University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for the 21st-century learner – An innovation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for the 21st-century learner – An innovation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: 21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

Judaic/Israel Studies Curriculum for the 21
st
Century Learner – An Innovation Study

by

Rabbi Menachem M. Weiss

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2018

Copyright 2018 Rabbi Menachem M. Weiss

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 2

Acknowledgements
To God goes the first offering of thanks and praise for all that I am capable of, have and
am meant to accomplish as his humble minister. Education saved my life, and this dissertation is
the culmination of a 47-year life-long journey of learning, so I would like to first thank all the
dedicated and loving educators that never gave up on me and helped me find my own voice. The
first of those teachers were my parents who taught me to trust in God and who passed along the
value of hard work and perseverance. Since then, God has blessed me with extremely generous
men and women of great character who helped mentor and support my continued growth, both
personally and professionally.
The first of these key figures was Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson of blessed memory
(OBM) who forever remains my spiritual Master and Teacher. To my Aunt Renee, thank you for
opening my eyes to the work of inner healing through the power of your love and caring. To
Rabbi Yossi Haber OBM, who taught me that one who acquires a teacher also gains a friend. To
Rabbi Ezra Shochet, you helped me realize that the true beauty and wonder of life is found in its
imperfections. To Rabbi Shlomo (OBM) and Olivia Schwartz who took me into their home and
hearts, thank you for teaching me how to love unconditionally. To Rabbi Schneur Zalman Gafni
I owe my love for learning and the belief in its power to transform the world. To Mrs. Lauretta
Rothwacks for helping me discover the that true art of teaching begins with empathy and
patience. To Dr. Stephen Brenner who adopted me like a son, thank you for enabling me to
forge new paths, leading to the fulfillment of dreams once only dreamt. To Mr. Hyman Jebb
Levy, thank you for teaching me the value of discipline and that the true measure of strength is
one's integrity and giving heart. To Metuka Benjamin, thank you for your unwavering faith and
friendship. This was all your doing, and I will never be able to repay you for your
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 3

encouragement, love and support. To Mr. Lowell Milken, a man who embodies all the attributes
I wish to emulate in my own life, thank you for being you. I thought I had received the greatest
gifts from all the other mentors I have had in my life, but you proved me wrong. To observe you
at your highest or lowest moments of life makes no difference. Either way, you demonstrate the
epitome of grace, intelligence, caring, and humility through the subtle ways you offer respect and
dignity to all those around you. I hope this dissertation makes you proud, as it is written in your
honor.
Thank you to my doctoral committee chair, Dr. Lawrence Picus, and members Dr.
Monique Datta and Dr. David Cash. Dr. Picus, thank you for your gracious, never-ending
wisdom and guidance throughout this process. From our very first conversation I knew that you
were a God-send, and three years later I can confidently say I was right. Dr. Datta, you gave me
my only B grade in the program, and I deserved better, only I didn't know yet how to achieve my
full potential. Your encouragement and continued expectations of excellence helped to bring out
the best in me and inspire me to discover parts of myself previously never revealed, and for that I
am forever grateful. Dr. Cash, you were there for me during difficult moments along this
journey, and your patience and support helped me carry on, so thank you for your kind and
encouraging heart. And to all the professors and staff at Rossier and at USC, thank you for
making this an amazing and rewarding experience. I give you all five stars! My heartfelt
gratitude goes to the JS faculty at JCS who bravely participated in this study. Thank you for
your dedication to Jewish education and to the students you serve. I learned something from
each of you, and it was a privilege to create this dissertation with you. To my many students,
thank you for being my best teachers (especially if your name happens to be Mendel).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 4

Last, but for sure not least, I wish to thank my entire family and friends. To my mother,
thank you for your love and encouragement and for always believing in me. To my second
parents, Joseph and Bella Kruper, thank you for treating me like your own son and for everything
you have done for Baila and me. You are both my heroes! To my brothers, sisters, brothers-in-
law, sisters-in-law, nephews and nieces, and close friends (you know who you are), thank you all
for enriching my life and for being there for me when I needed you. I truly believe that each one
of you have been placed by God in my life to help prepare me for this moment, and you have all
taught me so much. To my terribly talented treasures, my children (i.e. support staff): Ester and
Bentzi, thank you for being the best editor and therapist a father could ask for; Rivka, thank you
for being the best administrator a father could ask for; Sara, thank you for being the best
motivator a father could ask for; Mo, thank you for being the best bodyguard (captain of the
team) a father could ask for; Nachman, thank you for being the best researcher a father could ask
for; Baruch, thank you for being the best assistant a father could ask for; Chaim, thank you for
being the best listener (and Rabbi) a father could ask for; Yaakov, thank you for being the best
scholar (and wrestler) a father could ask for; and Devorah, thank you for being the boss!
Finally, to my best friend, life partner, savior and wife, thank you for everything, but
especially for your unconditional love and acceptance! Baila, you get your own paragraph
because you fill the most special space in my life. We have been on this adventure together for
25 years, and you have made it wonderful in every way. You didn't only believe in me, you
helped me believe in myself. Your patience for me and my dreams should earn you a Nobel
prize, and in my eyes, you are and will always be golden! Thank you for supporting me through
this long journey, and I promise I will never ask you to get another doctorate again, but if you
want me to, we can always discuss it.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 5

Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 9
List of Figures 10
Abstract 13
Chapter One: Introduction 14
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 14
Background of the Problem 16
Importance of the Problem 16
Organizational Context and Mission 17
Organizational Performance Status and Need 18
Importance of the Organizational Innovation 19
Organizational Goal 20
Description of Stakeholder Groups 20
Stakeholder Group for the Study 23
Purpose of the Project and Questions 23
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 24
Definitions 25
Organization of the Project 26
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 28
Jewish Education for the 21
st
Century 28
Importance of Jewish/Israel Education 29
Historical Development of American Jewish/Israel Education 31
Denominational Development and Impact 34
Relationship to Jewish Continuity 36
Impact of Jewish Demographics 38
Challenges in Engaging Students in Jewish/Israel Studies 40
Challenges to Engaging Students in Jewish/Israel Studies 40
Religious Perceptions and Development 41
Jewish Education Curriculum 42
21
st
Century Education 44
21
st
Century Education 45
Pedagogical Methodology 47
Technological Advances 48
Flipped Classroom Approach 50
Use of Technology Considerations 51
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 52
KMO Framework for Organizational Improvement 52
JCS JS Faculty Knowledge and Motivation Influences 54
Knowledge and Skills 54
Knowledge influences 54
Pedagogical content knowledge 55
Blended flipped classroom methodology and practice 57
Reflective practices 58
Motivation Needs 62
Utility value theory 62
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 6

Utility Value influence on JISC implementation 63
Attribution Theory 65
Attribution theory influence on JISC implementation 65
Organizational Influences 68
Cultural Model 68
Learning organization 69
Pluralistic Community Jewish schools 71
Cultural Setting 74
Accountability 75
Organizational change management 75
Conceptual Framework 80
Literature Review Conclusion 86
Chapter Three: Methodology 88
Purpose of the Project and Questions 88
Conceptual and Methodological Approach 89
Participating Stakeholders 90
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale 91
Survey Sampling Strategy and Rationale 91
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 92
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 92
Data Collection and Instrumentation 94
Surveys 96
Interviews 97
Documents and Artifacts 98
Data Analysis 100
Credibility and Trustworthiness 104
Validity and Reliability 104
Ethics 105
Limitations and Delimitations 108
Summary 114
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 115
Survey, and Interview Participants 116
Survey Results 117
Knowledge Survey Results 117
Meta-Cognitive Knowledge 117
Procedural Knowledge 121
Motivation Survey Results 122
Attributions 122
Utility Value 124
Organization Survey Results 127
Cultural Modal 127
Cultural Setting 129
Qualitative Interview Results 130
KMO Themes Results 131
Organizational Needs Qualitative Results 133
Cultural Setting Accountability 133
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 7

Cultural Model Pluralism 135
Cultural Learning Organization 136
Knowledge Needs Qualitative Results 137
Declarative Knowledge Needs Results 138
Procedural Knowledge Needs Results 139
Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Needs Results 141
Motivation Needs Results 142
Utility Value Needs Results 142
Attributions Needs Results 143
Findings 145
Organizational Needs 146
Accountability Needs 146
Organizational Accountability 147
Curricular Accountability 149
Student Accountability 151
Pluralism Needs 154
Societal and Demographic Shifts 155
Differing stakeholder priorities and vison 158
Issues of the school’s mission, culture and identity 160
Learning Organization Needs 163
Resistance to Change and Non-Learning Organization Indicators 165
Knowledge Needs 167
Declarative Needs 168
Procedural Needs 170
Meta-Cognitive Needs 172
Motivational Needs 176
Utility Value Needs 177
Jewish communal continuity 177
Improving society through Jewish education 178
Building Jewish identity 179
Attribution Needs 181
Demographic factors 181
Lack of strong school culture 182
Societal factors negatively impacting JS 183
Synthesis of Qualitative and Quantitative Knowledge Data 185
Knowledge Needs Qualitative and Quantitative Synthesis 185
Declarative knowledge needs synthesis 186
Procedural knowledge needs synthesis 186
Meta-cognitive knowledge needs synthesis 187
Motivation Needs Synthesis 190
Utility value needs synthesis 190
Attributions needs synthesis 191
Organizational Needs Synthesis 192
Learning organization needs synthesis 192
Chapter Five: Recommendations 194
Organizational Context and Mission 194
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 8

Organizational Performance Goal 194
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study 195
Purpose of the Project and Questions 195
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences/Needs 196
Knowledge Recommendations 196
Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets 200
Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets 201
Metacognitive knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets 202
Motivation Recommendations 204
Self-Efficacy 206
Utility Value 207
Attributions 208
Organization Recommendations 209
Cultural models 212
Cultural settings 213
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 214
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 214
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 215
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 216
Level 3: Behavior 216
Critical behaviors 216
Required drivers 217
Organizational support 218
Level 2: Learning 219
Learning goals 219
Program 220
Components of learning 221
Level 1: Reaction 223
Reaction to training experiences 223
Evaluation Tools 224
Immediately following the program implementation 224
Delayed for a period after the program implementation 225
Data Analysis and Reporting 225
Summary 226
Recommendations for Further Study 228
Conclusion 228
Appendix A: Survey Protocol 230
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 233
Appendix C: Observation Protocol 237
Appendix D: JISC Levels 1 & 2 Training Evaluation Instrument 238
Appendix E: JISC Levels 1, 2, 3, &4 Training Evaluation Instrument 239
References 240

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 9

List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals 22
Table 2: Stakeholder Goal and Knowledge Influence, Type and Assessment 61
Table 3: Stakeholder Goal and Motivation Influence, and Assessment 67
Table 4: Stakeholder Goal and Organizational Influences, and Assessment 77
Table 5: Combined Stakeholder Goal and KMO Influences and Assessments 78
Table S. Data Collection Method by Stakeholder Group 96
Table 6: Summary of Assumed KMO Needs for JISC Implementation 110
Table 7: Validated Assumed Knowledge Needs and Recommendations 197
Table 8: Validated Assumed Motivation Needs and Recommendations 205
Table 9: Validated Assumed Organization Needs and Recommendations 210
Table 10: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 216
Table 11: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for JS Faculty 217
Table 12: Required Drivers to Support JS Faculty Critical Behaviors 217
Table 13: Components of Learning for the Program 222
Table 14: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 223

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 10

List of Figures
Figure A. JCS JS Faculty KMO Needs Interaction Conceptual Framework 82
Figure B. KMO Gap Analysis Model Adapted from Clark and Estes (2008) 89
Figure 1: Survey Q2: J/I Faculty Opinions on Level of Academic Rigor in J/I Studies 119
Figure 2: Survey Q3: J/I Faculty Opinions on Changing J/I Studies 120
Figure 3: Survey Q4: J/I Faculty Opinions on Tampering with Traditional Methods 120
Figure 4: Survey Q10: J/I Faculty Beliefs influence on Student’s Jewish Identity 121
Figure 5: Survey Q13; J/I Faculty Knowledge of the Flipped Class Model 122
Figure 6: Survey Q1, J/I Faculty beliefs on difficulty of teaching in a pluralistic school 123
Figure 7: Survey Q7 & Q8: Teachers Attributions of Student Engagement in JS 124
Figure 8: Survey Q5: How often teachers enjoy teaching J/I studies 125
Figure 9: Survey Q6: Teacher’s Reporting on Student Behavior During JS 125
Figure 10: Survey Q9; Student Engagement Scale 126
Figure 11: Survey Q12 and Q14; Teacher Utility Value of New Pedagogical Learning 127
Figure 12: Survey Q11: Cultural Model Learning Organization Item 128
Figure 13: Survey Q15: Availability of Resources for Flipped Class Methodology 129
Figure 14: Comparison of KMO themes referenced in Qualitative Interviews 132
Figure 15: KMO needs themes by frequency of reference in qualitative interviews 132
Figure 16: Organizational Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes 133
Figure 17: Cultural Setting Accountability Needs Comparison by Interview Participant 135
Figure 18: Cultural Model Pluralism Needs Comparison by Interview Participants 136
Figure 19: Cultural Model Learning Organization Needs by Interview Participant 137
Figure 20: Knowledge Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework Axial Codes 138
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 11

Figure 21: Factual/Conceptual Knowledge Needs by Interview Participant 139
Figure 22: Procedural Knowledge Needs Comparison by Interview Participant 140
Figure 23: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Needs Comparison by Interview Participant 141
Figure 24: Motivation Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework Axial Codes 142
Figure 25: Utility Value Motivational Needs Comparison by Interview Participant 143

Figure 26: Attributions Motivational Needs Comparison by Interview Participant 144
Figure 27: KMO Validated Needs Totals by Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes 145
Figure 28: Organizational Needs by Qualitative Data References 146
Figure 29: Accountability Totals by Qualitative Data References 147
Figure 30: Accountability Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective 153
Figure 31: Accountability Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective 154
Figure 32: Pluralism Totals by Qualitative Data References 155
Figure 33: Demographic Shifts in Enrolment for Years 2014-2017 157
Figure 34: Pluralism Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective 163
Figure 35: Pluralism Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective 163
Figure 36: Learning Organization Totals by Qualitative Data References 164
Figure 37: Learning Organization References by Teachers’ Perspective 165
Figure 38: Learning Organization Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective 165
Figure 39: Knowledge Needs by Qualitative Data References 168
Figure 40: Declarative Knowledge Totals by Qualitative Data References 169
Figure 41: Declarative Knowledge Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective 170
Figure 42: Declarative Knowledge Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective 170
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 12

Figure 43: Procedural Knowledge Totals by Qualitative Data References 172
Figure 44: Meta-Cognitive Totals by Qualitative Data References 173
Figure 45: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge References by Administrators’ Perspective 175
Figure 46: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective 175
Figure 47: Motivation Needs by Qualitative Data References 176
Figure 48: Utility Value Totals by Qualitative Data References 180
Figure 49: Attributions Totals by Qualitative Data References 185
Figure 50: Sample of JISC Implementation Data and Analysis Dashboard 226
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 13

Abstract
With alarming declines in Jewish demographics in the United States, Jewish education is
being viewed as a way of reversing this negative trend. Some have therefore argued for the use
of 21st century pedagogical methods to increase the relevancy and effectiveness of Jewish
education. This study utilizes a modified Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model to
investigate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of Jewish/Israel studies
teachers who are charged with implementing such a curriculum based on established literature
relating to Jewish education, 21st century educational approaches, learning and motivation
theory, as well as organizational culture influences. Qualitative analysis of study data was
collected and triangulated through survey, interviews, and document analysis resulting in six
needs being validated and another seven being validated with a high probability. Using the
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model (2016), these needs lead to the formation of
implementation and evaluation plans for this study's recommended solutions, which include
collaborative, educational and training experiences in which Jewish Studies (JS) faculty will be
able to learn, observe, practice, and receive feedback on their training, followed by strategic
follow-up and reinforcement of training until established outcomes can be systematically
demonstrated.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

