Kahne & Westheimer Argument

In the article In the Service of What? Kahne & Westheimer spend a decent amount of time arguing the difference between charity and change.
I consider charity to be a short time fix, like what Kozol mentions in his article by saying it's a band-aid on a broken leg. There's nothing wrong with charity when it's all a person can do, but it is nothing compared to change. It's not a bad idea to supply clean needles to a drug ridden community, but it's an even better idea to try and fix the drug problem. Fixing the drug problem would be change vs charity. When working at a soup kitchen why stop there? Why not start a group or program that works to decrease the amount of people in your community who go hungry. Work to fix the minimum wage and make it a working wage. This is a shorter article that gets to the point of the difference between charity and change and address the fact that we need more change to progress in the future socially.
It doesn't take much to change someone's life forever instead of just changing it in the moment. For example, in our service learning projects right now I believe that we are doing "charity" work, not necessarily because the schools and students need us, but because we are changing their lives in the moment. If we do our best to nurture them and teach them the skills needed to thrive in our community, they can take those skills with them and have better futures. Don't just brush this off as an assignment needed to pass the class, look at is as an opportunity to better the lives of children who need role models to look up to.