Well in my case I've read a couple books about KIPP looking for evidence that I was wrong, but I didn't find any. The problem is that while KIPP is probably the fastest way to improve kids performance on Things That Can Be Measured, there's a lot of research showing how this approach is really bad for kids. And the pro-KIPP literature doesn't take any of this into account. My problem with Gates specifically is that not only does he not know what these problems are, but even when told about them he has no interest in learning about them despite the fact that they are extremely serious.

"The problem is that while KIPP is probably the fastest way to improve kids performance on Things That Can Be Measured, there's a lot of research showing how this approach is really bad for kids."

I don't understand this point here. If you cannot measure something, how can you determine what is an improvement and what is not?

I think what he means is: you can't measure a specific metric but you can see from the end result that some other technique ended up with a better overall result.

So are the really bad things you mention things like obliterating intellectual curiosity, fostering dependence on authority, crushing children's self-esteem and so on?

Because it seems like there are some people for whom those results define cruelty and failure and others for whom those kinds of critiques ring hollow and self-serving.

This looks like a debate of preconceptions, the most intractable of arguments.

"This looks like a debate of preconceptions, the most intractable of arguments."

The issue is that this debate isn't even taking place, and people don't know about the research on what happens to kids' intrinsic motivation and such under these programs. Now if the parents knew this and thought it was an acceptable tradeoff then that would legitimately be an intractable debate, but for Obama and Gates to force this onto inner city minorities without informed consent seems extremely wrong.

Could you point me to some further reading about the criticisms of KIPP? I've noticed obvious incompatibilities between their philosophy and the research catalogued by Alfie Kohn, but he obviously doesn't bring up KIPP by name.

As far as I know, there are no real criticisms of this program specifically yet. Most of what I have read from about KIPP comes from Paul Tough, both his series of NYTimes Magazine articles and also his book Whatever It Takes. He's clearly a supporter of KIPP, but in his book he also briefly acknowledges that the ideas underlying the program are not supported by science, unlike many recent initiatives to improve parenting ability. (IIRC the school he writes about in the book is not run by KIPP, but it uses their methodology.)