YEAR 2: EVALUATION OF THE BOSTON-HAIFA CONNECTION JEWISH IDENTITY SCHOOL PILOT. Fern Chertok David Mittelberg Dinah Laron Annette Koren

YEAR 2: EVALUATION OF THE BOSTON-HAIFA CONNECTION JEWISH IDENTITY SCHOOL PILOT Fern Chertok David Mittelberg Dinah Laron Annette Koren November 2012

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 2012 Brandeis University Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies Additional copies of this publication are available from: Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies Brandeis University Mailstop 014 Waltham, MA 02454-9110 781.736.2060 www.brandeis.edu/cmjs

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection i Acknowledgments Support for this research was provided by Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Boston. We appreciate the advice and support of Ariel Libhaber and the lay membersof the Boston Haifa committees in both cities including David Strauss, Maxine Zarchan, Sheryl Marcus, Beth Moskowitz, Gabby Dagan, Chava Kunreich, Eli Roth, and Gershon Naveh, as well as the professional staff including Ruth Kaplan and Vered Yisraeli. Ellie Aitan of the Cohen Center provided critical support at all phases of the project. Our work also benefited from the assistance of our colleagues at the Cohen Center, including Masha Lokshin and Deborah Grant, and at Oranim including Mira Kadosh, Noah Bar-Gosen and Alexander Borovlov. We wish to thank the Heads of School of Gann Academy, Prozdor, Reali and Ironi Hey; Rabbi Mark Baker, Dan Brosgol, Shlomi Dahan and Ron Kitrey. We are particularly appreciative of the many ways in which our work was made possible by the assistance of staff and teachers from each of the schools involved including Rebecca Shimshak, Shoshonah Zarrit, Rabbi Karen Medwed, David List, Galit Granot, Oren Hartzman, Dafna Yehudai, and Drorit Cohen. In addition we wish to thank Roberta Bell Kligler and her staff at the Department of Jewish Peoplehood at Shdemot, for providing guidance concerning the context, structure and process of the pilot program. We also wish to thank all the students, teachers, administrators and parents who took the time to share their thoughts with us through interviews or surveys.

ii Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments... i Table of Contents... iii Table of Figures... iv Executive Summary... 1 Executive Summary (Hebrew)... 3 I Introduction... 5 II Research Strategies and Methods... 7 III Student Experiences... 11 IV Curriculum Development... 19 V Impact on Students... 25 Developing a Sense of Jewish Peoplehood... 30 VI Expansion of Impact throughout School Communities... 33 Parent Experiences... 33 VII Partnership Development: Building Collaborative Capacity... 39 VIII Summary and Recommendations... 43 Building Collaborative Capacity... 43 References... 47 Appendix A: Survey Surveys... 1 Start of Year Survey... 1 End of Year Survey... 12 Appendix B: Parent End of Year Survey... 24

iv Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection Table of Figures Table 1: Hosting Parent Response Rates... 8 Table 2: Overview of Student Survey Data Collection by School... 9 Table 3: Survey Field Dates... 9 Table 4: Student Response Rates by Survey and School... 10 Table 5: Summary of Year Two JIESP Programs... 11 Figure 1: Preparation for Interactions with Partner School Peers... 13 Figure 2: Experience with Host Families... 14 Table 6: Traveler and Involved Non-Traveler Categories... 15 Figure 3: Kehilot Nifgashot Program Experience by Type of Participation... 16 Figure 4: Pirkei Dorot Program Experience by Type of Participation... 16 Figure 5: Reali Student Reactions to 10 th Grade Curriculum... 20 Figure 6: Prozdor Student Reactions to 10th Grade Curriculum... 21 Figure 7: Ironi Hey Student Reactions to 10th Grade Curriculum... 22 Figure 8: Involved Non-Traveler Perceived School Emphasis on Jewish Peoplehood... 23 Figure 9: Sutdent Reactions to Pirkei Doro as Opportunity to Make Connections... 25 Figure 10: Student Reactions to Kehilot Nifgashot as Opportunity to Make Connections... 26 Table 7: Pre-Post Changes in Sense of Commonality and Connection... 27 Figure 11: Contact between Students by Type of Involvement... 28 Figure 12: Pirkei Dorot Perceived Impact on Exploration of Jewish Identity... 29 Figure 13: Kehilot Nifgashot Perceived Impact on Exploration of Jewish Identity... 29 Figure 14: Emotional Attachement to Jews in the Partner Country... 30 Table 8: Jewish Peoplehood Scales and Items... 31 Table 9: Pre-Post Changes on Peoplehood Scales... 32 Figure 15: Host Parent Reactions... 34 Figure 16: Perceived Impact of Hosting... 34 Table 10: Attendance at Orientation... 35 Figure 17: Host Knowledge of Program Goals... 35 Figure 18: Student Perceptions of Strengthened Ties between Schools... 37

