"Waiting for Superman" and "TEACH" Reading Response 6

In the documentaries, Waiting for Superman and TEACH, Davis Guggenheim paints teachers in two very different lights. In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim does not claim teachers are heroes and instead claims teachers are the main reason for America's poor education system. Therefore, he suggests that a teacher can only be declared a hero unless they work extremely hard at their job and produce good results. Meanwhile, in TEACH, Guggenheim describes five teachers just as that- hard working individuals who go above-and-beyond what their jobs seem to require. In James Trier's (2015) article, "The Dialectical Progression: From The First Year and Waiting for “Superman” to TEACH," he too adds to Guggenheim's claim about teachers as heroes;

          ...teachers are not doing enough unless they are devoting all of their time outside 

           of school planning lessons and units and doing some kins of rigorous evaluation 

           of student work; unless all of their students succeed academically; unless 

           entire groups of students do well on standardized tests; unless one has contacted 

           all the students' parents...

What makes a teacher a good teacher then? Who should be the one to evaluate them? Guggenheim leaves this up to his audience while also advocating that teachers are needed. Particularly in TEACH, Guggenheim is advocating for people to become teachers more so than in Waiting for Superman. By following five teachers, and revealing the reasons why it is rewarding for them is crucial for people who are interested in teaching. Even though the profession may be difficult and time consuming, there are instances that can be rewarding. 

In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim complicates the hero role for teachers and actually suggests teachers are a major contributing factor of the "failed" American education system. For he claims teacher unions and tenure are the reasons for education reform to not occur. I do not agree with his argument completely for I believe there are multiple aspects other than poor teachers that contribute to poor education. One of the major criticisms I have for the movie is that it does not talk about the students who genuinely do not care about school or how parents contribute to the system. 

In Barnett Berry's article, "Good Schools and Teachers for All Students: Dispelling Myths, Facing Evidence, and Pursuing the Right Strategies," he further complicates Waiting for Superman in the sense that he proposes similar but different ideas to how to "fix" the educational system. One of the suggestions detailed how teachers should have more experience until they are released independently into the work-force. I highly agree with this statement for uneducated teachers simply does not make sense. Although, he seems to suggest that teachers should go through a much more intense evaluation system until they can be certified to independently teach. I find this to be interesting because with my experience in the work-force, you need experience to get experience. How does Berry expect teachers to receive excellent training from amazing teachers if they do not qualify? Most of the time, people are given more credibility as the amount of schooling they have received has gone up in which case they might have a higher chance at getting better training. Although, sitting in classrooms is not the same as interacting with people. Particularly in the teaching profession, being taught how to teach does not mean sitting in a classroom but as Berry claims, teachers need experience to improve. So what can be done? 

Trier, J. (2015). The dialectical progression: From The First Year and Waiting for “Superman” to TEACH. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Berry, B. (2013). Good schools and teachers for all students: Dispelling myths, facing evidence, and pursuing the right strategies. In P.L. Carter & K.G. Welner (Eds.) Closing the opportunity gap (pp. 181-192). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

"Waiting for Superman" and "TEACH" Film Reviews

These two documentaries are both directed by Davis Guggenheim and both highlight the problems within the American education system. Waiting for Superman is an amazing movie that is thought-provoking and interesting. While TEACH is much shorter (about 30mins), Guggenheim was able to convey four interesting opinions from teachers. These movies not only highlight the problems within the American education system, they also discuss how complicated education is. I would argue, these movies are not advocating for education, instead they are advocating for change. 

          

In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim follows the story of five students ranging from elementary school to middle school. Although, the movie is spent mostly talking about the adult politics that secretly determine the lives of these innocent children. At some point, both Waiting for Superman and TEACH underline how education is NOT about the students but rather the adults. This is a sad and harsh reality that is not fair for people who all deserve the best education. Waiting for Superman discusses this issue thoroughly. They movie discussed bad teachers, or teachers who were not producing good results for their students. Most would think, well why not just fire them? One of the many problems with that though, is due to tenure. Tenure is a legal contract that is supposed to protect teachers who may not deserve to be fired. Although, the movie argued that tenure is given out after a short period of time (two years) to unworthy teachers who then decide to no longer do their job- but since they have tenure, it is much harder for them to get fired. Consequently, schools preform the "lemon dance." The lemon dance is essentially when schools hand-off under-preforming teachers to other schools. Although, if this continues with countless other schools, eventually one school becomes a haven of bad teachers- which then bad students are sent to and the problem continues.

