A cartel is an explicit agreement in which competing firms work in collusion to increase their own profits while eliminating the competition. This is accomplished as “producers and manufacturers agree to fix prices, marketing, and production”. [1] Typically, that word brings to mind visions of drug cartels or organized crime. Prior to watching The Cartel by Bob Bowdon, a documentary film that claims to be making a statement on the state of education in America, while narrowly focusing in on New Jersey, cartel and public schools would not be two words which I would have thought people felt were synonymous. Bowdon, a reporter and news anchor, comes out swinging against teachers unions, the ring-leaders of the cartel, and cites “administrative bloat and lack of oversight” [2] being behind the failure of New Jersey public schools.
The film begins by stating that New Jersey spends more money than any other state on public education yet, students continue to receive poor test scores, no matter how much money they throw at the problem. Bowdon questions what do you get with all this spending and where is all the money going? Through the use of substandard graphics Bowdon presidents the superintendents of the New Jersey schools as a figure reminiscent of the Monopoly Man.
At one point he even goes so far as to count the amount of luxury cars in the parking lot of the Jersey City Board of Education.
Bowdon calls New Jersey the “soprano state” and discusses how administrators receive incredulous salaries, bad teachers can’t be fired and this whole process is protected as the New Jersey Educational Association (NJEA), the main teachers’ union, “exert a disproportionate influence on the public policies that most affect their members.” [3] This influence of the union, on politicians, school board members and even on election dates prevents administrators and policy makers from achieving educational equity and block policies that would allow for school choice.
The control exerted by the teachers’ union creates “the multi-billion dollar cartel” also known as the American educational system and Bowdon’s solution to the terrorism being committed by the cartel is to implement a corporate reform strategy resting on school choice and accountability. School vouchers are introduced forty six minutes and nineteen seconds into this documentary. Forty six minutes were spent narrating the problems: corruption, teachers’ unions, wasteful spending as the underlying problems in education. Forty six minutes were spent narrating a story with statistics on how American and New Jersey students in particular are as a majority not proficient in reading and math on standardized tests. Bowdon’s theory of school reform is that providing access to voucher and charter schools which are not run by the “cartel” will give them access “to the skills and behaviors necessary for access to economic opportunity.” [4]
The film captures pieces of a NAACP debate between Reverend Reginald Jackson, Orange Board of Education and Walter Farrell, Professor of Social Work at UNC Chapel Hill. In trying to diminish the argument of the CON speaker on voucher programs, Farrell, Bowdon criticizes the way Farrell uses the luxury cars owned by voucher supports as a statement that voucher supporters too are driven by profit and far removed from the inequality they claim they are trying to solve. Ironically, didn’t Bowdon count the cars in a parking lot earlier?
In his conclusion Bowdon says what we have learned is that:
“people think we should spend more on education, but they have no idea what we are spending now. When they find out they are amazed. People support higher education budgets because they think teachers should make more, but only a fraction of school spending goes to the teachers…. Schools that have to attract kids to exist are run better. Schools that are guaranteed a supply of kids, no matter how well they do , are usually run worse. Teacher’s unions are designed to protect the jobs of adults, not help kids. Teacher tenure helps protect bad teachers, the good teachers are often just as frustrated with the system as anyone. Teacher unions are not like other unions because they have a huge hand in selecting the superintendents with whom they’ll later negotiate. School vouchers would give poor parents an alternative to terrible schools. Defenders of the status-quo say poor parents should not have the option of a private school even if it’s better or cheaper.”[5]
What we do not seem to have learned though is how this corruption will be avoided in privately-run schools, how this competition is playing out in different states, how curriculum and teaching will be improved, if there are different ways to assess learning besides standard tests, how much of the money given to these school districts with a majority of minority students is spent on things considered obstacles to learning (such as malnutrition) and in providing those resources to students and when students stopped being students and became customers.
[1] Sullivan, Arthur; Steven M. Sheffrin (2003). Economics: Principles in action. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458: Pearson Prentice Hall. pp. 171.
