As tough as he may have been with punk students and in cleaning up the school, he just seemed too mean to his other teachers. Even the ones who didn't deserve it. Like the gym teacher or the music teacher. They were just doing their jobs. He yelled all the time and never listened to anybody. He deserved a punch in the mouth. He came across too arrogant and short-tempered.
share[deleted]
I think, though, that Clark's decision to expel the "bad" students was to get them to realize that the street is any better than not being in school. Kind of like a reverse pyschology. Apparently, it worked for some of the students.
share[deleted]
I'm a teacher, too. I think it is unethical to endanger the other students who are trying to learn and do well. The drug dealers, fighters and thugs make it hard to teach, as well as make the school unsafe. Keeping them in is unprofessional.
I have taught in schools like that and it is not enjoyable at all. In essence, the inmates run the assylum.
Education has been cutting off its nose to spite its face under some utopian idea that "all kids can learn." It's a load of crap.
Those teachers who can connect with the kids are amazing and my hat is off to them. But some will still refuse to learn no matter what. And we waste taxpayer dollars on them.
I compare this to a submarine that is taking on water and sinking. A captain must make the decision to seal off a compartment and drown 18 or 20 men to save the other 220. Education is drowning the other kids in order to save the few.
I know it sounds cold and heartless, but the ones that are constant distractions, threaten kids and teachers, deal drugs, and bring their destructive behavior with them owe the taxpayers, teachers, and other students. Society has offered a way out of poverty for them, but they ignore it. They take no responsibility for their actions whatsoever.
Joe Clark was right to expel those students. For all the politicians and do-gooders who want to educate and reform them, be my guest.
Well-said, scott-sw.
"[Success is] to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived."
-B. Stanley
Again, well said scott-sw.
WWE AND THEIR FANS FEAR COMPETITION!!
HE-MAN'S COMING TO THE BIG SCREEN!
AMEN scott-sw, I agree 100%! I'm not going to make excuses for kids who don't want to learn. And besides, they were in school for over five years anyway so it was time for them to go. I'm interested in the kids who DO want to learn and make something better of thier lives !
SEE IT, BELIEVE IT, CLAIM IT, REICIEVE IT !!!
What about the kid who didn't do anything his freshman and sophmore year and then was able to bring his grades up and go to college? If that child were to have been kicked out when he was a freshman he wouldn't have had the chance to go to college. Not only that but Mr. Clark kicks out all of those students without even seeing what they did wrong, he doesn't even see if they deserved to be kicked out or not. He just assumes that since the teachers said they were bad kids that they don't deserve a second chance and they don't deserve and education.
shareThat kid you are talking about would first make other kids quit school by bullying them, beating them up, .... you get the drift. Then he becomes a human being. So what? You sacrifice 10 students to save the a-hole? School is the one place students should feel free to breathe.
shareMarcos, you're a punk.
This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.
Have you ever even been to Paterson? These aren't kids who are acting out because mommy and daddy are off in the Camans. You can buy drugs and guns on virtually any corner. Bad kids are BAD kids in this city.
shareYou are wrong on that point. Clark had a complete record of what those kids kicked out did, and he carried it with him. He referenced it in the film.
Regarding the suspension of those kids who just started high school and just started screwing around, that's exactly what they need to get their rears in gear. Any kid suspended from any public school has the right to appeal the suspension, or choose to go to another public school. Usually they choose to go to another school, because the suspension was correct. If they wise up and take it to heart, they'll then do better afterwards.
Your method would just give them a revolving door to go to school whenever they felt like it to get out of the cold and get some lunch. By the time kids get to high school, they are not always still the sweet, innocent kids of grammar school.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
agree 100%
shareWell, he was too arrogant and short tempered. But our society could use some of that. Look at what a great job he did, it was well worth the few hurt feelings along the way.
shareYes but tell me what the music teacher and the gym teacher did wrong
shareGym teacher was wrong to ignore what Clark asked all to do, but it was a minor infraction, he was reinstated and Clark admitted he was mistaken.
