Leadership

Waiting for Superman Documentary's Attack on American Public Schools

by Adekunle Lawal
04/17/16
Not For Sale
Author requests article critique

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

Waiting for Superman Documentary’s Attack on American Public Schools

Ravitch (2010) believes that Waiting for Superman documentaryby Davis Guggenheim is a wrong attack on public education. She believes that the director of the documentary was influenced by the nation’s most powerful figures and institutions. Having watched the film myself I think what Guggenheim documented about American public schools is true; so who influenced the producer is insignificant in this matter.

Moreover, Ravitch (2010) claims that Guggenheim does not mention any successful public school, school teacher, principal or superintendent in his film. I think that is a good observation, however, I think the objective of the documentary will be defeated if the director   mixes up bad and good images of the public schools. Of course, there are few good public schools, school teachers, principals, and superintendent in the country. But the number is so few and alarming; this is why the birth of Waiting for Superman movieis timely. According to Ravitch, Guggenheim seems to believe that teachers alone can overcome the effects of student poverty and other factors that contribute to student failures. She notes that there are countless studies that demonstrate the link between family income and test scores. I do not think Guggenheim believes only the effect of bad teachers contribute to student failures. Guggenheim obviously considers other factors like low income, poor nutrition, absent parents; this is why he features students from different backgrounds, income, race, and locations in the film. The message of Guggenheim is that America public school system and its teachers are some of the factors that contribute to the failures of the children.

Ravitch (2010) observes that Geoffrey Canada’s two charter schools have access to enormous resources to succeed. She seems not surprised at their outstanding performance. Ravitch believes that if all inner-city schools, which are public, had the same resources as Canada’s schools, they might also get the same good results. I am completely confused by the Ravitch’s statement. Does she understand what she is saying? Funding and resources like Canada’s are not the problem at all. The US government spends fortune on the public schools. The unbeatable problem is the management. How public schools administrators, principals, and teachers administer the entrusted resources in their possessions is completely wrong. And that is what Guggenheim’s film is trying to expose to the public.

However, I want to agree with Ravitch’s observations on poor conditions on which public school teachers operate. She claims that if we are serious about improving our public schools, we will take steps to improve our teacher force, as Finland and other educational successful nations have done. She suggests that would mean better screening to select the best teacher candidates, higher salaries, better support and mentoring systems, and better working conditions. Furthermore, Ravitch proposes, and I agree with her, that we should insist that only highly experienced teachers become principals, not retired businessmen and military personnel.

Karp (2011) claims that the US government at all levels use Test score gaps to label schools as failures; schools with good Test scores are good institutions, and bad schools are the ones that come up with poor Test scores. I do not see any problem with that conclusion. If Karp does not agree with the statement, then he should be able to tell us how we should determine the schools that are performing very well academically. I believe Test scores is the best yardstick to know good schools from the bad ones.

According to Karp (2011), serving schools with high numbers of students in poverty is no excuse for bad teaching, poor curriculum, massive dropout rates, or year after year of lousy outcomes. He observes that we need accountability systems that put pressure on schools to respond effectively to the communities they serve. I completely agree with Karp on his view concerning poverty and failures in our schools.

Ravitch (2013) states that public education is not broken as many people widely believe. To her, public education is not failing or declining as they have made public believed. She affirms that the diagnosis to arrive at that belief is wrong, and the solutions of the corporate reformers are wrong too. She believes that our urban schools are in trouble because of concentrated poverty and racial segregation. Ravitch’s statements are outrageous! She needs to face the fact that the public schools are actually in a mess. And her reason of poverty being the cause of the problem of public schools is totally wrong. I would like to invite her to read Stan Karp (2011)’s article Who’s bashing teachers and public schools and what can we do about it? The issue of poverty being the cause of the failures of America public schools is thoroughly dealt with. Karp affirms that poverty has nothing to do with this issue at all.

Notwithstanding, I am in support of the recommendations given by Ravitch (2013), she states that in order to solve the problem of failures in the public schools, American children need prekindergarten classes that teach them how to socialize with others. To her, teachers should write their own tests and standardized tests only for diagnostic purposes. She claims that classes should be small enough – ideally fewer than twenty – so that students get the individual attention they need from their teacher. She further proposes that teachers should be well-educated and well-prepared for their profession.

According to Underwood et al (2012), ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) is an organization that aims to defund and dismantle public schools. They claim that ALEC is the mechanism that implements many pieces of model legislation that propose legislative methods for defunding and dismantling public schools. Well, all the evidences supplied by UnderwoodMead to support their claims are overwhelming. But my point is this: It seems UnderwoodMead are very good at proving that ALEC are fraud and cannot provide sensible solutions to solve public schools problems. So it would have been appropriate if UnderwoodMead themselves provide some suggestions as solutions to public schools problems, unfortunately, none is provided. I do not think UnderwoodMead believe that America public schools system is in problem at all. If that is their stand, then they must be very unserious and sentimental.

Considering all the views narrated above I think I want to believe there is problem in America public schools system. And Charter schools have resources to compliment the efforts of public schools in producing good students with impressive Test scores. Moreover, I would like to embrace Ravitch (2013)’s recommendations to solve the problem of failures in our public schools.

References

Karp, S. (2011). Who’s bashing teachers and public schools and what can we do about it? Rethinking Schools, 35(3),

http://www.rethinkingschoolsorg/archive/25_03/25_03_karp.shtml

Ravitch, Diane (2010). The Myth of Charter Schools. The New York Review of Books.         http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/11/myth-charter-schools/

Ravitch, Diane (2013). Reign of Error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the    danger to America’s public schools. New York: Knopf

Underwood, J., & Mead, J. F. (2012). A smart ALEC threatens public education: Coordinated efforts to introduce model legislation aimed at defunding and dismantling public schools is the signature work of this conservative organization. Phi Delta Kappan, 93 (6), 51-55.