Jeg er lidt nervøs, fordi min kone Yvonne sagde til mig, hun sagde, "Geoff, du ser TED Talks."
I'm a little nervous, because my wife Yvonne said to me, she said, "Geoff, you watch the TED Talks."
Jeg sagde, "Ja, skat, jeg elsker TED Talks."
I said, "Yes, honey, I love TED Talks."
Hun sagde, "Du ved, det er ligesom, virkelig smarte, talentfulde --
She said, "You know, they're like, really smart, talented -- "
jeg sagde, "Det ved jeg, det ved jeg." (Latter)
I said, "I know, I know." (Laughter)
Hun sagde, "De vil ikke have, altså, den vrede sorte mand." (Latter)
She said, "They don't want, like, the angry black man." (Laughter)
Så jeg sagde, "Nej, jeg skal nok være god, skat, jeg skal nok være god. Det passer." Men jeg er vred. (Latter) Og sidste gang jeg kiggede --
So I said, "No, I'm gonna be good, Honey, I'm gonna be good. I am." But I am angry. (Laughter) And the last time I looked, I'm --
Bifald) Så det er grunden til jeg er begejstret men jeg er vred. I år, vil der være millioner af vores børn som vi mister unødigt, som vi kunne -- lige nu, kunne vi redde dem alle. I så kvaliteten af underviserne der var her. Fortæl mig ikke at de ikke kunne nå ud til de børn og redde dem. Det ved jeg de kunne. Det er absolut muligt. Hvorfor har vi ikke fikset det her? De af os der arbejder indenfor uddannelse har holdt fast i en forretningsmodel hvor vi er ligeglade med hvor mange millioner af unge mennesker fejler, vi fortsætter med at gøre den samme ting der ikke fungerer, og ingen bliver skøre nok af det -- vel? -- til at sige, "Nok er nok." Så her er min forretningsmodel der simpelthen ikke giver nogen mening.
(Applause) So this is why I'm excited but I'm angry. This year, there are going to be millions of our children that we're going to needlessly lose, that we could -- right now, we could save them all. You saw the quality of the educators who were here. Do not tell me they could not reach those kids and save them. I know they could. It is absolutely possible. Why haven't we fixed this? Those of us in education have held on to a business plan that we don't care how many millions of young people fail, we're going to continue to do the same thing that didn't work, and nobody is getting crazy about it -- right? -- enough to say, "Enough is enough." So here's a business plan that simply does not make any sense.
I ved, jeg voksede op i den indre by, og der var børn der fejlede i skolerne for 56 år siden da jeg gik i skole, og de skoler er stadig elendige i dag, 56 år senere. Og vil I vide noget om elendige skoler? Det er ikke ligesom en flaske vin. Ikke? (Latter) Hvor man siger, ligesom, '87 var et godt år, ikke? Det er nu en ting -- jeg mener, hvert eneste år, er det stadig den samme tilgang, ikke? En størrelse til alle, hvis I forstår den, fint, og hvis ikke, så er det bare ærgerligt. Bare ærgerligt. Hvorfor har vi ikke tilladt at der finder nogen udvikling sted? Sig ikke at vi ikke kan gøre det bedre end dette.
You know, I grew up in the inner city, and there were kids who were failing in schools 56 years ago when I first went to school, and those schools are still lousy today, 56 years later. And you know something about a lousy school? It's not like a bottle of wine. Right? (Laughter) Where you say, like, '87 was like a good year, right? That's now how this thing -- I mean, every single year, it's still the same approach, right? One size fits all, if you get it, fine, and if you don't, tough luck. Just tough luck. Why haven't we allowed innovation to happen? Do not tell me we can't do better than this.