Music teach was snide and arrogant herself, and not teaching to the curriculum as Clark wanted, and not really helping her students, but instead really only promoting herself and her own ego. So as in the case of two arrogant bulldogs meeting, the lesser one loses.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
scott-sw, WELL SAID!!! I've taught in public schools for 34 years, and I think mandatory attendance is a crock. Through the decades of my career, I've seen more and more young people who are apthetic to an education, and could care less about learning. Yes, Joe Clark was a dictator and that's exactly what Eastside needed. Did anyone not see the sad condition that school was in before he arrived and all the improvements that were made? The sad part of the whole movie is how politics can affect the education process. Here, Clark had cleaned up the school but some of the thug parents wanted him out, so they make a deal with the mayor who needed their support for his reelection. If I were running a school today and had a free hand at it, every day I'd load my troublemakers up with ex-drill sergeants and have them go clean up graffiti, pull weeds, and do other community service projects OUT of the classroom where the students who want to learn are. I'd tell these thugs,"You don't want an academic education? Fine, we'll give you an education somewhere else.
shareYou post "Who is he to decide which students can learn and which can't?" Well the people that hired him said he can and the people who trained hi said he can and the state he received his certification said he can.
But turn that quote around. Who are punks like those depicted in the movie and those in real life to decide that they can ruin the education of the majority of students who want to learn?
Any school in condition like that can be turned around as depicted in the movie. It just takes the political courage to do so by the school board and the public.
[deleted]
In reality, they didn't pass that test...It has been pointed out that while discipline problems lessened under Clark, the students' test scores did not rise as highly as the movie suggested. share
Even so, they did rise. It is not possible to raise test scores the way the movie showed, because of the lack of eduction these kids had in the many years prior to getting to Eastside.
The move was still in the right direction anyway. I had a principal like Clark, and in the hallway he always annoyed me, but I could sit and talk to him in his office like a person, and I'm glad I went to a school that was safe and where I got a much better education than the schools are giving out now.
Even in a school so large, the principal, one person, can make a big difference in how things are done.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
I understand that the drug-dealers, poeple who don't want to learn etc. are distractions, but no one has the right to throw them out of school
They might seem like they do not want to be taught, but thats because, when one lives in a ghetto environment, first on thje priority list is survival. They are doing anything they can to keep afloat and if done so illegally, that means they need help
Give them help, they have potential
but kicking them out is unfair and not changing anyones life, its only an expedient!
Your wrong, ellenajl8; principals can 'throw them out' if they continually disrupt the learning environment, have weapons, drugs, alcohol, etc. I agree it is expedient but what do you do, put up with their nonsense that endangers the other students in the school. Before we as teachers can 'save' them, they have to want to try to save themselves. The trouble with a most of these kids is the parents who either didn't want them, neglect them, abuse them, or try to be their buddies rather than their parents.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
If it wasn't working before he got there then he did his job. I bet lots of parents are singing his praises. Fighting a guy who has a knife and just his daily walk could have been threatned. Perhaps if you had been there you could understand his trial and success. I am so happy you don't speak for all the people in NJ.
share[deleted]
So he was just supposed to let the drug dealers, thugs, gangsters, and other vermin stay in the school to ruin everyone elses learning? I think if all schools were tough like this we wouldn't have half the problems we face in the public school system now.
Clark was an a-hole, and that was a point in the movie, and he eventually got better. Even so, how could he be a nice guy and clean up that horrible school? That would have been impossible, no one would have took him seriuosly and walked all over him.
I'm not surprised to learn that the real Joe Clark was an a##hole. I thought Morgan Freeman did a great job of portraying such an unconventional High School Principal. I agree that tossing out every student who is represents the reason why Eastside High is facing closure is not the answer and would not happen in real life. I've been a counselor for 10 years and you don't just toss out students as was portrayed in the gym assembly scene. There are procedures to follow and such a display of authority is unnecessary and potentially dangerous. Then there's the hallway scene with Clark and his VP. In that scene Clark is reminded that his teachers are working just as hard as he is but he doesn't notice because he wants to be the only 'go to' guy for the students. The VP refers to him as a bully and she was right. Clark has become a bully to get his way. She reminds him that he isn't the only one who cares about the students. Every teacher had vested their time and energy to prepare the students for the 2nd round of the upcoming Basic Skills Test. Clark had to hear that he wasn't the only one helping the students. He made a vain attempt to talk about all the work he had done but the VP quickly reminded him that it wasn't and could never be about him.
