accomplish its own aims. Chapter 3 considers the ideology that gives the program direction and purpose. It analyzes the relationship of the students and staff to that ideology, including a discussion of the factors that seem to bind them to it. Chapters 4 to 6 focus on some of the important repercussions of this ideological restriction. Chapter 4 discusses the relationship of the staff and students to each other and to OSRP. The accepted ideology of the program sets a framework within which the staff and the students understand the roles that they are playing. This ideology limits these roles; staff do not feel free, for example, to permit criticism of institutions (such as schools) by their students. Chapter 5 highlights how the staff judge parents as blameworthy, thereby allowing themselves to act as substitute parents, with numerous repercussions. Chapter 6 presents the divergent views of OSRP staff, students, and their parents on the degree to which schools are meeting their responsibilities to these students. Despite their differences, all parties are influenced to some degree by the dominant American ideology of individual opportunity.
Finally, chapter 7 concludes with a discussion of how these findings relate to the existing literature on compensatory programs and alienated students. It also considers the implications of these findings for educators. Ultimately, the question to be discussed is how educators can best respond to the interests of the poor, the disenfranchised, and the at-risk children who inhabit our schools and our communities.