The personal stories are down right heart wrenching, but when Guggenheim departs from simply putting a human face on the impact of failing public education in America, he diagnoses the root of the problem, puts the focus on market-based solutions, and conveniently omits details about education that leave one thinking if the problems of teachers and government are tackled children will no longer suffer.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the compromise bill on education that President Bush and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy worked together on, is held up as a measure that was going to ensure a supreme superpower in the world fixed education. That NCLB was to measure every student and require every student be 100% proficient in math and reading is highlighted. Statistics are shown to indicate that across the country, in most states, less than 50% percent are proficient in math and 20-35% are proficient in reading.
Upon revealing this information, Guggenheim moves on with the film never returning to discuss the effects or impact of standardized or high-stakes testing on students. Except for a mentioning that NCLB was not funded properly, Guggenheim never suggests that a culture of teaching to the test in public schools is devaluing education. He, instead, advances the movie onward and eventually tells the story of acting Chancellor of D.C. Schools, Michelle Rhee, a 37-year-old who had never run a school district but happened to be a multitasking, corporate rabble-rouser that found a way to turn D.C. Schools around.
Guggenheim consciously chooses to get into the subjects of tenure, teachers' unions and the general bureaucracy in public education that makes education reform nearly impossible before sharing how Rhee fired more than thirty principals and closed over twenty-three schools to achieve whatever success she has achieved.
There's something terribly disingenuous about the way with
which Guggenheim tells Michelle Rhee's story. The presentation of her
confrontation with the teachers union in D.C. makes it seem like she is up
against a villainous hive of individuals. Their disinterest in going along with
a process of evaluations that has fraudulent aspects to it is seen as
out-of-touch with reality.
What part of unions doesn't Guggenheim understand?
Teachers unionized for better wages, establishment of grievance processes, reduced workloads, and more funding for public education. Unions like the National Education Association have a history of fighting for the rights of all people to education--the NEA and the AFT both had roles in advancing measures of desegregation in education and labor unions.Jonathan Alter of Newsweek appears on screen to attack the unions and call them a "menace." The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA) are singled out as the largest campaign contributors to President Obama's campaign, a fact that is likely a triangulation of sorts because the finance industry's contributions were at least as large if not larger. And, the Democratic Party is said to be a "wholly owned subsidiary of AFT and the NEA."
A "Teacher of the Year," who makes it clear he is one of
those teachers that understand he must donate his life to children, contends
one of the biggest obstacles "to real reform is contracts with teachers
unions." Explanations of the hoops administrators must jump through to get rid
of teachers who are part of unions are presented and Guggenheim edits the scene
to make the viewer feel exhausted from a long-winded line of excuses for why
teachers don't get to be held accountable.
With all this talk about teachers unions and contracts, one might find it interesting that there is little in the film about how teachers are hired. In a film that routinely raises doubts about the motivations of teachers unions, that might be important.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
