoenrolintothe
InternationalBaccalaureateprogram,thereisabsolutelynoguaranteethatthestudentwill
bemadeanoffer.Infact,therearemanystudentswhodoapplytodotheIBprogramthat
arentofferedaplace.ThusthepotentialdemandfortheIBDwasseentooutstripthe
permittedsupply,artificiallyproducingaconditionofsocialscarcityforaplaceintheIBD,or
20

moreaccurately,aplaceatthisschoolofchoice.Theschoolmanagementwasfrustratedby
thesedepartmentalpolitics,becausefromthestaffingpointofview,itsveryexpensiveforusto
runtheIBandacriticalmasswasneededtooperateviableclassesandsubjectchoices.In

addition,anearbyschoolhadrecentlycommencedofferingtheIBDasanalternative,which
underminedthesocialscarcityoftheIBD,andSchoolAsdistinctioninthelocalmarket:I
amabitmoreworriedwiththoseschoolscomingonline.Welostafewnumbersbecauseofthat.

StudentfeesfortheIBDatSchoolAhavebeenkepttotheminimum:wewouldbethe
cheapestIBschoolprobablyanywhereWedonthave10%toaddonoranythingelse,wejust
chargewhatthecostsare.Thisschoolcouldabsorbothercostsbecauseoftherelative

flexibilityofthelocalcurriculum,suchthatboththeIBDandthelocalcurriculumwere
accommodatedinthesameclassesformanysubjects,thusavoidingtheneedtostaff
parallelclasses.TheIBDsmajorpointofdifferencewiththelocalcurriculumhoweverisits
prescriptionofsixsubjectsacrossarequiredbreadthplusadditionaltasks,whereasthelocal
curriculumrequiresfiveinthefinalyearbasedsolelyonstudentchoice.Theschoolhada
patternofhighongoingattritionfromtheIBDtothelocalcurriculumacrossthefinaltwo
yearsofschoolingwhenstudentsweigheduptherelativecostsandbenefitsoftheIBDs
greaterworkload,tomaximisetheiruniversityentrancescores.ThustheIBDandthelocal
curriculaareeffectivelyoperatingassubstitutegoodsnoonebrandisconsideredto
necessarilyguaranteemorepositionalvalueforthefuturethantheother:

butthereasonwhystudentsbailoutisbecauseoftheflexibilitythatwehavewithin
oursystem.AndIwouldntwanttotiesomeoneonsomethingwheretheythinkthey
candobetterelsewhere.SoleavingtheIBandgoingtothe[state]systemdoesnt
21

meantheyareworseoff.Infacttheyaremaybebetterof.Wehavetolookatthe
individualstudentsoutcomeratherthanthefiguretomakethejudgementwhether
itsagoodthing.

TheprincipalconsideredthesignificantcostassociatedwiththerequiredIBOprofessional
developmentasaninvestmentintheschoolshumancapitalproducingpositiveexternalities
forthewholeschool,notjustprofitingIBDstudents:

SostaffingtheIBcostsquitesubstantially.ButIthinkitsworthitbecauseofthe
expertisethattheteachersgain.Andalotofstudentswillgainfromit.Itmaybe
seenthereareonlyfewstudentswhowillbenefit,butineconomicterms,therealot
offreeridersinthiscase.

Therewerehowevernegativeexternalitiesandresentmentsproducedbythepracticeof
staffingofextraIBDtutorialsforsomelargerclasses,becausethebroaderschool
communityhadtoabsorbthisinstaffingallocations,whileonlythesmallgroupofIBD
studentswereseentoprofit.

Insummary,SchoolAenjoyedanenviablepositionastheschoolofchoiceinitslocal
market,inwhichtheofferingoftheIBDwasinstrumental,butthiswassettochangeas
moreschoolschosetooffertheIBD,crowdingitssocialscarcity.Withintheschool,by
treatingtheIBDandlocalcurriculumaspotentialsubstitutegoodswhileemphasizingthe
positiveexternalitiesofinvestingintheIBD,theprincipalaimedtosetupawinwin

22

situation,ratherthanthezerosumgameofpositionalgoods,whichwasmorethecaseat
SchoolB.