14
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION OF THE PROBLEM OF PRACTICE
Demographic studies show a steady decline in Jewish identification, engagement, and
enrollment in Jewish Day Schools, bringing current Jewish educational methods into question.
Woocher (2012) lists eight emerging patterns that are affecting dynamics of Jewish identity and
education and argues considering those patterns for a paradigm shift to make Jewish education
relevant for 21
st
century learners. This shift would involve a move toward a more student-centric
educational approach aligned with modern pedagogical thinking, being that today’s students are
more individualistic. Whereas in the past Jews have found purpose in a communal survival
narrative (Woocher, 1986), the “survivalist” approach to Judaism has lost its appeal as modern
Jews search for meaning from a more “personal-universal” perspective than a “collective-tribal”
one (Woocher, 2012, p. 190). This question about the efficacy of Jewish education is of vital
importance to the future of Jewish demographics in the United States, which according to 2015
Pew Research Center study projections, will decline from 6,040,000 total Jewish population
(including Jews of religion and cultural Jews) in 2010, to 5,920,000 in 2050. This drop
represents a negative growth rate for the total US Jewish population over the next three decades.
Background of the Problem
According to current demographic studies, the number of Americans identifying
themselves as religious Jews has declined to approximately 4,163,700 (Tighe, Saxe and Kramer,
2012)
1
. The 2013 Pew Research Center study of the American Jewish population records a
declining number of Jews by religion, who they define as citizens of Jewish descent who identify

1
The variation in different estimates is a result of differing criteria used by various demographic
researchers in defining “Jews by religion” and “Jews of no religion”.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

15
themselves with the Jewish faith, versus Jews of no religion who are culturally Jewish. These
researchers found that over the last half-century, Jews by religion have increased by only 15%,
while the general population has grown by 50%, demonstrating a comparative decline. Pew
(2013) estimates showed this trend continuing with Jews by religion dropping from 1.8 million
in 2008 to 1.5 million in 2013. As a result, “Jews of no religion,” who they define as citizens of
Jewish descent claiming a purely cultural connection to being Jewish, have increased as an
overall percentage of the American Jewish population (Sheshkin & Dashefsky, 2014). These
numbers represent a decline compared to past generations. For instance, the study by Rosenquist
and Friedman (1951), which looked at five decades of census bureau figures, found the Jewish
population growing almost twentyfold from the late 19
th
century till the mid 20
th
century, with
230,000 Jews being recorded in 1850, versus 4,641,187 being tallied in 1936. This contrast
between past and present Jewish demographic trends requires understanding if solutions are to be
found to help revive the number of Jews who identify themselves with Judaism. The study poses
the question: Why are fewer Jews identifying with their religion, and what role can Jewish
education play in reversing this trend?
Jewish education has been shown to have a positive effect on participants’ level of Jewish
engagement, but researchers question how modern sociological and cultural changes are
impacting Jewish education’s current effectiveness (Schiff, and Schneider, 1994). Data from
Dushkin and Engelman (1959) showed estimated enrollment in Jewish supplementary education
at 491,000 students. Enrollment numbers have declined since then as demonstrated by Schick
(2009) in an AVI CHAI Foundation 2008-2009 census of Jewish supplementary education,
which estimated current enrollment at 230,000. These lower enrollment numbers demonstrate a
weakening in Jewish engagement and may be contributing to a further decline in Jewish identity.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

16
Friedman, Friedlander and Blustien (2005) found that American Jews were conflicted about their
Jewish identity due to a lack of Jewish education. Eighty percent of respondents in their study
viewed themselves as bicultural, as having negative feelings about being Jewish, while still
wanting to know more about their heritage.
There is limited empirical Jewish educational research (Goodman, Flexner, &
Bloomberg, 2008), but other research across disciplines finds that student-centered educational
methodology results in positive effects for 21
st
century learners. For instance, Hattie, Marsh, Neil
and Richards (1997) found that cooperative and collaborative learning increases secondary
school student achievement by demonstrating that students who participate in small group
learning moved from the 50
th
percentile to the 70
th
on standardized tests. Woocher (2012) argues
for the use of these progressive pedagogical approaches in the learning of Jewish education,
which he states should be engaging, student centered, and enjoyable. Therefore, the primary
objective of this current research is to look at the use of these methods specifically in Jewish
education.
Importance of the Problem
This is an important problem to solve for the following reasons. With Jewish
demographics declining, and 85% of American Jews responding that they seldom or never
participate in Jewish services (Pew 2013), there is evidence of a cultural/religious dilemma in the
American Jewish community. Jewish educational institutions are being viewed as the greatest
hope of reversing this trend (Wertheimer, 2011). Chertok, Phillips and Saxe (2008)
demonstrated that students who have attended a Jewish Day School show a substantial increase
in Jewish engagement. According to their findings, 64% of Orthodox and 31% of non-Orthodox
Jewish college students who had attended Jewish day schools attended Jewish religious services,
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

17
compared to 11% for those who attended non-Jewish private schools, and 9% for those who
attended public schools. Phillips (2010) showed a connection between participating in Jewish
education and engaging in Jewish spiritual practice. The researcher found that 83% of Jews by
religion are likely to light the Chanukah menorah, compared to 31% of secular Jews. When it
came to attending a Passover Seder, the numbers were 79% for Jews by religion and 24% for
secular Jews. Saxe (2011) explains the dynamic effect Jewish education has on participants as
one in which positive Jewish learning and experiences inspire participants to further engage in
additional Jewish practices, leading to increased future learning and participation. Therefore,
this current research study questions whether Jewish education would benefit from employing
progressive pedagogical methods in educating 21
st
century students.
Organizational Context and Mission
Jewish Community School (JCS) is a non-denominational religiously pluralistic private
Jewish Day School serving a major metropolitan Jewish community for over 25 years. The
school’s mission is to develop students’ minds, hearts and souls, meaning that it envisions them
being able to possess the cognitive, emotional and spiritual capacity to tackle personal and global
issues with intelligence, compassion and the motivation to selflessly act for the benefit of others.
The school also focuses on strengthening its students’ sense of Jewishness and feeling of deep
connection to Israel, the Jewish people, and a commitment to service of humanity. JCS currently
has approximately 350 female students and 400 male students enrolled in grades 7-12. Its
student population comes from diverse segments of the Jewish community, but mostly from
Conservative (54%) and Reform Jewish families (37%), with the rest coming from Modern
Orthodox (6%) and non-affiliated or other (3%) families. The school employs over 225 staff
members, about evenly divided between male and female, of which 65% are part of the teaching
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

18
faculty. Approximately 70% of the school’s teachers hold advanced degrees, and they draw from
various religious and ethnic backgrounds, with about half being Jewish, 40% Christian and 10%
other or non-religiously affiliated. The school values innovation and prides itself in excellence
in everything it does across its dual Judaic & General studies curriculums, with small class sizes
averaging at around 17-20 students per class (JCS, 2016 school report).
Organizational Performance Status/Need
Below is an excerpt of a recent Senior Sermon draft, written by a 12th grade JCS student.
“I recite prayers that thank God for all that he has done in the world and state how great
and almighty God is. I read and learn of biblical stories that incorporate our ancestors’
communications with God. However, it is difficult for me to actually believe in these prayers or
stories when there is no hard evidence that a God really exists. If God is so great, then why did
the holocaust happen” (JCS Anonymous 2016 Senior Sermon).
Unfortunately, this type of disillusionment among today's Jewish youth is widespread,
and it reflects similar attitudes towards religion prevalent in our 21st century world. As an
educational institution whose general mission includes strengthening its students’ sense of
Jewishness and feeling of deep connection to Israel, finding relevant ways of addressing
students’ negative perceptions of Jewish/spiritual concepts is of paramount importance to
JCS. A failure to adequately teach fundamental concepts of Judaism and Israel could possibly
contribute to furthering misconceptions widely held by students. This inadequacy could result in
them leaving JCS less committed to Judaism/Israel, or even disillusioned, like the example of the
senior quoted above. This is the purpose behind the creation of the 21
st
Century Fundamentals of
Judaism/Israel Curriculum (JISC), which aims to engage students with Judaism and Israel
utilizing innovative approaches appropriate for 21st century learners.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

19
Importance of the Organizational Innovation

The 21
st
Century Judaic/Israel Curriculum (JISC) is a potential middle/high school
integrated Judaic/Israel curriculum that utilizes an innovative, multimedia, flipped class, blended
approach in order to inspire the next generation of Jewish/Israel leaders. The purpose of JISC is
to make Judaism and Israel exciting and relevant to 21st century learners. This is accomplished
by framing the exploration of Jewish/Israel studies through the lens of specific values, which
speak to leadership, personal development, national belonging, empowerment, and to meeting
the real-life aspirations of today’s teens. How the curriculum is delivered by the teacher and
experienced by the student is also reflective of 21st century learning styles, use of technology,
and innovative pedagogical approaches.
The proposed JISC development results in six separate courses to be taught in 7th-12th
grades. The courses take students on a journey of exploration as they begin to understand and
internalize the values and principles that empower Israel and Jewish living.
7th - Hebrew Heroes / Jewish Values through the lens of diverse Jewish historical figures
8th - Innovation Nation / Israel as a vision: Past, Present and Future
9th - Applied Torah / Practical wisdom about humanity, leadership and reflective practices
10th - Israel-hood / Belonging to Israel; its people, values, rituals, history, language and land
11th - Guardians of Israel /Protecting Israel: Knowledge, Courage, and Commitment to the
people of Israel
12th - Champions of Israel / Building Israel: Being a global citizen of the state of Israel
The proposed development of JISC happens in several phases, each with three
stages: Design & Conceptualization (D.&C.), Initial Prototyping (I.P.), and Final Development
(F.D.). Besides the actual development of the curriculum’s learning objectives, scope &
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

20
sequence, learning materials, lesson plans, games, assessments, and training materials,
multimedia assets will also be developed towards the creation of a branded, unique, cutting edge
online learning management software platform for the curriculum’s flipped class, blended-
delivery approach.
Organizational Goal
JCS’s organizational goal is that by June 2020, all students will be able to articulate
relevance and personal connections between their own lives and Judaic/Israel studies’ (JS)
content materials and concepts. Attainment of this goal will require curriculum/asset
development, learning management system development, teacher training, parent/community
education, and student/program evaluation. The JCS’ Israel Center director established this goal
after consulting with the Judaic/Israel studies sub-committee of the school board’s education
committee, which includes the school’s President, Headmaster, Rabbi/director of JS, and Chair
of the education committee. This sub-committee is tasked with increasing student and parent
satisfaction and engagement with the school’s JS programs, which have been identified by
surveys and anecdotal evidence as areas in need of improvement. Successful achievement of
JCS’ goal to revitalize its JS programs will be measured by its ability to make JS personally
relevant and engaging for all students.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Three important groups of stakeholders at JCS are its faculty, administrators, and parents.
Faculty contribute to the achievement of JCS’ organizational goals through their understanding
and contributions towards the fulfillment of the school’s mission and global goals, and by taking
personal responsibility for student learning. They accomplish these tasks by effectively engaging
with all available curricula, resources, support personnel, and professional development and
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

21
training opportunities made available to them by the school. Administrators contribute to the
achievement of JCS’ organizational goals by creating a safe and professional learning
environment that meets the academic, developmental, and spiritual goals outlined in JCS’
“Portrait of the Graduate” document. They accomplish these goals by supporting excellence in
teaching and learning, and by continually assessing and reprioritizing organizational resources
and strategic objectives, all toward improving the school’s efficiency and effectiveness in
reaching its goals. Parents contribute to the achievement of JCS’ organizational goals, first by
creating a safe and supportive home where learning and values are encouraged, and then by
setting and maintaining high academic and moral expectations for their children. Parents also
help by being proactively involved in their child’s education and by volunteering for leadership
opportunities at the school. This involves participating in shared decision-making opportunities
by partnering with school administrators, teachers and auxiliary staff in supporting their child’s
learning through consistent communication, participation in parent organizations, and by
fundraising or contributing to the school’s annual capital campaign.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

22
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
On the foundation of the highest academic standards and Jewish ethical and spiritual values, JCS
develops students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind souls. We value each member of
our pluralistic community while we foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the
Jewish people, and a passionate commitment to the service of humanity and the perfection of
God's world.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2020 all JCS students will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections
between their own lives and Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Faculty Administration Parents
By September 2019, 100%
of JCS Judaic studies
teachers will be capable of
implementing the
“Judaic/Israel studies for
the 21
st
Century”
curriculum.
By January 2018 JCS
administrators will develop a
strategic implementation plan for
the “Judaic/Israel studies for the
21
st
Century” curriculum.
By June 2018, JCS parents will
be able to articulate the
rationale and core principles of
the “Judaic/Israel studies for
the 21
st
Century” curriculum.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

23
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
organizational goal of all JCS students being able to articulate relevance and personal
connections between their own lives and Judaic/Israel studies’ content materials and concepts, it
is important to evaluate where the JCS’ Judaic/Israel studies faculty members currently are
regarding their performance goal of being able to implement the “Judaic/Israel studies for the
21
st
Century” (JISC). Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study will be all JCS
Judaic/Israel studies faculty members. The stakeholders’ goal, supported by the Israel Center
director, is that 100% of Judaic/Israel studies faculty members will be capable of implementing
JISC in their classes by September 2019. Implementation would include completion of a
summer training workshop on the principles and structure of the curriculum, modeling and
utilization of all course materials and assessments in the planning and delivery of lessons,
constructive feedback, and ongoing participation in professional development and supervision of
the curriculum’s implementation. Failure of Judaic/Israel studies teachers to accomplish their
stakeholder goal would lead to their inability to implement JISC, which is aimed at increasing
student engagement and satisfaction with Judaic/Israel studies towards the fulfillment of JCS’
organization goal.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary to reach the organizational performance goal
of all JCS students being able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own
lives and Judaic/Israel studies. The analysis began by generating a list of possible needs and then
moved to examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs. While a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

24
complete needs analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes this study
focused on one. Because it is important to evaluate where the JCS’ Judaic/Israel studies faculty
members currently are regarding their performance goal of being able to implement JISC, they
were the stakeholder of focus for this analysis. Failure of Judaic/Israel studies teachers to
accomplish their stakeholder goal would lead to their inability to implement JISC, which is
aimed at increasing student engagement and satisfaction with Judaic/Israel studies towards the
fulfillment of JCS’ organization goal.
As such, the questions that guided this study were the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for JCS
Judaic/Israel faculty to achieve full implementation of a 21
st
century learner centered
Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th
(JISC)?
2. How can the data collected from this gap analysis be used to inform the development
of training materials for implementation of JISC?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual and methodological approach of this study is based upon Clark and Estes’
(2008) gap analysis framework, which divides needs and influences for organizational
improvement into three universal categories: knowledge (K), motivation (M) and organizational
resources (O). This KMO paradigm allows for a complete and systematic way to uncover the
root cause of performance gaps and to identify possible solutions. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap
analysis process utilizes various research methods for the collection and analysis of data. Gap
analysis studies can utilize either qualitative research methods, which include observations,
surveys, interviews, document analyses, and focus groups, or quantitative research methods and
mixed methods, which combine qualitative and quantitative methods in one study. This study is a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

25
mixed method case study and includes collection of document data pertaining to the soft-
implementation of the school’s new curriculum, as well as administering surveys, interviews
with teacher participants, and observations. Data analysis will consist of thematic coding of
qualitative data triangulated with quantitative data collected.
Definitions
Jewish Community School: A non-denominational religiously pluralistic private Jewish day
school that offers a dual curriculum of general and Judaic studies, Hebrew language and
Zionism.
JISC: A 21
st
Century Judaic / Israel Curriculum (JISC) is a middle/high school integrated
Judaic/Israel curriculum that utilizes an innovative, multimedia, flipped class, blended approach
being developed by JCS.
Judaism: “The monotheistic religion of the Jews” (Google.com).
Rabbinic Judaism: “The normative form of Judaism that developed after the fall of the Temple
of Jerusalem (ad 70). Originating in the work of the Pharisaic rabbis, it was based on the legal
and commentative literature in the Talmud, and it set up a mode of worship and a
life discipline that were to be practiced by Jews worldwide down to modern times.”
(Encyclopedia Britannica.com)
Reform Judaism: “Also known as Liberal Judaism or Progressive Judaism, is a major Jewish
denomination which emphasizes the evolving nature of the religion, the superiority of its ethical
aspects to the ceremonial ones, and a belief in a continuous revelation not centered on the
theophany at Mount Sinai” (Wikipedia).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

