In his last post Paul posted a question for me asking what the current point of divide is among Democrats. It's a good question, but in asking Paul also reminds us that the real point of this discussion is to call attention to his great book, so let me do that again: It's a really good book that you should read regardless of where you come down in these various debates.

Paul interpreted my previous post to be somewhat dismissive of the interventions that the "Bigger Bolder" calls for because I was vague in my wording. That was just a style issue of writing for a blog and not my intent. The "Bigger Bolder" crowd does offer specific interventions, which overall I strongly support (although less because there is overwhelming evidence, something that is debatable, but rather because it's a compelling logic model for how to approach some of these problems).

Read more »

Paul,

At the end of one of your entries, you ask why aren't more cities trying something akin to Canada's Baby College. More broadly, I'd ask why - given all that we know - isn't there a greater public commitment to early childhood education? (To say nothing of a greater commitment to education in general, but more on that later.)

I think parenting classes are a tough public sell, mostly because we get jittery when trying in any way to intervene in the lives of families. A number of years ago, early in the Bush administration, before 9/11, before the disastrous foreign policy, there was conversation about the importance of marriage. The proponents of some kind of marriage program were roundly jeered at, especially by liberals, in large part because it smacked of paternalism, and of sticking our noses in places government didn't belong.

Read more »

I feel pretty lucky to be involved in a conversation with sharp thinkers like Andy Rotherham, Alex Kotlowitz, and Amy Wilkins - let alone a conversation in which I get to refer (and link) to my book.

Both Alex and Andy wrote explicitly about the divide between the two camps in the Democratic Party on education today - a subject I've also written about on Slate recently. It's a fascinating and compelling question, for me. Sometimes this divide can seem fairly artificial, as Alex suggested, and sometimes it can seem pretty real, as Andy wrote. I'm hoping Andy can say a bit more about what he thinks is behind the schism.

Personally, I'm certainly sympathetic to the principles of the Education Equality Project. And it's not that I want to talk any of that manifesto's signers out of their focus on schools and accountability.

Read more »

In Alex Kotlowitz's post on Monday, he gave what I thought was a particularly insightful summary of Geoffrey Canada's approach to Harlem's parents:

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.

Read more »

Paul and TPM, Thank you for inviting me to participate in this week's discussion. I'll echo the previous posts by saying that Paul's book is compelling and terrific in so many ways, and I am sure that it will push the education debate in some important directions.

There's no question that the Harlem Children's Zone is an exciting, innovative model that's producing results. But refining and replicating it and other projects like it takes time. Right now, our kids and our nation don't have a moment to spare.

Read more »

First let me thank TPM for hosting this discussion and Paul for inviting me to participate. Paul has a lot of fans in the education policy community because his work at the Times Magazine has elevated the discourse around education a great deal, and everyone who cares about education is in his debt for that. Our corner of the policy world doesn't often get lights like this shined on it.

That's why Whatever It Takes is a wonderful book. It's a great story; Geoffrey Canada is just one of those magnetic people in life. It's an outstanding and accessible look at the complicated intersection of social policy, education policy, race, and class. And it couldn't be better timed. Although education is a second tier issue in a presidential campaign where the economy, foreign policy, and energy are understandably taking center stage, the school reform debate is quietly coming to a head.

Read more »

What happens to the kids after No Child Left Behind leaves them behind?

This, and more in Paul's comment threads. Check them out.

You may have noticed the Capitalism, it doesn't work too good. This should not be good news for John McCain. But it isn't very good news for Barack Obama either, since the secret watchword for his economic policy is "nudge," whereas what capitalism needs is more like an ass-whippin. Obama has good and smart economists, but they are so square you could jab yourself on one of their sharp corners.

McClueless is entertaining. By the way, did you hear he was a P.O.W.? He is going to clean up Wall Street, and he wants to free the economy of burdensome regulation. At least, that is the ideology to which he apparently adheres. Free enterprise, individualism, small government, "laissez-faire."

Except the model towards which the U.S. system and its politicians incline, like flesh-eating zombies to a ripe Rotarian, is not laissez-faire at all. It is the unified machinations of big corporations, high finance, and big, bad government, also known as corporativismo. (Sounds better in the original Italian.)

Read more »

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.

Read more »

When I set out to write Whatever It Takes, I wanted to accomplish two things. The first was, simply, to tell a story. I wanted to describe the life and work of Geoffrey Canada and chronicle his attempt to build the Harlem Children's Zone, an ambitious and well-funded nonprofit that stretches across 97 blocks of central Harlem. And I wanted to tell the stories of the children and parents in Harlem who are using the organization's resources to try to improve their lives.

But as well as offering what I hoped would be an engaging story, I also wanted to use the book to investigate a few questions that I found intriguing and hard to answer.

The main question was one that is disarmingly straightforward and yet infuriatingly complex: Why are poor people poor?

Read more »

Happy Monday, Café-ers,

For this week's book club, New York Times Magazine's Paul Tough joins us to talk about his new book Whatever It Takes: Geoffrey Canada's Quest To Change Harlem And America.

The book pivots around Geoffrey Canada, a poverty-fighting Harlem visionary-- Obama described his work once as "an all-hands-on-deck anti-poverty effort that is literally saving a generation of children."-- and his work on The Harlem Children's Zone, a $58 million organization reaching out to 7,000 children.

Sort of an interesting counter-example to Sarah Palin's grassroots snark.

Discussing along with Paul: Kira Orange-Jones of Teach For America, Amy Wilkins of the Education Trust, Alex Kotlowitz, author of There Are No Children Here: The Story of Two Boys Growing Up in the Other America and Andy Rotherham, co-director and co-founder of the Education Sector.

Join us!

A word of thanks to Rick Hertzberg, Alvaro de Soto, Bruce Lawrence, and to the many outstanding commentators who contributed to making the Book Club debate so much more original than what one can normally expect from reviews. Thanks also to Lila Shapiro for bird-dogging the process. There will be a new prime minister in Israel in a week or so, and, no doubt, renewed interest in the process once the US election is concluded.