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 1 Executive Summary Since the turn of the millennium, school twinning initiatives have emerged as a key paradigm for fostering personal and meaningful connections between Israeli and Diaspora youth and educators. This report describes the findings of the second year of exploration of the Jewish Identity and Education School Pilot (JIESP); an initiative to infuse twinned school communities in Boston and Haifa with an exploration of Jewish identity and peoplehood and to create models of school-to-school collaboration. The research strategy included a dual focus on both formative and summative evaluation and examined development of the collaborative relationship and implementation of the program in each pair of schools, quality of the experience for program participants, and impact of the program on a variety of outcomes for students, their families, and schools. Overall, students reported positive experiences with JIESP and many found the in-person encounters with their peers to be deeply meaningful. Israeli students found it very meaningful to be exposed to the diversity of approaches to observance of Judaism in the US. The manner in which students participated was found to be a key determinant of both the quality and impact of their experience. Those who traveled to the partner country, as compared with schoolmates who were involved but did not travel, were more positive about how meaningful they found their experience, how much it contributed to their understanding of the lives of peers, and their thoughts about their own Jewish identity and observance. Travelers were also more likely to stay in contact with peers from their partner school. However, this should not be taken to imply that travel was the only key ingredient but instead that travel experiences boost the impact of an educational framework. Over the two years of the research we have identified four robust components of Jewish peoplehood: Collective Belonging, Interpersonal Attachment, Jewish Responsibility and Jewish Capital. As in the first year of the initiative, moving the needle on students sense of Jewish peoplehood was difficult for both JIESP partnerships and the isolated results for different dimensions of peoplehood were observed only among travelers. The fact that JIESP educators struggled with how to move students toward an understanding of peoplehood speaks to the challenges inherent in teaching peoplehood. Connection to and responsibility for the larger, transnational Jewish people is an abstract concept and one that does not directly follow from enriched Jewish historical and sociological appreciation of home or peer communities, or through interpersonal encounters. Work needs to be done to develop the pedagogical content knowledge related to directly teaching peoplehood with special attention to the strategies and tools that teachers can employ to directly transmit the concepts of peoplehood. In Year 2 both JIESP partnerships experienced successes as well as limitations to expanding program impact throughout their school communities. Inroads were made at both Pirkei Dorot schools and at Ironi Hey to spreading word about the project through the student body and even into the larger community. At Gann Academy the program continued to be largely encapsulated within

2 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection the Office of Student Jewish Life and had only limited presence in the larger school. There are clearly ways in which hosting a student also broadened the impact of the JIESP program to include entire households. Host families appreciated this facet of the program and without exception would recommend the experience to their friends. Although hosting parents are an integral part of the operation of mifgash programs, they were typically not treated as full partners in this endeavor. Especially among Israeli families, limited knowledge of and involvement in the program undermined the power of hosting experiences to expand the impact of school to school programs. Each of the partnerships made progress in developing shared language, goals, and strategies, and in one case, in co-creating an innovative curriculum. The Pirkei Dorot curriculum is ready for dissemination with complete and detailed lesson plans for each unit. However, there were also continued examples of working in parallel rather than collaboratively and of cultural misunderstanding. The Kehilot Nifgashot partnership developed a set of common goals and objectives during their summer teacher mifgash. Unfortunately, once the school year commenced, the teams reverted to separate program planning although based on the same set of goals. The Kehilot Nifgashot partnership also experienced tensions over perceived violations of the assumption of symmetry in decision making. A continuing challenge for both partnerships is the subtle but fundamental difference in the way that Israeli and American schools understand the goals of peoplehood education. For the two Israeli schools the goal is to leverage exploration of Jewish peoplehood to enhance students personal Jewish identity while American schools focus on building a more global sense of connection to and responsibility for the Jewish people. Where we have seen progress in the second year is in the degree to which these differences have been explicitly acknowledged and become part of the discourse within each partnership. The research suggests that school partnerships benefit from the participation of external consultants acting as cultural translators, assisting teams in bridging cultural gaps and fostering a level of mutual confidence and trust. Future partnered schools may benefit from an extended prologue period that allows teachers to get to know each other s school cultures, to develop shared concepts, goals, and values, and sets the shared context for collaboration. The JIESP initiative set ambitious goals for itself: to infuse school communities in Boston and Haifa students, parents, and educators with an exploration of Jewish identity and transnational connection and to create models of school-to-school collaboration that are effective and suitable for replication. At the end of the second year of the project there is evidence of progress on each of these fronts, but also of remaining work to be accomplished.

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 3 Executive Summary (Hebrew)

