I went to see “The Cartel” at The Peoria Theater over the weekend (it’s playing through Sept. 16). From a technical standpoint, I was immediately disappointed that it was a DVD played over an LCD projector. When I go to the theater, I expect to see an actual film. I recognize that many films today use digital cinematography, but 4K or even 2K digital film resolution is a far cry from a standard-def TV signal output to an LCD projector.
But leaving aside that pet peeve and getting into the actual content, “The Cartel” breaks no new ground. You’ll find the usual complaints against public education in this country — and the usual solutions. Some critiques are better than others. Teachers unions and tenure are criticized for protecting bad teachers and not adequately rewarding good teachers (good critique). Top-heavy administration and patronage hiring are blamed for keeping money away from the classroom (good critique). One of the interviewees claims there’s an inverse correlation between the quality of the school district and the number of luxury cars parked in the administration lot (ridiculous critique).
The film focused almost exclusively on New Jersey public schools, but the filmmaker stated emphatically this wasn’t a New Jersey documentary, but rather a documentary on the entire American public school system. He apparently feels the problems in New Jersey are a perfect example of what’s wrong everywhere. By and large, that’s probably true, although earlier in the movie he had some nice things to say about Maryland public schools, so evidently not all the problems addressed in the film are universal.
As for solutions, there seemed to be an implication that teachers unions have to be busted. But the most overt solution presented was school vouchers. A good part of the film was spent presenting and defending the use of vouchers. He deals head-on with the usual criticisms of voucher systems, and steadfastly defends the redeeming power of free-market forces (if kids get vouchers, the free market will create lots of high-quality private schools, the public school system will improve because they’ll want to compete with the private schools, etc.).
From a film-making standpoint, I thought the music and graphics were good, as was the editing. The movie is broken up into chapters, and each chapter forms a cohesive unit that is well-put-together and keeps your interest. However, the chapters don’t feel like they tell a story when put together. They feel more like discrete issues presented in no particular order. In other words, there’s not a sense of flow to the film. While most of the film was well-argued (whether you agreed with the arguments or not), some parts of the film felt a little too heavy-handed and propaganda-ish.
All in all, I would recommend seeing this documentary. I think it would make a good jumping-off point for discussion on the issues surrounding public education.икони
Jon, I erred in declaring a reason why these young people left the charter school–I do not know the reason and each of them may have had different reason(s). Did I tell you the story about the parent (last week) who did not want her child to go to an Edison school (lives in an Edison attendance area) and knew that 150’s policy is that parents can opt out of Edison. Well, she was told by one board member or administrator to forget it and embrace Edison. Then some other people began to intervene on her behalf. A bit of a run around took place. Then I believe 150 heard that she was planning to show up at the school of her choice on Monday with TV people. She was originally told that the classes were full in the school of her choice–yet she knew that the class size had been posted at 17 (not sure of the exact number). Finally, 150 admitted that the classes weren’t full. The child is now enrolled in the non-Edison school. How many parents will go to these lengths (that should be unnecessary) to get the choice promised by 150? Jon, are you paid for PR from 150 and/or the charter school? 🙂
that Jon is paid for PR by the charter school or district 150, so are we to assume she is paid for PR by the district watch or the teacher’s union?
oh, 🙂
No, Sharon, I’m not paid by D150 or the charter school. I do appreciate your example of the diffculties in “choice” within D150. I agree that the process should be much more transparent and easier to navigate (as well as having as many options as possible).
Speaking of choices–I don’t think District 150 should continue offering all these choices if they can’t have success busing kids all over the city. The only two people to whom I’ve talked have had a horrendous time with the buses. One going from West Peoria to Richwoods didn’t have a bus for some days and the bus was 40 minutes late yesterday. Another family (who has done plenty of questioning, etc.) has yet to have a bus pick up their two kids. I believe the State of Illinois has decreased transportation money to schools. Sooner or later, District 150 may have to acknowledge that they can’t afford to have magnet and/or choice schools requiring students to be bused all over the place.
“Conclusion: I guess it’s okay to be bigoted as long as you’re bigoted against the “right” people — in this case, parents who send their kids to private/religious schools.”
Interesting conclusion… Why do you think private schools even exist, C.J.?
I am reading William Hawley Smith’s book All The Children of All The People, published in 1912, talking about the “longs and shorts” of intelligence and ability in children… It is Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences 80 years before Gardner.
I have no interest in ANY school system that feels the need to mold and train children. Every child a genius, every man a king. The function of education is to bring out the best in each person, not fill them up with other people’s priorities.