CasestudySchoolB
SchoolBisagovernmentschoolinadifferentstatewitharelativelyshortinvolvementwith
theIBD.Theprincipalsstrategicaimwastopositiontheschoolasastrongcompetitorwith
localprivateschools,aswellasnearbygovernmentschools.TheIBDwasalsostrategicin
termsofattractinginternationalfeepayingstudentstotheschool:
Wegetparentswithinternationalexperiencewhoknowofdifferenteducation
systemsoverseasandtheIBtheycantbelieve,whatyougetintheIBfor$1000a
yearforthreeyears.
ImplementingtheIBDwaspartofacomprehensivestrategytoattractandretainhigh
achievingstudents,whoseresultswouldfurtherenhancetheschoolsreputation.Inthis
strategy,theseniorschoolcohorthadbeendisaggregatedintobroadtracksaccordingto
academicabilityandeducationalaspirationsandallocatedtailoredcurricularchoices.The
mostacademicallyablestudentscouldchoosebetweentheIBDandhighstatusacademic
subjectsinthelocalcurriculum.Highachievingstudentsintheearlieryearsextended
classes,theIBqualitykids,weretargetedforinformationsessionsontheIB:
whenweputouttheapplicationorputoutindicationtostudentstocometothe
parenteveningtohearabouttheIBweveputitouttoourfourextendedclasses,and
thenwepickedthetop50studentswhoweregettinggoodresultsinthemiddleband
classesandinvitethemaswell.

23

ThisselectivescreeningconstructstheIBDasarestricted,relativelyscarcepositionalgood,
notavailabletoall,andconfersdistinctionandadvantageonthoseincluded:thefactofthe
matteristhatifyouareareasonablygoodkidinagroupofvery,veryablestudents
yourresultswillimprove.UnlikeSchoolA,theIBDprogramatSchoolBlargelyoperated
separatelyfromthelocalcurriculum,andthestudentsdevelopedacloseknitcommunity
anddistinctidentity:thebeautyoftheIBisyouhaveatotallydifferentculturetotally
differentrelationshipwiththeteacher.
Thelocalcurriculumwasconsideredtohaveenormousweaknessesandconstitutean
inferiorgood,byseniormanagers,howeverwasalsothedefaultmeritgoodmadeavailable
totherestoftheschoolpopulation.TherewasnootherschoolofferingtheIBDinthelocal
market.SchoolBhadhoweverlostanumberofvaluableteachersandinvestmentintheirIB
trainingacrosstheirshorthistorytojobopportunitieselsewhere,suggestingtheIBDteacher
mightalsoenjoyanadvantageouspointofdifference.
Intermsofpositiveexternalities,theprincipalcelebratedthecontributionoftheIBDs
curricularstandardsandprofessionaldevelopmenttogeneralimprovementinteachers
teaching:
Ilikenittospreadingavirusthroughouttheschool.Wedonthaveanyonewho
justteachesoutofitsoifyouthinkofthis,ifyoutaughtalltheEnglishatthat
energised,reallyfreneticlevel,thennextsessionyouwalkintoyouryear12Senior
Englishclass,[statecurriculum]classnowyourenotgoingtochangetoomuch.
Intermsofnegativeexternalities,theprincipalsuggestedthatimplementingtheIBDputa
bitofastrainonfinanceswithintheschool.Someteachersexpressedguiltaboutthe

24

smallerIBDclassesproducinglargerclassesforotherteachers.TheIBDwasalsoconsidered
toconsumemoreofthespecialistmathsteacherstime,whichreducedtheavailabilityof
thisexpertiseforthelocalcurriculum.

Tosummarise,SchoolBsglocalisedimplementationoftheIBDhadconstructeditmoreasa
positionalgood,restrictedaccesstoit,andsubsidisedtherelativeadvantageofits
conditionsforthosestudents.Therewerepositiveexternalitiesforthebroaderschool
population,butalsonegativeconsequenceswherebyadvantagingofsomeimplicated
disadvantagingothers.

CasestudySchoolC
SchoolCisahighfeeindependentschoolinathirdstate,withamediumrangehistory
offeringtheIBDsincethe1990s.TheIBDdistinguishesthisschoolfromitscompetitorsin
theimmediatevicinity,thusprovidesanimportantpointofdifferenceforschool
marketing.TherearehoweverotherIBDschoolsavailabletostudentsatareasonable
distance,whichfosterssomedegreeofcompetitionbetweenproviders:Icouldntreallysay
thatwetendtolosestudentstootherIBschoolsalthoughitdidhappenthisyearwelost
twostudentstoanotherschool.