26
Conservative Judaism: Conservative Judaism (known as Masorti Judaism outside North
America) is a major Jewish denomination, which views Jewish Law, or Halakha, as both binding
and subject to historical development (Wikipedia).
Orthodox Judaism: “The approach to religious Judaism which subscribes to a tradition of mass
revelation and adheres to the interpretation and application of the laws and ethics of the Torah as
legislated in Talmudic texts. Orthodox Judaism includes movements such as Modern Orthodox
Judaism and Ultra-Orthodox or Haredi Judaism” (Wikipedia).
Torah: “The central reference of Judaism. It has a range of meanings. It can most specifically
mean the first five books (Pentateuch) of the twenty-four books of the Tanakh, and it usually
includes the rabbinic commentaries (perushim)” (Wikipedia).
Jews by religion: Jews who identify their Jewishness with the religion of Judaism.
Jews of no religion: Jews who culturally identify with being Jewish.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about Jewish education for the
21
st
century learner. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders, as well as the initial
concepts of gap analysis, were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature
surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of the history, significance, challenges to, and current
trends of Jewish education will be addressed, followed by research pertaining to 21
st
century
education and specifically to the flipped class method. This section will conclude with a more
detailed description of the KMO gap analysis conceptual framework of Clark and Estes (2008),
especially as it relates to knowledge, motivation, and organizational assumed influences on
JCS’s Judaic/Israel studies teacher’s stakeholder goal of implementing the school’s new
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

27
Jewish/Israel studies curriculum for the 21
st
century. Chapter Three details the assumed
interfering knowledge, motivation and organizational elements, as well as methodology when it
comes to the choice of participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and
results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature,
for closing the perceived gaps as well as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation
plan for the solutions.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

28
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review will examine potential knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influencers on the implementation of the Jewish Community School’s (JCS) new 21
st
century
learner-centered flipped class Judaic/Israel studies curriculum (JICS). The review begins with
general research on the historical development of Jewish/Israel education in America and its
relevance to Jewish continuity and demographic growth. This is then followed by an overview of
literature on challenges in engaging students in Jewish/Israel studies. The review will present an
in-depth discussion on scientifically-based pedagogical best practices for 21
st
century learners.
This section includes current research on the flipped class blended model of instruction.
Following the general research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analytic conceptual framework including knowledge, motivation and organizational influences
on JCS teachers’ ability to implement JISC.
Jewish Education for the 21
st
Century
At a time when demographic studies indicate that there is a concerning decline in Jewish
observance and identification (Pew Research, 2013), Jewish education has never been more
important, and Jewish schools play a very important role in the continuity of the Jewish people
(Wertheimer, 2011). Woocher (2012) raises the question, however, about the effectiveness of
current Jewish educational practices for today’s learners, and therefore argues for a shift towards
a more relevant, progressive, and student-centered 21
st
century form of Jewish education. Since
the introduction of the term “21
st
century learning” (Delors, 1998), many educational researchers
and thinkers have been exploring new ways of moving education forward to better meet the
needs of our rapidly changing social, economic and technological world (Bolstad, 2011;
Hepplestone, Holden, Irwin, Parkin & Thorpe, 2011).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

29
One model that has gained a lot of attention is the flipped-class or blended approach, in
which “…events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside
the classroom and vice versa” (Lage, Platt, & Treglia, 2000, p.32). With its creative use of
technology, media and a student-centered approach, the flipped-classroom is in alignment with a
21
st
century approach to education and has been shown to increase student learning (Moravec,
Williams, Aguilar-Roca, & O’Dowd, 2010).
To increase student engagement and satisfaction with Judaic studies, the Jewish
Community School (JCS) has embarked on a project of developing and implementing a new
Jewish/Israel studies curriculum (JISC) for grades 7-12, which is based on a student-centered
approach and utilizes innovative 21
st
century educational models such as the flipped classroom.
As part of the JISC development process, a soft-rollout phase of the curriculum is being
conducted and studied to ascertain any knowledge, motivational, and organizational (KMO)
influences affecting the Judaic studies teachers involved in the initial implementation phase. The
decision to enact this exploratory phase is based on the KMO conceptual model put forth by
Clark and Estes (2008), which they propose as essential for the success of any organizational
improvement attempt. The results of this KMO analysis in this investigative phase will be used
to inform and guide the final phase of the JISC’s development, teacher training modules, and full
implementation of the curriculum.
Importance of Jewish/Israel Education
In describing the rationale for God establishing a covenant with Abraham, the father of
the Jews, Genesis 18:19 states, “For I have singled him out, that he may instruct his children and
his posterity to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is just and right, in order that the
LORD may bring about for Abraham what He has promised him,” thus placing education as a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

30
core value of Judaism and fundamental to the national destiny of Israel. Accordingly, educating
one’s child in the ways of Judaism is a religious duty incumbent upon every Jewish parent
clearly expressed in the Bible, including the central Shema prayer which states, “And these
matters that I command you today shall be upon your heart. You shall teach them thoroughly to
your children and you shall speak of them while you sit in your home, while you walk on the
way, when you retire and when you rise” (Deuteronomy 6:6-7). Indeed, the original concept of
Jewish education is based on these and other similar verses in the Torah (Jewish Bible), and
historically, this duty was fulfilled primarily by mothers and fathers modeling Jewish traditions
and practices in the home, as well as engaging children in Jewish text-based learning in both the
home and the synagogue.
With the onset of the French revolution, the emphasis of the home as the main agency of
Jewish education began to shift with societal attitudinal changes towards the centrality of the
family (Greenberg, 1949). This parental-educational agency continued to diminish until after
World War I, as many parents were no longer adequately engaged in the observance of Judaism
or educated enough to transmit Jewish knowledge and practice. Simultaneously, American
Jewish denominational developments began to erode the synagogue’s importance in Jewish
communal life (Greenberg, 1949). Auxiliary educational institutions were founded to meet
Jewish families’ educational needs. According to Rabbinic Judaism, a parent who cannot fulfill
educational duties is charged to hire expert educators to act as their agents in educating their
children in the ways of Jewish tradition (Code of Jewish Law 60:10). This transference of
agency from the parent to the educator is reflected in the Rabbinic law that a student must afford
his/her teacher the very same level of honor and respect as he/she would his/her own parents
(Maimonides Mishnah Torah: Laws of Torah Study Chapter Four). Over the course of history,
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

31
and differing across geographical areas, Jewish schools have taken on many forms. The
evolution of the Jewish school continued and accelerated as many Jews increasingly became part
of the Western world, and especially as the Jewish population concentration shifted from Europe
to America (Greenberg, 1949). A 20
th
century innovation of American Jewish education has
been the Jewish Community School, which is the category of schools that JCS fits into. JCS’s
implementation of a new 21
st
century Jewish/Israel studies curriculum represents a next step in
the evolution of Jewish education, so it is important to understand the historical context of
Jewish education as a prerequisite to discussing changes for the future.
Historical Development of American Jewish/Israel Education
Throughout American history, Jewish education has continuously evolved because of
changing cultural and political dynamics in the world. In the early years of American history,
organized Jewish education was less of a priority for Jews compared with other pressing matters,
such as issues relating to immigration, dealing with the effects of anti-Semitic discrimination,
and the emergence of Zionism (Sarna, 1998). Following the historically prevalent parental
method of Judaic transmission laid out by Greenberg (1949), it would make sense that the
earliest Jews to arrive in America mostly managed their children’s Jewish education the old-
fashioned way: in the home. This supposition is supported by the historical record, which is
bereft of significant organized Jewish educational institutions in America until the early 1800s.
At that time, there were a limited number of small religious charity schools focused almost
exclusively on skills development, such as Hebrew reading and writing, while religious practice
and matters of faith were still experientially and holistically learned from home and synagogue
life (Sarna, 1998).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

32
By the mid 1800s religious charity schools began to lose State funding due to the
advancement of compulsory public education for all children, resulting in American Jews
grappling with how to react to this major societal development. Sarna (1998) labels the two
main camps that emerged as the “Protestant model,” which prioritized the value of Americanism
and followed a more universalistic approach (non-Orthodox); and the “Catholic model,” with a
more dogmatic, segregationist approach to religious education (Orthodox) (Sarna, 1998, p. 11).
According to the Protestant model, students attend regular secular public schools during the day,
and then receive religious education at a religious Sunday school, while the Catholic model
dictates that students attend private dual-curriculum religious schools exclusively, in order not to
assimilate completely into American life, thereby maintaining their religious identity.
Since the largest and most influential segment of American Jews at the time were
Reform, Gartner (1969) explains why the clear majority of them and their leaders fully embraced
the liberal public education movement. They saw it as a great equalizer that would help Jews be
a part of the larger American culture and community, something anti-Semitism had prevented for
centuries. Concerns about Christian missionizing efforts on the Jewish community, however,
still motivated American communal leaders to prioritize strengthening Jewish identity within
their youth and led to the establishment of many secondary religious Sunday schools, even as
early as the mid-1800s (Ashton, 1997). This apparent historical Jewish tension between being a
Jew versus an American aligns with Cutter’s (1996) description of how the development of
Jewish studies in America sought to mediate the opposing forces of secular universalism and
religious particularism as a primary objective. This is a departure from the traditional European
and Sephardic/Mizrachi models, in which Jewish studies was more about Biblical and Rabbinic
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

33
scholarship/law and was, therefore, unfamiliar to many Jews who arrived in the late 19
th
century
into the early and mid 20
th
century from those regions (Sarna, 1998).
The early Liberal Reform “Protestant model” of Jewish education began to seriously
falter with the growing influx of Orthodox immigration from Europe to the United States around
the beginning of the 20
th
century, as well as the establishment of the Conservative Judaism
movement by Rabbi Solomon Schechter around the same time. Emboldened by very negative
Jewish demographic census numbers at the turn of the century that showed intermarriage as a
growing threat, and educational survey data shortly after showed dismal enrollment numbers of
Jewish children receiving formal Jewish education, these groups began putting pressure on the
established Jewish educational system to produce a better-quality education.
These dynamics contributed to the most popular form of American Jewish education
moving from Jewish Sunday schools into Jewish afternoon Hebrew schools (Sarna, 1998), where
Zionism and the speaking of modern Hebrew were integrated with religious and ritual instruction
in such a way as to develop proud knowledgeable Jews, who could be fully integrated into
American society, yet still maintain their uniqueness without separateness. Besides for the
Orthodox segment, these Hebrew schools remained the dominant type of American Jewish
schools until the early 1970s, even though their popularity had already begun to dwindle in the
1960s. This is what Ackerman (1975) calls the “Americanization” of Jewish Education (pg.1)
where non-Orthodox education was viewed mainly as a way of assuring the survival of the
Jewish people.
However, Ackerman (1975) states that Jewish survival is not an adequate motivator for
Jewish education or its improvement. Nevertheless, due to dire demographic predictions because
of worsening intermarriage rates, American Jewish education shifted gears once again as the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

34
Jewish Day School movement grew during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, with the Conservative and
Reform movements dramatically increasing the number of day schools under their auspices,
joining the Orthodox American Jewish community who had been moving towards the day school
model since World War II (Saran, 1998).
Yet even with the growth in the number of actual schools, many question the quality and
relevance of modern Jewish education, as the growing secularization of American Jewry has had
an effect on how Judaism as a religion, and effectually Jewish education, are defined (Cutter,
1996; Sarna, 1998). The answer to how Judaism is defined as a religion would depend on which
Jewish denominational perspective, the three major ones being Orthodox, Conservative and
Reform, one is considering. The historical development of denominational perspectives in
American Jewish education is therefore important to understand when considering future
improvement initiatives within that discipline because these varying religious interpretations of
Judaism have impacted the development of Jewish education.
Denominational development and impact. Jewish education has its origins in the
religion of Judaism and has been adapted by various sects of Judaism to accurately reflect their
values and theological principles. Beginning in the nineteenth century in response to the
enlightenment and emancipation trends occurring in the world, three major religious movements
emerged within the Jewish people: Orthodox, Conservative and Reform. These denominations
can basically be divided into two groups, traditionalist and non-traditionalist. The Orthodox,
who are of the traditionalist camp, subscribe to the belief that the Jewish Bible, known as the
Torah, is of absolute divine origin, and therefore they adhere to all the statutes, ordinances and
testimonies written in it, as well as to the Rabbinical tradition that has developed out of Biblical
exogenesis over the past 3000 years. The Conservative and the Reform both belong to the non-
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

35
traditionalist camp and are attempts to modernize Judaism, with Conservative theology ascribing
some divine inspiration to the Torah, and Reform theology ascribing none. Both, therefore,
allow for deviation from traditional practices and rituals (Raphael, 2003).
These differing theologies about the divinity of the Torah and the resulting ability or
inability to change Jewish practices is at the core of what separates the three denominations.
Over the past century this theological chasm has led to the formation of separate religious
institutions, each acting as umbrella organizations for membership organizations that adhere to
the theological principles of each one. The Orthodox Union for the Orthodox movement, United
Synagogue of Conservative Judaism for the Conservative movement, and Union for Reform
Judaism for the Reform movement (Porter, 1963). This development has led to a major
fragmentation between Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews, with each typically living,
socializing and practicing exclusively with others who adhere to the same form of Judaism
(Hartman & Sheskin, 2011). Even more, there has been a long-standing animosity between the
traditionalists and the non-traditionalists and vice versa. The traditionalists resent the watering
down of the tradition and consider it blasphemous to question the divinity of the Torah (Gurock,
2009). At the same time, the non-traditionalists resent being considered heretical and see the
traditionalists as holding Jews back from being fully incorporated into the modern world. This
religious and social fragmentation among Jews only further exacerbates the negative
demographic forecast, as it contributes to intermarriage, one of the main factors contributing to
Jewish assimilation and dwindling demographic numbers (Meyer, 1995).
As American Jews of different religious sects have grappled with simultaneously being
both Jewish and American, they have created Jewish educational institutions that reflected their
respective ideas of how to address these issues. Reform schools are most concerned with helping
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

36
Jewish children navigate the American non-Jewish environment/culture they will live in, with an
emphasis on Judaism as an individualistic religious expression, with no right or wrong way to be
Jewish if one’s personality and character are in alignment with humanistic values (Hertz, 1953).
Conservative Judaism schools are also very focused on helping students thrive in the non-Jewish
world they live in but take a more traditional approach when it comes to their view on Judaism,
emphasizing it more as an extension of the ancient civilization that it represents. They stress
ritual observance, reverence of the Torah, synagogue attendance, Hebrew mastery, sacred textual
study, liturgy, and Jewish history, along with Zionism being an integral part of one’s Jewish
identity (Katzoff, 1949). Orthodox schools adhere to the traditional approach to Jewish
education, which is to teach Judaism as the divine revelation of God’s will, to be observed even
if it means not always being able to integrate one’s life with the dominant culture, and to identify
being Jewish with their adherence to Jewish law, and Zionism being a multi-millennial
foundational religious duty (Pilch, & Ben-Horin, 1966). Despite the different manifestations of
Jewish education that have emerged from the three main sects of American Judaism, one thing
they all share is their shared belief that Jewish education is key to ensuring the continuation of
the American Jewish community.
Relationship to Jewish continuity. Jewish education is a means by which to increase a
person’s sense of Jewishness, which contributes to the continuance of Jews as a distinct
peoplehood. Fishman, and Goldstein (1993) showed that the younger a person was when
enrolled in formal Jewish education, the higher the effects on Jewish identification, and that
increased adult ritual observance is correlated with prolonged formal Jewish education. This
follows Waxman (1975), who describes how Jewish education helps form a child’s Jewish
identity through the development of religious knowledge, feelings and practices, and that its
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

37
impact significantly increases with continued formal Jewish education into adolescence.
Goldstein and Goldscheider (1968) had already shown that participation in Jewish education
prior to college increases the likelihood of the student retaining a stronger Jewish identity
afterwards, and that years spent in Jewish education were also predictive of advanced secular
degree attainment. This aligns with the PEW (2016) findings that Jews are by far the most
highly educated religious group in the world by an almost 50% margin. This correlation is
promising for Jewish identity considering Waxman’s (1975) assertion that the positive
identification effects on students’ Jewishness steadily increases with advanced secular academic
degree attainment. According to these researchers, one could say that the longer a person
receives a Jewish education, the higher secular degrees they will earn, and the more Jewish they
will remain
Waxman (1975) also showed that an emphasis in Jewish education on Judaism as a
religion versus a culture, a common theme in the literature presented here, has an even greater
positive impact on one’s Jewishness. Based on the differing denominational emphases described
above, it is not surprising that according to Schiff and Schneider (1994), Jewish education’s
impact on a student’s Jewish identity development is shown to be the greatest when both the
student’s parents are observant, when that education extends into early adulthood, and when it is
of Orthodox Jewish affiliation. A confirmation of this assertion was shown by Sands, Marcus,
and Danzig (2006), who compared denominational switching between the three denominations
and found that between 1990 and 2001 the percentage of Jews who left the Orthodox
denomination decreased by five percent, while the percentage of Jews who left the Conservative
movement increased by ten percent, leading to a growth in the Reform movement by three
percent.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

