Corporate Partnerships

Hurley Corporate Partnerships Corporate partnerships allow schools to gain extra cash by advertising a product or service around the school, this allows the school to gain extra money and the company possible sales. The supporters of corporate partnerships argue that it is a necessity for cash stripped schools. However the other side argues that school environment should be ad free and uninfluenced by corporations. I believe that corporate partnerships are a necessary part of our schools and only hold benefits, up to a certain point.
Too much advertising could be distracting or even annoying for students, it should be up to the school to decide the perfect balance of education and ads. The advocates for corporate partnerships argue that; it provides schools with money that they possibly couldn’t have raised before. They argue that the money gained could be used on multiple things, from things such as buying new updated books, hiring new teachers or even to finance a new wing for the main building as In the case of Calcareous HAS. Monitored advertisements for a certain product possibly oldest have an effect on student focus or learning.
In Calcareous HAS we have ad banners on the bleachers near the football field. From my experience I haven’t seen any student second glance at them or even give them a second thought, but It does provide the school with much needed money for construction projects. Who knows If we would’ve been able to afford a new wing to replace the portables without that aid. The opposing side argues that corporate partnerships take away from the learning environment. They argue that schools should always provide an environment free room corporate Influence and ads.

What the backers of the opposing side don’t take into account Is that students are already Influenced by ads every day, from the clothes they wear to the food they eat. Students see ads on TV’s, radios, the Internet, the APS on their phone etc. Seeing ads In a school won’t affect the student dramatically enough to dissuade him or her from learning. The promoters for the opposing side argue that corporate Influence In critical places such as the library or classrooms could distract the student from learning and are too extreme.
I agree with this because classrooms and library are the place of learning, you should be able to read a book or write an essay without an advertisement for the new Nikkei shoes In your face. I believe that advertisements In learning areas would be annoying and are a violation of the students rights. This Is a heated topic that requires much thought and research. While advertisements In critical learning areas might be annoying and a hindrance to the average student. Overall It’s obvious that corporate partnerships are necessary and re a good source of side revenue for schools.
By exaggeratedly books, hiring new teachers or even to finance a new wing for the main building as in any student second glance at them or even give them a second thought, but it does provide the school with much needed money for construction projects. Who knows if from corporate influence and ads. What the backers of the opposing side don’t take into account is that students are already influenced by ads every day, from the clothes they wear to the food they eat. Students see ads on TV’s, radio’s, the internet, he APS on their phone etc.
Seeing ads in a school won’t affect the student opposing side argue that corporate influence in critical places such as the library or read a book or write an essay without an advertisement for the new Nikkei shoes in your face. I believe that advertisements in learning areas would be annoying and are This is a heated topic that requires much thought and research. While advertisements in critical learning areas might be annoying and a hindrance to the average student. Overall it’s obvious that corporate partnerships are necessary and