Tenure is not the only source of problems within the education system. Waiting for Superman also discussed how teacher unions have a negative impact on students. Teacher unions were designed to also protect teachers and essentially act as an insurance policy although, since the teachers know that they have a legal contract that is fully supported by the teachers’ unions, they tend to slack off in their instruction and effort that they give their students. What happens is that teachers are unable to be fired by the school board. In the film, we see that one of the teachers is relaxing in his chair reading a newspaper article while students in the back are gambling. The director also uses clips from previous research where a student puts a camera in his backpack and video tapes the class as it is in motion. By using this form of evidence, Guggenheim is making the statement that teacher union contracts and teacher tenures produce lazy, uncaring, and clueless teachers.

Not all teachers who are part of union contracts or have tenure are lazy or uncaring. In TEACH, Guggenheim follows the teaching lives of four adults: Maurice, Geneviève, Andrew and George. Each of these teachers do not have it easy with their job but each of them claim teaching is worth it. These four teachers work hard and even spend their own money, time and effort outside of class to make sure their students are developing. For example, Maurice spends his time trying to connect with an inconsistent speech therapist who is not helping and instead, he decides to tutor his struggling student outside of class. Andrew spends his time contacting social workers for his students who have been the victim of domestic violence and George organized students to talk to a board so their funding wouldn't get withdrawn. Even though TEACH is short, Guggenheim was able to capture complicated aspects of the education system. 


Personally, I greatly appreciated these two documentaries. Together, I would give them 4.75 stars out of 5. As I mentioned, they gave insight into the complicated problem of the American education system. They were thought-provoking and had excellent examples with detailed explanations. I would not give it 5/5 because I thought Waiting for Superman did not look at how the education system is a combination of not only the politics between teachers and government, but also parents. From the five families the movie followed, each were of good students who cared about their education and had parents who cared for them too. That is not always true of families. I would have liked to movie to have gotten insight from families who do not care about education because Waiting for Superman, at least for me, pointed too much blame at the teachers. 

'The Giver' Reading Response 5

After reading these two articles, I have been enlightened to view student-teacher relationships in a different light. Based on Carl Jung's theory about archetypes, these readings describe and analyze three of the many archetypes: hero, trickster, and sage. In the hero narrative, a person, typically younger, endures trials and tribulations which ultimately help all of society. The trickster's narrative is more simple and tends to be perceived as the villain. The trickster's story typically begins with them feeling trapped and then rebelling towards which they may or may not learn anything about themselves. The sage, on the other hand, is a mysterious and yet complicated archetype. The sage is described to typically be physically different, isolated from society, and yet compose "dangerous knowledge" or wisdom. These three archetypes have made me realize how I view certain teachers and even students. In my own experiences, I have been taught by a sage and also a trickster but I have never been taught by a "hero." I do not expect my teacher to be a hero because personally, I do not and have not known my teacher's personal lives enough to declare them as heroes. The heroic journey has been studied and described for hundreds of years and is depicted as having a clear outline. For a teacher to be a hero, not only do their significant others or coworkers have to know about their personal lives, students do too. In most, school settings, the student-teacher relationship is bounded by specific social guidelines and expectations (i.e. no touching or outside relationships). Although, if one understands a teacher's personal life, describing them as a hero can be more appropriate. In the reading, "Exploring the Heroic Teacher Narrative...", the authors argue that teachers can do heroic actions for their students but do all teachers have to as well? In the movie, Freedom Writers, Erin Gruwell decides to help her students by buying new books for them amongst other activities, but in doing so, she needs to get two other jobs outside of being a full-time teacher. Her bravery and willingness to give up her freedom for her students is heroic, although, is it sustainable? Not all teachers are as invested in their students' learning and well-being. With that in mind, the sage is an archetype that is not always the constant hero in people's lives.

The sage archetype has a more flexible role in students' lives. As depicted in countless movies and novels, the sage is an aloof character that does not seem to be interested in all students' lives but instead is focused on one or a few. In The Giver, Harry Potter, and The Hunger Games, the sage characters (The Giver, Professor Dumbledore, and Haymitch Abernathy respectively) all take an interest in a specific character (which is often the hero). Sages act more as mentors in the sense that they help guide people on their own journeys. They do not necessarily care about the life choices of their mentees but rather the overall outcome of which they know their mentees will accomplish.

