GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Philissa Cramer and Pedro Noguerra roundly misconstrue the message of my book, Sweating the Small Stuff. I never suggest or argue that KIPP and other secondary schools that I describe as examples of the “new paternalism” are imposing alien values on disadvantaged students. In chapter two of my book, I describe the meaning of the new paternalism in schools, rooting it firmly in a 343-page volume from 1997 that was entitled, appropriately, The New Paternalism: Supervisory Approaches to Poverty. This volume documented at length an important trend in social policy and antipoverty strategies–and was published by the Brookings Institution, no bastion of reactionary thought. I didn’t dream up the moniker of the “new paternalism,” which, as I say, was coined at Brookings, a left-leaning think tank. Yet most critics of the new paternalism label have yet to read my book or are largely unfamiliar with the decade-old Brookings volume on the same subject.
On p.35, I address the question head-on of whether the new paternalist schools impose alien “middle-class” values on their students. Here is what I wrote: “Paternalistic programs, including paternalistic schools, survive only because they typically enforce values that ‘clients already believe,’ [Lawrence] Mead [the editor of the 1997 Brookings volume] notes. Rare is the parent who thinks it is a good idea for their child to be disruptive or do poorly in school. But many paternalistic programs remain controversial because they seek to change the lifestyles of the poor, immigrants, and minorities, rather than the lifestyles of middle-class and upper-class families. The paternalistic presumption, implicit in the schools portrayed here, is that the poor lack the family and community support, cultural capital, and personal follow-through to live according to the middle-class values that they, too, espouse.”
KIPP and the other “new paternalist” schools I wrote about are highly-prescriptive schools; they care not only about academics but about building character by cultivating traits like self-discipline, perseverance, the ability to plan ahead, and politeness. Conservatives would say that these schools are cultivating traditional virtues. Liberals–and most of the schools I wrote about are founded by liberals–would argue that the schools are building up the “non-cognitive” skills that will allow students to persist in college and and succeed in the workplace. The latter position has been staked out by liberal luminaries like Christopher Jencks, James Heckman, and Richard Rothstein, a point that I explicitly make in my book. I imagine that Pedro Noguerra agrees that high-performing schools for low-income students do tend to build these “non-cognitive” skills in students. But my book does not contend that educators must treat the culture of poor kids as the problem. I argue that paternalistic programs only work when they are in accordance with people’s values, even if low-income families sometimes lack the resources and support to act upon those values.

David, I really appreciate your thoughtful comment. Just to distill, for the record and to make sure I have it right, the central point you raise here as in your book is the difference between lifestyles and values. The new paternalistic schools are changing lifestyles by accentuating inherent and shared values. Correct?

I wonder if the missing link – and the reason some will continue to take issue with the schools you chronicled – is culture. Does culture fit in the bin of “lifestyle” or of “values”?

I was recently at a seminar at Longfellow Hall on the campus of Harvard University and I listened to Mr. Whitman talk about his book. I am impressed with the successes and the respectful treatment of the students throughout the various schools profiled. I worked in one of the buildings noted in the book, although my school is not mentioned. Since the time the data was collected, we have modeled some of our programs after the other school and taken advantage of the NEW PATERNALISM. Longer school day to support the school community and address the specific social/emotional and academic needs of the student population. I hope everyone who reads Mr. Whitman’s book is educated to what can make a difference. I look forward further conversations with students, parents, educators and community leaders to make continued progress in our quest for the best.