The Truth Regarding The Funding Of The Education System
There's money to be made in education, argues Bob Bowdon, although merely if you cut away the unprofitable bits, like good quality teachers. In his documentary "The Cartel," Bowdon, a New Jersey TV news newsman, turns the camera upon the monumental degeneracy and misdirection that has led his state to squander more than any other on its students just with shoddy results. The numbers tell the tale: $17,000 spent per student, and at hand's but a 39% reading proficiency rate, it's distressing to contend that there's a crisis underway, but harder to agree on a solution.
On the one side is the massive Jersey teachers union and umbrageous school officials, who see to it that that, as Bowdon points out in his picture, 90 cents of every tax dollar go for other expenses, including six figure incomes for school administrators and, in a astonishing example, a school board secretary who makes $180,000. The other faction are the supporters of charter schools, the private schools that can evade the authority of the public school system and would aid inner-city kids if their taxpayer money could be more carefully used. One of Bowdon's principal criticisms is that a teacher, even a shoddy one, basically can't be fired -- which provides zero effort to do much genuine instruction.
"The movie examines lots of diverse aspects of public teaching, tenure, financing, patronage drops, corruption --meaning thievery -- vouchers and charter schools," says Bowdon. "And as such it kind of serves as a swift-moving primer on all of the red-hot topics within the education-reform movement."
Bowdon's docudrama started touring the festival circuit in summer of 2009 and made its theatrical debut in April 2010. Hopefully it will get a rise, and not be overshadowed, by the more recently released documentary "Waiting for Superman," by "An Inconvenient Truth" director Davis Guggenheim. Bowdon sees the films as complementary, and hopes that "Superman," with its human-interest position, draws more interest to his own, which focuses on public policy. "The two films make exchangeable conclusions," Bowdon says.
The left-brained position means arguments that watch the economics -- money misspent, opportunities wasted. But that isn't to say the film is without heart. Bowdon makes certain his eye is invariably on the people affected, in particular the inner-city students trapped in a damaged system. A girl's tears upon hearing that she wasn't selected to attend a charter school, that she's stuck in her public school, portray the failure of a system as well as Bowdon's charts and interviews.
It's difficult to see a film about corruption in Jersey and not think of the mob, but it's also unmistakable that this is a national problem seen through a tight lens. A watcher anyplace in the country will discern similar failings in their own school system, and may share Bowdon's frustration and eagerness for a resolution. Bowdon puts his faith in the charter schools, where the taxpayer has influence over the kind and quality of instruction. Nevertheless he also knows it'll be an upward struggle to recover control from those who've worked so hard to make education very profitable for the very few. - 2361
On the one side is the massive Jersey teachers union and umbrageous school officials, who see to it that that, as Bowdon points out in his picture, 90 cents of every tax dollar go for other expenses, including six figure incomes for school administrators and, in a astonishing example, a school board secretary who makes $180,000. The other faction are the supporters of charter schools, the private schools that can evade the authority of the public school system and would aid inner-city kids if their taxpayer money could be more carefully used. One of Bowdon's principal criticisms is that a teacher, even a shoddy one, basically can't be fired -- which provides zero effort to do much genuine instruction.
"The movie examines lots of diverse aspects of public teaching, tenure, financing, patronage drops, corruption --meaning thievery -- vouchers and charter schools," says Bowdon. "And as such it kind of serves as a swift-moving primer on all of the red-hot topics within the education-reform movement."
Bowdon's docudrama started touring the festival circuit in summer of 2009 and made its theatrical debut in April 2010. Hopefully it will get a rise, and not be overshadowed, by the more recently released documentary "Waiting for Superman," by "An Inconvenient Truth" director Davis Guggenheim. Bowdon sees the films as complementary, and hopes that "Superman," with its human-interest position, draws more interest to his own, which focuses on public policy. "The two films make exchangeable conclusions," Bowdon says.
The left-brained position means arguments that watch the economics -- money misspent, opportunities wasted. But that isn't to say the film is without heart. Bowdon makes certain his eye is invariably on the people affected, in particular the inner-city students trapped in a damaged system. A girl's tears upon hearing that she wasn't selected to attend a charter school, that she's stuck in her public school, portray the failure of a system as well as Bowdon's charts and interviews.
It's difficult to see a film about corruption in Jersey and not think of the mob, but it's also unmistakable that this is a national problem seen through a tight lens. A watcher anyplace in the country will discern similar failings in their own school system, and may share Bowdon's frustration and eagerness for a resolution. Bowdon puts his faith in the charter schools, where the taxpayer has influence over the kind and quality of instruction. Nevertheless he also knows it'll be an upward struggle to recover control from those who've worked so hard to make education very profitable for the very few. - 2361
posted by Marcondes Allen at 12:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home