Monday, March 4, 2013

OU Prez Endorses Blended Learning



Blended Learning: The Newest Frontier in Jewish Education?

by   in President's Message
This is the question facing every Jewish day school in the country struggling with the escalating costs of Jewish education. Admittedly, there is no simple answer to this question; no silver bullet.
The Orthodox Union is fully committed to building legislative support for school choice (http://www.ou.org/texas-school-choice; http://www.ou.org/teach-nys) and with communal support, we will, please God, prevail. But this approach requires patience; it will take time.
katz
A more immediate solution may, however, be on the horizon. In my own community of Bergen County, New Jersey, one school has quietly begun a revolutionary experiment in Jewish education that has significantly reduced tuition costs. Yeshivat He’Atid, which opened this past September with 116 students, embraces a new and innovative—if somewhat controversial—educational approach known as “blended learning.” Remarkably, Yeshivat He’Atid’s tuition is 40 percent less than other schools in Bergen County.
What is blended learning and how does it manage to dramatically cut costs? Blended learning combines independent computer instruction with face-to-face traditional classroom methods. While my experience as an educator has been limited to teaching on the graduate school level for the past several decades, I believe that blended learning, while still in the experimental stages, may be one of the most exciting developments in the world of education, with particular effectiveness in grades one through twelve.
Envision twenty-first-century classrooms outfitted with big screens, laptops and software that teaches students everything from converting percents to decimals to writing persuasive essays. This groundbreaking educational model is increasingly found in public schools across the country. Imagine students using specially-designed interactive software programs to master Hebrew grammar and Chumash—the possibilities are endless! Indeed, many yeshivot have been slowly introducing digital media into their limudei kodesh classes. For instance, The Frisch School in New Jersey recently developed an iPad app for Gemara. And while educational software for Judaic studies is currently limited, companies and vendors are hard at work developing such materials. One extraordinary resource is the Aleph Beta Academy, launched by Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone, regional director of New York NCSY.
With the explosion in digital learning across the country, not surprisingly, Jewish schools have begun to take notice. Tiferet Academy in the Five Towns and Westchester Torah Academy, both scheduled to open this fall, will be blended learning schools. Ohr Chadash Academy in Baltimore, Maryland, is yet another model of digital learning, and similar schools have sprung up in East Brunswick, New Jersey; Sharon, Massachusetts; Los Angeles, California and Seattle, Washington.
Advocates of blended learning—such as Meir Nordlicht, a board member of Westchester Torah Academy, and Gershon Distenfeld, chairman of the board of Yeshivat He’Atid—claim that it not only cuts costs, but it also provides a superior education. Teachers are able to customize computer activities for students based on skills and abilities, eliminating the need for both an enrichment program as well as a resource room. Moreover, because of the individualized learning component, classes can be larger than those in traditional schools. A higher student/teacher ratio also translates into savings. Furthermore, in some schools students take independent courses under the supervision of a facilitator (as opposed to a highly-paid teacher).
Nordlicht and Distenfeld contend that blended learning helps bring kids up to speed, teaching them twenty-first-century skills while ensuring that each child receives an individualized, personalized approach. Computer programs are continually assessing a child’s performance, providing invaluable feedback to the teacher. Most importantly, students get to learn at their own pace.
And yet, while I am excited about the possibilities of using digital learning to teach Chumash, Rashi and Gemara, I am cautiously optimistic. I know that opponents of blended learning also make compelling arguments. There is no hard data proving that blended learning impacts academic performance. It is foolish, opponents say, to jump headfirst into embracing a new educational approach when there is no evidence that the results will be any better. Moreover, many argue that in a blended classroom, students have to be self-motivated, and that blended learning overemphasizes digital skills over the fundamentals such as math, reading and writing. Many also argue that there’s no substitute for teacher-student interaction. One critic, cited in a New York Times article, referred to blended learning as little more than a “high-tech babysitter.”
In fact, blended learning does entail changing the teacher’s role. In a blended classroom, teachers guide more than they lecture, although effective programs strive to strike a balance.
Of course, the sacred rebbe-talmid relationship can never be replaced by a computer screen. A screen could never convey hashkafah or inculcate middot. And I certainly don’t believe that a software program, no matter how sophisticated, can teach one to “lain a gemara.”
In Baltimore, Rabbi Akevy Greenblatt of Ohr Chadash is another passionate advocate of blended learning. The school has the lowest tuition in Baltimore for its grade levels. When the school was in the formation stage, there was some opposition to giving students iPads and Internet access. “Computers,” he told parents, “are not dangerous if students are taught to use them properly.”
Even established schools such as Yavneh Academy in Paramus, New Jersey, are gradually introducing blended learning, giving students some control over the pace and content of their learning. Currently, the Avi Chai Foundation is working with thirty-six established yeshivot and day schools nationally to set up blended learning programs, according to program officer Rachel Abrahams.
Whether it is a new or established school, there will be costs to incorporate the technology. Expenses include computers and software, licensing fees for the software, specialized furniture, wiring and, of course, teacher training. Schools must be aware that cost savings may not be realized in the first year, during which philanthropy must fill the gap.
Is blended learning the panacea for which parents and educators have been searching? Is this approach feasible or even desirable for every Jewish day school and yeshivah? Do yeshivot and day schools have an obligation going forward to consider blended learning?
The jury is still out. Currently, all we can say with certainty is that this is an exciting venture in Jewish education that holds much promise. We have no guarantees that it will work. However, it is our responsibility to try various approaches and models to enable us to provide quality education at an affordable cost. And with God’s help, we will be successful.
Special thanks to Stephen Steiner, director of OU public relations, in preparing this article.
To learn more about blended learning, contact Rachel Abrahams, program officer, Avi Chai (212) 396-8850; Gershon Distenfeld, gershon.distenfeld@gmail.com; Meir Nordlicht through Jeff Kiderman, executive director of the Affordable Jewish Education Project, jeff@ajeproject.org; Rabbi Akevy Greenblatt at rabbigreenblatt@ocabaltimore.org; Rabbi Aaron Ross at aaron.ross@yavnehacademy.org and Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone at alightstone@gmail.com.
In addition, the following print sources and videos are available: 
http://digitaljlearning.org/what-is-online-learning; http://digitaljlearning.org/online-learning/research; http://www.youtube.com/user/educationelements/videos.


