Thought Leadership – Page 4 – A Floor, But Not a Ceiling

The Transparency Files: CAT4 Results Part 3 (of 3)

Welcome to “Part III” of our analysis of this year’s CAT4 results!

In Part I, we provided a lot of background context and shared out the simple results of how we did this year. In Part II, we began sharing comparative data, focusing on snapshots of the same cohort (the same group of children) from 2019 to 2021 (with bonus data from 2018’s Grade 3). Remember, based on which grades have taken the CAT4 when, we were only able to compare at the cohort level from 2019’s Grades 3-5 to 2021’s Grades 5-7 to 2022’s Grades 6-8. [Remember, that we did not take them at all in 2020 due to COVID.] In the future, that part of the analysis will only grow more robust and meaningful. We also provided targeted analysis based on cohort data.

Here, in Part III, we will finish sharing comparative data, this time focusing on snapshots of the same grade (different groups of children). We are able, now, to only provide data on Grades 5-8 (from 2019, 2021, & 2022, with bonus data from 2018’s Grade 6), but in future years we’ll be able to expand this analysis downwards.

Here is a little analysis that applies to all four snapshots:

Remember that any score that is two grades above ending in “.9” represents the max score, like getting a “6.9” for Grade 5.
We are no longer comparing the same children over time, as when it comes to analyzing a cohort, therefore we aren’t looking for the same kinds of trajectories or patterns in the data. You could make a case – and I might below – that this part of the data analysis isn’t as particularly meaningful, but we go into it open to the idea that there may be patterns or outliers that jump out and warrant a thoughtful response.
As we have mentioned, the jump between 2019 and 2021 might have been the place one would have expected to see a “COVID Gap” (but we largely did NOT) and between 2021 and 2022 one might expect to see a “COVID Catch-Up”.

Here are the grade snapshots:

What do these grade snapshots reveal?

Again, keeping in mind that we are not tracing the trajectory of the same students, outliers like “Spelling” and “Computation & Estimation” for Grade 7 in 2021 help us understand that whatever is happening there is more a function of the cohort than the grade, which means that the remedy or intervention, if needed, has less to do with the curriculum or the program in Grade 7 and more to do with better meeting the needs of that that particular cohort of children. [And you can see how that played out and with what results by cross-checking with the cohort data in Part II.] To be clear we aren’t suggesting that the only explanation for their outlier status is about them that it is the children’s fault! The deeper dive into the data helps clarify that this is not a “Grade 7” issue, it doesn’t absolve us from better understanding or applying a remedy.
You can see a little of the reverse by looking at “Computation & Estimation” in Grade 6. Now, in this case we are only dealing with being at grade-level or above, but you can see that Grade 2021’s relatively higher score (7.7) is an outlier. If the goal was to have each Grade 6 score nearly a grade-and-a-half above – which is certainly doesn’t have to be – you would look at the data and say this is a Grade 6 issue and we’d be looking at how students come out of Grade 5 and what we do in the beginning of Grade 6. Again, this is not about intervening to address a deficit, but I use it to point out how we can use the data to better understand outliers and patterns.
To the degree that this data set is meaningful, the trajectory that feels the most achievable considering we are dealing with different children is what you see in Grade 5 “Computation & Estimation” – small increases each year based on having identified an issue an applying an intervention.
The bottom line is essentially the same as having viewed it through the cohort lens: almost each grade in almost every year in almost each area is scoring significantly above its grade-level equivalencies.

Current Parents: CAT4 reports will be coming home this week. Any parent for whom we believe a contextual phone call is a value add has, or will, be contacted by a teacher.

The bottom line is that our graduates – year after year – successfully place into the high school programs of their choice. Each one had a different ceiling – they are all different – but working with them, their families and their teachers, we successfully transitioned them all to the schools (private and public) and programs (IB, Gifted, French Immersion, Arts, etc.) that they qualified for.

And now again this year, with all the qualifications and caveats, and still fresh out of the most challenging set of educational circumstances any generation of students and teachers have faced, our CAT4 scores continue to demonstrate excellence. Excellence within the grades and between them.

Not a bad place to be as we open the 2023-2024 enrollment season…

If you want to see how all the dots connect from our first Critical Conversation (Jewish Studies), our second Critical Conversation (French), our CAT4 results, and so much more…please be sure to join us for our third and final Critical Conversation, “The ‘Future’ of OJCS” on Thursday, February 9th at 7:00 PM.

The Transparency Files: CAT4 Results Part 2 (of 3)

Welcome to “Part II” of our analysis of this year’s CAT4 results!

In last week’s post, we provided a lot of background context and shared out the simple results of how we did this year. Here, in our second post, we are now able to begin sharing comparative data, focusing on snapshots of the same cohort (the same group of children) from 2019 to 2021 (with bonus data from 2018’s Grade 3). In other words, for now based on which grades have taken the CAT4 when, we can only compare at the cohort level from 2019’s Grades 3-5 to 2021’s Grades 5-7 to 2022’s Grades 6-8. [Remember, that we did not take them at all in 2020 due to COVID.] In the future, this part of the analysis will only grow more robust and meaningful.