Hør engang, man kommer et sted hvor børn er fejlet i 50 år, og man siger, "Hvad er planen?" Og de siger, "Jamen, vi vil gøre det som vi gjorde sidste år, i år." Hvad er det for en forretningsmodel? Banker plejede at åbne og betjene kunder mellem 10 og 15. De drev forretning mellem 10 og 15. De var lukket til frokost. Men, hvem kan gå i banken mellem 10 og 15? De arbejdsløse. De har ikke brug for banker. De har ikke nogen penge i banken. Hvem skabte den forretningsmodel? Ikke? Og det fungerede sådan i flere årtier. Ved I hvorfor? Fordi de var ligeglade. Det handlede ikke om kunderne. Det handlede om bankerne. De skabte noget det fungerede for dem. Hvordan kunne man komme i banken mens man var på arbejde? Det gjorde ingen forskel. Og de er ligeglade med at Geoff er oprevet over at han ikke kan komme i banken. Find en anden bank. De fungerer alle på den samme måde. Ikke? Men, en dag, fik en skør bankier en ide. Måske skulle vi holde banken åben når folk kommer hjem fra arbejde. Det kan de måske lide. Hvad med om lørdagen? Hvad med at introducere teknologi?
Look, you go into a place that's failed kids for 50 years, and you say, "So what's the plan?" And they say, "We'll, we're going to do what we did last year this year." What kind of business model is that? Banks used to open and operate between 10 and 3. They operated 10 to 3. They were closed for lunch hour. Now, who can bank between 10 and 3? The unemployed. They don't need banks. They got no money in the banks. Who created that business model? Right? And it went on for decades. You know why? Because they didn't care. It wasn't about the customers. It was about bankers. They created something that worked for them. How could you go to the bank when you were at work? It didn't matter. And they don't care whether or not Geoff is upset he can't go to the bank. Go find another bank. They all operate the same way. Right? Now, one day, some crazy banker had an idea. Maybe we should keep the bank open when people come home from work. They might like that. What about a Saturday? What about introducing technology?
Jeg er fan af teknologi, men jeg skal indrømme for jer alle, at jeg er en smule gammel. Så jeg var lidt langsom, og jeg stolede ikke på energi, og da de først kom ud med de nye himstregimser, de bankkasserer hvor man putter et kort i og så giver de en penge, havde jeg det, "Det er helt sikkert at den maskine ikke tæller pengene rigtigt. Den bruger jeg aldrig, ikke?"
Now look, I'm a technology fan, but I have to admit to you all I'm a little old. So I was a little slow, and I did not trust technology, and when they first came out with those new contraptions, these tellers that you put in a card and they give you money, I was like, "There's no way that machine is going to count that money right. I am never using that, right?"
Så teknologi har ændret sig. Ting har ændret sig. Men ikke i uddannelse. Hvorfor? Hvordan kan det være, at da vi havde drejeskivetelefoner, da der var folk der blev invalideret af polio, at vi underviste på samme måde som vi gør lige nu? Og hvis man kommer med en plan til at ændre tingene, så bliver man anset for at være radikal. De siger de værste ting om en. En dag sagde jeg, jamen, hør engang, hvis videnskaben siger -- dette er videnskab, ikke mig -- at vores dårligste børn taber terræn op sommeren -- Man ser hvor de er i juni og siger, okay, der er de. Man ser på dem i september, det er gået nedad for dem. Man siger, whoo! Det hørte jeg om i '75 da jeg var ved Ed School ved Harvard. Jeg sagde, "Hold da op, dette er et vigtigt studie." Fordi det foreslår at vi bør gøre noget. (Latter) Hver 10. år gentager de det samme studie. Den viser præcis det samme: Dårlige børn taber terræn om sommeren. Systemet beslutter at man ikke kan holde skolen åben om sommeren.
So technology has changed. Things have changed. Yet not in education. Why? Why is it that when we had rotary phones, when we were having folks being crippled by polio, that we were teaching the same way then that we're doing right now? And if you come up with a plan to change things, people consider you radical. They will say the worst things about you. I said one day, well, look, if the science says -- this is science, not me -- that our poorest children lose ground in the summertime -- You see where they are in June and say, okay, they're there. You look at them in September, they've gone down. You say, whoo! So I heard about that in '75 when I was at the Ed School at Harvard. I said, "Oh, wow, this is an important study." Because it suggests we should do something. (Laughter) Every 10 years they reproduce the same study. It says exactly the same thing: Poor kids lose ground in the summertime. The system decides you can't run schools in the summer.
