It's quite late, and I really should be stepping away from the computer, but I wanted to point to a post by Harry at Crooked Timber. Harry discusses the depressing conclusions of Richard Rothstein's book.

Rothstein examines urban schools that have received a lot of press for their amazing results with at-risk kids. He questions whether these schools are really beating the odds. These schools have children who are more motivated than their peers and have more committed parents. The schools are led by charismatic leaders. In addition, their test results haven't improved in a systematic way. 

Scaling up innovation in education is a long standing problem. Separating educational success from SES has been darn near impossible. Sure, it's highly unlikely that the KIPP model can be fully replicated by the public school system – Rothstein's conclusions aren't that earth-shattering — but I think the KIPP model and other recent success stories shouldn't be entirely dismissed.

These urban charter school do help a small group of motivated students. But that's a good thing, right? We may not be able to help out thousands at this minute, but let's help a few hundred. 

There are some characteristics of these schools that can't be replicated. The public school system can't chuck out every problem child. They have to educate kids with special needs. Charismatic leaders don't grow on trees. That's true. But are there other practices that can be scaled up? A longer school year, for example. 

Luckily, we have more to work with than merely the KIPP schools. The Obama administration is putting in place new reforms. The urban teachers' unions can no longer call the shots. NCLB may be cursed by suburban parents, but the teacher certification requirements and tougher standards may have helped a lot of city kids. We need layers upon layers of education reform. We also need to improve the economic health of the cities.