Here is a little analysis that will apply to all three snapshots:

Remember that any score that is two grades above ending in “.9” represents the max score, like getting a “6.9” for Grade 5.
Bear in mind, that the metric we are normally looking at when it comes to comparing a cohort over time is whether or not we see at least one full year’s growth (on average) each year – here we are factoring an expected two full year’s growth between 2019 and 2021. As we discussed last year, that might have been the place one would have expected to see a “COVID Gap” (but we largely did NOT) and between 2021 and 2022 one might expect to see a “COVID Catch-Up”.

Here are the cohort snapshots:

What does this snapshot of current Grade 6s reveal?

They consistently function a full grade if not not more above the expected grade level.
That even with COVID we consistently see at least a year’s worth of growth each year across almost all the topics.
Technically, there is only six month’s worth of growth “Mathematics” (6.9 to 7.5) from 2021 to 2022, but that is already significantly above grade level.
The one domain, Computation & Estimation, where they are barely below grade level (6.0), we can now properly contextualize by noting that they grew from 4.4 in 2021 to 6.0 in 2022 – more than a year’s worth of growth in a year (the year we would expect a bit of “COVID Catch-Up”. This means, that they should be more than on track to match all the rest of their scores being significantly above grade level when they take the text in 2023.

All in all…excellent news and trajectory for our current Grade 6s.

What does this snapshot of current Grade 7s reveal?

Not much! This cohort has maxed out their scores in almost every domain in almost each year! And in the few places they did not, they were still above grade level – like “Spelling” (4.9) and “Computation & Estimation” (5.5) in 2019 – and grew at least a full grade level each year so that by now, in Grade 7, it is max scores all across the board! That is pretty awesome to see.

What does this snapshot of current Grade 8s reveal?

This class had a bit of stranger trajectory, but essentially ends where we would like. “Spelling” took a strange path, beginning way above grade level, plateauing with a dip where we should have seen two years worth of growth, and now fully rebounding to grade level. “Computation” had a more normal curve, but went from being consistently a year below grade level before completely catching up and now being well above.

To sum up this post, we have a lot to be proud of in the standardized test scores of these particular cohorts over time. The two areas (Spelling and Computation & Estimation) that were worthy of prioritization the last couple of years (this year’s Grades 6 & 8) were indeed prioritized. We began providing professional growth opportunities for language arts teachers in our school on Structured Word Inquiry as part of larger conversation about the “Science of Reading”. [Please check out our Director of Special Needs, Sharon Reichstein’s recent post on this issue, which I’ll also have more to say about in Part III.] With regard to Computation & Estimation, we discussed it during last year’s November PD Day which focused on “Data-Driven Decision Making” and it has continued to be a point of emphasis. The results indicate that these efforts have borne fruit.

The Math and Language Arts Teachers in Grades 3-8 have now begun meeting to go through CAT4 results in greater detail, with an eye towards what kinds of interventions are needed now – in this year – to fill any gaps (both for individual students and for cohorts); and how might we adapt our long-term planning to ensure we are best meeting needs.

Stay tuned next week for the concluding “Part III” when we will look at the same grade (different students) over time, see what additional wisdom is to be gleaned from that slice of analysis, and conclude this series of posts with some final summarizing thoughts.

The Transparency Files: CAT4 Results Part 1 (of 3)

As committed to “transparency” as I am, I find myself growing more and more ambivalent each year about how to best facilitate an appropriate conversation about why our school engages in standardized testing (which for us, like many independent schools in Canada, is the CAT4), what the results mean (and what they don’t mean), how it impacts the way in which we think about “curriculum” and, ultimately, what the connection is between a student’s individual results and our school’s personalized learning plan for that student. It is not news that education is a field in which pendulums tend to wildly swing back and forth as new research is brought to light. We are always living in that moment and it has always been my preference to aim towards pragmatism. Everything new isn’t always better and, yet, sometimes it is. Sometimes you know right away and sometimes it takes years.

I have already taken a blog post that I used to push out in one giant sea of words, and over time broke it into two ,and now three parts, because even I don’t want to read a 3,000 word post. But, truthfully, it still doesn’t seem enough. I continue to worry that I have not done a thorough enough job providing background, research and context to justify a public-facing sharing of standardized test scores. Probably because I haven’t. [And that’s without factoring in all the COVID gaps that come along with it.]

And yet.

With the forthcoming launch of Annual Grades 9 & 12 Alumni Surveys and the opening of the admissions season for the 2023-2024 school year, it feels fair and appropriate to be as transparent as we can about how well we are (or aren’t) succeeding academically against an external set of benchmarks, even as we are still just freshly coming out facing extraordinary circumstances. That’s what “transparency” as a value and a verb looks like. We commit to sharing the data and our analysis regardless of outcome. We also do it because we know that for the overwhelming majority of our parents, excellence in secular academics is a non-negotiable, and that in a competitive marketplace with both well-regarded public schools and secular private schools, our parents deserve to see the school’s value proposition validated beyond anecdotes.