This article was featured in Jewish Action Spring 2013.

Comments (21)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
a friend was just complaining to me about the cost of catholic school. i asked how much they paid and was told $15k for 3 kids. can some one explain to me what we are doing wrong that the catholics can educate their kids in a traditional school environment (no blended learning) for 1/3 the cost?
Teaneck Father's avatar

Teaneck Father · 629 weeks ago

I believe Catholic School is greatly subsidized by the Catholic church which is one of the richest institutions on the planet.
The Catholic school system is indeed subsidized by the Catholic Church. In addition, most of the teachers are nuns who don't marry (and take vows of poverty) and overload their classes via student/teacher ratios.
Your comments about the Catholic schools system are no longer true for most of their schools.
Jim: Then please explain why they are so much cheaper than yeshivas? Is it the double program?
Well, it's not so hard to see what makes Yeshiva so expensive. I think the difficulty is thinking that Yeshiva is somehow unique and there are no useful comparisons. I think that lies at the heart of your "double program" question.

If you wanted to make a good, but cheap yeshiva what would you do? If yeshiva was essential to your religion, what values would your religion teach to allow for the sustainability of the yeshiva model? I think if you look at both of those questions you'll see that Modern Orthodoxy does the exact opposite of what is needed to ensure low costs.

Addressing the first question: I think first and foremost you would want teaching staff that can teach an entire day - they can teach tanach and algebra, for example. Instead we hire two teachers and pay them each a full-time salary for part-time work. That edges into the second question: We should be educating our rabbis and morahs to be multi-skilled. Isn't that what Torah U'Mada is all about anyways? If you paid that single teacher say 75% of what 2 teachers are paid, you could attract much better talent as well. But, the schools are often just dressed up communal employment agencies giving jobs to people who, at best, are passionate, but not terribly qualified. There would be massive employment issues in our communities if the schools laid off 50% (or more) of teachers to conform with this "teach the entire day" model. But, costs would instantly drop over 25% and teacher quality would go up. Teaching could become a competitive job.

Another issue is just the cost of living in Modern Orthodox community. The schools are not just employment agencies, but they have to pay a "good" wage so teachers (especially rabbis, supposedly) can afford to live in these communities. The idea above would partially address this, but the problem is far deeper. You have to wonder why in other religions (and, not too long ago, in Orthodoxy as well) it is an honor to serve God in a communal role even (especially?) if it means an ascetic lifestyle. We practically equate wealth with holiness. For all the issues on the right, the Chareidim value personal/financial sacrifice for communal service.