The hallway scene was, in my opinion, pivotal. Would such a scene happen in real life? Maybe ...
That scene serves as a reminder that to achieve a desired goal it should never be about one person but a collective effort.
Finally there is no room for bullying and Clark's first meeting with the teachers was not a chapter out of 'How To Gain Friends and Influence People'. He comes in as an outsider and immediately alienates himself from the teachers he's working with. In real life teachers would transfer and leave the new Principal to figure it out with those who chose to stay. Of course a Principal answers to a school board and Superintendent.
You are right. I don't think any kind of learning can happen under his reign. It is one thing to be a disciplinarian and another to be an intimidator.
shareClark was a former army drill instructor, and he ran the school like the army. The point of expelling the kids was to get the worst ones out there, like kicking out and court marshalling undeserible enlisters. And firing the teacher and suspending them for little things, yelling....the purpose isn't to intimidate or be an *beep* it's to create an atmosphere of discipline. If he won;t listen to a simple instruction not to move during the singing of the school song, than why would they listen to more complex instructions? As I said, the military is the same way. HE wanted to bring law and order to a lawless school, clean it up, and he did that by creating the environment of a military base. It may seem harsh, but most of us aren't around the military to understand how and why it works. And he did turn the school around.
My grandfather was a teacher in Trenton for 40 years, he taught in Trenton High, also a bad school, and taught when Joe Clark was doing his thing in Patterson. Some liked Clark, some didn't, but in the end, he did the job he was hired to do, he turned the school around and many teachers in NJ loved him for it. And most of his complainants were, frankly, fellow blacks, who didn't like that he made students and teachers responsible for their own actions instead of blaming outside forces *cough cough white people cough cough* for it. And also whites who felt white guilt
[deleted]
While they didn't pass the test, transforming the school into a place more conductative to learning and less like a drug filled crime ridden den WAS mainly the job he was hired to do and he did that.
Congrats though, you sound like an exceptional teacher for your students :) They are lucky to have you, you definately sound like one of the rare ones
[deleted]
Well sadly, most of these boards are filled with pretentious, rude or self-centered people who can't have a civil, polite and respectful conversation with someone who disagrees with you. As you stated, your opinion is greatly appreciated as well.
[deleted]
I see the point about if the teacher won't follow a simple instruction then would he follow something more serious. But he didn't let Darnell explain and is the school song so important anyway? Believe me, I wouldn't have come back to teach after that.
shareNo, you are wrong. My principal was just like that. I was a goof-off until I got to that school and got his attention. He straightened me out fast, and even though I didn't like it, I learned a hell of a lot more at that high school than I would have otherwise, to the point where I got all A's in senior year, and went on to graduate college with honors.
In my senior year, I had a chance to talk to the principal in his office, just us, about rebellion and authority, and he listened to my side and was not judgemental at all. By being mean, he was doing his job, and I realized he was not really an bad person, but sincerely wanted all students to reach their potential and had to treat some of us with toughness to get us there.
It was like having Sgt Stryker as the principal, and I am glad of it.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
ferri07501 sounds like 1 of the few ppl in life to pick a profession actually fit for themselves. I really like how you admit there are some students that are hard to deal with at times- but you still should'nt give up on them. strong statement. so many ppl just throw their hands up & give up.
I know ppl in northern nj,& I've heard clark is a jerk.
=======================================
popeye has ate his spinach
Saying the principal doesn't have the right to expell the drug dealers is like saying that they never have the right to kick anyone out of school for anything. People get suspended for fighting all the time, eventually they do expell students who just can't seem to learn from their mistakes. I know that teachers are never supposed to give up on their students but there comes a time that you can't help people who don't want to help themselves.