Now for the annual litany of caveats and preemptive statements…

We have not yet shared out individual reports to our parents. First our teachers have to have a chance to review the data to identify which test results fully resemble their children well enough to simply pass on, and which results require contextualization in private conversation. Those contextualizing conversations will take place in the next few weeks and, thereafter, we should be able to return all results.

There are a few things worth pointing out:

Because of COVID, this is now only our fourth year taking this assessment at this time of year. We were in the process of expanding the range from Grades 3-8 in 2019, but we paused in 2020 and restricted last year’s testing to Grades 5-8. This means that we can only compare at the grade level from 2019’s Grades 5-8 to 2021’s Grades 5-8 to 2022’s Grades 5-8.
And we can only compare at the cohort level from 2019’s Grades 3-5 to 2021’s Grades 5-7 to 2022’s Grades 6-8.
This is the first year we have tested Grades 3 & 4 on this exam at this time of year.
From this point further, assuming we continue to test in (at least) Grades 3-8 annually, we will soon have tracking data across all grades which will allow us to see if…
- The same grade scores as well or better each year.
- The same cohort grows at least a year’s worth of growth.

The last issue is in the proper understanding of what a “grade equivalent score” really is.

Grade-equivalent scores attempt to show at what grade level and month your child is functioning. However, grade-equivalent scores are not able to show this. Let me use an example to illustrate this. In reading comprehension, your son in Grade 5 scored a 7.3 grade equivalent on his Grade 5 test. The 7 represents the grade level while the 3 represents the month. 7.3 would represent the seventh grade, third month, which is December. The reason it is the third month is because September is zero, October is one, etc. It is not true though that your son is functioning at the seventh grade level since he was never tested on seventh grade material. He was only tested on fifth grade material. He performed like a seventh grader on fifth grade material. That’s why the grade-equivalent scores should not be used to decide at what grade level a student is functioning.

Let me finish this section by being very clear: We do not believe that standardized test scores represent the only, nor surely the best, evidence for academic success. Our goal continues to be providing each student with a “floor, but no ceiling” representing each student’s maximum success. Our best outcome is still producing students who become lifelong learners.

But I also don’t want to undersell the objective evidence that shows that the work we are doing here does in fact lead to tangible success. That’s the headline, but let’s look more closely at the story. (You may wish to zoom in a bit on whatever device you are reading this on…)

A few tips on how to read this:

We take this exam in the “.2” of each grade-level year. That means that “at grade level” [again, please refer above to a more precise definition of “grade equivalent scores”] for any grade we are looking at would be 5.2, 6.2, 7.2, etc. For example, if you are looking at Grade 6, anything below 6.2 would constitute “below grade level” and anything above 6.2 would constitute “above grade level.”
The maximum score for any grade is “.9” of the next year’s grade. If, for example, you are looking at Grade 8 and see a score of 9.9, on our forms it actually reads “9.9+” – the maximum score that can be recorded.
Because of when we take this test – approximately two months into the school year – it is reasonable to assume a significant responsibility for results is attributable to the prior year’s teachers and experiences. But, of course, it is very hard to tease it out exactly, of course.

What are the key takeaways from these snapshots of the entire school?

Looking at six different grades through six different dimensions there are only five instances out of thirty-six of scoring below grade-level: Grade 3 (Vocabulary 2.2, Writing Conventions 2.5, and Spelling 2.6), Grade 5 (Computation Estimation 4.6), and Grade 6 (Computation Estimation barely falling short at 6.0).
I’m not quite sure what to make of Grade 3’s Language Arts scores altogether. Reading and Writing has been the most notable lagging skill for the Grade 3 cohort since their entry into Grade 2. This is in part due to disruptions to their learning through their foundation-building years in Kindergarten and Grade 1. In Grade 2, this cohort’s remediation was heavily focused on closing the gaps in reading and comprehension abilities, as developmentally this is what comes first. The remediation focus has shifted to writing at the start of Grade 3, as this is a lagging skill that was already identified prior to the CAT-4 testing. Supports and interventions have already been put in place to address this lagging skill and we have seen academic growth in these areas. To put it more simply: These are our youngest students whose early learning was the most disrupted by COVID and they have never taken a standardized test before in their lives. It will become a baseline that I imagine us jumping over quickly in the years to come – I’m inclined to toss them out as an anomaly.
Importantly, tracing the trajectory from our 2019 results to our 2021 results to 2022’s, we can now more conclusively state that Spelling and Computation & Estimation are no longer globally lower as a school relative to the other dimensions. I will have more to say about why we believe this to be true in Parts II & III.

What stands out the most is how exceedingly well each and every grade has done in just about each and every section. In almost all cases, each and every grade is performing significantly above grade-level. This is a very encouraging set of data points.