Another issue is lack of religious identity. There's little room in Modern Orthodoxy for someone who wants to be very observant. A person like this quickly changes identity to Yeshivish or just Orthodox. Similarly, someone who's a little loose with observance is quickly identified as left wing Modern Orthodox. So, you lose people at both ends and it undermines the educational system. Often this means sliding to the right since the rebbeim naturally fall out to the right of the community (since Modern Orthodoxy holds no place for them). This (along with many other factors) leads to more people working for the community and siphoning off resources instead of bringing resources in from the outside.

In a similar vein, we've lost our immigrant drive. Sure there are lots of kids going off to medical school or law school or business school, but we've become complacent to a certain extent. Our communities are fabulously wealthy, but that's starting to hurt us. We rely more on the wealth of the older generation. We rely more on the wealth of our neighbors. It's not shameful to ask for assistance even when you could do for yourself with some effort. The yeshivas perpetuate this negative cultural attitude through scholarships and other handouts.
2 replies · active 629 weeks ago
Well, from my understanding rebbeim are paid more (though not necessarily well) because of the need to support their families factoring in the high cost of living in Modern Orthodox communities. I don't have time to search for quotes, but several articles have statements to that effect from heads of schools or people in institutions studying the tuition problem (often the point made is that this is of course true and cannot and should not be changed as it would be grossly unfair). I don't think teachers are well paid and the teachers I know are not swimming in money. But, you don't go into teaching to be wealthy.

And that's where the disconnect is. Public school teachers aren't wealthy either nor are private school teachers. And yet we for some reason think it's odd that yeshiva teachers struggle to get by or need a spouse who earns more money. There's a sense in our community that everyone should be wealthy and that it's a real "shame" when someone isn't. They're a nebach case. And that's, sadly, how we view teachers often - as nebach cases. As someone who clearly wasn't qualified to anything else. This then often becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy as it discourages people who would otherwise be fine teachers.

The other issue is that we're so money focused that the very idea of someone teaching or being a communal rabbi and not getting paid decently is laughable. We may tell stories of poor rabbis who lived in a bare bones small apartment with threadbare clothes and only just enough to eat, but secretly we think those people were crazy. Obviously that's an extreme, but we have very high standard of living expectations for those that do serve the community in various roles. There's a reason administrators of our schools, our shul rabbis, heads of our charities and camps, etc. are paid many hundreds of thousands of dollars. They're not doing a communal service, they're doing a job like any other and demand to be paid well for it. It's a question of values and religion. Other religious leaders lead ascetic lives and see their sacrifice as part of their service to God. We seem to think those people are chumps.

It's an interesting issue to think about.
Jim: I agree with a lot of what you wrote except for this:

"You have to wonder why in other religions (and, not too long ago, in Orthodoxy as well) it is an honor to serve God in a communal role even (especially?) if it means an ascetic lifestyle."

Teachers are already paid way below the average HH wage in Bergen County, especially in the Orth community. So, in essence, they have already considered it an honor to teach by accepting a very minimal living standard. I mean, I guess if you wanted to set up a "Jewish convent" where teachers don't get married you could pay them even less, but unlike Christianity, Judaism teaches that marriage is much better than celibacy.
1 reply · active 629 weeks ago
I don't think earning less than the average household wage in Bergen County or in the Modern Orthodox community is really equivalent to living an ascetic lifestyle. This was my point: that our standard of living is so high that people consider it a sacrifice or a nebach situation when people only eat out once a week or only have a 3 bedroom house or had to get a used minivan. Maybe these are slightly exaggerated examples, but I think you get my point. Also, I wasn't just talking about teachers, but all communal service roles such as shul rabbi or yeshiva administrator. I think comparing to RW and Chareidi communities is really telling in this regard. People in those communities intentionally make tremendous sacrifices to serve their communities and Hashem. I'm not saying our teachers and communal leaders should live in squalor, but one should think about why it's so abhorrent to Modern Orthodox Jews that someone should serve the community while making real, meaningful sacrifices. I think even if all basic needs were covered by the community (food, shelter) this still wouldn't be enough for many people to want to serve the community and you'd quickly have people saying basic needs includes new cars, summer camps, household help, takeout food, etc. This has nothing to do with having kids. It's a basic attitude. Chareidim have even more kids, but are more willing to sacrifice. And, as just noted, having "basic needs" covered wouldn't be enough of a reason to go into teaching or other communal service roles.
do many people really believe that the teachers at the day schools are all unqualified to do anything else but teach and PT people get paid the same as FT people? Its ridiculous and not the case.

Most of the teachers at my kids school have master degrees and some of them, multiple maters.