4 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 5 I Introduction School twinning has been shown to be a successful educational strategy for developing collective or regional identity (Uzunboylu, 2006; European Commission, 2004), for fostering international and intercultural understanding (Rose, 1989; Romero, 2005), and for resource sharing (Saunders & Hamilton, 1999). Since the turn of the millennium, school twinning initiatives have also emerged as a key paradigm for fostering personal and meaningful connections between Israeli and Diaspora youth and educators. Israeli-Diaspora school twinning has been identified as a means to increase students Jewish knowledge, enhance their Jewish identity, and enlarge their sense of connection and belonging to a worldwide Jewish people (Mittelberg, 2011). American educators involved in school twinning programs report that these encounters build powerful personal connections to Israeli peers and influence their educational vision and practice (Pomson & Grant, 2004). The Boston-Haifa Connection (BHC) was established in 1989 by Combined Jewish Philanthropies and the City of Haifa with the aim of building living bridges between individuals and organizations in the two cities. In March 2009, the BHC Jewish Identity Task Force decided to focus its attention on the development of a new school twinning model. The goals of this initiative, the Jewish Identity and Education School Pilot (JIESP), were to infuse entire school communities in Boston and Haifa including students, parents and educators with an exploration of Jewish identity and peoplehood and to create models of school-to-school collaboration that could be replicated throughout the Boston area, as well as in other parts of the United States and Israel. Since the September 2010 JIESP launch, researchers at the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies (CMJS) at Brandeis University, and Oranim, The Academic College of Education in Israel have engaged in a multiyear multi-level study of the development, implementation and impact of this initiative in the two pilot school partnerships. Findings from the first year of the study indicated that students were encouraged to develop connections with peers and explore their Jewish identity. However, the program did not foster significant changes in students more global sense of identification with, or responsibility to care for, the Jewish people. Both partnerships also experienced difficulties in planning and logistics; they tended to work in parallel, as opposed to working collaboratively, and planning teams often failed to model the sense of camaraderie and open communications they were trying to achieve for their students and school communities. This report describes the findings of the second year of exploration of the JIESP initiative. Continuing the research focus of the inaugural year, this study was designed to provide information about the impact of this initiative on students in the two pairs of twinned schools. The study was intended to explore whether involvement alters students thoughts about their Jewish identities or sense of peoplehood, and the effects on their understanding of their relationship to their own Jewish community, Israeli or American Jewry, and world Jewry. In addition, the research continues to assess the impact of this initiative on the peoplehood focus of the involved schools. Since one of the goals of JIESP is to explore the potential for the development of positive and productive

6 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection partnerships between pairs of schools, the second year of the study also included expanded examination of the development of school-to-school collaboration. The report begins with a description of the research design and methodology. This is followed by discussion of student experiences in JIESP programs. The fourth section entails description and analysis of the curriculum strategies developed by the two pairs of schools and is followed by discussion of the effects of the program on students Jewish identity, sense of peoplehood and connection to Israel and American Jewry. The sixth section considers the development of collaborative relationships between the twinned schools. The report then examines dissemination of program impact throughout the school communities. The report concludes with implications for the further development of this and other school twinning initiatives.

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 7 II Research Strategies and Methods As in the inaugural phase of the study, this year s research strategy included a dual focus on both formative and summative evaluation. The formative component of the study examined development of the collaborative relationship and implementation of the program in each pair of schools, as well as the quality of the experience for program participants. The summative evaluation focused on the impact of the program on a variety of potential outcomes for students, their families, and schools. This section describes the overall strategy and specific elements of each aspect of the study. Formative/Implementation Research Strategy The study employed a qualitative strategy to develop a textured understanding of the collaborative process within school pairs. The formative research strategy included key informant interviews, ethnographic observation and documentary review. Each of these forms of qualitative data was analyzed through the Grounded Theory model which consists of an iterative process of content analysis resulting in identification of main themes and categories (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Key Informant Interviews Semistructured interviews were conducted at several points in time during the second year of the program with key informants at each school including administrators, lay leaders, and educators. Interview protocols focused on development of their partnership, the challenges of joint planning, curriculum design and implementation, the most effective strategies for developing good working relationships with physically distant partners, and the extent to which the partnerships met the needs of each school. The end of year interview protocol also addressed the impact of this initiative on the culture of the school community. Ethnographic Observation Senior researchers observed two joint teacher planning retreats as well as a debriefing meeting for the Kehilot Nifgashot school partnership. 1 Observations focused on development of the collaborative relationship, challenges faced in the process of joint planning, approaches to conflict resolution, and the scope and tenor of these sessions. Teachers were informed of the presence of the observer and only public behavior was noted. Documentary Review To gain a fuller understanding of the JIESP program in each school pair, curricular materials including educational goals, lesson plans, and itineraries were reviewed. Summative/Evaluation Research Strategy The primary strategy of the summative aspect of the research in Year 2 was comprised of a pre-post design of within-student comparisons. In addition, a post-only strategy was used to explore the impact of hosting on parents and families of participating students. The primary data collection method was surveys. Hosting Parent Survey At the end of the school year a survey was distributed to parents from the four schools who had hosted an Israeli or American student through the JIESP program. This survey,