Stay tuned next week when we begin to dive into the comparative data. “Part II” will look at the same cohort over time. “Part III” will look at the same grade (the same group of students) over time and conclude this series of posts with some additional summarizing thoughts.

Leadership Begins With You

OK, so I guess technically “Leadership” begins with “L”, but a pithy blog post title that does not make…

I have been blessed to have two leadership experiences juxtaposed across two weeks that drive home the idea that leadership is personal – and that leadership development is personalised. I am going to spend just a bit of space sketching out what those two experiences were and then see if I can meaningfully connect the dots.

Two weeks ago, we had our November PD (Professional Development, and although we prefer to use “Professional Growth”, “PG” is not the phrase people know) Day at the Ottawa Jewish Community School and we decided that in terms of both content and pedagogy, we wanted to lean into personalised learning. And that is how we wound up with…

A phrase I am fond of saying is that “we should at least treat our teachers as well as we treat our students,” which is my way of saying that oftentimes what is good pedagogy and practise for teachers teaching is also good for teachers learning. If we “own our learning” at OJCS [North Star alert!] than our teachers should have an opportunity to own their professional growth and, thus, “A Day of You” was born. Now it was not open-ended – if you look at the fine print you’ll see “Based on Teacher-Led Evaluation Learning Targets”. That is because although they had lots of choices, we did want to ensure that the day (like each and every other day) moves them and us closer to the OJCS Learning Target. [What is this “OJCS Learning Target” you speak of? Ah, yes. Click here for an important refresher.]

Here is what teachers were asked to do…

And what tasks did they have to choose from?

You might need to zoom in if you are interested in the details, but you can see that we provided teachers with lots of choices to grow themselves in each of the domains of our Learning Target. You also can see at the bottom that in addition to working on their own or in groups, the Admin (with support of a few of our “Leads”) offered direct coaching as well. Like a good old fashioned Choose Your Own Adventure book (you young folk can follow the link if you don’t catch the reference), our teachers were able to create a Choose Your Own Professional Growth Adventure by filling out…

The mood and the energy in the building was fantastic and we are already thinking about our February PD Day! More to say on this down below…

You either walk inside your story and own it or you
stand outside your story and hustle for your worthiness.

Brené Brown

This week, I was in Los Angeles for the Spring Retreat of Cohort 12 of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) for whom I serve as one of the Mentors. [I have written previously about this work, including how it contributes to my work as a head of school.] The title of the Retreat was “The Leader in Me” and it is not my place to share here the details of the readings and the learning that served as the anchor for the exchanges and conversations that anchored our time together. What I am capable of sharing, was that it was a rare opportunity for both the mentors and the mentees to take a deep dive inward as a means to staking out the next steps and stages of our individual (personal) leadership journeys. We studied text, we analyzed personality inventories and explored leadership theories. We journaled and we shared and we journaled and we shared some more. We made ourselves vulnerable and received caring feedback.

As is true with my rabbinical school journey, I carry a certain amount of guilt about the time I spend in DSLTI because I tend to believe that time is a zero-sum game – each minute not spent at school is a minute missed. But the truth is that these experiences make – I genuinely believe – me a better leader, which is to the good of our school, our teachers and, ultimately, our students. And the whole point of this retreat was to underline that idea – that when leaders don’t take the time to nourish and think and grow themselves, that their organizations run the risk of growing stale and declining. When the oxygen drops, we put our masks on first and then assist others…

What’s the connective tissue? Well. The last thing we did at our DSLTI Retreat was to create our own leadership quotes to summarize what we believe to be true about leadership. Mine (and I wish I could share them all!) contains some words that readers of my blog will surely recognize, but I think in some ways connects the dots from these two leadership experiences:

The goal of leadership is to ensure that there is an inspirational floor and an aspirational ceiling for each and every person in the organization – including you.

Jon Mitzmacher

Weeks like these last two are reminders that I have to keep learning and growing in order to achieve my ultimate leadership goal, which is to unleash the talent and passion of each student, teacher and administrator at OJCS. If we can do that, then we will hit those Learning Targets and reach those North Stars. It is a journey that I am blessed to walk, along with fellow travellers, both within my school and across the globe. It is a journey with both a clear destination and, yet, no endpoint. It is a journey whose momentum can only be sustained through pauses.

And with these pauses behind me and two action-packed weeks left before Winter Break, it is time to hit “play”…

The Rare Blessing of Stable Leadership in a Jewish Day School

I have had more than my share of leadership positions in Jewish Education over the years. And that is pretty par for the course. Some of that is to due to changing social norms about “careers” and it is the rare person in almost any field who has the same position or works for the same company from entry to retirement. Some of that is due to the more unique pressures of educational leadership and the average lengths of tenure for independent school leaders continue to be alarmingly low (like less than four years) and, post-COVID, trending even lower. Some of that is due to the special circumstances of Jewish day school leadership which suffers from its own kind of “grass is greener” phenomenon. [I wrote a lot about this during my time in charge of Schechter.] And, finally, of course, there are the individual idiosyncratic decisions that play their part as well.

