"Lions For Lambs"

"Write a blog entry reflection for 'Lions for Lambs.'" Easy enough, I thought, so here I am. Except for the fact that I am handicapped in my analysis because of the technical difficulties in Olin 102. As a result of this, I saw the opening twenty minutes of the movie, which I didn't quite understand. Therefore, come Monday night at 6:00 pm, I will be able to give a more thorough explanation of the "why" in education. As for right now, however, I will reveal all I can.

The Congressman/Senator represents the idea that in the education field, we need to be ever-adapting to new circumstances and challenges. ( Maybe it is for that purpose we educate children, to be open to new ideas and to formulate the new ideas to deal with new situations.) The Congressman is aware that his plan for the troops in the Middle East has failed thus far, and in reaction to that he proposes a change in strategy to stay in the game. In the same way, we see children not meeting the standards in the classroom, so we change our tactics. The congressman is playing the part of the school administrator (or President Bush with his "No Child Left Behind" act) in order to raise the level of achievement, to "win the war" on the achievement gap. However, with the congressman, we are able to see the almost instantaneous impact his tactics have on the "students" (the troops).

We are introduced to the troops in what seems to be a briefing on the new plan. But instead of unanimous support, the Sergeant is bombarded with questions, inconsistencies in the tactics. All this is pointed out by an intelligent private. In this scenario, the sergeant represents the teacher, forced into a new curriculum. He is outwardly confident in what he is telling the troops. But ultimately he is questioning the plan. The troops on the other hand represent the students, who at this point can say nothing against the new approach, and must do as their told. Although the troops have valid concerns about the tactics, they are utterly at the whim of Washington (administration, teacher, etc). This could also be a reason why we educate: so people learn to do what they're told.

I have no idea why the Californian kid is in the picture right now, but I do know that he is wasting his life and is reluctant to put forth any effort. Why do we educate kids who don't want to learn? What is the point (if any?)

More to come.

Ms. Rachel Gabbert