I ved, jeg undrer mig altid over, hvem der finder på de regler? I flere år tog jeg til -- Hør engang, jeg gik på Harvard Ed School. Jeg troede jeg vidste noget. De sagde det var den agrariske kalender, og folk havde -- men lad mig fortælle jer hvorfor det ikke giver mening. Det forstod jeg aldrig. Det forstod jeg aldrig, fordi alle ved at når man driver landbrug, sår man ikke sin afgrøde i juli og august. Man sår dem i foråret. Så hvem fandt på denne ide? Hvem ejer den? Hvorfor gjorde vi det overhovedet? Jamen det viser sig at vi i 1840'erne havde skoler der var åbne hele året. De var åbne hele året, fordi vi havde mange mennesker der skulle arbejde hele dagen. De havde ikke noget sted som deres børn kunne komme hen. Det var et perfekt sted at have skoler. Dette er ikke noget der er forordnet fra uddannelses guderne.
You know, I always wonder, who makes up those rules? For years I went to -- Look, I went the Harvard Ed School. I thought I knew something. They said it was the agrarian calendar, and people had — but let me tell you why that doesn't make sense. I never got that. I never got that, because anyone knows if you farm, you don't plant crops in July and August. You plant them in the spring. So who came up with this idea? Who owns it? Why did we ever do it? Well it just turns out in the 1840s we did have, schools were open all year. They were open all year, because we had a lot of folks who had to work all day. They didn't have any place for their kids to go. It was a perfect place to have schools. So this is not something that is ordained from the education gods.
Så hvorfor gør vi det ikke? Hvorfor gør vi det ikke? Fordi vores hverv har nægtet at bruge videnskab. Videnskab. Man har Bill Gates der kommer ud og siger, "Hør engang, dette fungerer, ikke`Vi kan gøre dette." Hvor mange steder i USA vil ændre sig? Ingen. Ingen. Okay, jo, der er to. Okay? Ja, der vil være nogle steder, fordi nogle folk vil gøre det rigtige. Som erhverv, skal vi stoppe dette. Videnskaben er tydelig.
So why don't we? Why don't we? Because our business has refused to use science. Science. You have Bill Gates coming out and saying, "Look, this works, right? We can do this." How many places in America are going to change? None. None. Okay, yeah, there are two. All right? Yes, there'll be some place, because some folks will do the right thing. As a profession, we have to stop this. The science is clear.
Her er det vi ved. Vi ved at problemet begynder med det samme. Ikke? Denne ide, nul til tre. Min kone, Yvonne, og jeg, vi har fire børn. tre voksne og en 15-årig. Det er en længere historie. (Latter) Med vores første børn, kendte vi ikke videnskaben bag hjernens udvikling. Vi kendte ikke til hvor kritisk de tre første år er. Vi vidste ikke hvad der skete i de unge hjerner. Vi kendte ikke til rollen som sprog, en stimulus og reaktion, råb og reaktion, hvor en del der var i at udvikle vores børn. Det ved vi nu. Hvad gør vi ved det? Ingenting. Velstående mennesker ved det. Uddannede mennesker ved det. Og deres børn har en fordel. Fattige mennesker ved det ikke, og vi gør ingenting overhovedet for at hjælpe dem. Men vi ved dette er afgørende.
Here's what we know. We know that the problem begins immediately. Right? This idea, zero to three. My wife, Yvonne, and I, we have four kids, three grown ones and a 15-year-old. That's a longer story. (Laughter) With our first kids, we did not know the science about brain development. We didn't know how critical those first three years were. We didn't know what was happening in those young brains. We didn't know the role that language, a stimulus and response, call and response, how important that was in developing those children. We know that now. What are we doing about it? Nothing. Wealthy people know. Educated people know. And their kids have an advantage. Poor people don't know, and we're not doing anything to help them at all. But we know this is critical.