38
Simply put, these numbers indicate that Jews raised Orthodox are more likely to stay
within the religion, whereas those raised in more Jewishly liberal homes are more likely to opt
for forms of Judaism that are less religious in nature and more of a cultural type (Sands et al,
2006). Based on Schiff and Schneider’s (1994) additional findings that, regardless of type of
Jewish education, children will typically continue to identify with the religious denomination of
their parents, it is predictable that individuals who are currently Orthodox are more likely to raise
children who will attend Jewish schools. Even though there are positive residual effects on one’s
identity from receiving a Jewish education for every denomination, the significance of these
effects is increased by duration, denominational type, and family influences. Therefore, Jewish
demographical issues relating to national religious identity trends also impact Jewish education.
Impact of Jewish Demographics. As a dwindling minority, declining Jewish
demographics are of great concern to the survival of the American Jew, and Jewish education has
been shown to be a significant predictor of Jewish demographic projections. For instance, adults
who have had formal Jewish education of six or more years resulted in significantly higher
indicators of Jewish identification, including marrying another Jew and opposing intermarriage
for their children, which are both directly related to demographic growth (Fishman, & Goldstein,
1993). They also showed that as parents, these same adults were significantly more likely to
provide the same level, or more, of formal Jewish education to their children, and that parents’
own duration of Jewish education is directly correlated to the extent to which they raise their
child as a Jew (Goldstein, & Fishman, 1993).
The future of Jewish survival is closely linked to demographic trends which, according to
most researchers in this area, will continue to decline at an alarming rate over the next 50 years
(DellaPergola, 2014). The most recent demographic studies of U.S. Jews indicate the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

39
denominational breakdown of American Jews as: 10 % Orthodox, 18 % Conservative, 35 %
Reform, and 36 % just Jewish or some other denomination, which effectively represents a 50%
decrease in American Jews by religion over the past 50 years (Pew, 2013). Goldstein and
Fishman (1993) showed rates and duration of attendance in Jewish education are affected by the
Jewish denomination of a child’s home, which might be demographically problematic as Sheskin
and Hartman (2015) found a large variance in how individuals within different Jewish
denominations identified with Judaism, with Orthodox Jews being twice as likely as
Conservative Jews and four times as likely as Reform Jews to engage in Jewish practice and
ritual. It follows then that if the smallest segment of the Jewish population are the ones most
ardently loyal to the religion, one can expect even less of a majority of Jewishly identified
individuals in the future (Lazerwitz, Winter, Dashefsky, & Tabory, 1997). This trend is evident
in the enrollment numbers of students at Jewish Day Schools, with only the Orthodox seeing
increases, and the Conservative and Reform seeing continuously dwindling numbers (Avi Chai,
2014).
Della Pergola (1991) linked a weakening in Jewish demographics to the American Jew’s
perceptual shift of Judaism as a religion to a culture or ethnic group and found a relationship
between the strengthening of the American Jewish population core’s Jewish identification and
the rapid rise of Jewish Day Schools during the 1980s and 1990s. This was motivated by the
theory that increasing Jewish education at the school level was a way of both reaching out to
Jews on the periphery of Jewish identification and preventing the further disillusionment of the
core segment of the American Jewish population (Della Pergola, 1991). As has been shown,
Jewish education tends to have a positive correlational impact on Jewish perceptions of Judaism
as a religion and thereby demographic developments. On the basis that Jewish education has and
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

40
continues to be an important part of the history and continuity of the Jewish people, the question
now is how Jewish education must adjust to the challenges presented by our ever-increasingly
changing world.
Challenges in Engaging Students in Jewish/Israel Studies
As in the past, modern Jewish education must recognize, understand and overcome
societal changes to remain relevant and effective. Cutter (1996) states that a variety of modern
global and American societal developments must be considered in the continual rethinking of
Jewish studies if the field is to remain relevant in the 21
st
century. One such development is the
above demonstrated American emphasis on Judaism as a culture instead of as a religion, which
according to Waxman (1975) decreases Jewish education’s impact on Jewish identity.
Ackerman (1975) therefore argued that Jewish education should be driven rather by ideals of
character and the transmission of tradition and values if it is to remain relevant. Since then, the
world has rapidly changed even more dramatically, so understanding these changes and how they
might be affecting Jewish education is imperative to creating relevancy within Judaism/Israel
and its study.
Challenges to Engaging Students in Jewish/Israel Studies
For current Jewish education to be relevant, Jewish educators must be constantly asking
tough questions about how they can transmit ancient texts, practices and ideas in ways that speak
to the modern person. Resnick (2013) explores the need for teachers of the Bible to develop
sensitivity to modern sensibilities when teaching pre-modern texts. This aligns with Evans
(2014), who addresses the cognitive gap between Biblical interpreter and child and argues that
Biblical knowledge transfer between adults and children, in a postmodern context, needs to help
children achieve coherence between Biblical and scientific knowledge. Resnick (2013) contrasts
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

41
the training of students in the classical method of Jewish Biblical exegesis, in which novel
interpretations generate inspiration and new knowledge, versus Biblical appropriation, in which
one’s personal life experience frames the lens through which one interprets the Torah, arguing
for the latter to increase personal relevance for the students. This agrees with Woocher (2012)
who states that personal meaning makes Jewish education relevant and results in motivation to
engage with it. Other suggestions for increasing relevancy by Resnick (2013) are the utilization
of various approaches to the study of the Bible, including rationalistic, thematic, spiritual and
allegorical methods, as well as the resolving of misunderstandings and pit falls, such as the
apparent contradiction between historical Jewish separatism and the Bible’s global message of
universalism.
Wertheimer (2011) states that Jewish education’s curricular focus and emphasis is in flux
as schools reprioritize Jewish educational goals considering competing philosophical approaches
and time constraints, as well as expanding in the growing area of Israel education, and he
therefore argues that relevancy should be one of the primary outcomes of these and future
reforms. Woocher (2012) reminds his readers about the important role that parents play in
modeling relevancy for their children, and therefore argues for Jewish schools engaging parents
in adult learning opportunities, in addition to making Jewish learning student centered, engaging,
challenging, and enjoyable. This may prove difficult to do if students find the subject matter to
be archaic or irrelevant. Understanding modern societal perceptions of religion and dynamics of
youth’s religious development should therefore help religious curricular developers improve
their curriculum’s relevancy for the 21
st
century learner.
Religious perceptions and development. Today’s adolescents and teens hold fewer
religious beliefs and convictions. This reality was demonstrated by Smith, Faris, and Regnerus
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

42
(2003) who mapped American teen religiosity and attitudes toward religion and found that many
American youth appear to be alienated or hostile towards organized religion, with Jewish teens
reporting the lowest in Importance of Religion and Frequency of Prayer scales. According to
these researchers, this is important for religious educators of youth to know, as they found that
adolescence and young adulthood are periods when many religious attitudes take shape (Smith et
al., 2003).
Building on this, some of these researchers continued to explore the nature of religious
development among American teens and found that parents influence the religious development
of their kids by creating the social contexts that precipitate religious development during
adolescence. This influence includes the choice of school parents choose for their kids, which
along with friends plays a role in religious development during adolescence (Regnerus, Smith, &
Smith, 2004). King, and Boyatzis (2004) also explored adolescent’s spiritual and religious
development, making a distinction between societal definitions between Spiritual and Religious,
where Spiritual refers more to personal beliefs, especially as they relate to perception of the self
in relation to others, and Religious pertains to participation in the social construct of a religion,
and relationship with a supernatural power. They claim that being aware of these distinctions
should help to add clarity and relevance to religious/spiritual conversations with adolescents.
Religious and spiritual development during youth is a complex process affected by various
aspects of their social context along with broader societal influences. It therefore makes sense to
consider issues of religious development and youth perceptions about religion in the
development of religious educational curriculum and materials.
Jewish education curriculum. Modern religious educators are engaged in formulating
curriculum approaches that seek alignment with the learning styles and cultural perceptions of
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

43
today’s learners. Katzin (2015) describes the need for developing Constructivist Jewish
curricula that engages in the transmission of explicative, activating and adaptable knowledge in
Jewish studies to make it more relevant for learners. Muszkat-Barkan (2015) approached
relevancy from a more meta-cognitive approach and identifies acculturation, socialization and
individualization as social ways of raising the personal meaningfulness of being Jewish by
developing a sense within students of belonging to the larger Jewish collective, and a personal
spiritual vision for one’s life.
Hebrew, as the original language of the Torah and most rabbinic texts, and the national
language of the modern State of Israel, is an essential component of any Jewish/Israel studies
program, and many Jewish schools have Hebrew as a second language requirement, such as JCS.
In response to addressing concerns about student engagement and satisfaction with Hebrew,
Avni (2011) talks about the importance of relating the importance of Hebrew to the values and
ideas of Judaism/Israel to help students relate to it emotionally and making it part of their
identity. This he says is accomplished by connecting Hebrew more to students’ feelings and
beliefs about Jewish identity and Jewish life.
Pomson (2001) considers curriculum integration between general and Jewish studies as a
multi-disciplinary path to increasing relevancy and recommends an approach that invites the
teacher and students to be co-learners while they work collectively towards a common goal or
culminating event, ideas very much in line with 21
st
century educational thinking. This
integrative approach is also in alignment with Shenhar (1994), who writes,
To create change in pupils’ attitudes to Jewish studies and reduce their alienation from
the subject matter…there is a requirement to train teachers with a pluralistic-critical
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

44
worldview so that they will be significantly familiar with the entirety of Jewish and
general humanist fields of knowledge. (Shenhar Commission, 1994, pp. 24–25).
Shenhar (1994) prescribes having teachers with the ability to integrate general and Jewish
knowledge into their teaching of Judaism as a way of combating negative attitudes, such as
irrelevance, held by students. Kohn and Goldstein (2008) propose formulating a curriculum
framework for Bible study that clearly defines attainment targets or learning outcomes for Jewish
studies in the areas of knowledge, skills and student understanding to increase both student and
teacher motivation in the learning process. The idea is that by having clearly defined progressive
learning goals and objectives, students and teachers are supplied with the reasoning for each
subject learned, increasing their relevance. This way of thinking is the foundation of Powerful
Knowledge, another 21
st
century educational approach, which stresses the importance of
progressive conceptual development as a key factor to increasing student engagement and
mastery in the learning process (McPhail & Rata 2016). So as can be seen, many developers of
current religious educational materials are attempting to translate ancient religious concepts and
beliefs into a more practical modern context, which takes into consideration the religious realities
of the modern world. These efforts are in alignment with current educational trends based on the
philosophy that education in general must adapt to the needs and attitudes of the 21
st
century
learner.
21
st
Century Education
The term 21
st
Century Education (TCE) was first coined by Delors et al. (1996) in their
seminal report to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s
International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first century, in which they lay out a
vision and plan for a future education that will empower all humans to achieve personal
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

45
actualization in a global economy through life-long learning. However lofty this goal may seem,
the aspirations of this report have spurred a conversation about what education should look like
in the future that has continued ever since. As predictions about the ways in which modern
technologies could be used to change education in a way that would allow for Delors et al.’s
(1996) lifelong learning have been increasingly realized, TCE has actually begun to take shape.
Following is a brief description of TCE ideologies and developments, as these relate directly to
the educational philosophy and methodology of JCS’ new 21
st
century Jewish/Israel studies
flipped class curriculum (JISC).
21
st
Century Education
As recent technological and ideological upheavals have given way to a dramatically
different and ever-changing world, many educational thinkers have been grappling with the re-
imagining of education for the 21
st
century. Delors et al. (1996) were the first to use the term in
describing a futuristic approach to being able to cope with a rapidly changing world, in which
humans would be empowered by the ability and knowledge to engage in life-long learning. Per
these policy makers, learning is viewed as the most valuable commodity in the world, and the
goal of TCE is to help unlock the hidden learning potentials from within each human being. The
organization of TCE as they formularized it is conceptualized around four fundamental types of
learning: Learning to Know, Learning to Do, Learning to Live Together, and Learning to Be.
Each of these categories relates to emerging needs generated in the new ways humans can learn,
work, travel, and communicate with one another using modern technologies. Essentially what
they mean is that every human should have the ability to acquire the necessary marketable
knowledge and skills that they will need to be a part of the expanding global economy, while
also being able to live in a state of self-actualization and peace within the united yet completely
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

46
diverse human race. This might sound too good to ever be true, but these authors believe that
with the sociological and technological advances mankind has and continues to achieve, these
ideals are not too far off into the future, and that in fact education holds the keys to this quasi-
utopian realization.
Gilbert (2005) built on the concept that TCE should be characterized by the unleashing of
life-long learning by defining the future knowledge society in which knowledge is seen as having
economic power. According to him, this represents a paradigm shift that has already begun in
the information age, where knowledge is thought of in terms of the actions that it leads to, rather
than just stuff that one collects throughout life. This new 21
st
century perspective on knowledge
places the emphasis more on the process of knowing then on the information itself, with self-
mastery as the ultimate outcome. In the field of education, this translates into a shift from simply
transferring knowledge from the knower (teacher) to the naive (student), to a complex dynamic
in which teachers help and guide learners as they construct their own knowledge through
problem solving processes (Gilbert, 2005). Carneiro (2007) also describes the new global
realities brought about by modern societal and technological developments as representing a
paradigm shift in both how people learn and think about learning. He divides this emergent
paradigm shift into phases moving from the past focus of industry, through to the present one of
globalization, and then into a future new renaissance, like Delors et al.’s vision (1996).
According to Carneiro (2007), each of these phases necessitates changes in educational delivery
methods, with the past relying on rote systems (e.g. Post Office), the present one being
segmented distribution (e.g. Amazon) and moving in the future to personalization/customization
(Uber, Google Express), and that therefore, the forces driving education should also move from
being market led to human mastery driven. This would lend itself towards the idea that TCE
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

47
should be more relevant and student centered. Appropriate 21
st
century educational reforms
should therefore play an integral part in shaping the future of society to enable its citizens to
thrive in it. These reforms are taking shape in 21
st
century aligned innovative pedagogical
approaches to education.
Pedagogical methodology. To achieve the vision set out by 21
st
century educational
proponents, innovative pedagogical approaches are being conceptualized, studied and applied at
all levels of modern education. Fink (2013) describes TCE as needing to create
“significant” learning experiences for the student and calls for a “Learning centered,” or long-
term view of learning, paradigm shift (pg. 5). Significant learning is defined by this author as
being about foundational knowledge, meaning that the students realize that what they are
learning is vital, and serves as a basis for their future learning. This relates to Delors et al.’s
(1996) Learning to Know dimension of TCE. Next, Fink (2013) states the importance for
learning to be applicable and integrated, which means that students walk away with an actual use
for the knowledge they have gained, while also realizing how it is connected to other areas of
knowledge that they possess. This relates to Delors et al.’s (1996) Learning to Do dimension of
TCE.
Another aspect of adding significance for learners that Fink (2013) outlines is learning
possessing a human dimension and getting students to be engaged in caring for another (i.e.
social justice component, team learning). This relates directly to Delors et al.’s (1996) TCE
dimension of Learning to Live Together. Finally, Fink (2013) lists Learning How to Learn as an
important ingredient to making learning significant for learners. Here, he is referring to the
meta-cognitive dimension of learning and is saying that relevancy within the learning process is
increased if the students can connect it to actual meta-cognitive improvements in their ability to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

48
learn. This would relate to Delors et al.’s (1996) TCE dimension of Learning to Be, an idea that
is influenced by Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs, with self-actualization being at the
pinnacle (Maslow, 1943).
Another way to describe an educational system that is geared towards 21
st
century
learners is future focused, a term used by Bolstad (2014) in describing a type of education that is
authentic and set in real world learning experiences. This progressive pedagogical model seeks
to cultivate the enterprising spirit through the development and use of innovation, creativity, and
entrepreneurialism. It also encourages students to build community and business connections
and partnerships, and to engage in community service. Based on Bandura’s (1977) social
learning theory Han, and Newell (2014) propose incorporating team-based learning methods into
the learning process as a way of promoting a more constructivist approach to enhance student
learning. The global shifts that TCE purports to address have also given rise to innovative and
progressive advancements in education itself. The most radical of these changes can be seen in
the development of technology and its application to education and educational environments.
Technological advances. The pros and cons of the digital age as they relate to education
is a subject that many in the field are seeking to understand in order to better make use of these
technologies in educational settings. For instance, Hepplestone, Holden, Irwin, Parkin, and
Thorpe (2011) discuss the usefulness of technology for instructional feedback that is more
frequent, consistent and dynamic, by using computers to enhance both formative and summative
assessment. Miller (2013) explores the synthesis of digital video composition and the classroom
as part of a multimodal literacy theory. This researcher posits that students who live in a
multimedia world value, and benefit from, possessing a basic literacy in the creation of various
forms of media. Miller promotes these student media creations as a way of helping to embody
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