Byaseniormanagersaccount,theschoolandindependentsectormoregenerallywere
initiallymotivatedtoimplementtheIBDafterareviewofthelocalcurriculumanditsde
valuingtoaninferiorgoodinpublicperception:therewasthefearthatthegifted,able
studentswouldnotbecateredenoughsoletsgowiththismorerigorousandmore
roundededucationopportunity.Thustheglobalproductwaslocallyconsumedmoreforits
25

academicstandardsthananyinternationalistethics.BoththelocalandtheIBDcurricula
havesinceundergonechange,andtherearenowfewermarkedpointsofdifference,with
anassociatedchangeinthestudentcohort:whenIstartedteachingtheIBearly90s,itwas
onlyattractingtheveryhighflyerofyoungkids.Thatwasthewholefocus.onlyrecent
years,thewholedemographichaschanged.Thisschoolsrhetoricaroundcurricularchoices
nowcarefullyconstructstheIBDandlocalcurriculumassubstitutegoods:notstratified
offerings,theyareallgood.Theyarejustdifferent.IncontrasttoSchoolBsexplicit
streaming,allstudentsatSchoolCareencouragedtoconsidereitherprogram:

WecertainlydontwanteithertheIBstudentsoranyoneelsetothinkitsanelite
program.ButcertainlyyoullhearstudentssayImdroppingbacktothe[local
curriculum].IfIcananditdoesntembarrassthemIdprobablycorrectthemeven
thoughImabig,sortof,fanoftheIBIdontwantthemfeelingasthoughthe[local
curriculum]issomethinglesser.

AseniormanagerdescribedhowenrolmentsintheIBDhadfluctuatedwiththepopularity
ofsubjectchoicesmadeavailableinthelocalcurriculum,furthersuggestingthetwo
programshaveoperatedlargelyassubstitutegoods,chosenforindividualpreferencerather
thansystemicstratification.SchoolCdoesnothavethesameconstantattritionfromthe
IBDasSchoolA.Rather,ithasalimitednumberofpointsatwhichafewstudents,in
negotiationwithparentsandteachers,transfer.

Thisschoolwasmoreexposedtomarketforces.Enrolmentsareultimatelynormalgoods
whosesupplyanddemandweresensitivetocapacitytopay.Arecentsqueezeon
26

enrolmentshadpromptedschoolmanagementtorevisititscommitmenttoparallel
offerings,andconsiderrationalisingoptionswithinprograms:oneconcernwedohaveis
thatwevegotdroppingenrolmentsandweretryingtoturnthataroundwedontwantto
gettothepointwherewehavetosaywecantruntheIB.Theteachingstaffwereunder
pressuretoattractandretainsufficientIBDenrolmentstoensuretheviabilityofparticular
subjects,ifnottheIBDofferingitself.ThesmallsizeofmanyoftheIBDonlyclasseswere
thusbothaformofpositionaladvantageforthosestudents,andaformofstructural
vulnerabilityfortheprogram,riskinginefficienciesthatmadeongoingsupplylessattractive
fortheschool.

Onepositiveexternalityofinvestingincurricularchoiceforthisschoolwasthecachetthis
choiceandtheIBbrandgavetheschoolinthelocalmarket.Italsowasseento
accommodatefamilieswithvariedneedsasreturnbusiness:Therearethreegirlsfromone
familySothisparticularfamilyhastakentheopportunityoftheschoolsvarietyandsay
wellthiscourseactuallymatchesthischildandthiscoursematchesthatchild.Anegative
externalityoftheschoolsmarketsensitivitywastheconsiderablestressandrivalryamongst
teachingstaffsurroundingthemootedcuts.Inaddition,interimworkloadarrangements
combiningclassesforlocalandIBDstudentswereasoreindustrialpointfortheteachers
concerned,andoneteacherhadresignedinprotest.

Insummary,SchoolCsongoingrelationshipwiththeIBDproducthadmovedthrougha
numberofchaptersatfirstitwasthepositionalgood,foraparticularechelonofstudent;
thenwithachangeinitspointofdifferencewiththelocalcurriculum,itwasrealignedasa

27

substitutegood.Withfallingenrolmentshowever,theIBDwasbeingaskedtoaccountfor
itselfasanormalgood,andtoattractdemandtosustainanefficientsupply.