Hvis man nu ser på præ-børnehaveklassen. Vi ved det er vigtigt for ungerne. Fattige børn har brug for den øvelse. Nej. Mange steder findes det ikke. Vi ved at sundhedsgoder er vigtige. I ved, vi leverer sundhedsgoder og folk småskændes altid en smule med mig, I ved, fordi jeg er forstander for ansvarlighed og data og alle de gode ting, men vi yder sundshedsgoder, og jeg skal skaffe mange penge. Når folk kom med midler til os plejede de at sige, "Geoff, hvorfor stiller du disse sundhedsgoder til rådighed?" Jeg plejede at finde på ting. Okay? Jeg sagde, "Jamen, du ved at et barn der har huller i tænderne ikke vil, uh, være i stand til at studere lige så godt." Og det blev jeg nød til, fordi jeg skulle skaffe pengene. Men nu er jeg ældre, og ved I hvad jeg fortæller dem? Ved I hvorfor jeg giver disse unger de sundhedsgoder og idræt og fritidsinteresser og billedkunst? Fordi jeg faktisk kan lide unger. Jeg kan faktisk lide unger. (Latter) (Bifald)
Now, you take pre-kindergarten. We know it's important for kids. Poor kids need that experience. Nope. Lots of places, it doesn't exist. We know health services matter. You know, we provide health services and people are always fussing at me about, you know, because I'm all into accountability and data and all of that good stuff, but we do health services, and I have to raise a lot of money. People used to say when they'd come fund us, "Geoff, why do you provide these health services?" I used to make stuff up. Right? I'd say, "Well, you know a child who has cavities is not going to, uh, be able to study as well." And I had to because I had to raise the money. But now I'm older, and you know what I tell them? You know why I provide kids with those health benefits and the sports and the recreation and the arts? Because I actually like kids. I actually like kids. (Laughter) (Applause)
Men når de virkelig bliver påtrængende, folk bliver virkeligt påtrængende, siger jeg, "Jeg gør det fordi du gør det for dit barn." Og du har aldrig læst en undersøgelse fra MIT der viser at når man giver sine børn danseundervisning vil det hjælpe dem med at løse algebra bedre, men man giver den unge danseundervisning, og man vil være henrykt over at barnet vil gå til danseundervisning, og det vil redde ens dag. Og hvorfor bør fattige børn ikke have de samme muligheder? Det er bunden for disse børn. (Bifald)
But when they really get pushy, people really get pushy, I say, "I do it because you do it for your kid." And you've never read a study from MIT that says giving your kid dance instruction is going to help them do algebra better, but you will give that kid dance instruction, and you will be thrilled that that kid wants to do dance instruction, and it will make your day. And why shouldn't poor kids have the same opportunity? It's the floor for these children. (Applause)
Her er noget andet. Jeg er en kontrollant. Jeg mener man har brug for data, man har brug for information, fordi man arbejder på noget, man tror det fungerer, og man finder ud af at det ikke fungerer. Jeg mener, I er undervisere. I arbejder, I siger, I mener I har det fint, ikke? Og man finder ud af at de ikke forstod det. Men her er problemet med at afholde prøver. De prøver vi udfører -- vi udfører vores prøve i New York i næsten uge -- er i april. Kender I det når man får resultaterne tilbage? Måske juli, måske juni. Og resultaterne har fantastiske data. De fortæller en at Raheem virkelig kæmpede, kunne ikke udføre to-cifret multiplikation -- fantastiske data, men man får det tilbage efter skolen er slut. Så hvad gør man? Man tager på ferie. (Latter) Man kommer tilbage fra ferie. Nu har man al denne data fra sidste år. Man kigger ikke på det. Hvorfor skulle man kigge på det? Man vil ud og undervise i år. Hvor mange penge brugte vi lige på alt det? Milliarder og milliarder af dollars på data der er for gamle nu. Jeg har brug for den data i september. Jeg har brug for den data i november. Jeg skal vide hvad du kæmper med, og jeg skal vide om det jeg gjorde afhjalp det eller ej. Jeg skal vide det denne uge. Jeg har ikke brug for at vide det i slutningen af året når det er for sent.