[2] The Cartel, (00:08:11)
[3] Adrianson, Alex. “The Cartel: How Special Interests Block Real Education Reform.” The Foundry Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation. N.p., 30 July 2009. Web. 24 Feb. 2013.
While reading your video analysis on The Cartel, I found myself connecting some aspects of the issues presented in it to issues discussed in The Lottery. Both films view charter schools as the best solution to the education crisis that exists today. It is also interesting how both films criticized the demand for increased spending as the solution to better schools. In The Lottery, Geoffrey Canada, President and CEO of the Harlem Success Academy, (the school that was the focus of the documentary) discussed that charter schools receive the same amount of funding and often have the same class sizes as traditional public schools, but they are considerably more successful. Therefore, suggesting that education spending should be less of the focus while trying to improve the education system. Both films point fingers toward the teachers unions as being the culprits of the failures of the education system because they are not truly invested in the children’s interests, but the adults (specifically the teachers) instead. Unlike The Lottery, which used the lives of four children looking to score the winning ticket to educational success to capture the hearts of the viewers, The Cartel focuses on the administrators instead of parents who often blamed for the reason why children are not succeeding. This distinction frankly suggests that the failures of the system are much more complex than most people think because of the higher ups that are involved. Although both films offer a different lens to examine the education system and possible ways that it can fixed, both filmmakers should have dug a little deeper to longitudinally examine if the new solutions that are being proposed (charter schools) are actually successful or if they will eventually lead us back to the status quo.
I enjoyed reading your video analysis and seeing how my film relates and how they could have further contributed to the education debate beyond the efforts that they made.
-Victoria
As I read your analysis of The Cartel, I was reminded of the documentary I looked at, The Lottery. Both films are similar in the sense that they are very one-sided and have a clearly depicted “villain,” the teachers’ union. The Lottery does this by showing an interview with the President of the teachers’ union in 2008. She is essentially caught red-handed in a lie trying to protect tenured teachers that are under qualified and should have been fired a long time ago. I’ve also seen The Cartel before, and if I remember correctly, the director does something similar with another member of the union. The Lottery does this to make charter schools seem like the only option.
I also saw a comparison between The Cartel and The Lottery in the demographic location of both films. Just as yours focuses primarily on the New Jersey public school system, my film only looks at New York City, specifically Harlem and the Bronx. I think this is interesting and is one of the reasons they are both so controversial; it seems like a generalization to apply statistics from one state to the entire country, as interesting or jarring as they may be. I really enjoyed reading your analysis and thought you made some great points!
Rachel, I love your analysis on “The Cartel.” I think you did an excellent job at exposing the films insensitivity to the humanity of the education process. “The Cartel,” in direct opposition to “The Lottery,” focuses on the sheer numbers and statistics surrounding the finances of the education system, but lacks any foundational substance regarding the emotional severity of the situation. An interesting similarity in our films is that they both focus on a specific area. Large claims are made about the education system in both films, and yet they are only focused on a specific urban school culture. Your analysis of this notion in “The Cartel” opened my eyes to the similar position of the film “The Lottery.” Though my opinion on the film and my stance regarding the issue of charter v. zone schools has not changed, I am now interested in looking up similar debates in other, such as suburban or rural areas.
Rachael,
Similar to Lydia and Victoria, I also drew several comparisons between The Cartel and The Lottery. One statistic that really stuck with me when I watched The Lottery was that in 2008, the firing of ten unfit tenured teachers cost the New York City tax payers $250,000. You mention that New Jersey spends more money that any other state on public education which makes me wonder exactly WHAT they are spending the money on. I think it is easy for the public to see a statement like that and assume that New Jersey therefore must have an excellent public education system, but from your analysis of The Cartel and from The Lottery, we can see that the more money designated toward public education does not necessarily mean better schooling or learning.
Katie
Thanks for this very thoughtful video analysis, which clearly explains the new connections that The Cartel formed in your mind, while challenging the director’s decision to count luxury autos in one setting but not another.