Introduction

Some of the major ways by which private corporations attempt to exert their influence on government – including the funding of political activities, congressional lobbies and mass information campaigns – have, in recent years, manifested themselves in new ways. This chapter focuses on the relationships between corporate elites in the United States and two distinct aspects of that emerging landscape: a large not-for-profit firm called inBloom that stored and analysed student data; and a smaller not-for-profit firm called Geo Listening that monitors students’ public social media profiles for negative behavioural indicators. We argue that the fortunes of these organisations rose (in the case of Geo Listening) and fell (in the case of inBloom) based largely on the ability of elite managers to manage the political environment in which the firms operate. As political elites learn how to be more responsive to organisations like these, the student identity market is gradually evolving from a less-regulated environment to one which is becoming more tightly regulated. As with any political reform initiative that intends to rein in unregulated markets, the firms operating in this space – and the elites who manage them – are presented with a central tension of organisations operating in free markets: embrace forwardthinking dynamism to respond to changes in the market, or remain static and, by so doing, ultimately fail.

In an era of unprecedented technological growth and the globalisation of information and trade, new markets are emerging that do not conform to the lightly regulated status quo in public education. These emerging markets challenge the existing framework, by continuing to outstrip changes in the political process. The changes wrought by increased private involvement in American public education have caught many policy makers by surprise, but the evolution of educational provision should have been easily anticipated. Much of the new education privatisation in the United States and elsewhere has been driven by accountability reforms that envelope a strong need to understand the implications of accountability frameworks on students with lower socioeconomic status, underserved English language learners and other underrepresented groups.

It has become essential to look closely at the processes of public response and legislation creation in order to understand the current pace of change that propels new laws. In the absence of good theory, we must draw on specific cases to guide inquiry in this vital area for two key reasons.