Form: Comparatively, this podcast by Ira Glass was, in most senses, “better” than the homemade podcast: Exposing the Mythology of Education Reform. Ira Glass’s podcast had a clearer sound and an overall better quality. The podcast included music interludes for traditions, as well as background music behind the speaker’s voice. In addition, this podcast was shorter making the material more concise and to the point. I believe that this aspect allowed the listener to walk away with a better understanding of the underlining message. After listening to the two podcasts and comparing, I believe that I would rather model my own podcast after Glass’s podcast. Especially since our time allowance is similar, I think that my podcast could also include many of the same aspects (like music and a clearer sound) that Glass’s podcast did.
Besides being an overall better quality, I think that Ira Glass’s podcast was also more compelling than the homemade podcast we had previously listened to. More striking, Ira Glass’s podcast had an emotional and personal story straight from the source (Jada). Jada’s story allowed listeners to become emotionally invested in the podcast’s message in a short amount of time. This is another aspect I think I could use in my own podcast to make it more compelling. However, I think I would only use a personal story has a prologue, instead of as the meat of the entire podcast.
Content: Jada’s story about moving from a poor to well-funded school and then back to a poor school again was extremely touching. In Jada’s words, the well-funded suburban school had more resources like a computer lab and greenhouse; as well as, teachers who were more serious about their students. In one comparison, Jada reflected on science in her old, poorly-funded urban school as being taught from a book with no interaction-simply putting a pumpkin seed in a bag. Comparatively, the suburban school had a greenhouse where students could actually watch a variety of plants grow! In short, Jada was much more satisfied, stimulated, and open to learning at her new school.
That is why when Jada had to go back to her poorly funded school she was devastated. Although Jada had completely broken the rules by lying about her address, she felt it was unfair or the dumbest thing she ever saw that students couldn’t get an equal education because they didn’t live in the same district. She found her old school (after experiencing the well-funded school) to be different. The students were disruptive and she simply knew she would never learn as much.
I can’t help but agree with Jada. The public school system is inherently unfair. If it is unjust to separate students by color or race, then it should be equally as unjust to separate them by where they live. This is especially true because students really have no choice or control over the decision on where their parents choose to live. I agree with the statement that concluded the podcast (and I think summed up the issue nicely), “the neighborhood of a child isn’t their destiny all the time, but oftentimes it is”.
From the evidence presented by Jada’s story, I think that several education reform efforts should be pursued. First, there should be an effort to get more resources to poorer schools. Poor districts should not be spending half as much money on their students as the well-funded districts do. Poor districts should also get to experience some luxuries like computer labs or greenhouses. Another reform effort could be one of a school voucher or open enrollment, as the Glass readings had suggested. This would give students a choice. Students would not be limited in their options or forced back into a “bad” school like Jada was.
Does anyone have an opinion to add?
Comments
2 responses to “Is it fair to limit a student to a ‘bad’ school?”
Yes, more resources should be provided for poorer schools, and yes, poor districts should also get to experience the luxuries that are present in wealthier districts. It makes me sick to think that students are stuck in bad schools because that is where they happen to live. I completely agree with you that students should have a choice, however, after watching “Waiting for Superman,” it has become evident to me that this choice cannot be possible. Watching the system of the lottery was heartbreaking and it seems like a process that should not be taking place. Students should not just be numbers who “luck” in to the better public schools. However, it opened my eyes to the unavoidable fact that there just isn’t enough room in the schools for every student to be accepted.
I think that a choice would be the most ideal situation, but the public school system is providing an education for too many children for everyone to be able to choose which school they want. There would be over-populated schools and under-populated schools. All students and families would choose the best schools which means that there will not be enough room to hold all these students. This makes it more clear that there are bad schools that no one wants to attend. I think this is the more important problem and funding is what can fix this. If we focus on improving the resources and conditions of the so-called “bad” schools, then students won’t be over-crowding the one good school in the district because there will be more “good schools” to choose from.
I will right away grab your rss feed as I can not find your e-mail subscription link or e-newsletter service. Do you have any? Kindly let me know so that I could subscribe. Thanks.