I'm wearing an ape suit. That means I don't give a *beep*
Yeah, everybody who uses a different method that you don't agree with is a jerk. Everybody who lives has been called a jerk by others at some point.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
Watching the scene again, the music teacher really had no place in a hell hole like that. Clark was a drill instructor brought in as a last attempt to turn that place around and a snarky upper middle class white lady worrying about some concert had nothing to contribute to the school that was necessary to save it. Clark wanted her to teach the school song, but she thought Mozart and an out of town concert were more important and she didn't follow orders. It made perfect sense for her not to return to that school. She probably found easy work at a nice suburban white neighborhood school.
Seeing Mr Clark in 67, he's got the whole angry black guy/freedom fighter look going on with the Nelson Mandela get up. So there was some angry black guy attitude going on with him. The only part of his personality I didn't care for was him shouting at someone he just asked a simple question. Tone it down guy, and save the yelling for when it is necessary. He seemed a lot cooler when we see him working at the clean elementary school. Going back to ESH brought out the meanest and worst of him to whip that place into shape, but he didn't seem able to flip the switch when necessary which pissed off a lot of people.
while he didn't have the right to just kick them out into the street with no education,what he was supposed to do is have them sent to alternative schools.
some students were'nt really trouble makers, they had low attendance,teen parents ect.
______________________________
brush your breath,brush your breath,brush your breath with dentyne.
[deleted]
op you are wrong, it was an extreme situation and clark handled it the only way he could
------------------
behold, sublime genius: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLPe0fHuZsc
[deleted]
[deleted]
Well, you are so obviously incorrect that you should be sent to detention, required to re-watch the film and make a full report on it, or be suspended. Here's why:
He was mean to the teachers who themselves were not doing the job they are paid to do, which is to educate their students, and more teachers need to be told this. He was also trying to give them a safe setting to do their job, which is half of the battle in a school like that, and then impress upon them the reason why they were there, and why they chose their profession. Also, it was a plot point to where he finally realized that he was inconsiderate of the teachers and admitted that, and moved forward.
The gym teaacher was suspended for a small, meaningless infraction, not for doing his job, and afterwards he was reinstated, and Clark admitted he waas wrong to suspend him. It's part of the story, look again. You will notice he was much more appreciative of that particular teacher later.
The music teacher was fired, but only after she rebuked Clark with her own arrogant and snide remark, and after Clark saw that what she was teaching was not a part of the curriculum, and when she refused to teach the curriculum. It was a correct firing, even if handled improperly.
The whole point of him being loudmouthed and arrogant was to show how he used these negatives, in any other situation, to bring a school to where it needed to be, and to also show his own growth away form being so bombastic, and attenuating his style to be more beneficial. It is as much a story of the growth of Clark as it is of the students and the school.
If you couldn't see that, then you must have gone to a school that needed a Mr Clark.
-----
The Eyes of the City are Mine! Mother Pressman / Anguish (1987)
Sorry rixrex, but that isn't how schools work. First, the music teacher was not fired for failing to teach the curriculum. He fired her because she wouldn't kiss his ass. Same thing with Mr. Darnell. A principal does not have the power to suspend a teacher, let alone fire them. He would need to make a case and bring it to the Superintendent who would then determine whether he/she thought it was worthy to bring in front of the board. There is a chain of command. If you notice, his Superintendent was pissed about how Clark handled the music teacher, and rightfully so. He even made a comment that if he was so big on discipline than he should respect his. Clark didn't respect the chain of command.
As for suspending 300 kids, he couldn't do that either. A principal can suspend a kid, but can't expel a kid. Again, he would have to build a strong case against each one of those kids and bring it in front of the disciplinary committee of the board. Parents would have the right to an attorney and the right to be heard at that meeting. No principal can just toss out any kid he wants.
Bottom line, this is an entertaining movie, but it is not the story of what really happened. In real life, the school barely improved, Clark was let go, and the state took over. IMO, he wasn't a hero to education. He was a blowhard who gave up on kids too easily and whose methods proved to not work.
Boy, you got me confused with a man who repeats himself- Omar Little
I agree with you about Morgan Freeman's Joe Clark. He was too arrogant and short-tempered. Especially considering he worked at a school.
share