10 for 10
Trends, Findings, and Other Learnings from 10 Years of Rosov Consulting
Watch a video introduction from Alex Pomson
Use up/down arrows to navigate, or return to start screen by clicking home button
01
TEENS
They want to grow, and they want to be challenged. This interest shouldn’t be conflated with wanting to burnish their resumés on the one hand or delving deeply into Jewish content on the other.
We’re struck by the extent to which teens who participate in Jewish experiences are motivated both by an appetite to learn and to stretch themselves, and not only an interest in having fun with old friends or in making new friends.
For sure, many teens seek to improve their college-admission competitiveness, but their motivations are often deeper and perhaps more profound.
02
INTERMARRIAGE
We’re finding that there is less of a correlation between how people think about marrying Jewish and how they think about raising their children Jewish. In recent years, these two concepts have become completely uncoupled (forgive the pun).
We’re often asked to research emerging adults — people between the ages of 18 and 30 — for their views about intermarriage. To do so, we typically ask a standard, well-validated, multi-part survey question:
How important is it to you to date Jewish, marry Jewish, and raise your children Jewish?
03
FAMILIES AS A UNIT OF ANALYSIS
engaging them in conversation about religious and cultural life, and paying attention to home-based experiences and applications.
We see meaningful results when programs or studies address change or outcomes for the couple or the family as a unit and not only for the individual. Acknowledging the family context as a powerful factor in the development of Jewish life can mean listening for and tracking the couple or family’s definition of who they are (whether Jewish, interfaith, or none of the above),
The role of family systems in moderating/intensifying Jewish life outcomes is something Randal Schnoor and I examined over a 10-year period and reported in our recently published book, Jewish Family: Identity and Self-Formation at Home.
04
SCHOOL LEADERSHIP
Perhaps the middle-managers are the ones left to maintain the school's standards, build staff morale, and help it pursue its vision. That’s our speculation.
The literature on school change highlights the critical role of school heads. In our evaluation of many initiatives in Jewish day schools, we find that middle managers play an equally important role. This might be because of the steep turnover in day schools among those in the most senior positions.
Either way, those individuals with broad enough influence who also are situated close enough to the ground (squarely in the middle of the management hierarchy) have a decisive influence. We suggest that investing in this stratum of school leadership is altogether less risky than placing all of one’s bets on recruiting and retaining an exceptional Head of School.
05
MENTOR/MENTEE RELATIONSHIPS
Although these relationships are some of the most expensive for educational interventions to sustain, the outcomes they produce merit the investment.
Mentoring promises relational learning in its purest form.
The range of contexts in which we find this to be true is striking: day schools, synagogues, camping, and Israel experience programming.
06
EMERGENT PROGRAMS
One of the most satisfying experiences in our work is to accompany a program, as thought-partner and evaluator, from before launch through different phases of take-off. Repeatedly, we find – whatever the context – that it takes three seasons or more for programs to gain real traction competitively and educationally.
Two years is rarely enough time. We have learned that stakeholders need to hold their nerve while programs find their feet and their market.
07
MEASURING CHANGE
We notice funders asking why, if Birthright can produce life changing outcomes in only 10 days, can’t other, more extensive, programs do better? Our perspective is that program outcomes must be contextualized by where program participants start out. Knowing where participants start is as important as knowing where they end up.
Birthright Israel has been a remarkably disruptive innovation. Not only has it shaken up the Israel experience market, it also has completely changed the expectations of funders. They now expect other programs to produce the same kinds of deep outcomes.
08
EVALUATION AS A LEARNING PROCESS
Some evaluation findings can and should be celebrated. But truly meaningful (and helpful) evaluation always contains elements that foster organizational learning and growth, which sometimes prompt difficult conversations.
The organizations (grantees or donors) that benefit most from program evaluation are those that learn to trust process and understand that the trajectory of success is not always linear. They learn that data don’t always tell you the story you wanted to hear; but data often tell you the story you need to hear nonetheless.
09
COMPARISONS
When this is not possible, we get creative about finding proximate comparison groups. In some cases, we are lucky enough to study similar populations for two different clients who allow their data to be compared to each other. Or we collect data from program applicants who are similar to program participants in all but their participation in the program being studied.
In important ways, evaluation is about comparison. This means that in order to truly measure growth and change, the first step is to establish a baseline, or at least some reference point, against which to benchmark progress. This could mean conducting year-to-year tracking, or pre-post analysis (comparing specific measures before and after a programmatic intervention).
10
SURVEY QUESTIONS
This means that you want the survey-taker to resonate with the language and tone of a question. Sometimes this means dialing back on the quantity of what is asked, so that the quality of the answers is higher and more reliable.
Program stakeholders need to be on the same page about desired outcomes for a program before drafting any kind of outcome survey. Equally important, they need to be attuned to their target audience. Surveys, even when conducted by a third party, are an intervention of sorts.
Thanks for reading!
