Join the conversation

I was wrong. I thought the debate between the value of schools and the value of community support for children was winding down, but it seems the debate is alive and well in the pages of the Washington Post.

Joel Klein, Michael Lomax, and Janet Murguia resurrected it in an op-ed last Friday. Their opening strikes me as a bit of a strawman:

In the debate over how to fix American public education, many believe that schools alone cannot overcome the impact that economic disadvantage has on a child, that life outcomes are fixed by poverty and family circumstances, and that education doesn't work until other problems are solved.

I don't know many people who believe that education won't work "until" we fix all the other problems. Groups like the Broader, Bolder Approach (which is a likely target of the op-ed) call for robust work to improve schools and address those factors outside of schools that can hinder students' learning.

The op-ed's following sentences might be jarring to people who work in and for schools: "This theory [that life outcomes are fixed] is, in some ways, comforting for educators. After all, if schools make only a marginal difference, we can stop faulting ourselves for failing to make them work well for millions of children."

Few educators would be "comforted" to think they can make only a "marginal difference." Why go into a line of work that yields such small financial rewards if you don't think you can make a difference? How depressing

The op-ed's closing paragraph betrays the either/or thinking that sustains the old debate: "Apologists for our educational failure say that we will never fix education in America until we eradicate poverty. They have it exactly backward: We will never eradicate poverty until we fix education"

Shouldn't we really try to fix schools and poverty together? Great schools strengthen poor communities. But strong communities also strengthen schools. That's the principle behind the Harlem Children's Zone, Ready by 21, Say Yes to Education and a host of other efforts that are actually changing the prospects of poor children in some places around the country.

Such efforts are not as widespread as they should be. It will take a lot of work, a lot of outreach, and even a lot of PR to expand the approach. I worry that attempts to paint BBA supporters as "apologists" might get in the way of these efforts. It may also give ammunition to people who want to cut back on community supports in these harrowing budget years.

In fact, we need to use all the tools in our toolbox to improve the lot of our children.