Sharon – you don’t identify what Edison you speak of. During the time my children were at Kellar, Northmoor Edison (NE) had been in operation for a number of years and was having some success. With that background in mind, I will tell you that there were many families that purposely moved into the NE attendance area in order to opt out to Kellar and it appeared they had an inalienable right back then to do so?? I find this practice duplicitous to say the least. Being able to opt out of NE when the program was initially implemented seemed like the fair thing to do. By now, if you don’t wish your child to attend NE, then DON’T MOVE THERE!!!! To allow this type of bait and switch practice denies opportunities for students living south of W. Memorial, that are attending failing school, a chance to transfer via a waiver, which IS legitimately there right to do by law. I think the Board should stop the practice of allowing NE students to opt out to Kellar. Are you reading this Mr. Stowell?
RE: District 150 Transportation. Transportation for Choice schools may have brought issues to light, but there has always been problems with the buses. I lived just a little over a mile from my children’s primary school and still the bus was late, sometime never came, and there were constant stubs driving that did not know the route and missed entire neighborhoods (and this bus route was not that complicated). Also, many days there was hardly anyone on the bus. Big waste of dollars IMO.
Maybe the District should do a study as to how necessary bus service is in some areas. As a working parent, it would have been much better for me if I could have paid for some before school extra-curricular class or if school had started a 1/2 hour earlier and I could have just dropped them off at school. I realize this might not be a workable solution for all schools, but the District needs to begin individualizing how different schools operate to best meet the needs of the group that they serve.
I think this year is bound to be the worse ever. The two sagas I have heard are just plain crazy–with no real explanation as to why the buses are late or no-shows. Part of the problem could be that two weeks before school started, the district was short 25 drivers. Closing Woodruff has truly compounded the problem. What if transportation just becomes too costly (state cuts, down the pike gas shortages could emerge again, permanent shortage of drivers)? If the district can’t get a handle on transportation, then surely the should realize that new solutions must be found. I certainly think that more choice and/or magnet schools are out of the question. I have heard of examples of transportation being the problem that has kept former Woodruff students from participating in extra-curricular activities at their new schools. That is not right.
Frustrated, how many families would you estimate moved into the Northmoor area just so they could get a waiver into Kellar? I can’t imagine that happening often enough to develop a policy to keep it from happening. Are there that many houses for sale in the Northmoor area? Maybe I don’t know the area well enough. Are you saying that houses are cheaper in the Northmoor area (and that Northmoor Edison is less desirable than Kellar)? Therefore, parents who can’t afford a home in the Kellar area come in the back door by buying a cheaper house in the Northmoor area. If your argument is that people prefer Kellar to Northmoor, then why do you defend Edison so much? I am confused.
Are you really saying that people who live in the NE area should be obligated to attend an Edison school? Isn’t Edison still a choice school–or has it now become a “closed” neighborhood school? Also, since when do students who live south of War Memorial have the option to go to Northmoor? I thought that Franklin was their only option. I know from a FOIA that I did that very few of the former Loucks students were allowed to go to Rolling Acres when their Edison school closed.
District Watch will be meeting at Monical’s (Lake and Knoxville) at 6 p.m. on Sunday, Septembe 12. Everyone is welcome.
It seems these posts are so similar to those back in April I just read….but it comes down to how you define “quality”. Essentially, the quality of a school is a confluence of teachers, students and parents. If one does not support the rest, the quality goes down. As a parent, if I expect my child to perform, and want them to be prepared, but the teachers are having to fight a large student population who does not see education as a means to an end, then why would I not want and seek an environment for my child where that is not the case? I don’t think it has anything to do with social status, or financial position. My immigrant family came with nothing, and used education as a way out. There has been an overwhelming trend decreasing the importance of high achievement and competitiveness in favor of meeting minimum requirements. I think the voucher system is really just calling the “minimum requirement” emphasis into question in favor of schools that may be trying harder to provide a higher ceiling on expected achievement levels. I am often drawn to the athletic analogy: would you ask a Heisman Trophy quality athlete to stay on a pee-wee football team if it meant he would never reach his full potential as an athlete just because it might benefit that team? We are so keen to push our athletes to their maximum potential and provide every opportunity to those who show a spark of talent, but we seem to begrudge parents of high-potential learners from providing the same in academic opportunities to their children.
Sharon writes,
“Frustrated, how many families would you estimate moved into the Northmoor area just so they could get a waiver into Kellar?”
The real question is… why do so many families move outside of District 150 [i.e. Peoria]?
Schools?
Of course, with the new museum coming to town, good schools be damned!
Diane Ravitch on The Daily Show
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-3-2011/diane-ravitch?xrs=share_copy