8 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection completed by one parent, asked about family involvement in, and reactions to, JIESP program elements, as well as potential impact of the experience on their household. The parent survey is presented in Appendix A. Parents were emailed invitations to the survey using contact information they had provided to their respective schools. Response rates for this survey were very good for the two American schools ranging from 70% to 75% (Table 1). Response rates were considerably lower for the Israeli schools (23%-38%). In part this low response reflects difficulties encountered in the online administration of the survey instrument in Israel, but it may also be due to cultural differences such that Israeli schools rarely make direct requests to parents via the internet. Student Surveys Students in the grades involved in the project at each school were invited to complete start of year surveys administered in early fall 2011. In those cases where students had already completed a spring 2011 end of Year 1 survey, this served as their Year 2 start of year survey. This pre-program survey collected information about students understanding of their own Jewish identities, their connections to Israel/ American Jewry, their sense of Jewish peoplehood, and their expectations for the JIESP program. Student post program surveys were completed at the conclusion of the school year. As in the first phase of the study, the Year 2 end of year survey asked about involvement in, and reactions to JIESP program elements, current thinking about Jewish identity and peoplehood, and perceptions of the educational focus of their school. Start and end of year student surveys are presented in Appendix B. Table 1: Hosting Parent Response Rates Hosting Parent Response Rates Responses Population Response Rate Prozdor 16 23 70% Reali 10 44 23% Gann Academy 9 12 75% Ironi Hey 8 21 38% Total 43 100 43%

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 9 The different nature and size of the schools involved in the JIESP as well as variations in the participating grades required slightly different configurations of student data collection in each school. Table 2 summarizes the scope of the summative data collection in each school. Students at the four schools completed paper and pencil start and end of year surveys during the regular school day. Multiple attempts were made at each school to account for students who might not be available on any particular date scheduled for data collection. The schedule of in-person survey administration was also tailored to each school s calendar and the timeline for each twinned pair. Table 3 summarizes survey field dates for the four schools involved in the JIESP. Table 2: Overview of Student Survey Data Collection by School Prozdor 9 th Grade 10 th Grade 11 th Grade 12 th Grade Entire Cohort Haifa mifgash participants Entire Cohort Remainder of grade Reali Entire Cohort One People Two Paths participants Comparison group Gann Academy Entire Cohort Virtual mifgash participants Remainder of grade Entire Cohort Stateside students Students attending fall semester in Israel Ironi Hey Subset of Pluralistic Judaism class Boston mifgash participants Haifa and Hannaton mifgash participants Hosts Comparison group Hosts Hannaton and Haifa mifgashparticipants Table 3: Survey Field Dates Prozdor School Start of Year Survey Field Dates End of Year Survey Field Dates 10/23/2011, 11/6/2011, 11/20/2011, 12/4/2011, 10/11/2011 4/29/2012, 5/13/2012, 5/20/2012 Reali 9/18/2011 4/29/2012 8/22/2011, 8/25/2011, 9/2/2011, 5/2/2012, 6/1/2012, 6/4/2012, Gann Academy 10/17/2011, 10/18/2011 6/7/12 Ironi Hey 9/21/2011 2/29/2012, 3/5/2012, 4/18/2012

10 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection At Gann Academy and Prozdor, all students in the grades targeted for the program and for whom parental consent forms were submitted were invited to complete surveys. The rate of parental consent for these schools was good ranging from 59%-62% of students eligible to be surveyed. In Israel surveys were reviewed and authorized by the Chief Scientist office of the Ministry of Education, which in the case of anonymous surveys does not require parent permission. 2 As shown in Table 4, response rates for the start of year surveys at the two Boston schools are good (58%-62%) when calculated as the percentage of the total population and excellent (96%-100%) when calculated as the portion of those for whom parental consent was obtained. Response rates for the start of school survey for the two Israeli schools are also very good ranging from 74-92%. Response rates for the end of year survey for the US schools ranged from 46%-52%, when calculated as the percentage of the total population and from 77%-89% when calculated as the portion of those for whom parental consent was obtained. For the Israeli schools the response rates for the end of year survey are good (62% and88%). Table 4: Student Response Rates by Survey and School Population Start of Year Survey End of Year Survey Consent % % of Consent % of Population Consent % % of Consent % of Population Prozdor 188 62% 100% 62% 59% 89% 52% Reali 235 100% 92% 92% 100% 88% 88% Gann Academy 160 60% 96% 58% 60% 77% 46% Ironi Hey 182 100% 74% 74% 100% 62% 62%

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 11 III Student Experiences Student Experiences During the 2011-2012 school year the JIESP program included components in the 9 th and 10 th grades of Prozdor and Reali schools, which comprised the Pirkei Dorot program; and in the 10 th, 11 th and 12 th grades of Ironi Hey and Gann Academy, constituting the Kehilot Nifgashot program. Table 5 summarizes the elements and scope of participation within the two partnerships in the second year of the initiative. This year both pairs of schools experienced a two way mifgash. Forty-one Gann 11 th graders participated in mifgash experiences as part of their fall semester in Israel, with the remainder of the class participating in a stateside encounter with 26 juniors from Ironi Hey. Twenty Prozdor freshmen traveled to Israel and 34 Reali sophomores traveled to Boston. The classroom elements of the JIESP program were conducted in a variety of configurations based on the school. The Pirkei Dorot curriculum was taught as a full year program in all Prozdor 9 th and 10 th grade core classes and in four Reali 9 th grade English classes and one 10 th grade special program. Tenth grade Reali participants came from Young Leadership or Public Diplomacy classes both of which require a demanding application process. A Gann study group comprised of nine 10 th grade students and a subset of 36 sophomores from a class on Pluralistic Judaism at Ironi Hey participated in a year-long virtual mifgash program consisting of one twenty minute session every week. This section of the report explores student reactions to their experiences in the JIESP program. Table 5: Summary of Year Two JIESP Programs Partnership School Program by Grade Number of Participants 9 th grade curriculum 109 Prozdor 9 th grade Haifa mifgash 20 Pirkei Dorot 10 th grade curriculum/boston mifgash 79 9 th grade curriculum 139 3 Reali 10 th grade curriculum 44 10 th grade Boston mifgash 34 10 th grade-virtual mifgash group 9 Gann Academy 11th grade-haifa or Hannaton mifgash 41 11 th grade-boston mifgash 25 Kehilot 10 th grade group from Pluralistic Judaism Nifgashot class 36 Ironi Hey 11 th grade Boston mifgash 26 11 th grade Haifa or Hannaton mifgash 44 12 th grade Haifa or Hannaton mifgash 34