So here's the other thing. I'm a tester guy. I believe you need data, you need information, because you work at something, you think it's working, and you find out it's not working. I mean, you're educators. You work, you say, you think you've got it, great, no? And you find out they didn't get it. But here's the problem with testing. The testing that we do -- we're going to have our test in New York next week — is in April. You know when we're going to get the results back? Maybe July, maybe June. And the results have great data. They'll tell you Raheem really struggled, couldn't do two-digit multiplication -- so great data, but you're getting it back after school is over. And so, what do you do? You go on vacation. (Laughter) You come back from vacation. Now you've got all of this test data from last year. You don't look at it. Why would you look at it? You're going to go and teach this year. So how much money did we just spend on all of that? Billions and billions of dollars for data that it's too late to use. I need that data in September. I need that data in November. I need to know you're struggling, and I need to know whether or not what I did corrected that. I need to know that this week. I don't need to know that at the end of the year when it's too late.
Fordi i mine ældre år, er jeg blevet en anelse clairvoyant. Jeg kan forudsige skolers score. Man kan tage mig med ud på en hvilken som helst skole. Jeg er virkelig god i skoler i den indre by der kæmper. Og man fortæller mig at sidste år var der 48 procent af de unger der var på et bestået niveau. Og jeg siger, "Okay, hvad er planen, hvad gjorde vi fra sidste år til i år?" I siger, "Vi gør det samme." Jeg vil lave en forudsigelse. (Latter) I år, vil et sted mellem 44 og 52 procent af ungerne være på et bestået niveau. Og jeg vil have ret hver eneste gang.
Because in my older years, I've become somewhat of a clairvoyant. I can predict school scores. You take me to any school. I'm really good at inner city schools that are struggling. And you tell me last year 48 percent of those kids were on grade level. And I say, "Okay, what's the plan, what did we do from last year to this year?" You say, "We're doing the same thing." I'm going to make a prediction. (Laughter) This year, somewhere between 44 and 52 percent of those kids will be on grade level. And I will be right every single time.
Vi bruger alle disse penge, men hvad får vi? Lærere har brug for reel information lige nu om hvad der sker med deres børn. De høje indsatser er der i dag, fordi man kan gøre noget ved det.
So we're spending all of this money, but we're getting what? Teachers need real information right now about what's happening to their kids. The high stakes is today, because you can do something about it.
Her er den anden problemstilling som jeg mener vi skal være bekymrede over. Vi kan ikke undertrykke innovation i vores erhverv. Vi skal innovere. Og folk i vores erhverv bliver vrede over innovation. De bliver vrede hvis man gør noget på en anden måde. Hvis man prøver noget nyt, siger folk altid ting som, "Uha, fundats skoler." Hej, lad os prøve nogle ting af. Lad os se. Disse ting har ikke fungeret i 55 år. Lad os prøve noget andet. Og her er problemet. Noget af det kommer ikke til at fungere. I ved, folk siger til mig, "Ja, de fundats skoler, mange af dem fungerer ikke." Mange af dem gør ikke. De bør blive lukket. Jeg mener, jeg mener virkelig de bør blive lukket. Men vi kan ikke forveksle det at regne videnskaben ud og ting der ikke fungerer med at vi derfor ikke bør gøre noget. Ikke? Fordi det er ikke sådan verden fungerer.
So here's the other issue that I just think we've got to be concerned about. We can't stifle innovation in our business. We have to innovate. And people in our business get mad about innovation. They get angry if you do something different. If you try something new, people are always like, "Ooh, charter schools." Hey, let's try some stuff. Let's see. This stuff hasn't worked for 55 years. Let's try something different. And here's the rub. Some of it's not going to work. You know, people tell me, "Yeah, those charter schools, a lot of them don't work." A lot of them don't. They should be closed. I mean, I really believe they should be closed. But we can't confuse figuring out the science and things not working with we shouldn't therefore do anything. Right? Because that's not the way the world works.
