I felt like the author not only decried projects where the kids have access to parental help, but projects where the kids have access to good facilities. And motivation. I'm not sure what's left to measure if we attempted to remove support, facilities, and motivation.

The author seems to support the idea that schools should provide more support and facilities. That sounds good, but the outcome of some schools doing this (the infamous ones near New York, apparently) seems to be the focus of criticism. I'm left not understanding the thrust of the article.