Conclusionglocalecologies,curricularmarketsandpointsofdifference
ThispaperhasdescribedtheglocalisedecologyoftheIBDinthreeAustralianschoolsin
termsofhowthegloballystandardisedIBDisfilteredandenactedthroughlocalhistories,
relationsandmarketdynamics;andhowlocalprovidershavetoresourcetheIBDsprogram
fromtheirlocalwherewithal.FollowingRobertson,glocalisationisunderstoodtoproduce
refractionanddifferenceintwowaysdistinguishingthelocalschoolfromothersinthe
market;andproducingadiversityoflocalinterpretationsoftheglobalproduct.Usinga
typologyofgoodseachwithitsownmarketdynamic,theIBDofferingwascharacterisedin
eachsettingintermsofhowitsuptakeinteractedwithdemandandsupplyconsiderations.
Thedifferenceproducedwithinandbetweensitesbecameevidentthroughthetypesof
goodtheIBDconstitutedovertheschoolsinvolvement.ForSchoolA,ithadshiftedfrom
beingasubstitutegoodforinternationalfamilies,toasubstitutegoodforlocalstudents,
whileplacesatthisschoolofchoiceineithertheIBDorlocalcurriculumwereinmanyways
asociallyscarcepositionalgood.ForSchoolB,theIBDservedtodistinguishtheschoolinthe
localmarket,andasapositionalgoodfortheacademicallyablestream,protectedby
selectivescreening.ForSchoolC,theIBDreportedlyfirstservedasasuperiorgoodto
replacetheperceivedinferiorqualityofacompromisedlocalcurriculum,thenbecamemore
asubstitutegoodlefttostudentpreferences.However,withdroppingenrolments,itis
increasinglycomingunderthedemand/supplypressuresofanormalgood,toachievecost
efficienciesthatmakeitssupplysustainableinthisparticularmarket.

28

Likethesitesdescribedintheliteraturereview,eachsitetellsadifferentstoryastheglobal
productinteractswiththecontextualecologyofthelocalmarket.Thesedifferencescome
tomattermorewidelythroughpositiveandnegativeexternalities.However,thereisamore
generaltrendunderpinningtheseempiricaldifferences.AsmoreschoolslooktotheIBDto
gainsomecachet,ordistinctionintheirlocalmarket,economictheorywouldsuggestthatit
becomesacaseofmorepeoplestandingontiptoe,andagenerallossofbenefitin
proportiontoeffort.FortheIBDtoretainitsparticularbrandofdistinctionforrigorous
academicstandardsanditsimpliedpromiseofpositionaladvantage,itneedsthecondition
ofsocialscarcity.Asitbecomesmorepopularasasolutiontoperceptionsoffalling
standardsorlackofcurricularchoice,itwillnolongerservetodistinguishtheinstitution
northegraduate.Withpositionalgoods,earlyadoptersreapmorebenefitsthan
latecomers,whomayfeelobligedtojumponthebandwagon.InLabareesterms,
uncommonschoolingthenbecomescommon.Ongoingmarketpressureforpositional
goods(Hirsch,1976)withintheeducationalquasimarketcouldgenerateanewproductto
startthecycleagain.IntherecentAustralianfederalelection,theLaborpartyraisedthe
possibilityofambitiousAustralianBaccalaureatesothisprocessmaysoonbeunderway.
TheIBOisridingasurgeinenrolments,anditsstrategicplanaimsforplannedgrowthto
extendaccess(seehttp://ibo.org./mission/strategy/index.cfm)toanIBeducation.This
analysissuggeststhatitmayneedtoconsiderhowitisbeingconsumedlocally,andwhether
it,asamorallyinfusedorganisation,needstoaccounttoitselffornegativeexternalities,not
justpositiveones.

