Paul,

Thanks for the invitation to be a part of the book club - and for writing Whatever It Takes, a profoundly important antidote to what too often prevails in conversations about education, which could be titled simply, Whatever.

I've been intrigued by a debate taking place, which you addressed in a recent Slate piece. The scholars and social scientists who refer to themselves (in somewhat unwieldly terms) as the Broader, Bolder Approach to Education VS the Education Equality Project. As I understand it, the former believe we need to focus on early education, on family, on neighborhood, on health care and the latter believes we need to focus on reforms in the schools and more pointedly on reforms in the classroom. To be honest, I'm not quite sure why the divide. How can you talk about one without addressing the other? It's in part what's so intriguing about what Canada's attempting. He seems to viscerally understand that one of the central institutions in this whole conversation is family, and yet also the most difficult institution to tinker with. But he's figured out ways to involve families, not only in the schools but more importantly in the education of their children. I often cringe at the notion of parenting classes - which are often paternalistic and diminishing. But Canada talks about it in a way that makes sense, and more importantly does it in the context of rearranging the dynamics of the local schools. It's as if he's saying to the parents, Come on now, we need you. Your kids need you. And in return for their engagement he promises schools that teach, that won't let kids fall through the cracks, that will begin teaching kids at an early age and not be constrained by the traditional limitations of school procedures and schedules. That seems a rather fair bargain.

It was also interesting that on Fresh Air today, Canada talked some about the forces bearing down on these children, especially the violence. He's right on. We ask far too much of our teachers. How can we possibly ask them to teach if their students can't concentrate? In our inner-cities, we see kids who have been exposed to trauma and who as a consequence act out violently, who suffer from depression, who are hyperactive, who even have flashbacks and often turn to drugs as a kind of self-medication. Earlier this year, over the course of six weeks, two students at Chicago's Community Christian Alternative Academy were murdered on the streets. Myra Sampson, the principal, told me that students would come up to her in the hall and declare, "I'm next." One student had to be hospitalized because he was having hallucinations that the deceased was talking to him. "They're in a constant heightened state of arousal," Sampson told me. "They can't learn. Honestly, I'm not sure what to do." On Fresh Air, Canada underscored the need for readily available psychological resources for these children. It's just one instance, a rather stark one, where life in the classroom intersects with life in the streets (or at home.) In other words, how can we not tangle with both simultaneously? How can we think we'll reform our schools if we do nothing about the violence, or about the lack of well-paying jobs, or about the inaccessibility of even basic medical or dental care? And conversely how can we think about rebuilding community or fortifying family if we don't reimagine the one institution which has the potential to give a step up to those whose lives don't measure up to the American ideal, the one institution which has the potential to equalize that proverbial playing field: school.

This divide between those who call themselves the Broader, Bolder Approach to Education and the Education Equality Project feels like a false one. Maybe it's just a question of emphasis - or priority. But for anyone who believes that those who are growing up in poverty, especially in the deep poverty of our cities, is there because of circumstance (and not because of flaws in character) it seems self-evident that schools are the key, but that to re-imagine them without re-imaging community and reengaging families would be a mistake. And it feels like Canada gets that. He clearly has put his money on education as the key (and I think he's right to do that) but he also sees clearly the forces bearing down on his students, forces which have nothing to do with what happens inside the walls of his schools.

Again, kudos on such a provocative, incisive book. I've been recommending it to anyone who'll listen.

best,

Alex