In terms of applying the sage archetype to teachers, most teachers do not have the time nor are allowed to focus on one student. Although, I wouldn't mind having someone their dedicated to helping me. If I were to be Jonas in The Giver, I would be excited to have someone to experience unfamiliar territory with and I would appreciate their perspectives. Despite this, I am not sure if I would like a student-teacher relationship that is portrayed in The Giver. Most relationships in life are not like Jonas' and the Giver's, for parents often fill in the role of caring for their children the most. Teachers are generally distant from all of their students and do not act as a mentor like the sage archetype. I would appreciate a teacher who had the time to focus on my personal well-being but in the classrooms that we are in today, that is nearly impossible especially when classroom sizes are growing. As mentioned in the reading, "Wisdom, Mystery, and Dangerous Knowledge...", the problem with the sage character is that it insinuates the idea that only certain people are worthy of the sage's attention. In current school settings, I have witnessed teachers being forced to focus on certain students. These students are often the trouble-makers or disrupt the class to the point where the teacher needs to intervene- at least this is what I have experienced. Who is to argue which student is "worthy" enough of the teacher's attention then- if there are students who are more respectful compared to others? In nearly all sage and prodigy relationships, the prodigy already has the ability to express respect, therefore, comparing the sage to teachers is not always adequate. 

Renga, I.P. (2015). Exploring the heroic teacher narrative with help from the trickster. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Renga, I.P., & Lewis, M.A. (2018). Wisdom, mystery, and dangerous knowledge: Exploring depictions of the archetypal sage in young adult literature.Study and Scrutiny: Research on Young Adult Literature, 3(1), 25-50. DOI: 10.15763/issn.2376-5275.2018.3.1.25-50

'The Giver' Film Review

The Giver contains big-name actors and actresses along with a heart warming story. Based on the children's novel by Lois Lowry, the movie visualizes the futuristic and utopian society of a white-dominated "community." The story takes place after "The Ruin" in which it is assumed caused chaos and immediate need for a shift in social norms. In this community, there are endless amounts of rules towards which the population must follow. With that, there are no memories of the past nor The Ruin and there are no emotions. Jonas, is a young man who becomes the next "receiver of memory" towards which his job is to advise the government. The Giver explores what it means to be in a "perfect" society and the consequences of not having emotion.

              

In the beginning of the movie, we are introduced to the society of which the precise rules are laid-out to the audience, some of which include: proper usage of language, take the daily medication, always return to one's dwelling before curfew, and never lie. Soon, it is clear the medication alters reality for it does not allow people to see color nor experience any emotion. Along with the proper usage of language and the curfew, the society has been carefully organized and designed around control.

At a certain age, young people go through the "ceremony of commencement" towards which they are assigned to jobs the "elders" have carefully chosen for them. Meryl Streep's character is the Chief Elder and is the leader of the community. She demands respect and also commands the audience's attention. She is compliant with the rules of the community and is unaccepting of differences or unexpected behavior. Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is selected to be the next receiver of memory and consequently, the next receiver of emotions.

After a few trainings with "the giver" (Jeff Bridges), Jonas realizes there is more to life than the controlled environment he and his community blindly lives in. He experiences all of the emotions the Chief Elders have been trying to suppress for the hopes of creating a society without pain, racism, hatred, sexism, and murder. Jonas' tolerance of this concept was rejected when he found out what it meant for the elderly people and sickly babies to be "released." Instead of calling it murder, they changed the meaning to "release to elsewhere." People are unaware of the true meaning of being released and are convinced being released is a good thing. Although, when Jonas discovers murder and death, he is outraged by the hypocrisy and the brainwashing him and his loved ones are experiencing. In the effort to enlighten his community, he endures a difficult adventure towards which he crosses the "boundary of memories." Once the boundary was crossed, the entire community experienced the emotions that were stollen from them.

The Giver is a heart-warming story and highlights the problems with a controlling society meant to be "perfect." The movie explores the idea of a society without emotion and yet remains intact and functional. The movie also argues that emotions are a fundamental human right and should not be undermined or controlled. And even to a certain extent, the movie argues pessimism is more dangerous than pain. The Chief Elder is an example of this idea for she believes that emotions are the reason for pain. She is not wrong, but her inability to grow and learn from bad experiences does not help the community either. The Giver underlines the idea that for a society to be "perfect," people must have the desire and understanding of good experiences and therefore, have an optimistic mindset. If I were to rate this movie, I would give it three out of five stars. I enjoyed the provocative story and appreciated the cinematography but there were too many plot holes of the movie. I do not mind the "hollywood" effect is has for I believe if the movie was taken more seriously, it would be confusing and not as heart-warming. Although, I had a lot of questions that were not addressed. For example, how is it scientifically possible for people to "transfer" memories through the touch of hands? How do words come to Jonas if he was never taught them? If they didn't want bad emotions, couldn't the society have taught better coping mechanisms instead? I have a lot of questions for how certain aspects of the movie worked. It leaves me to wonder if modern society would benefit from more "sameness" or not. 