I say all of this to provide context to just how rare a moment we are experiencing here at the Ottawa Jewish Community School. As I wrote about a couple of years ago, I am now in the second year of a (second) contract that extends for an additional three years – putting my minimum tenure as Head of OJCS at nine years. That, by itself, is pretty rare. But the more local folk know that our school’s success does not hinge on my leadership, and certainly not my leadership alone. Part of our success relies on the partnership I share with Keren Gordon.

When I came to OJCS, I was not the only person starting a new leadership position. Ms. Gordon was elevated from her Special Needs Coordinator role (a role in which she excelled) and was named “Vice Principal” with a contract that matched mine in length. We were constructed to be a team, match-made with the hope of complementary skills and personalities, but I don’t think anyone could have predicted how quickly our partnership would bear fruit and how deeply it is has evolved over time. From our students to our teachers; from our parents to our board – to anyone who has spent meaningful time working for or with our school – I genuinely believe it is clear how important this leadership partnership has been in helping getting our school from where it was to where it is. But where is it going?

I imagine a question has occured to you. If I am now working through a second contract that will end at a tenure of nine years, what about Ms. Gordon? If her contract was originally tethered to mine, what now? Well. I am very pleased to let our wider community know what our Board and our Faculty have now known for a few weeks. That after a healthy negotiation, we have come to terms on that second contract. And there are two features of that contract that I want to name…

The first is probably obvious at this point, but worth saying out loud. Ms. Gordon’s new contract will again match mine so that we are guaranteed at least nine years of partnership guiding the school. I cannot underline with thicker ink how unusual that is and how much it will contribute to our school’s current and future success. In a world with less and less stability, our school is blessed with more and more. It matters. Nine years literally represents the journey from SK to Grade 8, so for the families who began when we did (before we relaunched JK), Ms. Gordon and I will wind up being the only leaders they will ever know. Our knowledge of our students, our teachers, our families and our community grows each year along the way – so each year our ability to guide our school closer to its North Stars grows as well. So that’s the first feature – the length of time. But there is a second…

The job of being a “head of school” is ideally split between the “CEO-like” activities that one might describe as “outward-facing” (at least so far as the students and teachers might experience it) and the “principal” activities that one might describe as “inward-facing”. A head of school has to embody all the work of running a nonprofit while serving as instructional leader…aspirational at best, but some situations and some people do function more evenly between the two spheres. It has become increasingly clear that here, at least during this window, I have had to occupy a bit more “CEO space” than “principal space”. But luckily, Ms. Gordon has been here, and over the last five years based on the quality of her work and the relationships she has nurtured, she has begun to occupy more and more of that space. And that is why, with great pleasure, I am happy to share that Keren Gordon is no longer the Vice Principal of OJCS; Keren Gordon is our Principal. (Cue the applause!)

Although this well-earned honor doesn’t change all that much on the ground, it is still worthy of sharing with our community and of celebration. Ms. Gordon is my right hand and partner in all the work we have done, are doing and will be doing over the next three and a half years (and who knows from there!). Together we will have been blessed to co-author a few chapters in the narrative of this school’s story – and if that story is a story of “success”, then one of its main characters will surely be “stability”.

Let’s Talk About French…Again. L’assemblée de Français 2022

As discussed, connected to our larger theme this year of “Getting Our Mojo Back”, last night we held the second of our three critical conversations this year, that will both hearken back to give everyone equal footing and dream forward to give everyone an equal stake. Last night’s “town hall” was dedicated to the school’s French Language Journey these last six or so years, and thank you to the parents who turned out to listen and to share. [For those of you who might have participated had we had made a virtual option available, please know that there will be occasions when we do go hybrid. We just felt/feel that for these conversations, it is easier to navigate live.]

What I’d like to do here, is provide a kind of annotated guide to the slides that were presented – layering in a bit of my own commentary – and ending with both some proposed next steps and opportunities for onboarding more questions and feedback from more parents. Parent voice is critical to our ability to dream big dreams, since you, our parents, are our most important stakeholder community and partner. Please add your voice to the conversation in whichever way is comfortable for you – comment on this blog, shoot me a private email, or make an appointment to come in. This takes the village.

Unlike the Jewish Studies Town Hall we held in recent weeks, last night’s did not go quite so far back to the beginning. We really began with a snapshot of what we have done in recent years…consider it, “Promises Made; Promises Kept”:

In terms of academic periods…

And in terms of pure time…it has increased this year (beyond what is reflected above) due to one of a number of more recent changes…

In addition to now offering French-language PE, we have also reorganized our approach to be aligned with the “proficiency” approach to language acquisition – a best practice which describe language learning by…

And with this commitment to the “4 Strands”…

And additionally…

And to ensure our teachers are up to the task…

Now that we are caught up about what is, let’s pivot to what’s next…

On the “After School French Programs” piece…we have received LOTS of positive feedback and interest in our first two offerings. A parent email went out the same day this post was published (11/25), so if you are a current OJCS family interested in participating, please check your email and be sure to respond to next steps.

