In answer to Reb Yudel (see comment on last blog): There are different levels of accountabilty and evaluation. The basic level is the ongoing accountability of the operations of any school or institution - is it being managed and run responsibly, safely and professionally, and with a dash of flair and inspiration? That covers the questions (in a school) of a planned curriculum, of proper teacher supervision, and in any programme of safety, fiscal responsibility, and short-term evaluation. I agree with Reb Yudel -- there is no excuse for sending any teacher into any class without sufficient and appropriate preparation and backing. (Which, realistically, in the Jewish school system, can vary. The future of Jewish Ed is, IMHO, "professionalize, professionalize, professionalize", but that's another megillah .)
But I think that the Jewish Life Foundation folks are looking at another level entirely of evaluation: trying to assess the impact of (apparently, fairly short-term) programmes on the "neshamah" of the participants, and then attempting to moderate the flow of grants and resources according to the results. I'm in favour - but only cautiously. The nearest analogy (maybe, better, parallel) comes from a book that I just finished reading -- "Another Life", by Michael Korda, the sort-of Hungarian, sort of Jewish, sort of American publisher. It's an entertaining read (altough see the readers reviews on Amazon.com!), and it relates his 'insider's story" of his career in publishing (mainly at Simon and Schuster). A main theme of the latter half of the book is the transformation of publishing in the 1980's and 90's into business -- from the 'gentlemen's occupation' to merged, mega-publishing houses that were part of conglomerates. I can't put my finger on the exact passage, but at some point he points out that as soon as the publishers (and the authors) began to be run by accountants, who lost sight of the human/literary factor, the industry changed radically -- because the core business had not changed, and the skills and instincts of editors and publishers were still the essential determining factors in ensuring quality.
I am wary of the "accountants" taking over Jewish ed., and deciding that because birthright is so successful (which it is, and I am a great supporter and admirer of its founders), ALL resources should go to informal education and Israel programmes.
An example - again, from my own school - very relevant to both the short and the long-term is our Shabbaton programme. A few years back, we decided that our classroom programmme needed to be complemented with an experiential component (short-term evaluation). With the very important support of the AviChai Foundation, we launched a programme of Shabbatonim. Four five years now, we have taken (on average) seven hundred students a year away on Shabbatonim. We have a programme of supervision, of programme evaluation etc etc, and, indeed, submit an annual report to AviChai. It appears to be very successful, and to all of our knowledge has had a profound effect on school life, school 'ruach'. But how do I know whether in fact it is affecting the pattern of Shabbat observance among our students - now or in twenty years time????? What can I do, other than survey our grads - and that will only tell me how effective the Shabbaton was twenty years ago! And how can I compare the effect of an emotionally-charged Shabbaton with the effect of 110 hours' course in Grade 12 of 'Jewish ethics', or with the importance of a great Ivrit or Rabbinics or Tanakh or Jewish History teacher in Grade 9? And how can I compare the effect of either with an unplanned, unnoticed five minute conversation in the lunchroom between a teacher and a student, which for the student may be an 'orienting experience' (Emile Fackenheim, z'l), after which his/her life may never be the same??
Or: A few days ago I met a CHAT grad (from before my time) who is doing a PhD in psychology, "developing a therapeutic model on the principles of Chovot Halevovot". He came to CHAT from a non-jewish school. "I owe it all", he said, "to Gary Levine teaching me Vayikra in Grade 12". The aforementioned Levine (now one of our Campus Principals), cannot remember teaching this student. How would this have been 'scientifically' evaluated at the time? Would the student have recognised then the impact the course was to have on his future life? Would the teacher have been able to say (assuming he was overcoming his modesty!) "I believe I have inspired this class" ......
anyway, it's a blog - you get the point (I hope!)
No comments:
Post a Comment