References:
Arnold,R.A.(2004).Economics(6thed.).Mason,Ohio:Thomson/SouthWestern.
29

Adnett,N.,&Davies,P.(2002).Educationasapositionalgood:Implicationsformarketbased
reformsofstateschooling.BritishJournalofEducationalStudies,50(2),189205.
Bagnall,N.(2005).TheIBinAustraliaandNewZealandinthe21stcentury.Change:Transformations
inEducation,8(1),110123.
Bunnell,T.(2008).TheInternationalBaccalaureateinEnglandandWales:thealternativepathsfor
thefuture.CurriculumJournal,19(3),151160.
Bunnell,T.(2009).TheInternationalBaccalaureateintheUSAandtheemerging'culturewar'.
Discourse:Studiesintheculturalpoliticsofeducation,30(1),6172.
Cambridge,J.(2002).Globalproductbrandingandinternationaleducation.JournalofResearchin
InternationalEducation,1(2),227243.
Campbell,C.,Proctor,H.,&Sherington,G.(2009).Schoolchoice:Howparentsnegotiatethenew
schoolmarketinAustralia.Sydney:Allen&Unwin.
Culross,R.,&Tarver,E.(2007).TeacherandstudentperceptionsoftheInternationalBaccalaureate
Program.JournalofSchoolChoice,1(4),5362.
Doherty,C.(2009).TheappealoftheInternationalBaccalaureateinAustralia'seducationalmarket:a
curriculumofchoiceformobilefutures.Discourse:Studiesintheculturalpoliticsof
education,30(2),7389.
Doherty,C.,&Shield,P.(2012).Teachersworkincurricularmarkets:conditionsofdesignand
relationsbetweentheIBDiplomaandthelocalcurriculum.CurriculumInquiry,42(3),414
441.
Drake,B.(2004).InternationaleducationandIBprogrammes:Worldexpansionandpotential
culturaldissonances.JournalofResearchinInternationalEducation,3(2),189205.
Halicioglu,M.(2008).TheIBDiplomaprogrammeinnationalschools:ThecaseofTurkey.Journalof
ResearchinInternationalEducation,7(2),164183.
Harvey,J.(1998).Moderneconomics:Anintroductionforbusinessandprofessionalstudents(7th
ed.).Hampshire,London:MacmillanPressLtd.
30

Hirsch,F.(1976).Sociallimitstogrowth.Cambridge,Massachusetts:HarvardUniversityPress.
Hoag,A.J.,&Hoan,J.H.(2002).IntroductoryEconomics(3rded.).NJ:WorldScientific.
Labaree,D.(1997).Publicgoods,Privategoods:TheAmericanstruggleovereducationalgoals.
AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,34(1),3981.
Layton,A.,Robinson,T.,&Tucker,I.(2002).Economicsfortoday.Melbourne:Thomson.
Levin,H.,&Belfield,C.(2003).Themarketplaceineducation.ReviewofResearchinEducation,27,
183219.
Marginson,S.(1997).Marketsineducation.StLeonards,N.S.W:Allen&Unwin.
Phillips,J.(2002).Thethirdway:Lessonsfrominternationaleducation.JournalofResearchin
InternationalEducation,1,159181.
Poonoosamy,M.(2010).TheInternationalBaccalaureateDiplomaProgrammeinpostcolonial
Mauritius:reaffirminglocalidentitiesandknowledges.AsiaPacificJournalofEducation,
30(1),1530.
Pusey,M.(2003).TheexperienceofmiddleAustralia.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Resnik,J.(2012).ThedenationalizationofeducationandtheexpansionoftheInternational
Baccalaureate.ComparativeEducationReview,56(2),248269.
Robertson,R.(1992).Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture.London:Sage.
Robertson,R.(1994).Globalisationorglocalisation?JournalofInternationalCommunication,1(1),
3352.
Sassen,S.(2006).Territory,authority,rights.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.
Stake,R.(1998).Casestudies.InN.Denzin&Y.Lincoln(Eds.),Strategiesofqualitativeinquiry(pp.
86109).ThousandOaks:Sage.
Tarc,P.(2009).Globaldreams,enduringtensions:InternationalBaccalaureateinachangingworld
NewYork:PeterLang.

31

Vidovich,L.,&YapMeenSheng.(2008).Globallocaldynamicsinexpandingschoolchoicein
Singapore.InM.Forsey,S.Davies&G.Walford(Eds.),Theglobalisationofschoolchoice?
(pp.209230).Oxford:SymposiumBooks.
Whitty,G.,&Power,S.(2002).Theovertandhiddencurriculaofquasimarkets.InG.Whitty(Ed.),
Makingsenseofeducationpolicy(pp.94106).London:PaulChapman.

ItshouldbenotedthatAustraliaiscurrentlyintheprocessofimplementingitsfirstnationalcurriculum,to
officiallycommencein2014,thoughmattersofassessmentwillstillresidewiththeStateauthoritiesatthis
stage.

32