Hollywood's Depiciton of Urban Schools: Documentary or Fiction?

Amanda M. Rudolph. (2006). In J. Kincheloe et al. (Eds.), The Praeger handbook of urban education Vol. 2. (pp. 421-429). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

The author emphasizes the importance of demystification of urban schools represented in Hollywood movies because this representation influences our perception of the schools strongly, thus affecting policies and regulations. In this article, she reviews three movies, Lean on Me, Dangerous Minds, and 187 in terms of demographic representation and Hollywood influences in the films.

First, the representations of ethnicity, poverty level, facilities and violence level are not correct, she argues.

"According to the U.S. Department of Education, minorities may comprise the majority of the student population in some larger schools. By no means are all large schools solely composed of Hispanic and black students. as Hollywood films may lead the audience to believe. " (p.425)

"Up to one-fourth of a school population could be poor based on the statistics, but in the films of Hollywood the majoirty of the students are depicted as living in poverty."(p.425)

"The representation that schools are forced to use portable building may be accurate, but it is not a problem exclusive to urban schools" (p. 425).

"The percentages of schools reporting less serious or nonviolent crimes were higher for the urban fringe and town schools than for the central city schools" (p.425).

Second, Rudolph analyzes 'the heroic individual teacher' and 'the domineering bureaucratic administraion' as Hollywood contributions to perpetuate the sterotype of urban schools. Bulman argues that this lone figure escapes the bureaucracy, speak directly to the hearts of the troubled youth and transforms them into studious and sincere students with middle-class aspirations; furthermore, these teachers succeed without training, any partnership or other necessary resources (cited on p.426). Rudolph underpins Bulman's argument by writing that problematic is that Hollywood signals only an untrained educator can make changes at school. With regard to uncaring bureaucracy, Rudolph asserts that Hollywood continues to emphasize the disconcertment between the faculty and administration to better urban education.

As for implications of these films for the general public, Rudolph argues that the urban school movie helps to maintain the sterotypes of minority groups and the urban school. Bulman contends that by simplyfing the phenomena of urban schools, Hollywood reflects middle-class anxiety about the problems of inner-city schools; simulataneously, implys that the problems can be solved through individual moral conversion of poor students, not involved with political commitment. (cited p.427).