Now these next slides are important not just in and of themselves, but what they represent (an external, objective assessment of French fluency) and create (an opportunity/responsibility to work “backwards by design” and update a curriculum map that ensures students from JK on up are best positioned to receive their certification. Let’s talk about DELF:

We are piloting the DELF in this year’s Grade 8 and are looking forward to best utilize it – again, not only as a way of “verifying” that our students have realized a certain external standard of French fluency (or to put it more bluntly, that OJCS graduates are prepared to transition to French Immersion in Grade 9), but as a way of working backwards to ensure that each grade level is preparing students for the next grade level with DELF success front of mind.

And finally, because I believe in naming those things which need to be named, let me acknowledge what I also believe to be true…

…we need to hire at least one French Language Resource Teacher as soon as the budget allows for it.

…we should begin exploring “what would need to be true for OJCS to offer a French immersion track at any grade levels”, understanding there are significant space/staffing/budgetary considerations at play.

…if OJCS is ultimately unable to offer the Core/Immersion options available through the public board at any grade level, then it has to clarify whether the model will continue to be Core/Extended (with however many add-ons, tweaks, supplements, etc., the model allows for) or whether its future is simply as a French Immersion Jewish Day School (à la Montreal). At some point it is fair to “call the question”.

So…let me repeat that parent voice is critical to our ability to dream big dreams since you, our parents, are our most important stakeholder community and partner. I am making a plea, again, to please add your voice to the conversation in whichever way is comfortable for you – comment on this blog, shoot me a private email, or make an appointment to come in.

This takes the village.

Please be sure to join us for our third and final Critical Conversation, “The ‘Future’ of OJCS” on Thursday, February 9th at 7:00 PM.

Let’s Talk About the “J” in “OJCS”…Again: The JS Town Hall 2022

As discussed, connected to our larger theme this year of “Getting Our Mojo Back”, last night we held the first of our three critical conversations this year that will both hearken back to give everyone equal footing and dream forward to give everyone an equal stake. Last night’s “town hall” was dedicated to the school’s Jewish Journey these last six or so years, and thank you to the parents who turned out to listen and to share. [For those of you who might have participated had we had made a virtual option available, please know that there will be occasions when we do go hybrid. We just felt/feel that for these conversations, it is easier to navigate live.]

What I’d like to do here, is provide a kind of annotated guide to the slides that were presented – layering in a bit of my own commentary – and ending with both some proposed next steps and opportunities for onboarding more questions and feedback from more parents. Parent voice is critical to our ability to dream big dreams since you, our parents, are our most important stakeholder community and partner. I am making a plea, here, while my word count is still under 200, to please add your voice to the conversation in whichever way is comfortable for you – comment on this blog, shoot me a private email, or make an appointment to come in. This takes the village.

We began by turning the clock back to 2017 or so to remind ourselves of where our journey began. Looking back is never intended to be disrespectful or disparaging of what was – there were, of course, lots of good things happening prior to my arrival (this is not about me!) – but we do want to be honest about what was true. So here’s…

Again, this did not mean that we did not have excellent teachers or that teachers simply showed up each day without having planned their lessons. We did and they did not. But it is fair to say that we had done the work of clarifying much about our program as a whole – its ultimate benchmarks and standards when it comes to academics, and its mission and vision as a “Community” school.

That’s pretty straightforward. That’s how much time we spent in Jewish Studies and how they were divided. What jumps out in the K-5 is the decoupled nature of “Hebrew” and “Jewish Studies” and the mirroring of French in terms of when streaming took place and what we called it.

It is hard to measure outcomes without data. But pay attention to those bullet points because the fact they were flagged then by parents as being of utmost concern absolutely guided what happened next. [That’s why adding your voices now is paramount! We really do act based on what you tell us!]

OK, that is what was true at the time. So…

We had a big task in front of us! Remember – or, know – that unlike in General or French Studies there are no external standards, curricula, or philosophies for Jewish Day Schools (of any type). It is up to each school to make these decisions – schedule, curriculum, and clarifying what kind of “Community Day School” to be – important and exciting work indeed. So…

How did we begin the work? DATA!

But also…

One of my great joys is that we have managed to create a space where each pulpit rabbi in our community is willing and able to sit around one table to engage in debates and disputes that are truly “for the sake of Heaven”.

So once we collected data, what did we wind up doing, beginning in the 2019-2020 school year?

That was quite a lot! And since then what else…

Great that’s what we have done as a result of all the feedback and work over the last few years. But…

We are very excited about these current initiatives and look forward to sharing back updates, results, gleanings and deliverables as each of these initiatives and programs starts to take shape. That first bullet point hearkens all the way back to the first slide or so and closing that loop is among our highest priorities. It is a huge task and hugely important – so no promises on anything other than transparency as to its process and a pledge to share whatever we can, as soon as we can.