49
the youth culture of new media into the learning process, while promoting a more student-
centered approach. These new uses of technology in education however, are accompanied by
new challenges as well. For example, Fisher, Goddu, and Keil (2015) explore the physiological
relationship between students’ use of the Internet for research and their perceptions of internal
“in the brain” knowledge and found there is phenomenon in which the new information reality
creates risks of the Internet being perceived by students as acting as a “transactive memory
partner” with the brain (p. 685.) According to these researchers, this false perception could have
negative implications for students, such as them thinking they had mastered a subject, even
though they really had not.
Others like Mayes, Natividad, and Spector (2015) looked more at the sociological and
practical side of technologies introduction and use in education and found various challenges that
include crossing the digital divide that exists between students and teachers, physically
integrating technology into schools and the classroom, and both encouraging and training
teachers and curriculum developers to incorporate technology into their instructional design.
According to Prensky (2008) this digital divide is due to a generational chasm that he argues
exists between students of the past and today’s students who are much less sheltered from the
outside world, and who grow up immersed in a global reality with access to the world at large
using everyday technologies.
Herein lies a great incongruence between students who were born into this digital age and
teachers who were not (Prensky, 2001). According to Roehl, Reddy and Shannon (2013), this
new digital reality makes traditional forms of education seem boring and outdated to today’s
students, leading to decreased engagement and learning. They therefore encourage modern
educators to navigate and engage with the new digital age in an attempt to incorporate
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

50
technological advances into their classrooms. One such 21
st
century methodology heavily
dependent on the use of technology, and that is gaining a lot of popularity and is utilized in JISC,
is the flipped classroom approach.
Flipped Classroom Approach
Lage, Platt, and Treglia (2000), describe a flipped classroom as where “… events that
have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice
versa” (p.32). This is a very new and innovative approach to education that has only become
possible with the advent of the Internet and other modern technologies but is already showing
very positive results for student outcomes. For example, Moravec, Williams, Aguilar-Roca, and
O’Dowd (2010) showed that having students watch short PowerPoint presentations on new
material, and completing a related worksheet prior to coming to class, resulted in a 21% increase
on exam items relating to that material over items that were not taught using this method. Avdic,
and Åkerblom (2015) delineate positive learning strategies which emerge out of the flipped
classroom’s inclusion of recorded lectures, including adding the ease of the student repeating the
lesson however many times they choose, and wherever they wanted to with the use of mobile
devices.
This autonomous, asynchronous aspect of the flipped class method can also provide
learners with instantaneous formative feedback and promotes Delors et al.’s (1996) TEC
philosophy of lifelong learning, which puts the power and responsibility for learning in the hands
of the students themselves (Avdic & Åkerblom, 2015). Most recently, Zhu and Chen (2016)
studied the use of an internet based flipped classroom teaching model and reported that it helped
to cultivate innovative talents within students, while assisting teachers in classroom management
through facilitating individualized, interactive and collaborative learning, all of which are aspects
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

51
of TCE. The flipped classroom approach takes advantage of technological advances to meet the
educational needs of 21
st
century education. While its use of technology enables the flipped
classroom model, special attention should be spent on considering the impact of reliance on
technology in the educational process.
Use of technology considerations. Technology makes the flipped classroom possible,
but with these new possibilities come additional challenges that educators must address. Barber
(2015) discusses the challenges of building a sense of community within the flipped classroom
environment. These challenges include adjustments that must be made by both teachers and
students who are new to this innovative model, being that the shift caused by flipping a class is
of the learning process being student centered versus teacher centered. Other challenges raised
by this researcher are student and teacher usability or dissatisfaction with the Learning
Management System (LMS) that manages the delivery of the flipped class.
Also mentioned are issues with the flipped model limiting interactions between students
and each other and their instructor, leading to problems with sociability and usability. This
mirrors the concerns of Wallace (2014), who notes ontological change dynamics in relation to
the use of digital technology in education, stating that it increases the complexity of the student-
teacher relationship within the flipped classroom model. The technological and social
differences that the flipped classroom approach bring to education should be understood to
overcome challenges to the learning process that this approach may generate. Being that JCS’s
Judaic/Israel studies teachers will make use of this approach and other new knowledge to reach
their stakeholder goal of implementing the schools new 21
st
century JISC, understanding various
influences that relate to their ability to reach this goal is what this study seeks to identify, and
validate.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

52
In summary, the above literature demonstrates the important role that Jewish education
has had, and continues to have, in the development of Jewish life and in the continuity of
Judaism, and establishes the need for changes in how Jewish education is conceptualized and
delivered to meet the needs of 21
st
century learners. In response to this need, JCS is developing a
new innovative Jewish/Israel studies curriculum; however, supporting successful implementation
will depend on understanding the knowledge and motivational (KM) needs of teachers involved,
as well as any organizational factors (O) that relate to their ability to successfully reach their
stakeholder goal of full implementation. The next section of this literature review addresses
these KMO needs in the context of JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers achieving this goal.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
KMO Framework for Organizational Improvement
To help organizations achieve their established performance goals, Clark and Estes
(2008) state that it is first necessary for that organization to accurately determine where they are
in terms of that goal in relation to where they want to be. Clark and Estes refer to the space
between the stated goals and current levels of performance as a “performance gap” (p. 21).
When these authors speak about improving performance within an organization, what they are
referring to is improving the performance of the humans that make up the organization in
relation to its goals. This detail is key to understanding how they reach their next conclusion,
which is that all performance problems that they have ever identified have fallen into the
categories of knowledge, motivation, or organizational barriers. This theory posits that if a
human is not performing at peak performance it is because he or she is lacking in either the
knowledge (K) and or skills needed to perform at that level; adequate motivation (M) to perform
at that level; or there are aspects of the organization (O) that hinder its members’ performance. It
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

53
follows then, that to determine the causes of performance issues, an organization must conduct
what these authors refer to as a “gap analysis” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 21) in each of the
possible areas of influence (KMO).
When conducting a gap analysis, it is important to know what to look for in the KMO
areas. For this reason, Clark and Estes (2008) draw from a variety of theoretical models
pertaining to each of these areas. One such model is that of Krathwohl (2002), who delineates
four dimensions: factual, conceptual, procedural and meta-cognitive. According to this model,
the factual and conceptual relate to what is known, the procedural to the knowing of how
something is done, and the metacognitive relates to self-knowledge of the internal thought
process that takes place within one’s own mind (Krathwohl, 2002). In motivation, Clark and
Estes (2008) expand the concept by describing it as having three components: active choice,
persistence, and mental effort. These can be understood as progressive mental stages one must
move through to complete a task. Motivation is fully demonstrated when one makes the choice
to engage in an activity, then persists through its performance, while investing the appropriate
amount of mental energy needed to see the task through to its fulfillment (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Rueda (2011) further discusses the need to consider other motivational variables, such as self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1986), utility value (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995) and attribution theory (Weiner,
1985, 2005), when conducting a gap analysis for motivational influencers. As an expansion on
the concept of gap analysis for organizational barriers, Clark and Estes (2008) divide the concept
into organizational cultures and settings. The culture refers to how things are normally done in
an organization, while the setting refers to the physical environment, resources, and tools
available within the organization. According to this conceptual KMO gap analysis model, a gap
analysis team who studies and validates influencers on performance in each one of these areas
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

54
within an organization should be able to determine in what area, and of what nature, changes
should be made to improve organizational performance (Clark & Estes, 2008).
JCS Jewish/Israel Studies Faculty Knowledge and Motivation Influences
Knowledge and Skills
To reach Jewish Community School’s (JCS) organizational goal that by June 2020 all
JCS students will be able to articulate relevance between their own lives and the Judaic/Israel
studies curriculum, an innovative, experimental, Jewish/Israel flipped-class curriculum (JISC) is
being developed by the school’s Israel Center. The success of JISC will be highly dependent on
the teachers asked to implement the curriculum in their classes. To facilitate a successful
supposed implementation, it is vital to first assess the knowledge, skills and motivational needs
that these teachers have in relation to the curriculum, its methodology and
materials/technologies. This relates to what Rueda (2011) calls the knowledge, instructional and
motivational dimensions, and he asserts that identifying influences/needs in these areas are vital
to improvement efforts. The purpose of this section is to review pertinent literature relating to
the knowledge, instructional, and motivational dimensions that JCS Jewish/Israel studies
teachers would need to achieve their stakeholder goal of being able to fully implement JISC by
September 2019.
Knowledge influences. When looking at how knowledge can influence performance it is
useful to define exactly what type of knowledge is needed for improvement. Following
Krathwohl (2002), these knowledge types are described as follows: factual, conceptual
procedural and metacognitive. Based on the Krathwohl (2002) model we can derive how each of
the four dimensions of knowledge relates to teachers implementing JISC in the following ways.
First, the factual and conceptual dimensions would pertain to a teacher’s knowledge of the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

55
biblical narrative, Jewish/Israel history, and the theological/philosophical underpinnings of the
curriculum. Second, the procedural dimension would pertain to being familiar with the
pedagogical model (in this case a blended flipped class) to be able to deliver the curriculum as
intended for maximum student learning and engagement. While the metacognitive dimension
would relate to the teacher’s ability to reflect on his/her teaching practice and to draw
connections in relation to student learning and engagement. It follows then that identifying and
validating any needs that exist in JCS Jewish/Israel teacher’s knowledge in any of these
dimensions would be essential to JISC’s full and successful implementation. The question of to
what extent does a Jewish/Israel teacher’s knowledge in the above four dimensions influence
student learning is vital to understand and is what this analysis seeks to answer.
Pedagogical content knowledge. The quality of teachers has been found to be the most
important factor in determining student learning and school performance (Hanushek, Kain, &
Rivkin, 1998). There is not a lot of specific research that investigates teacher knowledge
influences in Jewish/Israel studies, but there is research in relation to the teaching of other
subjects, such as mathematics and science, which demonstrate that the level and quality of a
teacher’s factual and conceptual knowledge of a subject matter, and their effective use of
applicable pedagogical principles and methods play an important role in how they teach, and in
what students learn (De Jong & Van Driel, 2004; Harris & Sass, 2007).
To describe the important areas of teacher knowledge necessary for good teaching,
Shulman (1986) coined the term Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). PCK, as he describes
it, is the subject specific knowledge that a teacher mainly acquires through the experience of
teaching that subject. Shulman views PCK as a sub-category of the general content knowledge
of a subject, but is in its own category as it transcends simple knowledge of a subject. According
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

56
to him, PCK is the aspects of any given content area that help to make the learning more
comprehensible for the students. Examples would be descriptions, analogies, stories, or any
activity that makes the content more understandable and thereby increases student learning. In
this category of knowledge, Shulman also included teacher knowledge of possible difficulties
that students might encounter while engaging with the subject matter, including misconceptions
commonly held by students about that subject area, and ways of addressing these and other
possible pit-falls to learning (Shulman, 1986, 1987). This concept was reinforced by Van Driel,
De Jong and Verloop (2002), who indicate that teachers need to develop understanding of
students’ learning difficulties and misunderstandings based on questions posed by students in
class.
Since Shulman, many researchers have furthered and expanded the PCK model. Van
Driel and Berry (2010) describe PCK as having three primary areas: the main ideas of a subject’s
content, appropriate teaching strategies for that subject, and knowledge about their students.
Others took a more empirical approach to PCK and looked specifically at its relation to student
outcomes, finding that there was a direct correlation between the two (Baumert et al., 2010).
Specifically, in Jewish/Israel education, Grant (2011) describes an aspect of PCK necessary for
Israel educators when he demonstrates the need for Israel educators to develop a meaningful
understanding of both the sacred vision and complex realities of Israel, past, present, and future
to successfully teach Israel Education in a pluralistic environment. This supports the
recommendations of Pomson and Deitcher (2009) who state that teachers need to be able to
identify and understand best practices that might serve as exemplars or points of reference for
Israel studies, a concept that relates directly to that of PCK.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

57
Based on the literature, a teacher’s PCK is important for maximizing student-learning
outcomes and relates to all four dimensions described by Krathwohl (2002) in the following
ways: In the factual arena, PCK would include a teacher knowing the facts of the topic being
taught. In the conceptual arena, PCK would include a teacher knowing how the factual aspects
relate to the foundational concepts of that subject. In the procedural arena, PCK would include a
teacher knowing how to best teach and assess the facts and concepts being taught. While in the
meta-cognitive arena, PCK would be a teacher knowing how to be self-aware of their own
internal thought process during and after teaching to ensure that they were utilizing effective
PCK in their teaching practice. This reflective aspect of PCK was explored by Park and Oliver
(2008) who demonstrated how teachers need to reflect on their PCK to know how to use critical
teaching moments occurring in the classroom to best handle these opportunities, and to better
integrate vital information. Being that the teachers at JCS would be implementing an unfamiliar,
totally new curriculum in Jewish/Israel studies, PCK developmental needs will be an area to
address to ensure proper integration of new knowledge, as it relates to all four of the above
described dimensions, within the implementation process of JISC.
Blended flipped classroom methodology and practice. Jewish/Israel faculty’s
procedural knowledge needs relating to the use and application of the flipped classroom model is
another knowledge area that must be addressed in JISC’s implementation. According to Prensky
(2008), today’s students are very different from those of the past in that they are not as sheltered
from the outside world. He explains how previous generations looked to school as a means of
going beyond the limited scope of their exposure to the world that was available to them.
Conversely, today’s students are much more aware of global events due to their access to
technologies that put the world and its information at their fingertips. The flipped class model
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

58
therefore aims to help assuage this incongruence, by making learning more learner- centered and
more in sync with the digital reality that today’s students live in. The flipped classroom
approach is an educational method in which learning that would traditionally take place in the
classroom, but instead takes place at home with the use of pre-recorded materials, while
classroom time is used for the reinforcing and expansion of that material using student centered
in-class activities (Lage et al., 2000). Teachers new to this approach need training in utilizing the
flipped classroom method and to model its use in their own learning process (Vaughan, 2014).
Therefore, being that JCS teachers will be asked to utilize this perhaps unfamiliar model along
with the accompanying technologies and software in the implementation of JISC, assessing and
validating their flipped classroom model procedural knowledge needs will have to be conducted
for proper implementation of JISC.
Reflective practices. Meta-cognitive knowledge is another important skill set that
teachers implementing JISC must possess to evaluate their teaching performance and to gauge
their own success in relation to the stated objectives of the JISC implementation goals. Dewey
(1933) introduced an educational philosophy based on the theory of scientific inquiry, in which
the educator must always be carefully evaluating their own knowledge and teaching practice.
This perspective has grown into what modern educators call reflective practice (Del Carlo,
Hinkhouse, & Isbell, 2010). Valli (1997) describes five types of reflective practices that relate to
teaching: technical, in-and-on action, deliberative, personal and critical. He asserts that a truly
reflective teacher consistently engages in a combination of all these practices.
Technical reflection pertains to thinking about how one’s own teaching aligns with
known research-based best practices, both in regards to instructional methods and classroom
management behaviors. These determinations are based on external guidelines (reported in the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

59
research). In contrast, in-and-on action reflection is personal and relates to how teachers gauge
their own performance as educators based on their beliefs about themselves and teaching in
general. Deliberative reflection is a kind of hybrid of the first two, where the teacher is
attempting to make sense between these differing educational viewpoints (research based and
personal). Personalistic reflection differs from in-and-on action as it does not address one’s own
beliefs about teaching; rather, it pertains to the personal benefits of teaching from both personal
satisfaction/growth, and relationship building with students. Critical reflection is the practice of
taking one’s own teaching into account in comparison with social and moral dilemmas/aspects of
education (Valli, 1997). Liston and Zeichner (1990) describe the process of reflective practice in
four stages that align with the steps of action research: plan, act, observe and reflect. This is
what Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993) meant when they wrote of the teacher in terms of being a
researcher. This approach describes a unique teacher based educational inquiry, in which both
theory and personal reflections on teaching experiences are combined to produce novel
approaches and perspectives about educational practices (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993).
Reflective practices relate directly to the dimension of meta-cognitive knowledge
described by Krathwohl (2002). Reflective practices are therefore essential to strategic problem
solving, as they can help to broaden one’s understanding of subtle conditions pertaining to a
situation or problem that might otherwise go unnoticed (Rueda, 2011). Reflective practices also
help one to understand the particulars of the context in which a problem exists, allowing teachers
to know what the best course of action is in a specific situation (Mayer, 2011) and gain insights
into students’ learning difficulties (De Jong & Van Driel, 2004). Together with the previously
discussed areas of factual, conceptual and procedural knowledge, reflective practices will be an
especially important part of Jewish/Israel studies faculty’s JISC implementation process, as their
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