Hvis man tænker på teknologi, forestil jer hvis det var sådan vi tænkte på teknologi. Hver gang der er noget der ikke fungerer, kaster vi bare håndklædet i ringen og sagde, "Lad os glemme." Ikke? I ved, de overbeviste mig. Jeg er sikker på at nogle af jer er ligesom mig -- den seneste og fedeste ting, PalmPilot. De sagde til mig, "Geoff, hvis du får denne PalmPilot har du aldrig brug for noget andet." Den ting varede hele tre uger. Så var det ovre. Jeg var så forarget over at have brugt mine penge på denne ting. Var der nogen der stoppede med at opfinde? Ikke en. Folk gik derud. De blev ved med at opfinde. Det faktum at man fejler, det bør ikke afholde en fra at drive videnskaben fremad.
If you think about technology, imagine if that's how we thought about technology. Every time something didn't work, we just threw in the towel and said, "Let's forget it." Right? You know, they convinced me. I'm sure some of you were like me -- the latest and greatest thing, the PalmPilot. They told me, "Geoff, if you get this PalmPilot you'll never need another thing." That thing lasted all of three weeks. It was over. I was so disgusted I spent my money on this thing. Did anybody stop inventing? Not a person. Not a soul. The folks went out there. They kept inventing. The fact that you have failure, that shouldn't stop you from pushing the science forward.
Vores job som uddannere, der er nogle ting som vi ved vi kan gøre. Og vi skal gøre det bedre. Evalueringen, vi skal starte før med børnene, vi skal sikre at vi støtter de unge mennesker. Vi skal give dem alle disse muligheder. Det skal vi gøre. Men denne motivations problemstilling, denne ide som vi skal blive ved med at innovere indtil vi virkelig får styr på det her videnskab er det noget der er helt afgørende.
Our job as educators, there's some stuff we know that we can do. And we've got to do better. The evaluation, we have to start with kids earlier, we have to make sure that we provide the support to young people. We've got to give them all of these opportunities. So that we have to do. But this innovation issue, this idea that we've got to keep innovating until we really nail this science down is something that is absolutely critical.
Og dette er, for øvrigt, noget som jeg mener vil være en udfordring for hele vores felt. Amerika kan ikke vente endnu 50 år på at gøre dette rigtigt. Vi er har ikke mere tid. Jeg ved ikke noget om en økonomisk klippeskrænt, men jeg ved der er en som vi går ud over lige præcis i dette øjeblik, og hvis vi tillader at folk fortsætter med denne tåbelighed om at sige at vi ikke har råd til dette -- Bill Gates siger det vil koste fem milliarder dollars. Hvad er fem milliarder dollars for USA? Hvad brugte vi i Afghanistan i år? Hvor mange billioner? (Bifald)
And this is something, by the way, that I think is going to be a challenge for our entire field. America cannot wait another 50 years to get this right. We have run out of time. I don't know about a fiscal cliff, but I know there's an educational cliff that we are walking over right this very second, and if we allow folks to continue this foolishness about saying we can't afford this — So Bill Gates says it's going to cost five billion dollars. What is five billion dollars to the United States? What did we spend in Afghanistan this year? How many trillions? (Applause)
Når landet bekymrer sig for noget, bruger vi en billion dollars uden at blinke. Når Amerikas sikkerhed trues, bruger vi uanede mængder penge. Vores nations virkelige sikkerhed er at forberede den næste generation så de kan tage vores plads og være verdens ledere når det kommer til tænkning og teknologi og demokrati og alle de ting vi bekymrer os om. Det er velsagtens håndører, det det ville kræve af os virkelig at begynde at løse nogle af disse problemer.
When the country cares about something, we'll spend a trillion dollars without blinking an eye. When the safety of America is threatened, we will spend any amount of money. The real safety of our nation is preparing this next generation so that they can take our place and be the leaders of the world when it comes to thinking and technology and democracy and all that stuff we care about. I dare say it's a pittance, what it would require for us to really begin to solve some of these problems.