12 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection When asked to describe the most meaningful aspect of their JIESP experience, the most common response among both American and Israeli students was the opportunity to make personal connections with their peers. Involved students from all four schools enjoyed learning about the lives of their peers, what they have in common, and where their experiences diverge. Many noted that these experiences were most pronounced during free time together or during home hosting. I absolutely loved getting to spend so much time with Israelis and creating international friendships with other Jews. (American student) It helped me establish friendships with Israelis which is quite important to me. (American student) The fact that I got to know youngsters, at my age, that are Jews and live in another place in the world was very important and interesting for me. (Israeli student) The most meaningful aspect during this experience was hosting them because then I had a chance to talk to them and really get to know my Boston colleague. I could show her what we do on our free time and introduce her to Israeli food and places. (Israeli student) To meet American friends and keeping in touch with them for the first time in my life. (Israeli student) For American students the second most common response to an open-ended question about meaningful aspects of their participation was the opportunity to experience Israel first-hand. Everyone talks about a connection to Israel. You can't understand until you visit. I'm glad I made that unbreakable connection. (American student) The trip to Israel was most meaningful in my experience in the program. I really got to connect to Israel. (American student) There are certainly many possible factors that contribute to the quality of a student s JIESP experience. Year 2 data indicate that two of the prominent determinants are the school

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 13 through which they participated and the nature of their participation. For example, there is wide variation in the extent to which students felt prepared for interactions with partner school peers, either in person or during virtual mifgashim (Figure 1). Ironi Hey students had the highest levels of endorsement of their preparation with 59% indicating strong agreement while students from their partner school, Gann Academy showed the lowest agreement with less than half agreeing at all and only one-fifth (20%) indicating strong agreement that they felt prepared for their encounters. The issue of preparation for Gann students also emerged in key informant interviews with school personnel and in the summer 2012 teacher mifgash with Ironi Hey. The Haifa mifgash for Gann consisted of two weekend meetings embedded within three months of study at the Alexander Muss School in Hod Hasharon. Teachers from Gann, Ironi Hey and Muss agreed that students left for their semester in Israel without preparation for their JIESP experience and did not fully understand how in-person encounters with Ironi Hey peers fit into the school s larger goals of promoting attachment to Israel. As a result, it was decided that in the third year of the program advance preparation would be carried out at Gann before students leave for Israel. Figure 1: Preparation for Interactions with Partner School Peers 100% I felt prepared for interactions with the American/Israeli students 80% 49% Strongly agree Somewhat agree 60% 59% 40% 20% 40% 32% 50% 20% 27% 31% 23% 26% 0% All Students Gann Students Ironi Hey Students Prozdor Students Reali Students

14 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection School also appears to be a factor in students evaluations of their experience of staying with a host family (Figure 2). In a similar pattern to that found above, at least two-thirds (67%- 73%) of students from Ironi Hey, Prozdor, and Reali strongly agreed that they enjoyed their time with their host family. In contrast, only 30% of Gann students indicated the same level of endorsement of this aspect of their experience. The second factor to emerge as a determinant of the quality of student experiences in Year 2 was the manner in which they participated. For these analyses, participants were divided into two categories; those that were involved but did not travel to the partner school in either Year 1 or 2 (Involved Non-Travelers) and those that took part in a travel delegation during Year 2 (Travelers).The category of Involved Non-Travelers includes students who participated in online exchanges, JIESP classes, or mifgash programming in their own country but did not travel in either year as part of the program. Table 6 describes the definitions of Traveler and Involved Non- Traveler for each pair of twinned schools and provides the number of students in each category for whom survey data is available. Figure 2: Experience with Host Families 100% I enjoyed staying with my Haifa/Boston host family 80% 60% 73% Strongly agree 40% 61% 71% 67% Somewhat agree 30% 20% 0% 16% 20% 20% 13% 7% All Students Gann Students Ironi Hey Students Prozdor Students Reali Students