60
use will provide insight and understanding into the process that can be used to help guide the full
implementation. Besides these knowledge influences (Table 1), Clark and Estes (2008), also
include motivational influences that must be addressed to improve organizational performance.
These will be discussed in the next section.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

61
Table 2: Stakeholder Goal and Knowledge Influence, Type and Assessment

Organizational Mission
On the foundation of the highest academic standards and Jewish ethical and spiritual values, JCS
develops students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind souls. We value each member of our
pluralistic community while we foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the Jewish
people, and a passionate commitment to the service of humanity and the perfection of God's world.
Organizational Global Goal
June 2020 all JCS students will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their
own lives and Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Stakeholder Goal
September 2019, 100% of JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers will implement the new “Judaic/Israel
studies for the 21
st
Century” (JISC) flipped curriculum.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Knowledge of use and
application of technologies
utilized in flipped classroom
& blended education
Procedural Teachers will be asked to model a
blended flipped-classroom lesson plan
and lesson while being observed, and
then participate in an open-ended
interview about it.
Knowledge of Jewish Biblical
theology and philosophical
underpinnings of the JISC
curriculum
Conceptual Teachers will be asked to describe the
rationale for implementing the JISC
curriculum.
Knowledge of reflective
practices relating to their
teaching practice and student
learning experiences in
Judaic/Israel studies.
Metacognitive Teachers will be asked to complete a
self-evaluation on their effectiveness
and its effect on student learning.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

62
Motivation
One’s motivation to invest the appropriate amount of mental effort needed to learn is a
prerequisite and is equally as important as knowledge acquisition in the learning process (Mayer,
2011). Being that implementation of the new JCS Jewish/Israel studies curriculum may require
Jewish/Israel studies faculty to learn new information, concepts, skills, practices and procedures,
motivation will be needed for the JISC implementation. Clark and Estes (2008) describe
motivation as having three components: active choice, persistence and mental effort. For JCS JS
teachers to attain their stakeholder goal of fully implementing the JISC curriculum, they will
need to demonstrate all three of these components of motivation in the following ways: They
will need to be motivated enough to invest the time and mental energy needed to master the
curriculum materials, and to teach, assess, and manage a classroom using the flipped method.
Instructors also need to believe in the importance of the role they play as Jewish/Israel educators
to be motivated to engage in reflective practices in relation to their own teaching, student
outcomes, and the actual implementation process objectives. The purpose of this literature
review is to ascertain what motivational influences and needs might exist in relation to the
implementation of the JISC curriculum. Two theories of motivational influences relevant to the
implementation of the Jewish/Israel studies curriculum at JCS that the literature addresses are
utility value theory (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995), and attribution theory (Weiner, 1985; 2005).
These influences will need to be identified and validated to address any motivational needs JCS
Jewish/Israel teachers might have in relation to implementing the new curriculum.
Utility value theory. Although there is no direct study of teacher motivational influences
regarding JS curriculum implementation, Katz and Shahar (2015) demonstrate a positive effect
on student learning resulting from a strong correlation between teacher motivation and their
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

63
effectiveness in implementing pedagogical innovations. Motivation means being willing to
invest the right amount of psychological, mental or physical effort into a task. The question is,
what factors can motivate someone to be motivated? According to Clark and Estes (2008) the
source of motivation is a person’s beliefs about the outcomes that will result from expended
efforts on a task based on past experiences and knowledge. Utility value is one such belief, and
it refers to the expected or perceived value or gain from engaging in a task or activity. This
value does not need to be monetary and can pertain to social or moral values as well (Eccles &
Wigfield, 1995). Eccles and Wigfield (1995) suggest that if an individual truly values the
outcome of a task, regardless of how much he/she enjoys the task itself, he/she can be motivated
to complete it. This value can be of a tangible nature such as a monetary incentive, but this has
been shown to be the least effective way to motivate people (Bonner, Hastie, Sprinkle, & Young,
2000). Other values such as social standing and moral values can also relate to utility value
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Utility Value influence on JISC implementation. According to utility value theory, if
Jewish/Israel studies teachers at JCS are to be successful in implementing JISC, they will require
utility value within JISC and the implementation process. One such utility may be the fact that
the school is in a transformational phase since it became independent of its founding
organization four years ago. It is possible that teachers who cannot grow with the school might
lose their jobs, so it is of utility value for them to demonstrate that they are willing to be part of
the changes that are being implemented, even if they do not completely agree with the school’s
new direction (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995).
There is another type of utility value that Eccles and Wigfield (1995) speak about that
relates to an individual’s beliefs, personal goals and psychological needs. Gilheany (2013)
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

64
looked at what motivates teachers to teach religion and lists those motivations in the following
descending order of priority frequency: “developing values, strengthening religious beliefs,
strengthening national identity, encouraging critical thinking, strengthening resistance to the lure
of secular society, and teaching about other religious traditions” (Gilheany, 2013, p. 501).
Based on this list, we can see that religious and personal moral principles like the ones
described by Eccles and Wigfield (1995) do come into play in what motivates teachers of
religion. It follows then that in the case of JCS Jewish/Israel studies teachers, if they believe that
the implementation of JISC will improve student engagement and learning of Judaism and/or
Jewish/Israel identity, then these beliefs could serve as a motivational utility value in their JISC
implementing efforts. This is in alignment with Roehrig and Kruse (2005), who show how
teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning should be aligned with their perceived value of new
curriculums in order for those beliefs to play a role in increasing the successful implementation
of those curriculums. Additionally, Holden and Rada (2011) argue that teachers should possess a
perceived usability as well as self-efficacy in the use of new educational technologies to increase
their acceptance of the new technology. Taking into consideration that JISC is a flipped class
approach that will require technology training and adoption to succeed, how useful the teachers
perceive the mastering of these technologies to be could provide another utility value to the JISC
implementation effort.
Attribution Theory. Another way that a teacher’s beliefs can affect their motivation is
described by the attribution theory of motivation (Mayer, 2011). Attribution theory addresses the
beliefs that one holds about the cause or responsibility of a situation and how those beliefs
translate into one’s motivation to avoid or address it. Weiner (2005) describes attributions as the
beliefs people hold about events that occur to them and are their attempts to make sense of these
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

65
events from an emotional perspective. He introduces three aspects of attributions that play an
important role in how these beliefs effect motivation. The three aspects are locus (cause),
stability (how predictable is the outcome), and controllability (to what extent is the outcome in
the person’s own hands) (Weiner, 2005). In other words, if one attributes the outcome of an
activity to the amount of effort put into it, there is a higher chance he/she will be motivated to put
in the required effort. If on the other hand, one believes that other factors out of their control
will ultimately decide the success of their endeavors, then he/she will not try as hard.
Attribution theory influence on JISC implementation. Per attribution theory, for JCS
Judaic/Israel studies teachers to achieve their stakeholder goal of implementing JISC, they
should attribute success to factors within their control rather than to factors in students’ control.
This concept is demonstrated by Foley (2011), who showed that teachers need to expect that
their implementation of new strategies and approaches in education will have a positive effect on
student learning for them to implement those strategies and approaches more often. In the case of
JCS Jewish/Israel studies teachers who will be implementing JISC, it is important for them to see
that their implementation and instruction of JISC can make a positive difference in student
learning and engagement in Jewish/Israel studies. If teachers attribute low student engagement
in Jewish/Israel studies to the religious level of their students, rather than on their own teaching
practices, then according to attribution theory, they will not be as motivated to implement the
new curriculum.
Although there are no studies dealing with the attributions of Jewish/Israel studies
teachers to lack of student engagement, Brady and Woolfson (2008) showed that a teacher’s
preconceived notions and beliefs about learning-disabled students did influence the attributions
they held about those students’ poor performance in their classes. Perhaps this same dynamic
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

66
applies to other areas of learning such as Jewish/Israel studies where there is a difference
between the worldview of religion teachers and the students they teach, who, for the most part,
come from secular homes. This supposition is in line with Evans (2014) who demonstrates the
importance of being cognizant of the cognitive gap that exists between adults and students when
it comes to religious concepts and texts. Along this line of thinking, understanding the JCS
Jewish/Israel studies teacher’s attributions of student satisfaction and engagement in
Jewish/Israel studies is an area of motivational influences that will be addressed with the ones
mentioned above (see table 2 below) to assist in the successful implementation of the JISC.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

67
Table 3: Stakeholder Goal and Motivation Influence, and Assessment

Organizational Mission
On the foundation of the highest academic standards and Jewish ethical and spiritual values, JCS
develops students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind souls. We value each member of our
pluralistic community while we foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the Jewish
people, and a passionate commitment to the service of humanity and the perfection of God's world.
Organizational Global Goal
June 2020 all JCS students will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their
own lives and Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Stakeholder Goal
September 2019, 100% of JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers will implement the new “Judaic/Israel
studies for the 21
st
Century” (JISC) flipped curriculum.
Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Utility Value
–
Teachers need to see the value of implementing
the new “Judaic/Israel studies for the 21
st

Century” (JISC) curriculum

Open ended survey question: “What is the value
of the JISC curriculum”?

“On a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being “no value”
and 5 being “great value”, how would you rate
the JISC curriculum?”
Attributions
–
Teachers should feel that low student engagement
for Jewish/Israel studies is due to their own
efforts at instruction rather than students’ lack of
interest or level of religious observance.

Written survey item “Student engagement in
Judaic/Israel studies is
strongly influenced by the amount of effort I put
into the lesson.”
(strongly disagree –
strongly agree)

Interview item:
“What are some of the causes for lack of student
engagement in Jewish/Israel Studies?”
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

68
Organizational Influences
Organizational influences are the third part of the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO gap
analysis framework. Implementation of its new Judaic/Israel studies curriculum (JISC) is part of
Jewish Community School’s (JCS) global organizational goal of increasing relevancy and
student engagement in Judaic/Israel studies, and will likely require organizational changes and
adjustments to accommodate JISC’s implementation. This presents the need for understanding,
analyzing, and validating organizational influences relating to JCS’ Judaic/Israel studies
teachers’ reaching their JISC implementation objectives. Unlike the first two influences of
knowledge and motivation, which relate to an organizational stakeholder’s performance (such as
employees), organizational influences describe aspects of the organization itself that may be
acting as barriers to stakeholder performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). In describing aspects of
organizational influences on change efforts, Clark and Estes (2008) divide them into two general
categories of “processes and materials” and “culture,” which need to be aligned with
performance improvement goals to properly support the individuals being asked to implement
improvement changes (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 103). These concepts stem from Gallimore and
Goldenberg’s (2001) differentiation between cultural models and cultural settings and serve as a
conceptual lens through which the organizational gap analysis relating to JCS Judaic/Israel
teacher’s needs for JISC implementation will take place.
Cultural Model
Viewing organizations broadly as collections of people with a shared purpose, Bolman
and Deal (1997) explicate “organizational principles” based on human behavioral dynamics,
describing them as being complex, surprising, deceptive and ambiguous (Bolman & Deal, 1997,
pp. 22-23). This human complexity within organizations is what Gallimore and Goldenberg
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

69
(2001) characterize as an organization’s cultural model; it being the internal, unwritten, unseen,
and ever-evolving ways and expectations that unconsciously guide people’s behaviors within an
organizational context. Schein (2010) discusses how these shared ways of being within an
organization help to provide a sense of “cognitive stability” for its members, and it is the
upsetting of this cognitive stability caused by organizational change that causes resistance to
those changes (p. 29).
Per Rueda (2011), gaining insights into the cultural models within schools is vital to
improving student learning. This is especially true of schools, considering their unique
organizational characteristics proposed by Thacker, Bell, and Schargel (2009), who state that
schools are even more complex than other types of organizations because of their varied and
interwoven systems, along with the increased emotional variables associated with the educating
of children. It follows, then, that if the cultural models of schools are more complex than other
organizations, trying to make changes within a school will result in more cognitive instability.
One way of accounting for this challenge in performance improvement efforts in schools is to
assess the degree to which the school’s cultural model is that of a learning organization (Rueda,
2011).
Learning organization. For individuals within an organization to be able to do their jobs
properly, they must be constantly learning and adjusting to changes in what is expected of them.
The same can be said about the organization, which, to remain effective and relevant, must also
respond to varying changes in the environment in which it exists (Rueda, 2011). This is what
Kazar (2005) refers to as organizational learning, and this concept helps to frame the extent and
speed to which an organization can learn and adjust to the demands of performance improvement
efforts. Therefore, the extent to which a school is a learning organization can affect its ability to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

70
enact reforms (Rueda, 2011). This principle is demonstrated by Bailey (2000) who, in studying
the State of Colorado’s implementation of a new standards-based curriculum, found that there is
a need to increase the culture of organizational learning in an organization to improve that
organization’s capacity for reform (Bailey, 2000).
Per this concept, it follows that JCS teachers’ ability to successfully reach their JISC
implementation objectives will be influenced to the extent which JCS is itself a learning
organization. This is one way in which an organizational influence gap analysis will benefit JCS
in the implementation of JICS, as it will help validate any organizational model needs that exist
around organizational learning. This relates directly to the implementation of JISC, which will
require specific professional development and training of its participating faculty members to
enable them to implement the curriculum in their classrooms. Besides the knowledge and
motivational components of any necessary professional development and training for these
teachers, organizational factors also play a big part in their successful mastery of the materials
they will be learning.
This organizational aspect of professional development and training is demonstrated by
Akerson, Cullen, and Hanson (2009), who showed that together with modeling and reflection,
there is a need to foster a community of learners among teachers engaged in professional
development to increase changes in practice and knowledge. Therefore, JCS’s ability to create a
community of learners among its Jewish/Israel studies teachers is an important cultural model
influence that will we addressed in the gap analysis. Another aspect of JCS’s cultural model’s
impact on JISC implementation is its self-identification as a religiously pluralistic Community
Jewish school.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

71
Pluralistic Community Jewish schools. Based on Gallimore and Goldenberg’s (2001)
cultural model framework of understanding what influences members of an organization to
behave in particular ways, JCS’s self-identification as a religiously pluralistic Community Jewish
school can be considered a major part of its cultural model. The purpose of this section is
therefore to better understand how this pluralistic Community Jewish school cultural model
might influence Judaic/Israel faculty’s attainment of their JISC implementation goal.
The growth of Jewish Day schools has been steadily increasing for the past 50 years but
has mostly been in the Orthodox segment of the community (Pomson, Wertheimer & Hacohen-
Wolf, 2014). As Jewish denominational/demographic dynamics have developed over the past
half-century, Jewish schools have evolved from being completely segregated by denomination to
partially integrated in terms of educational offerings and the makeup of their faculty and student
body. As stated in a previous section of this literature review, during the 1970’s Reform and
Conservative Jewish Day schools began to be established. Schools like Solomon Schechter from
the Conservative movement showed that Jewish schools could welcome and accommodate the
spiritual needs and beliefs of a diverse group of Jews in the same school (Mayer, 1995). At the
same time, a hybrid version called the Jewish Community School was also being created, which
was aimed at attracting Jews from a broader cross-section of the community. The goal of these
schools was to educate students within a non-denominational environment. To achieve this, the
value of religious pluralism, which is the integration of individuals from all religious
denominations into one institution, was adopted as a main tenet of these schools (Conyer, 2009).
Even still, attracting a critical mass of Orthodox students remains a major challenge because
many Orthodox Jews do not view these schools as truly catering to their children’s religious
needs (Freedman, 2001).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

72
Conyer (2009) describes two models of pluralism that have emerged in Jewish
Community Schools: the utilitarian and the values models. The utilitarian model is one in which
the school’s leadership is motivated by attracting the largest variety of students to keep the
school viable, whereas the values model is driven by a sincere belief that a pluralistic
environment is truly the best way to educate Jews for the future. The above author concludes
that a combination of the two models is a good way to insure pluralism succeeds at a Jewish
Community school, but that true pluralism must exist for this mixed model to work. True
pluralism is where the school does not show any favoritism to any one denomination, as well as
respects and supports the religious needs and requirements for each one. Some examples of this
pluralism are for the school to offer religious prayer services that would suit each denomination,
as well as adhering to the highest standards of kosher to be inclusive of the Orthodox students
(Conyer, 2009). Currently, JCS does not have an Orthodox prayer service on campus, nor is its
primary lunch offering kosher at the highest level of Jewish dietary laws and rabbinic
supervision. This raises an important question about the strength of JCS’s cultural model of
being truly denominationally pluralistic.
JCS defines itself as a religiously pluralistic school. Pluralism is clearly one of the
school’s core tenets, as evident from the “Mission Statement and Philosophy” section of the
organization’s website which reads, “JCS is home to a broad spectrum of students and families
from a variety of backgrounds, cultures, and levels of observance.” Although the school
philosophically claims to be inclusive of all segments of the Jewish community, its enrollment
numbers do not reflect that it is succeeding at this goal. Per the school’s most recent religious
affiliation data, a wide disparity exists between the various religious affiliations of the student
population, with the smallest percentages (Orthodox at 0%, and Modern Orthodox at 6.6%)
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