'Freedom Writers' Film Review

Based on the true story and the 1999 novel The Freedom Writer's Diary, the movie Freedom Writers depicts the story of Woodrow Wilson High School "at-risk" students and their influential teacher, Erin Gruwell (Hilary Swank). 
The story is predictable and yet heart-warming for Mrs. Gruwell is a dedicated new English teacher who helps initiate inspiration in her diverse classroom. She is naïve about her students and has high expectations for them but in the process of becoming a better teacher, her students learn to appreciate her along with them selves. Freedom Writers is a deeply earnest film that challenges the United States education system and yet follows a predictable and familiar storyline. 

Tensions are high in the early 1990's of Long Beach, California for the movie takes place in a gang- violent ridden environment. The story begins with the background of the young Eva Benitez (April Lee Hernández) when she was- you could say- uncorrupted. Eva witnessed her neighbor's drive-by-murder which her father is then falsely accused and convicted of. The audience is therefore, introduced to the difficult and anxious lives the students have and are experiencing. Erin Gruwell shortly-there-after comes into the scene. She is depicted as energetic and naïve about her students and unaware that wearing pearls to class may not be the greatest idea. Despite this, she is head-strong and wanting to teach the 'at-risk' students she was assigned to. Woodrow Wilson High School was described as once being an "A-school" in which the students were high achievers but after "voluntary integration," students became "at-risk." On her first day, tensions in the classroom grew quickly and regardless of her optimistic expectations, the students break-out into a fight which needed assistance. To further set the tone of the movie, we continue to follow Eva's story but in high school. She has pessimistic and stubborn opinions about people, she claims she hates white people (for falsely convicting her father), and that race is the only thing that matters. She describes school "...like a city and cities are like a prison." She acknowledges the racial tensions in her school for different races group together with their "own kind." Erin Gruwell is therefore forced to also acknowledge the racial tension in her classroom. 

Through multiple exercises, Mrs. Gruwell breaks the racial tensions by having her students understand and appreciate each other's and other's problems. She has them participate in "The Line Game" in which the students step-up to a line in response to a yes or no question. Erin asks them questions on the lines of their experiences with gang-violence. The exercise is emotional and eye-opening for her students not only do they admit their difficulties but they see how nearly everyone else is experiencing similar problems. She then has them write in a journal everyday about anything they want in the hopes that writing about their lives will free them. In another influential exercise, this one more unexpected, Erin teaches her students about the Holocaust. After an offensive and racist note was passed around the class of an African-American student, Mrs. Gruwell compares their actions to that of Nazi Germany and the propagandistic posters of Jewish people. The heated and emotional conversation about the Holocaust further led the plot of the movie in which the students read The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank and even met Hermine "Miep" Gies (owner of the attic in which Anne Frank and her family stayed). The students' experiences with learning and listening about the Holocaust, not only influenced better behavior but taught the students that their lives are not predetermined based on their ethnicity. For as Hermine Gies described it, "... [you] can turn on a small light in a dark room."

 

Freedom Writers is an emotionally raw story which concentrates on the problems in school systems and how ethnicity impacts the opportunity gap. Despite the overall fantastic content and intentions, I thought the film was predictable and oddly familiar. I was not surprised Hilary Swank's character become the heroic figure of the movie, that is, her experiences with her students follow the typical heroic-path. In most story that depict heroes, we are introduced to a character that is naïve and yet optimistic. The hero's strength is tested through multiple trials and tribulations in which their ego is impacted and their motivation decreases. Although, they rise from their difficulties and become a stronger and better hero. The story of Erin Gruwell follows this pattern with of course, a large dose of Hollywood effect. There were multiple aspects of the film that seemed fake or over-exaggerated. Particularly the claim that 100% of the students graduated and the scenes that were emotionally charged. Personally, I believe my bias about Hilary Swank has impacted my opinion of the movie for I generally view her as a less-genuine actress. Despite this, I thought she did a great job depicting a privileged and unexperienced teacher. The movie also tells the familiar story of how a teacher gains the respect of her students through eye-opening lessons. The movie is extremely similar to Dangerous Minds and has aspects of Monsieur Lazhar the only difference is a deeper understanding of the students' lives. Although, there was a lack of information on parental involvement. The school board in the movie along with a few teachers, believed the problem was the students' lack of interest and respect for education but the movie does not address parents as much as they should have. They covered a few students' lives with their parents but the movie did not mention how parents contribute to the problems in the school system. As mentioned in previous blog posts, the complex problem of the poor education system in the United States is not only the way in which the system is designed but also the students and parental involvement. Freedom Writers mostly addresses  'at-risk' students and claims they are the main source of educational distress. Overall, the movie was very interesting and as I mentioned, depicts emotional and controversial topics about the education system. If I were to rate this movie out of five stars, I would give it a three and a half.