Når vi gør det, vil jeg ikke længere være vred. (Latter) Så gutter, hjælp mig med at nå dertil. Mange tak. Tak. (Bifald)
So once we do that, I'll no longer be angry. (Laughter) So, you guys, help me get there. Thank you all very much. Thank you. (Applause)
John Legend: Hvad er frafaldet på et gymnasie som Harlem Children's Zone?
John Legend: So what is the high school dropout rate at Harlem Children's Zone?
Geoffrey Canada: Jamen, du ved, John, 100 procent af vores børn færdiggjorde deres gymnasieuddannelse sidste år ved min skole. Hundrede procent af dem tog på universitetet. Dette års afgangsklasse vil 100 procent bestå af elever der har færdiggjort deres gymnasieuddannelse. Det sidste jeg hørte var at 93 procent blev optaget på universitetet. Vi må hellere få fat på de sidste syv procent. Det er bare hvad der sker. (Bifald)
Geoffrey Canada: Well, you know, John, 100 percent of our kids graduated high school last year in my school. A hundred percent of them went to college. This year's seniors will have 100 percent graduating high school. Last I heard we had 93 percent accepted to college. We'd better get that other seven percent. So that's just how this goes. (Applause)
JL: Hvordan holder du øje med dem efter de forlader gymnasiet?
JL: So how do you stick with them after they leave high school?
GC: Jamen, du ved, et af de dårlige problemer vi har i dette land er disse unger, de samme unger, de samme udsatte unger, når man får dem i skole, falder de fra i rekordstore antal. Så vi har fundet ud af at man virkelig skal designe et netværk af støtte for disse unger der på mange måder efterligner det en god forælder gør. De chikanerer en, ikke? De kalder en, de siger, "Jeg vil se dine karakterer. Hvordan klarede du dig ved den sidste prøve?" Hvad taler du om, siden du vil forlade skolen? Og du kommer ikke tilbage hertil." En bunke unger ved at man ikke kan komme tilbage til Harlem fordi Geoff holder øje med en. De siger, "Jeg kan virkelig ikke komme tilbage." Nej. Du har bare at blive i skole. Men jeg pjatter ikke med noget af det her, og det har lidt at gøre med ben i næsen. Når unger ser at man nægter at lede dem fejle, sætter det et andet pres på dem, og de giver ikke så let op. Nogen gange har de det ikke i sig, og de siger, "Du ved, jeg vil ikke gøre det her, men jeg ved min mor bliver sur." Jamen, det betyder noget for børn, og det hjælper dem med at komme igennem det. Vi prøver at skabe et sæt strategier der giver dem undervisning og hjælp og støtte, men også et sæt opmuntringer der siger til dem, "Du kan gøre det her. Det bliver hårdt, men vi nægter at lade dig fejle."
GC: Well, you know, one of the bad problems we have in this country is these kids, the same kids, these same vulnerable kids, when you get them in school, they drop out in record numbers. And so we've figured out that you've got to really design a network of support for these kids that in many ways mimics what a good parent does. They harass you, right? They call you, they say, "I want to see your grades. How'd you do on that last test? What are you talking about that you want to leave school? And you're not coming back here." So a bunch of my kids know you can't come back to Harlem because Geoff is looking for you. They're like, "I really can't come back." No. You'd better stay in school. But I'm not kidding about some of this, and it gets a little bit to the grit issue. When kids know that you refuse to let them fail, it puts a different pressure on them, and they don't give up as easy. So sometimes they don't have it inside, and they're, like, "You know, I don't want to do this, but I know my mother's going to be mad." Well, that matters to kids, and it helps get them through. We try to create a set of strategies that gets them tutoring and help and support, but also a set of encouragements that say to them, "You can do it. It is going to be hard, but we refuse to let you fail."
JL: Jamen, tak Dr. Canada. Giv ham venligst en endnu hånd.
JL: Well, thank you Dr. Canada. Please give it up for him one more time.
(Bifald)
(Applause)