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 15 Table 6: Traveler and Involved Non-Traveler Categories Partnership School Program by Grade Participants with Survey Data Pirkei Dorot Reali Travelers 10 th grade Boston trip 34 Prozdor Travelers 9 th grade Haifa trip 14 Total Travelers 48 Reali Involved Non-Travelers 9 th grade classes (4) 10 th grade curriculum group 126 12 Kehilot Nifgashot Prozdor Involved Non-Travelers 9 th grade core classes 45 10 th grade core class students who did not travel in Year 1 47 Total Involved Non-Travelers 230 Ironi Hey Travelers 11 th grade Boston trip 27 Gann Travelers 11th grade-haifa or Hannaton mifgash 36 Total Travelers 63 Ironi Hey Involved Non-Travelers Gann Involved Non-Travelers Total Involved Non-Travelers 10 th grade Pluralistic Judaism class 11 th grade Haifa or Hannaton mifgash 12th grade Haifa or Hannaton mifgash 10 th grade virtual mifgash group 11 th grade Boston mifgash group 31 15 25 5 14 65 Students were asked to rate aspects of their JIESP experience on a five point scale where a rating of one indicated not at all and a rating of five indicated to a great extent. As shown in Figure 3, although all of the involved Ironi Hey students were very positive about their experience, those who travelled to Boston as part of the Kehilot Nifgashot program gave significantly more positive ratings to how enjoyable and meaningful they found their participation as compared with Involved Non-Travelers. Gann Travelers were far less positive on either of these ratings as compared to Ironi Hey Travelers or Non-travelers. Sufficient data was not available from Gann Non- Travelers to conduct comparative analyses. Significantly more positive ratings are given to their experience by Travelers as compared with Involved Non-Travelers from the two Pirkei Dorot schools (Figure 4).

16 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection Figure 3: Kehilot Nifgashot Program Experience by Type of Participation 4 Figure 4: Pirkei Dorot Program Experience by Type of Participation

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 17 Findings on the added impact of travel cannot be explained by differences in the travel histories of the two groups. For example, the portion of Travelers in each group that report visits to their partner country prior to JIESP (68% for Reali, 67% for Prozdor and 54% for Ironi Hey) is not significantly different from that among Non-Travelers in each group (72% for Reali, 69% for Prozdor and 69% for Ironi Hey). With only one exception, we also did not find significant differences between travelers for whom this was their first trip and travelers with previous visits to the partner country for any of the findings in this report where a travel effect is reported. The only exception is that first time travelers, as compared to previous travelers to the partner country gave significantly more positive ratings to how fun their experiences were in the program. The JIESP program at each school involved multiple elements and levels of participation. Overall, students had a positive experience and many found the in-person encounters with their peers to be deeply meaningful. However, students experiences also differed according to the school they attended and travelling to the partner school significantly added to how meaningful the experience was on several dimensions. As the following sections will demonstrate, these are themes that will be repeated throughout the data from Year 2 of the initiative.

18 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 19 IV Curriculum Development Whether focusing on formal or informal educational strategies, both pairs of schools developed a curricular approach specifically for the JIESP initiative. Employing review and analysis of curriculum documents, interviews of key members of each team involved in the preparation or implementation of these materials, and student survey responses, this section of the report examines the curricular contribution of the two JIESP partnerships. Pirkei Dorot Curriculum The name of this curriculum, Pirkei Dorot means Chapters of the Generations and is a two year curriculum for 9 th and 10 th graders developed jointly by Prozdor and Reali teachers and administrators. The 9 th grade curriculum focuses on Jewish Identity, Jewish peoplehood, and the connection to Israel, while the10 th grade curriculum focuses on the history of the state of Israel and of American Jewry and is built around a dual timeline of Jewish social events, movements, cultural trends and historical figures in both communities. Although the topics and lesson plans for each school are not identical, the intent was to develop a coordinated approach with defined points of intersection. The explicit goal of the formal curriculum (Goodlad & Klein, 1979) of Pirkei Dorot was to build a meaningful curriculum that could be taught in parallel in Israeli and American supplementary schools and which would provide an academic foundation for student encounters. It was also important to both schools that this curriculum give students a language and framework for seeing themselves and their Jewish identity within the socio-cultural context of their country; so that they could better understand what they share as well, as what is different for Jewish peers from other parts of the world. If we want to create a true encounter, where each party knows the other, the culture, the history, the characteristics, then we have to teach it. (Israeli Educator) For Reali the curriculum was also seen as a means to foster the development of social leaders in Israeli society and to address gaps in the Israeli Ministry of Education curriculum for the history of the state of Israel. As one of the curriculum s developers put it history is not just about dates of immigration and wars. Leveraging the JIESP partnership to address perceived gaps in the Israeli history curriculum can be thought of as a hidden goal of Pirkei Dorot (Jackson, 1968). They [Israeli students] do not have sufficient historic background. Many times we find that the American students know us better than our students do. The curriculum of the Ministry of Education does not fill the pedagogic need and surely, our students lack knowledge of the American Jews. (Israeli Educator) The Pirkei Dorot curriculum consists of a professional looking set of spiral bound booklets. Each unit provides detailed lesson plans including explanation of the goals and major points, lists of equipment and materials needed (such as drawing paper, materials for arts and crafts, film projectors, etc.), and description of all activities, discussion protocols, and

