The education method in America is working magnificently, says Bob Bowdon, however only for some -- and those few definitely aren't the students. In his documentary Bowdon, a New Jersey TV news newsman, turns the camera on the monumental corruption and misdirection that has led his state to expend more than any other on its students just with meager results. It's not troublesome for Bowdon to exemplify that something's atrociously incorrect with a state that pays $17,000 per student but can only wield a 39% reading proficiency rate -- that there's a crisis is undeniable, how to deal with it is separate question entirely.
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."
"The film started making the round of the festivals in summer 2009, and made its theatrical debut just about a year later, in spring 2010. The movie has started a lot of talk, which ought no doubt carry on with the more-recent release of "An Inconvenient Truth" director Davis Guggenheim's own education expose, "Waiting for Superman." Bowdon says the documentaries can be seen as companion pieces: his focusing on public policy and Guggenheim's taking the human-interest slant. "The two films attain common conclusions," Bowdon says.
The left-brained stance means arguments that observe the economics -- money misspent, opportunities wasted. But that isn't to say the film is without heart. Bowdon makes certain his eye is at all times on the people affected, principally the inner-city students trapped in a damaged system. A girl's weeping upon hearing that she wasn't selected to attend a charter school, that she's stuck in her public school, represent 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.
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."
"The film started making the round of the festivals in summer 2009, and made its theatrical debut just about a year later, in spring 2010. The movie has started a lot of talk, which ought no doubt carry on with the more-recent release of "An Inconvenient Truth" director Davis Guggenheim's own education expose, "Waiting for Superman." Bowdon says the documentaries can be seen as companion pieces: his focusing on public policy and Guggenheim's taking the human-interest slant. "The two films attain common conclusions," Bowdon says.
The left-brained stance means arguments that observe the economics -- money misspent, opportunities wasted. But that isn't to say the film is without heart. Bowdon makes certain his eye is at all times on the people affected, principally the inner-city students trapped in a damaged system. A girl's weeping upon hearing that she wasn't selected to attend a charter school, that she's stuck in her public school, represent 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.