But that’s just today! We have also been thinking about…

That second bullet point is where you start to come in. As will be true with French, in the weeks ahead we will be reaching out to parents to better understand what kinds of before- and after-school classes and experiences we might offer or be willing to host that may help to either fill gaps or simply enhance our Jewish Studies Program for all our families or, if desired, subcommunities of our families. We really want to make sure we are doing whatever we can to meet needs in whatever ways we realistically can. We do not have time to offer every possible Jewish Studies course or experience, but if we can partner with our parents to add what we can, when we can, it will be a win-win. Stay tuned!

And finally, because I believe in naming those things which need to be named, let me acknowledge what I believe to be…

When we did this last, Hebrew was the priority and, to be fair, it is part of our mission. But it is reasonable to ask the question of whether that is still true and to acknowledge that it comes at a cost. And we definitely know that there are a variety of opinions about how much time we could and should spend in Jewish Studies – and I encourage an expansive view of that, including both academic class time and experiences.

One interesting piece of feedback that came from the town hall was that maybe, just maybe, there is an appetite for extending the school day to make the task of delivering a high-quality trilingual program a bit more attainable? Do you think that’s true?

And finally, here are some big-picture questions we will be wrestling with as we go about dreaming the next dream for strengthening the “J” in “OJCS”…

So…let me repeat that parent voice is critical to our ability to dream big dreams since you, our parents, are our most important stakeholder community and partner. I am making a plea, here, while my word count is now well over 1,000, to please add your voice to the conversation in whichever way is comfortable for you – comment on this blog, shoot me a private email, or make an appointment to come in.

This takes the village.

Please be sure to join us for our next Critical Conversation, “L’assembleé de Français – What is currently true about our French outcomes and what can parents expect moving forward?” on Thursday, November 24th at 7:00 PM.

Re-Cycle: Let’s Talk About…Revisiting Critical Conversations

As I have thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to lean back into conversations about teaching and learning, community, relationship-(re)building, programs and all the normal stuff one does at the beginning of a new school year – as opposed to focusing inordinate time and energy on COVID protocols – it occurs to me that in many ways this is not just the beginning of a new school year, but the beginning of a new school chapter.

Five years is both a short and a long time depending on your perspective.

When I talk with parents, especially those who have only been at OJCS for two or three years, it is clear that we have a bit of a “generational” (that’s not the exact best word, but I can’t think of a better alternative) divide and I think the fault line describes the many “town halls” and “critical conversations” that took place during my first two years at OJCS. If you were here for all that foundational work (or chose to go back and peruse blog posts from those years) you both know what was true and what (now) is true AND you had a voice in helping chart the distance between the two. That is a very different perspective from those who only know the status quo.

Just that by itself would warrant action.

But schools are not static – they are learning organizations that continue to grow and evolve over time. It is not sufficient for new parents to come to know “The OJCS Way” as some kind of permanent state of affairs. Our “North Stars” may be fixed in the firmament above, but everything about how we get there is entirely up to us. So between wanting all our parents to better understand fundamental truths about our school as it presently is, and needing all our parents to participate in critical conversations to help decide what will be true about our school as it continues to evolve, we land in the same place.

Connected to our larger theme this year of “Getting Our Mojo Back”, we are going to schedule three critical conversations this year that will both hearken back to give everyone equal footing and dream forward to give everyone an equal stake. The titles will be the same as they were…

“Let’s Talk About the ‘J’ in OJCS” – what really is our Jewish mission/vision? Coming to a weeknight soon in October.
“L’assemblée de Français” – what is currently true about our French outcomes and what can parents expect moving forward? Coming to a weeknight soon in November.
“Let’s Talk About the Future” – what are the big ideas, programs and initiatives that will help us reach that much closer to our North Stars? Coming to a weeknight soon in February.

And for each, I will do as I have done – use my blog to transparently set the stage, to share the results and to share the impact.

In the meanwhile, my email and door – both metaphorically and in reality – are open. Feel free to engage with me on any issue, concern or question that is on your mind.

Next week at this time, I will be returning from what I already know will a triumphant return to our Annual Middle School Retreat, so you’ll forgive me if my weekly blog post is delayed by a few days. Feel free to check social to follow our adventures in zip-lining, caving, hiking, praying, learning, campfire-ing, and having an overall fantastic adventure as a middle school community!

Relationship Development = Professional Development: A DSLTI Reflection

I had the privilege earlier this month to spend two weeks in New York City, fulfilling my role as Mentor during the second summer of Cohort 12 of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI). [I was a Fellow in Cohort 4 and you can revisit my blog post from last summer for more context about my experiences in the program, why I am serving as a Mentor and how it fits into my current role as Head of OJCS.] Like many programs coming out of COVID times, DSLTI navigated the transition from Zoom to in-person. Unlike just about every leadership capacity-building program I’ve ever participated in, however, DSLTI spends at least as much time in relationship development as it does in professional development.