20 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection procedures. The content is rich with color pictures and links to websites. Appendices for each unit provide supplementary information, tools, and suggestions for additional activities. For example, the appendix related to study of the Holocaust provides excerpts of a chapter from Hannah Arendt's "Report on the Banality of Evil" and from Victor Frankl's book "Man's Search for Meaning. The overall impression is of a high quality product reflecting concerted effort to assemble the academic materials and edit them into a coherent program. The Pirkei Dorot curriculum appears to provide all the content as well as pedagogic strategies needed to teach the class. When asked what was most meaningful in their JIESP experience many Reali students mentioned Pirkei Dorot lessons focusing on the timeline of the Jewish people and on the origins of their family name. When asked to rate how meaningful they found different elements of the 10 th grade curriculum, the majority of Reali students were very positive about all elements, with particularly strong endorsement of lessons on the structure of the American Jewish community, the role of the American Jewish community in supporting Israel, and formative events in the history of the American Jewish community (Figure 5). Figure 5: Reali Student Reactions to 10th Grade Curriculum 100% 80% To what extent did any of the following Pirkei Dorot activities influence you? A great extent Very much 60% 16% 45% 48% 22% 40% 30% 19% 16% 41% 20% 27% 50% 34% 29% 29% 41% 38% 22% 0% N=32 Dilemmas facing Israel's leaders in the early years Formative events in the American Jewish community Cultural heroes in Israel The structure of the Jewish community in the US and its organizations The American Jewish community's support of the State of Israel Understanding the Jewish community in the US and its institutions Jewish cultural heroes in the US Decade by decade history of the State of Israel

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 21 Prozdor 10 th graders were somewhat less positive than their Reali peers in their assessment of how meaningful they found Pirkei Dorot lessons. Nonetheless, substantial portions strongly endorsed units on the evolution of Jewish identity in the 1950 s, images of Jews in popular culture, the history of the American Jewish community, and important figures in American Jewish life (Figure 6). Kehilot Nifgashot Curriculum This curriculum was developed for use in the 10 th grade Jewish Pluralistic Judaism class at Ironi Hey and an interest group at Gann Academy. At Ironi Hey the class meets once a week for a double session and involves 36 students while at Gann the group of nine students meets twice each week for a 25 minute session held during the morning prayer time. The Kehilot Nigfashot curriculum was developed jointly by the teachers involved and was intended to be a parallel rather than identical learning program for the two groups with defined points of joint or shared experience. The curriculum consists of a syllabus with seven units (e.g. personal identity, Jewish holidays, Jewish identity, peoplehood, and Boston- Haifa connection) and brief descriptions of lessons for each unit. For example the first lesson for the unit on Jewish identity employs a test case to help students explore the controversial issue of who is a Jew. Although lessons vary in the level of information provided, for the most part they do not contain detailed learning objectives or instructional plans. In many ways the curriculum is in the form of 'oral law' and in its present state could not easily be disseminated to other interested schools. Figure 6: Prozdor Student Reactions to 10 th Grade Curriculum 100% To what extent did each of the following activities in the "One People Two Paths" curriculum have an impact on you? 80% To a very large extent To a large extent 60% 17% 12% 27% 23% 40% 17% 20% 8% 25% 38% 50% 46% 35% 38% 17% 22% 29% 0% American Jewry and the Civil Rights Movement Hanukah and Christmas -- Assimilation in America Jewish identity and suburbia in the 1950's Important figures in American Jewish life Images of Jews and Judaism in popular culture History of the American Jewish community Birthright Israel and Jewish young adult identity in the 2000's The struggle to free Soviet Jewry N=23

22 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection When asked how much they agreed or disagreed with statements about the Kehilot Nifgashot curriculum, almost half (48%) of Ironi Hey 10 th graders agreed strongly that the activities were interesting and 86% strongly agreed that the on-line interactions with Gann peers were engaging. By contrast only one of the four Gann participants who responded to the survey (out of the nine participants in this program) strongly agreed that the topics or activities were interesting or that virtual encounters were exciting. of Ironi Hey 10 th grade participants strongly endorsed lessons or activities which focused on bereaved Israeli and Palestinian families (94%), what is required of them as Jews (80%), identity and gender (71%), and conversion to Judaism (70%). Over half of Ironi Hey students (54%) and four of five Gann participants strongly endorsed the activity on first and last names. Similar portions of Ironi Hey (58%) and Gann (two of four) participants gave very positive ratings to the lessons on Jewish symbols. Sophomore participants in the Kehilot Nifgashot curriculum were also asked to rate how meaningful they found specific curriculum elements. As shown in Figure 7, the majority Figure 7: Ironi Hey Student Reactions to 10 th Grade Curriculum 100% 80% To what extent did each of the following activities in the "One People Two Paths" curriculum have an impact on you? A great extent Very much 60% 41% 70% 16% 45% 34% 40% 29% 17% 39% 31% 20% 30% 24% 25% 26% 48% 18% 27% 34% 34% 0% N=23 Personal identity and gender Bereaved Israeli and Palestinian families Activity on first and last names Meeting with a Reform rabbi The people of Israel and being the chosen people Streams of Judaism Jewish symbols Class on what it means to be Jewish Class on who can join Judaism