They are extremely qualified and love to teach.

For whatever reason they choose to teach in Yeshiva and earn less than of they were in public school.

Teachers should be paid a fair wage. They spend more time with your children than you do. We should be encouraging teachers to continue their education. After all, it benefits our kids.
1 reply · active 629 weeks ago
I think a lot of people think teachers teach because they can't do anything else. It's not just an attitude in our communities, there's that old joke that those that can't do, teach. It's not true all the time, but it's the perception. I think in the case of yeshivas they exacerbate this attitude by turning into employment agencies and hiring on lots of part-time teachers.

As I said before, I think schools should hire only highly qualified teachers that can teach both the morning and afternoon parts of the curriculum and pay them higher wages.
Jim,

I agree that we need to hire good teachers but I don't think their level of education matters that much. More important that they have the necessary skills rather than extra degrees.

Also, there isn't much evidence that keeping student:teacher rations low really helps education. In Israel they sometimes have 37 kids in a class with no assistant & their results aren't much different than ours. I think we can get rid of most assistant teachers, at least for the older grades. Most of us managed as kids without the assistants in every class.
Schools often hire part time teachers because they can save money on benefits and get teachers who are also employed in public schools for other parts of the day (thus ensuring some level of quality).

The assumption that one can hire someone who can be a qualified educator for the "morning and afternoon" parts insults the professional who has a clear and focused skill in a content area because it assumes that one can simply "be" a good teacher in two divergent areas. It also assumes that schedules can be set up that cleanly divide the content into dayparts so a teacher is freed up to teach two separate curricula with no overlap in timing.
2 replies · active 629 weeks ago
Without seeing the payroll structure at the yeshiva, it's impossible to answer this question definitively. Logic seems to indicate (to me, at least) that one full-time teacher is cheaper than two part-time teachers. Especially when the part-time teachers are often paid more than part-time work would indicate (I seem to remember Rabbi Teitz confirming this, but I don't have time to look).

I think schools look for 2 teachers because they have no other choice. Our institutions of higher learning such as YU/Stern don't try to produce rabbis/morahs that can teach secular courses. This is not a priority for whatever reason. I maintain (and said above) that "double-threat" rabbis/morahs would be cheaper and provide a better overall education.

I'm not sure why this is insulting. Why is it insulting to say that we should seek out teachers capable of teaching in divergent areas? I'm not saying there's anything wrong with only being a math teacher or a gemara teacher, only that it would be better to have someone who could do both. Also, scheduling is the easiest part of this issue.
Full time teachers get a full time salary and benefits. Part time? An amount per class/hour that is lower than the full time teacher's pay divided by his class/hours. Savings on the per-hour and the lack of benefits result.

The training to be a teacher requires an approach to a content area which is specialized, at least in the upper grades, a preparation which is different from department to department. I rarely see anyone saying that a doctor who specializes in cardiology should also take over the OBGYN patients because it would save the hospital money. Isn't all medical training the same? Why have lawyers who specialize in tax law? Can't I get my real estate guy to do that? I went to school for years and had to practice my craft as a specialist in a field. To expect that it must be natural that I can do another job without a parallel set of training demeans the demands of the profession. That there were rebbeim who also taught secular studies when I went to school demonstrated cost savings at the expense of education.

And the statement you made about scheduling being the easiest part points to me that you have never tried to schedule a school day. I have. There is nothing easy about it.
Actually, as far as I know, Yeshivat Noam has mostly full time teachers. They teach identical subjects - one class before lunch, one class after lunch. Yes, I also know part time teachers there, but most of the teachers seem to be full time. I think the problem there is just too many teachers.

At JFS, most/all of the teachers teach full time. Some of them seem to teach many many classes, such as Hebrew language to 6 different classes. They also only have one teacher in the classroom, aside from 1st grade. These teachers seem to be excellent.
"There is no hard data proving that blended learning impacts academic performance."

Interesting thing to acknowledge in an article endorsing blended learning. Isn't that what you call, 'burying the lede' in journalism?
See the link below that someone just sent me from the OU website. I'd suggest you post this to clarify the OU's real stance.
http://advocacy.ou.org/2013/note-from-maury-litwa...
"Is blended learning the panacea for which parents and educators have been searching? Is this approach feasible or even desirable for every Jewish day school and yeshivah? Do yeshivot and day schools have an obligation going forward to consider blended learning?
The jury is still out. "

it would be good to see a follow up article/update on this topic

Post a new comment

Comments by