As I sit in my office gearing up for the return of teachers as we prepare to open my sixth year at OJCS, that is my big takeaway – my “a-ha” moment from my deeply intense and nourishing time at DSLTI. And when you think about, it is a also a deeply Jewish idea about learning – that learning is amplified when it comes in and through authentic relationship. Yes, in order to discuss issues that matter, a certain baseline of trust is necessary in any group. Vulnerability, candor, and transparency are prerequisites to moments of meaning. But I don’t simply view “relationship development” as a necessary step on a ladder towards “professional development”. I am arguing that we learn more deeply and more significantly when we do it in relationship with like-minded fellow travelers. Your feedback, your thoughts, your suggestions, your guidance lands on me with exponentially added force and weight, when I know you. And when I say “know” in this context, I mean somewhere that’s neither at a superficial level, but also not at unreasonably overfamiliar level.

Professional intimacy.

That’s as close as I can come to connoting this idea. To help teachers, to help administrators, to help students, to help myself continue to grow – to ensure that everyone in the culture can be their most authentic self in service of performing at their highest potential – I believe more attention at OJCS should and will be put towards relationship-building and relationship-sustaining.

When our teachers return for Pre-Planning Week, we will, of course, schedule traditional “professional development” sessions that deal with the art and science of teaching. [I’ll share more about that as it draws closer.] There are ideas, both new and old, that require time to master and to review. There are skills that require training. There is tachlis planning that requires time so that we are ready to welcome our students back the following week. But we are also going to spend significant time (re)building relationships as we emerge from years of silos and isolated work.

A school is only as good as its teachers and teachers will only be their best when they are fully invested in each other, the culture, the community and the school. An excellent Social Studies or French or Hebrew or Math Teacher will likely deliver a quality product, regardless. But we don’t just teach Social Studies or French or Hebrew or Math at OJCS. We teach Maia and Moshe and Liam and Lori. To truly do that – to teach children and not just subject matter – means investing in relationships.

I cannot wait to welcome my team and my teachers back to school.

What happens online, not only doesn’t stay online, it follows your child to school.

I distinctly remember when it hit me. I was hosting a large PTA-sponsored spaghetti dinner a year or so into my last headship and after everyone had settled into the room, I took a step back and zoomed out. This event was taking place in a room about as large as our school cafeteria and as I panned back and forth, the “a-ha” came screaming out of my consciousness. If you had taken a picture of a typical student lunch and mapped it onto a picture of this parent dinner, it would be a perfect match. The parents of the same children who typically hang out together were hanging out together. The parents of the same children who typically struggle to find friends to sit with were struggling to find friends to sit with. The same groups, the same pairs, the same cliques – what was true for the students was true for their parents.

And of course it was.

As our school year is winding down and parents look forward to our sharing out the faculty lineup for next year (coming soon!), I want to revisit territory I first staked out, here, in a blog post titled, “Do I have a stake in who my students are when they are not in school?”

In that post, I asked the following question: “Do I or does the “school” have a responsibility to address behaviors that take place outside the bounded times and spaces of school?”

My answer was most affirmatively, “Yes,” and I will let you (re)read the post to see why.

But, I also qualified my answer in the following way: “Let me be clear that I am purposefully leaving parents out of this behavioral equation. Not because I either blame parents for their children’s behavior nor because I abdicate parents of their responsibility to effectively parent. I am simply asking a different question.”

Well…I think I would like an opportunity to ask that question: “Do I or does the “school” have a responsibility to address the role parents play in behaviors that take place outside the bounded times and spaces of school?

And, again, I think the answer is, “yes”.

But, boy, is that more complicated.

The simple issue to explore is how to help parents best partner with school to truly become a community of kindness. The simple challenge is how to lovingly intervene when it becomes apparent that help may be required.

We are parenting in uncharted territory. Our children have access to information and to each other in ways we, not only never anticipated, but in ways that continue to change – and we may, or not, even be aware that it is happening. Whether it is through texting, chatting, or gaming, our children are in constant contact. And just like in reality-reality, their behavior in virtual reality provides opportunities for kindness and opportunities for its opposite. And parents play a crucial role in determining the outcomes.

Unfortunately, with rare exceptions, if it finds its way to me, it means the outcome was not-so-good. When it finds me, it usually means that a child has been excluded or disparaged. When it finds me, it usually means that a child has been exposed to language or content which may be inappropriate. When it finds me, it usually means that a parent is concerned about which influences are following their children from school without an invitation.

And when it finds me, I have to ask myself what am I to do?

This is normally the point in my blog where I would proceed to ramble on for another 500 words or so and provide the answer to my own question.

But to be transparent, I can’t. Because I actually don’t know the answer.

So, please, whether you are a parent, educator or concerned party, comment on this blog (or email me at [email protected] or come in for a coffee if you are local) and let’s collaborate on an answer. You can take the time it normally would have taken you to finish this blog post to formulate your response.

How do I address my fully accepted responsibility to care about the role parents play in behaviors that take place outside the bounded times and spaces of school?