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 23 The earlier noted finding of an effect for traveling raises the question of whether or not there is a unique contribution of curriculum by itself. As in the first year of the evaluation, a scale was employed to assess changes in how students perceived the prominence of Jewish peoplehood education in their schools that included a focus on Israel/Diaspora Jewry and connection to a larger Jewish people. The four items comprising this scale asked students about the emphasis in their school on learning about Israel/Diaspora Jewry and on the connection between themselves and the larger Jewish people. The scale showed good internal reliability (α=0.75). As shown in Figure 8, students who were exposed to JIESP curriculum but did not travel at Prozdor (9 th and 10 th grade), indicated significant increases in their perception that connection to the larger Jewish people and knowledge of Jewish communities outside their own country were important parts of their education. Ironi Hey 10 th graders and Reali 9 th and 10 th graders also indicated increases on this scale that approached but did not reach significance. JIESP partnerships have the potential to make a lasting contribution in curriculum development. Students appear to find the lessons developed for this initiative to be interesting and the Pirkei Dorot curriculum is in a form ready for dissemination. Although a boost is provided by the linking of these educational elements and the travel experience, the curriculum also appears to make its own unique contribution to students perception that their school is focused on peoplehood education. Figure 8: Involved Non-Traveler Perceived School Emphasis on Jewish Peoplehood 5 4.2** 4 4.0 3.2 3.4 3.2 3 2.9 Pre Post 2 1 Prozdor Reali Ironi Hey Prozdor N=63 Reali N=112 **p 0.01

24 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection

Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection 25 V Impact on Students Comprised of educational and experiential elements, JIESP has the potential to affect many aspects of student understanding and identity. This section of the report describes the impact of participation on behavior, knowledge, and attitudes of students. Making Personal Connections Whether through in-person meetings or online conversations, at their heart both the Pirkei Dorot and Kehilot Nifgashot programs aim to create lines of personal connection between American and Israeli students. As shown in Figures 9 and 10, students who travelled as part of their JIESP program at Prozdor, Reali or Ironi Hey were significantly more positive about the extent to which their experience educated them about the lives of their peers as compared with Involved Non- Travelers. Travelers from Prozdor and Reali also indicated significantly stronger endorsement of the extent of opportunities to develop friendships with peers at their partner school. Although sufficient data is not available from Gann Non-travelers to conduct these analyses, the data on Gann travelers does indicate that they are far less positive than the Travelers at their partner school. Figure 9: Student Reactions to Pirkei Dorot as Opportunity to Make Connections A great extent 5 4.9*** 4.9*** 4.3*** 4.2*** 4 3 2.4 2.2 2.4 2 1.9 Not at all 1 Involved Non- Travelers Travelers Involved Non- Travelers Travelers Involved Non- Travelers Travelers Involved Non- Travelers Prozdor Reali Prozdor Reali Helped you learn more about the lives of your Israeli/US peers Prozdor Involved Non-Travelers N=26 Prozdor Travelers N=13 Reali Involved Non-Travelers N=123 **p 0.001 Reali Travelers N=23 Travelers Gave you the opportunity to become friends with Israelis/Americans

26 Year 2: Evaluation of the Boston-Haifa Connection Figure 10: Student Reactions to Kehilot Nifgashot as Opportunity to Make Connections 5 A great extent 5 4.5*** 4.4 4 3.7 3.9 3 3.1 2.8 2 Not at all 1 ***p 0.001 Travelers Involved Non- Travelers Travelers Travelers Involved Non- Travelers Gann Ironi Hey Gann Ironi Hey Helped you learn more about the lives of your Israeli/US peers Gann Travelers N=22 Ironi Hey Involved Non-Travelers Travelers Gave you the opportunity to become friends with Israelis/Americans In both the start and end of year surveys students were asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements about how they understand the similarities and differences between themselves and peers from their partner country as well as how comfortable and connected they feel to these peers. As indicated in Table 7, the pattern of significant changes from start to end of year depends on both the school attended and the type of participation. Gann Involved Non- Travelers showed a significant increase in their endorsement of connection to peers from the partner country. Prozdor and Ironi Hey travelers significantly increased their level of agreement with comfort interacting with partner country peers and also the differences between, and commonalities among, Israeli and American teenagers. Although this combination of results might seem contradictory it can also be interpreted as evidence that these students have developed a more realistic view of what they do and do not have in common as a result of their participation in the program. Both travelers and non-travelers from Reali indicated significant drops in their overall sense of connection to American peers. This may be due to the fact that these groups also indicated either a decrease in perceived similarity or an increase in perceived dissimilarity with their American peers. Perhaps the best measure of the strength of connections made between students is whether they continue to have contact outside of the formal program. In end of year surveys students were asked to indicate how often they had different forms of contact with peers from their partner school. The impact of traveling is seen clearly on this behavioral measure of connection. Travelers, as compared with Involved Non-Travelers were significantly more likely in the prior three