Jump back to any page below
www.rosovconsulting.com
10for10
Karen Uribe
Created on September 14, 2018
Start designing with a free template
Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:
Explore all templates
Transcript
10 for 10
Trends, Findings, and Other Learnings from 10 Years of Rosov Consulting
Watch a video introduction from Alex Pomson
Use up/down arrows to navigate, or return to start screen by clicking home button
01
TEENS
They want to grow, and they want to be challenged. This interest shouldn’t be conflated with wanting to burnish their resumés on the one hand or delving deeply into Jewish content on the other.
We’re struck by the extent to which teens who participate in Jewish experiences are motivated both by an appetite to learn and to stretch themselves, and not only an interest in having fun with old friends or in making new friends.
For sure, many teens seek to improve their college-admission competitiveness, but their motivations are often deeper and perhaps more profound.
02
INTERMARRIAGE
We’re finding that there is less of a correlation between how people think about marrying Jewish and how they think about raising their children Jewish. In recent years, these two concepts have become completely uncoupled (forgive the pun).
We’re often asked to research emerging adults — people between the ages of 18 and 30 — for their views about intermarriage. To do so, we typically ask a standard, well-validated, multi-part survey question:
How important is it to you to date Jewish, marry Jewish, and raise your children Jewish?
03
FAMILIES AS A UNIT OF ANALYSIS
engaging them in conversation about religious and cultural life, and paying attention to home-based experiences and applications.
We see meaningful results when programs or studies address change or outcomes for the couple or the family as a unit and not only for the individual. Acknowledging the family context as a powerful factor in the development of Jewish life can mean listening for and tracking the couple or family’s definition of who they are (whether Jewish, interfaith, or none of the above),
The role of family systems in moderating/intensifying Jewish life outcomes is something Randal Schnoor and I examined over a 10-year period and reported in our recently published book, Jewish Family: Identity and Self-Formation at Home.
04
SCHOOL LEADERSHIP
Perhaps the middle-managers are the ones left to maintain the school's standards, build staff morale, and help it pursue its vision. That’s our speculation.
The literature on school change highlights the critical role of school heads. In our evaluation of many initiatives in Jewish day schools, we find that middle managers play an equally important role. This might be because of the steep turnover in day schools among those in the most senior positions.
Either way, those individuals with broad enough influence who also are situated close enough to the ground (squarely in the middle of the management hierarchy) have a decisive influence. We suggest that investing in this stratum of school leadership is altogether less risky than placing all of one’s bets on recruiting and retaining an exceptional Head of School.
05
MENTOR/MENTEE RELATIONSHIPS
Although these relationships are some of the most expensive for educational interventions to sustain, the outcomes they produce merit the investment.
Mentoring promises relational learning in its purest form.
The range of contexts in which we find this to be true is striking: day schools, synagogues, camping, and Israel experience programming.
06
EMERGENT PROGRAMS
One of the most satisfying experiences in our work is to accompany a program, as thought-partner and evaluator, from before launch through different phases of take-off. Repeatedly, we find – whatever the context – that it takes three seasons or more for programs to gain real traction competitively and educationally.
Two years is rarely enough time. We have learned that stakeholders need to hold their nerve while programs find their feet and their market.
07
MEASURING CHANGE
We notice funders asking why, if Birthright can produce life changing outcomes in only 10 days, can’t other, more extensive, programs do better? Our perspective is that program outcomes must be contextualized by where program participants start out. Knowing where participants start is as important as knowing where they end up.
Birthright Israel has been a remarkably disruptive innovation. Not only has it shaken up the Israel experience market, it also has completely changed the expectations of funders. They now expect other programs to produce the same kinds of deep outcomes.
08
EVALUATION AS A LEARNING PROCESS
Some evaluation findings can and should be celebrated. But truly meaningful (and helpful) evaluation always contains elements that foster organizational learning and growth, which sometimes prompt difficult conversations.
The organizations (grantees or donors) that benefit most from program evaluation are those that learn to trust process and understand that the trajectory of success is not always linear. They learn that data don’t always tell you the story you wanted to hear; but data often tell you the story you need to hear nonetheless.
09
COMPARISONS
When this is not possible, we get creative about finding proximate comparison groups. In some cases, we are lucky enough to study similar populations for two different clients who allow their data to be compared to each other. Or we collect data from program applicants who are similar to program participants in all but their participation in the program being studied.
In important ways, evaluation is about comparison. This means that in order to truly measure growth and change, the first step is to establish a baseline, or at least some reference point, against which to benchmark progress. This could mean conducting year-to-year tracking, or pre-post analysis (comparing specific measures before and after a programmatic intervention).
10
SURVEY QUESTIONS
This means that you want the survey-taker to resonate with the language and tone of a question. Sometimes this means dialing back on the quantity of what is asked, so that the quality of the answers is higher and more reliable.
Program stakeholders need to be on the same page about desired outcomes for a program before drafting any kind of outcome survey. Equally important, they need to be attuned to their target audience. Surveys, even when conducted by a third party, are an intervention of sorts.
Thanks for reading!
Jump back to any page below
www.rosovconsulting.com