73
coming from one side of the religious spectrum, and the largest contingencies of students
(Conservative at 56.2%, and Reform at 31.4%) coming from the alternate side of the religious
spectrum (JCS self-reported enrollment data, 2016).
JCS is currently going through a transitional period. Four years ago, the school became
independent of its founding institution, which is a Reform synagogue and elementary school.
One of the primary reasons for this separation was to help redefine the school as a community
institution, open to a wider Jewish demographic. This separation represents JCS’s desire to
change the cultural model of the school from being more Reform in association to one that is
community based. This paradigm shift, however, takes more than changing the name and logo,
especially when so many board members, faculty and administrators have been at the school for
over a decade or more. Tung and Lin (2015) explored the relationship between organizational
change and staffing and showed that when major organizational restructuring occurs, it
frequently has an impact on the diversity of the workforce. Currently, out of the school’s 280
staff members, there are about four (two administrator and two teachers) who are Orthodox. The
religious denominational makeup of the school’s staff may relate to its ability to reach its
pluralistic ideals. This notion of the need for role models that reflect the student population being
served is suggested by Beck (2014), who writes about the need for Black children to have Black
teachers as role models that they can look up to. The absence of more Orthodox teachers at JCS
therefore also calls into question its true level of pluralism.
A lack of true denominational pluralism at JCS might be impacting the religious culture
of the school, reflecting most of its current student body who do not identify as religiously
observant, and is therefore an organizational influence that will need to be validated by this
study. Concurring with the findings of Sheskin and Hartman (2015), these demographics would
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

74
indicate a general resistance to religion and its teaching among students. These researchers found
a large variance in how individuals of different Jewish denominations identified with Judaism,
with Orthodox being twice as likely as Conservative and four times more likely than Reform to
engage in Jewish practice and ritual. Based on the school’s current cultural model, along with
evidence from Smith, Faris, and Regnerus (2003) about the general religious alienation and or
hostility towards organized religion among many American teens mentioned above, it may be
probable that JCS’s students are indifferent to religious aspects of the school including JS.
Addressing this type of assumption is vital according to Shenhar (1994), who showed that
reducing teen alienation towards religion was connected to shifting their attitudes towards JS
(Shenhar Commission, 1994, p. 24). Being that JCS’s JISC implementation is of a new JS
curriculum, validating the assumed influence of the school’s pluralistic cultural model would be
useful in helping the teachers involved reaching their stakeholder goal. In addition to cultural
models, cultural settings are another aspect of organizational culture that must be assessed in the
organizational part of the gap analysis (Rueda, 2011).
Cultural Setting
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) describe the structural, procedural and material aspects
of an organization as constituting its organizational setting. Organizational setting is a way of
describing the visibly external characteristics of an organization, which when taken together,
establish the context in which the culture of the organization occurs. Based on findings that the
way people act within an organization is directly related to the social context (i.e. setting) they
find themselves in (Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyez, & Miller, 2003), Rueda (2011) states that
validating cultural setting influences is an important part of the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO
improvement model to improve student performance. This idea relates to the ability of JCS
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

75
Judaic/Israel studies teachers to reach their stakeholder goal of JISC implementation, as they will
need the necessary resources to accomplish their objectives.
Accountability. Resources do not only relate to physical materials, but also to the
necessary organizational structure and processes to support individual performance (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). Accountability within an organization is one such characteristic that has
been shown to affect performance (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). As Vygotsky’s (1978)
social learning theory places emphasis on the social context aspect of learning, it has been
asserted that accountability efforts to improve school performance consider the social
components of an organization to promote real change (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). In the case of
Judaic/Israel studies at JCS, the measures of accountability for teaching the designated
curriculum that are or are not present would therefore constitute a cultural setting influence that
might affect the implementation of JISC. There is room for assuming a lack of accountability
resources and expertise in Jewish/Israel studies, since no oversight committee expert in this field
or any universally accepted standards regulate this area of learning, as is the case in all general
studies areas. Assessing any JCS JS teacher’s needs that results from this assumed
accountability cultural setting influence would therefore be part of an organizational gap
analysis.
Organizational change management. Another cultural setting ingredient that can affect
improvement efforts pertains to whether there is effective organizational change management
guiding the process. As stated above, Schein (2010) explains how change in an organization
creates cognitive instability because it upsets the cultural identity of the organization that people
depend on for a sense of security and familiarity (Weick, 1995). To counteract this unsettling
aspect of organizational change, Schein (2010) outlines a three-stage model for change
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

76
management that involves incrementally introducing the change and seeing it through to
fulfillment. The three stages he describes are as follows: “unfreezing” (relates to creating the
motivation for people to want to change), “learning new concepts” (involves training), and
“internalizing new concepts” (ongoing after training) (Schein, 2010, p. 300). In relation to this
process, Hutchings and Quinney (2015) showed that there is a need for effective organizational
change management to successfully implement all the various aspects necessary to adopt the
flipped-class approach. In accordance with the learning new concepts stage of the Schein (2010)
model for organizational management, this would require “imitation of and identification with
role models” (p. 300). This relates directly to JCS’s JISC implementation, as it is based on a
flipped class approach, and there are no current teachers utilizing this approach in the school to
serve as role models for Judaic/Israel teachers. This assumed cultural setting influence will
therefore be included in the JISC implementation organizational gap analysis. A summary of
organizational influences and assessments in relation to JCS’s Judaic/Israel teacher’s stakeholder
goal is listed in Table 3.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

77
Table 4: Stakeholder Goal and Organizational Influences, and Assessment
Organizational Mission
On the foundation of the highest academic standards and Jewish ethical and spiritual values, JCS develops
students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind souls. We value each member of our pluralistic community
while we foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the Jewish people, and a passionate
commitment to the service of humanity and the perfection of God's world.
Organizational Global Goal
June 2020 all JCS students will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own lives
and Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Stakeholder Goal (If Applicable)
September 2019, 100% of JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers will implement the new “Judaic/Israel studies for the
21
st
Century” (JISC) flipped curriculum.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1:
There is a need to increase the culture of
organizational learning at JCS to improve its
capacity for reform.
Survey or interview question that identifies cultural aspects of
the school as being a learning organization open to change.
Cultural Model Influence 2:
There is a general indifference by many JCS
students towards the religious aspects of the
school, including spiritual practice, Jewish life
and Jewish/Israel studies.
Survey or interview question that identifies faculty
impressions of student attitudes towards the religious aspects
of the school.
Cultural Setting Influence 1:
There is a need for increased accountability in
Jewish/Israel studies at JCS to make curricular
changes.
Survey or interview question about their feelings regarding
the available resources and expertise necessary to assess and
improve Jewish/Israel studies curriculum and educational
practices.
Cultural Setting Influence 2:
There is a need for effective organizational
change management for the various aspects
necessary to adopt the flipped-class approach to
be successfully implemented.
Survey or interview question how curricular changes are
made at the school.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

78
Table 5: Combined Stakeholder Goal and KMO Influences and Assessments
Organizational Mission
On the foundation of the highest academic standards and Jewish ethical and spiritual values, JCS develops
students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind souls. We value each member of our pluralistic community
while we foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the Jewish people, and a passionate
commitment to the service of humanity and the perfection of God's world.
Organizational Global Goal
June 2020 all JCS students will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own lives
and Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Stakeholder Goal
September 2019, 100% of JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers will implement the new flipped model “Judaic/Israel
studies for the 21
st
Century” (JISC) curriculum.
Assumed Knowledge
Influences

Knowledge
Influence
Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle
Proposed Solution
Knowledge of flipped
classroom & blended
education model
pedagogy and
methodology
(Conceptual)
Open-ended
interview
question asking
teachers to
describe the
rational for using
the blended
flipped-
classroom model
Education is an effective
method to increase
organizational capacity
for its personnel to
“generate new conceptual
knowledge that will solve
novel problems and
handle novel job
challenges” (Clark &
Estes, 2008, p. 63).

Provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers an
educational workshop/training, which
provides the theoretical, conceptual, and
historical frameworks that serve as the
basis for JISC and its 21st century
approach, with opportunities to
summarize the information learned and
to generate strategies based on the
information that may be applicable to
their teaching practice.

Knowledge of use
and application of
technologies utilized
in flipped classroom
& blended education
(Procedural)
Structured
observation of
teachers
modeling a
blended flipped-
classroom lesson
plan and lesson
with follow-up
Mastery requires the
learning of relevant skills
accompanied by
integrative practice, and
the knowledge of when
and how to apply them
(Schraw & McCrudden,
2007).
Provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers
recurring and properly sequenced/
scaffolded training in implementing the
flipped classroom method, which
provides them with modeling of the
method in their own learning of it and
the opportunity to practice its use and
receive feedback on their performance.

Knowledge of Jewish
Biblical theology and
philosophical
underpinnings of the
JISC curriculum
(Conceptual)
Open-ended
interview
question asking
teachers to
describe the
rational for
implementing the
JISC curriculum.
Mastery requires the
learning of relevant skills
accompanied by
integrative practice, and
the knowledge of when
and how to apply them
(Schraw & McCrudden,
2007).
Provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers
properly sequenced training in
identifying and understanding best
practices that might serve as exemplars
or points of reference for Jewish/Israel
studies, which provides them with the
opportunity to practice these skills and
receive feedback on their performance.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

79

Knowledge of
reflective practices
relating to their
teaching practice and
student learning
experiences in
Judaic/Israel studies.
(Metacognitive)
Teachers will be
asked to
complete a self-
evaluation on
their
effectiveness and
its effect on
student learning.
Using metacognitive
strategies, such as
debriefing, aid in the
mastery of new
metacognitive skills and
learning (Baker, 2006).

Provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers
metacognitive schematic in house
education in the recognition and
understanding of students’ learning
difficulties and misunderstandings,
which includes the modeling of how to
metacognitively recognize them based
on questions posed by students in class.
Assumed
Motivation
Influences

Motivation
Influence
Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle
Proposed Solution

Teachers need to see
the value of
implementing the
new “Judaic/Israel
studies for the 21
st

Century” (JISC)
flipped curriculum
(Utility value)

Open ended
interview
question asking
teachers: What
do you see as the
value of the JISC
curriculum”?
Motivation to engage in a
task results from
experiences and beliefs
especially in relation to
one’s ability to
effectively complete it.
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel studies
teachers training in the use of flipped-
class technologies that includes
modeling, practice and immediate and
ongoing constructive feedback.
Teachers should feel
that low student
engagement for
Jewish/Israel studies
is due to their own
efforts at instruction
rather than students’
lack of interest or
level of religious
observance.
(Attributions)

Open interview
asking teachers:
“What do you
think are some of
the causes for
lack of student
engagement in
Jewish/Israel
studies?”
Individuals can be
motivated by adapting
their attributions and
control beliefs to ones
related to their own effort
rather than external
factors (Pintrich, 2003).

Provide JCS Judaic/Israel studies
teachers JISC training that includes
regular and monitored reflective
opportunities to consider their own
attributions and control beliefs in
relation to student engagement in Judaic
studies and offer alternative ones that
focus on their own effort in
implementing JISC as being able to
have a positive effect on increasing
student learning and engagement.
Assumed
Organizational
Influences

Organizational
Influence
Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle
Proposed Solution
Cultural Model
Influence 1:
There is a need to
increase the culture
of organizational
learning at JCS to
improve its capacity
for reform.
Survey or
interview
question that
identifies cultural
aspects of the
school as being a
learning
organization open
to change.
The extent and speed to
which an organization
can adjust to the demands
of performance
improvement efforts is
directly related to the
extent to which it
collaboratively engages
in new learning (Kazar,
2005).

Establish cohorts of Judaic/Israel studies
teachers who, together with leadership,
will give input towards the design of
JISC professional development
activities based on their own perceived
needs
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

80

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework is the theoretical foundation upon which all other aspects of a
study are built. It represents the researcher’s iterative cognitive attempts to both construct,
understand, and describe his or her own beliefs or ideas about his or her assumptions relating to
Cultural Model
Influence 2:
There is general
indifference by many
JCS students towards
the religious aspects
of the school,
including spiritual
practice, Jewish life
and Jewish/Israel
studies.
Survey or
interview
question that
identifies faculty
impressions of
student attitudes
towards the
religious aspects
of the school.
Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned with
goals established
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008)

Judaic/Israel studies teachers together
with leadership will set implementation
timeframes, accountability parameters,
and learning goals for JISC
Implementation.
Cultural Setting
Influence 1:
There is a possible
lack of accountability
in Jewish/Israel
studies.
Survey or
interview
question about
their feelings
regarding the
available
resources and
expertise
necessary to
assess and
improve
Jewish/Israel
studies
curriculum and
educational
practices.
Organization wide
assessment of an
improvement program’s
results are key to
supporting any change
effort’s success (Clark &
Estes. 2008).
Set, clearly communicate, and assess
S.M.A.R.T. goals for the entire
Judaic/Israel department and related
stakeholders in relation to complete
JISC implementation. Set, clearly
communicate, and assess S.M.A.R.T.
goals for the entire Judaic/Israel
department and related stakeholders in
relation to complete JISC
implementation.
Cultural Setting
Influence 2:
There is a need for
effective
organizational change
management for the
various aspects
necessary to adopt
the flipped-class
approach to be
successfully
implemented.
Survey or
interview
question how
curricular
changes are made
at the school.
Setting clear, current and
challenging
organizational
improvement goals
improves learning,
motivation and
performance towards the
accomplishment of those
goals (Kluger & DeNisi,
1996).

Set, clearly communicate, and assess
S.M.A.R.T. goals for the entire
Judaic/Israel department and related
stakeholders in relation to complete
JISC implementation.

Set, clearly communicate, and assess
S.M.A.R.T. goals for the entire
Judaic/Israel department and related
stakeholders in relation to complete
JISC implementation.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

81
various interactions between different elements within an observational context. Maxwell (2013)
uses the terms “theoretical framework” or “idea context” (p. 39) to describe how a study’s
conceptual framework represents the “actual ideas and beliefs” held by the researcher about the
phenomena he or she is studying. In explaining the purpose for having a theory about
something, Maxwell paraphrases Strauss (1995), saying it provides a “model or map of why the
world is the way it is,” and it also provides “a story about what you think is happening and why”
(p. 49, emphasis in original).
This theory-building process is a purpose of research, but even before conducting
research there is already the researcher’s current level of understanding and beliefs about the
situation he/she wishes to study. By engaging in research of existing literature and or theory
about that area of interest, reflecting on one’s own experiences as they relate to this area and by
engaging in either pilot or thought experiments, one can flesh out the various concepts and
beliefs they already hold about the area to be studied (Maxwell, 2013). These initial ideas and
concepts are then used to conceptually construct the study’s beginning conceptual framework,
which should evolve along with the study’s progress, and serves as the “lenses” or “frames”
through which the researcher views the study’s problem and purpose (Merriam and Tisdell,
2016, pp. 85-88). This conceptual scaffolding then helps to clarify the study’s problem
statement, purpose of the study, research questions, methodology, data collection, sampling
methods, analysis and discussion (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Although previously it was described separately based on the literature, how knowledge,
motivation and organizational influencers can be assumed to affect the stakeholders’ ability to
achieve their organizational goal, the following will be a description of how this researcher
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

82
believes all these aspects come together to construct the conceptual framework upon which the
rest of this study is based (see figure Y).
Figure A: JCS JIFM KMO influencers interaction conceptual framework.

Beginning with knowledge influencers based on Krathwohl’s (2002) factual and
conceptual types, this researcher assumes the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) paradigm
first put forth by Shulman (1986), which in addition to the regular factual and conceptual
curricular knowledge that a teacher would possess, describes a type of deeper insightful
knowledge that a teacher gains through the actual experience of teaching that subject matter.
These insights relate specifically to how to best teach that material. PCK is based on a teacher’s
experience of teaching that material, and this researcher therefore asserts that development of
JIFM’s PCK needs in relation to JISC will need to be included in the training process during
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

83
implementation for it to succeed. This would entail providing JIFM with both ongoing formal
and informal professional development opportunities where they can master best practices by
observing others model their own PCK of JISC, which is in accordance with Pomson and
Deitcher (2009), who argue that such mastery is essential for teachers of Jewish/Israel education.
It is the assertion of this researcher that all the above knowledge needs are dependent on the
cultural model of JCS being what Kazar (2005) calls a learning organization, which also
according to Rueda (2011), is essential for schools implementing new curriculum. This cultural
model of being a learning organization in turn is dependent on the cultural setting influence of
effective organizational change management (Schein, 2010). In the case of JCS’
implementation of JISC, this would be the school offering JIFM professional training
opportunities which, together with modeling and reflection, would help to foster a community of
learners among them that can increase changes in practice and knowledge (Akerson, Cullen, and
Hanson 2009).
In terms of the motivational influences within this conceptual framework, this researcher
defines attributions in terms of Weiner’s (1985; 2005) attribution theory. This gap analysis focuses
on the possible attributions made by JIFM in relation to students’ supposed lack of engagement
and dissatisfaction with Jewish/Israel studies and the subsequent effect these attributions may or
may not have on JISC implementation. It is further the assertion of this researcher that JIFM may
attribute these negative attitudes to the religious level of the school’s student body, which for the
most part is non-observant of Jewish law and practices. Just as Brady and Woolfson (2008) assert
that teachers need to reflect how their pre-conceived notions about their students can influence
student learning, so too here teacher’s attributions may be affecting student engagement and
satisfaction. If these attributions are identified and validated through this study, then possible
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

84
solutions to correct these attributions can be devised as part of the JISC full implementation
training modules.
It is further asserted by this study’s primary researcher that this potential attributional
reality may be a product of one of the school’s primary cultural models, its self-identification is
being a religiously pluralistic Jewish school. Although in its truest form, this would mean that the
school is accommodating to the three main branches of Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, and
Reform) (Conyer, 2009), it is possibly questionable whether the school is truly meeting this
aspiration, since Orthodox students make up less than 1% of the student body, with only 6% being
Modern Orthodox (JCS self-reported demographic data, 2016). This author asserts that there is a
relationship between this quasi-religiously-pluralistic cultural model and the make-up of the
student body, and in turn the JIFM attributions about why students don’t like Jewish/Israel studies
at the school.
Religious pluralism also relates to another cultural setting influence that this researcher
believes is a possible influencer of JIFM goal attainment, and that is the issue of accountability as
it relates to Jewish/Israel studies at JCS. With most parents of the school not being very engaged
or committed to Judaism themselves, and without the existence of universally accepted curricular
standards in this discipline, it is possible to assume that they do not demand as much from the
Jewish/Israel department as they would from other general studies disciplines. This dynamic may
result in the school hiring Judaic studies teachers who do not have a meaningful understanding of
what Grant (2011) calls the “sacred vision and complex realities of Israel, past, present, and future”
(p. 4), which according to him is necessary to successfully teach Israel education in a pluralistic
environment. Again, the extent to which the school is a learning organization could play a role in
helping JIFM develop this knowledge as well, if they hold some value in doing so.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

85
Utility value is another theory that helps to inform the conceptual framework that this study
is built upon, and it speaks to any perceived value that might act as a source of motivation to
engage in an activity (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). In terms of JIFM being motivated enough to
achieve their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation, this value would relate to whether they
perceive the new curriculum as being in alignment with their own beliefs about teaching and
learning, which according to Roehrig, and Kruse (2005) is vital for those beliefs to play a role in
increasing the successful implementation of new curriculum. Here too, this study’s primary
researcher asserts that both cultural models of religious pluralism and being a learning
organization have an influence on the utility value of JISC in the minds of JIFM in the following
ways. Gilheany (2013) lists the top six reasons that teachers of religion have for teaching, five of
them relating directly to valuing the transmission of religious traditions, identity and values.
These findings indicate that a religion teacher’s own religious convictions (values)
influence their perceived value of teaching their religion, as Eccles and Wigfield (1995) show
that non-tangible value such as religious convictions are perhaps even better motivators than
monetary ones. With JCS being a religiously pluralistic school, there is then the chance that its
Judaic/Israel teachers may not hold very strong religious convictions per se, which this researcher
would assert influences their willingness to fully accept the new curriculum and to properly
engage in its implementation. This possible lack of motivation would then have a snowball
effect in terms of creating the cultural model of being a learning organization because if, based
on their perception, enough of the teachers do not agree with the religious/educational goals of
the new curriculum, they would not be motivated to fully engage in JISC training and
professional development opportunities.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

86
Another aspect of utility value relates to the implementation of the flipped class model
that is part of JISC along with new technologies and software that teachers implementing it
would need to learn. This researcher asserts that there is also an important interaction between
the perceived utility value of JISC’s implementation and the cultural model of being a learning
organization, because if teachers see that their peers are engaged in the organizational
learning/change process, this would raise their own perceived value of engaging in the process
due to social dynamics this researcher believes are like those described by Bandura’s (1997)
social learning theory.
Literature Review Conclusion
The purpose of this project is to determine how to best help JCS Judaic/Israel studies
teachers achieve their stakeholder goal of implementing the school’s new 21
st
century flipped-
based approach Jewish/Israel studies curriculum (JISC). Chapter Two presented literature
pertaining to the historical significance of Jewish education and how it has evolved based on
societal changes and religious developments, along with current challenges to Jewish education.
The literature above also presented support for the utilization of progressive pedagogical
methods in the continued evolution of Jewish education based on the educational needs of 21
st

century learners. Chapter Two then presented Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis perspective,
where the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the stakeholder’s
goal were discussed. While the literature presented addressed various aspects of these
influencers, there is no known direct application of the gap analysis framework to Judaic/Israel
studies teacher implementation of new curriculum or to the organization of study. Therefore,
Chapter Three will begin with an explanation of the methods by which the gap analysis
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

87
framework will be applied to JCS’s Judaic/Israel studies faculty to determine implementation
goal progress.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

88
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary to reach the organizational performance goal
of all JCS students being able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own
lives and Judaic/Israel studies. The analysis began by generating a list of possible needs and then
moved to examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs. While a
complete needs analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes this study
focuses on one.
The stakeholder of focus for this analysis is JCS Judaic/Israel studies (JS) teachers who
would be involved in implementation of the “Judaic/Israel studies for the 21
st
Century” (JISC)
curriculum because it is important to evaluate where these faculty are currently at in regards to
their performance goal of being able to do so. Complete implementation of the new curriculum
is expected to take at least three school years and includes completion of three separate, three-
session summer training workshops on the principles and structure of the curriculum, utilization
of all course materials and assessments in the planning and delivery of lessons, and ongoing
participation in professional development and supervision of the curriculum’s implantation.
Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to poor implementation of the curriculum, which
may lead to continued dissatisfaction and lack of engagement with Judaic/Israel studies, which in
turn negatively impacts student enrollment and retention. In turn, these consequences could
possibly diminish the school’s reputation and hurt the fiscal solvency of the school. As such, the
questions that guide this study are the following:
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

89
1. What are the JCS Judaic/Israel studies faculty knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs necessary to achieve full implementation of a new 21
st

century learner centered Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th

(JISC)?
2. How can the data collected from this needs analysis be used to inform the
development of additional training materials for full implementation of JISC?

Conceptual and Methodological Approach
The conceptual and methodological approach of this study is based upon Clark and Estes’
(2008) gap analysis framework, which divides needs or influences for organizational
improvement into three universal categories: knowledge (K), motivation (M) and organizational
resources (O). This KMO paradigm allows for a complete and systematic way to uncover the
root cause of performance gaps and to identify possible solutions.
The gap analysis process is divided into six stages as shown in Figure 1.
Figure B: Adapted from Clark and Estes (2008)

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

90
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis process utilizes various research methods for the
collection and analysis of data. Gap analysis studies can utilize either qualitative research
methods, which include observations, surveys, interviews, document analysis, and focus groups,
or gap analysis studies may use quantitative research methods and mixed methods, which
combine qualitative and quantitative methods in one study. This case study utilized a mixed
methods approach with qualitative collection of data through open-ended interviews with
Jewish/Israel studies departmental leaders, administrators and teacher participants, along with
quantitative survey of all participants. Data analysis consisted of thematic coding of qualitative
data triangulated with the quantitative survey data.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population of focus for this study was the JS department administrators
and teachers of JCS. For certain aspects of the data collection (e.g. the survey section), total
population participation was the goal, with a limited sub-set of the total population being
desirable for in-depth interviews and an even more limited range for observations. There is a
total of 16 employees in this department; one rabbinic director, two school rabbis, two
department chairs, and eleven Judaic/Israel studies instructors. A description of Judaic/Israel
personnel is as follows: one male rabbinic director who has been at the school for decades and is
a co-creator of the school’s current Judaic studies curriculum and who is responsible for
overseeing the Judaic department and all religious/Jewish programing at the school; one male
upper-school Rabbi who has been at the school for three years and who is responsible for Jewish
life activities in the upper school; one male middle-school Rabbi who has been at the school for
one year and is responsible for Jewish life activities in the middle-school; one upper-school male
Judaic department co-chair who has been at the school for three years who assists the rabbinic
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

91
director in supervising the Judaic faculty; one middle-school male Judaic department chair who
has been at the school for seven years and who supervises the Judaic faculty; four middle-school
Judaic/Israel teachers (one male and three female); eight upper-school Judaic/Israel instructors
(five male and three female). (See table S for data collection by stakeholder).
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
This study was a case study of JCS, and therefore its findings are not being generalized
making a non-probability, purposeful, convenience sampling appropriate (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). For surveys, the optimum is to obtain the maximum of potential participants’
perspectives (Fink, 2013), and it was therefore the goal of this study to have all 15 of the current
Judaic/Israel department personnel participate in the survey section of this study. The rational for
this sampling approach was based on garnering the broadest and most diverse amount of data
from as many pertinent people within the organization who have the information necessary to
answer the study’s research question, and therefore the desired sample to be recruited was the
total population. The method of recruitment was to enlist participants at the end of a JS
symposium that was to be conducted at JCS. The survey was administered electronically to
encourage the greatest participation and constituted the beginning of the data collection process.
A $10 gift card to Juice Crafters was given as incentive for participating in the survey.
Criterion 1. For this study, the researcher selected currently employed JCS JS senior
administrators who are responsible for the overall JS curriculum/program development and
supervision of teachers. The rationale for choosing these individuals to participate in this survey
was based on the key administrative roles that they play in establishing the institutional
framework in which the Judaic/Israel studies/activities of the school takes place. This researcher
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

92
wished to better understand the dynamics that exist between organizational elements (models and
settings) and the knowledge and motivational needs of the JS faculty; therefore, these
organizational facilitators were positioned to provide unique perspectives that can shed light on
this study’s research questions.
Criterion 2. This researcher also chose currently employed Judaic/Israel studies
department chairs who assist in curricular/programing implementation and the supervision of
faculty. The rationale for choosing these individuals to participate in this survey was based on
the key supervisory roles that they play in overseeing Judaic/Israel studies activities at the
school. This researcher wished to better understand the knowledge and motivational needs of the
Judaic/Israel studies faculty; therefore, these direct supervisors were positioned to provide
unique perspectives that can shed light on this study’s research questions.
Criterion 3. This researcher also chose JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers. The rationale
for choosing these individuals to participate in this survey was based on the key instructional
roles that they play in implementing the Judaic/Israel studies curriculum and activities at the
school. This researcher wished to better understand the knowledge and motivational needs of
these Judaic/Israel studies faculty in relation to organizational influences, so their perspectives
are vital to answering this study’s research questions.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
Non-probability, purposeful, convenience sampling was used with the goal of obtaining
the perspectives of a subset of Judaic/Israel personnel at different levels of the Judaic/Israel
department hierarchy. The rationale for this sampling approach was based on Merriam and
Tisdell’s (2016) recommendation to be sure to sample the various key people within the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

93
organization who have the information needed to answer the research questions, rendering a
random sampling technique inappropriate. The total sample recruited for interviews was seven
personnel from both the middle and upper schools which included one Rabbinic director, two
Judaic/Israel department chairs, three high school Judaic/Israel instructors (one male and two
female) and one middle-school Judaic/Israel instructor. The rationale for having one teacher
from the middle-school and three from the upper-school was based on the demographic makeup
of each one. The middle-school has about 200 students, while the upper-school has about 500.
The interviews took place at the Israel Center of JCS. Participants received a $20 gift certificate
to Juice Crafters as incentive for participating in the interview section of the study.
Criterion 1. Participants must be JCS Judaic/Israel studies senior administrators who are
responsible for the overall Judaic/Israel curriculum/program development and supervision of
teachers. The rationale for choosing these individuals to participate in study interviews was
based on their role in creating and supervising the current Judaic/Israel studies curriculum at
JCS. The focus of the interview questions was to better understand the knowledge and
motivational influences and needs of Judaic/Israel educators at the school. Therefore, these
individuals’ past involvement with curriculum development and teacher supervision put them in
a good position to answer the types of questions that were included in the interview protocol.
Criterion 2. Participants may also be Judaic/Israel studies department chairs who assist
in curricular/programing implementation and the supervision of faculty. The rationale for
choosing these individuals to participate in interviews was based on the key supervisory roles
that they play in overseeing Judaic/Israel studies activities at the school. This researcher wished
to better understand the knowledge and motivational needs of the Judaic/Israel studies faculty;
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

94
therefore, these direct supervisors were positioned to provide unique perspectives that could
potentially shed light on this study’s research questions.
Criterion 3. Participants may also be JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers. The rationale
for choosing these individuals to participate in interviews was based on the key instructional
roles that they play in implementing the Judaic/Israel studies curriculum and activities at the
school. This researcher wished to better understand the knowledge and motivational needs of
these Judaic/Israel studies faculty in relation to organizational influences; therefore, their
perspectives are vital to answering this study’s research questions.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
To answer the questions that this study seeks to explore, data will be collected utilizing
multiple data collection methods for the purpose of triangulation (Fielding and Fielding, 1986),
which involves comparing the data collected using different methods against each other to ensure
accurate results and credibility. This use of multiple methods increases the credibility of the
study’s conclusions (Maxwell, 2013), and helps to achieve “complementarity and expansion”
(Green, 2007, pp. 101-104) of data, which means that it reveals different aspects of the
phenomenon being studied. This study will therefore utilize the following methods: survey,
interviews, and document/artifact collection, and the following section delineates their individual
use’s rationale and the procedures that will be employed in the use of these methods.
The rationale for utilizing surveys is based on Fink (2012), who states that it is a good
way of measuring attitudes, beliefs and values, which is one of the primary focuses of this study
as it pertains to the motivational influencers of JCS faculty’s attributions and level of utility
values in relation to teaching Judaic studies. Based on Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) description,
this study could be classified as “action research” (p. 49), which according to Stringer (2014) is a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

95
common way for educators to make sense of a certain dynamic or problem occurring in their
workplace. Additionally, Irwin and Stafford (2016) state that when conducting action research
within an educational organization context, it is important to “leverage the expertise” (p. i) of
others both within and outside the organization in order to “ensure a high-quality survey
instrument” (p. i). Based on these recommendations, and being that this survey will be
administered at Jewish Community Schools where I am a member of the administration and
faculty, development of the survey follows Irwin and Stafford’s (2016) five step collaborative
survey development process, which includes identifying topics, identifying relevant, existing
survey items, drafting new or adapted survey items, reviewing draft survey items with
stakeholders and content experts, and refining the draft survey items with cognitive interviewing
pre-testing.
Interviewing is a useful method of collecting information that cannot be easily observed,
such as a person’s unique perspective, feelings and knowledge, or for uncovering details about
events that have happened in the past (Patton, 2002). This makes interviewing a good method
for exploring the types of questions that this study seeks to answer as they relate to JCS faculty’s
knowledge and motivation influencers, as well as the organization’s historical dynamics that are
relevant to its cultural models and settings, which help to form the basis of the conceptual model
that this study is based on.
Finally, organizational documents and artifacts are collected throughout this study as a
way of contextualizing, deepening and validating the data generated through the study (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). In addition to the above methods, continuous field notes and a researcher’s
reflective diary/log will be kept throughout the data collection process, which are recommended
to assist the researcher in detecting nuanced information generated during the interviews and
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

96
observations, and to help detect any biases or reactivity that the researcher may bring into the
collection, processing and analysis of the study’s data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). (See table S for
data collection method by stakeholder group.)
Table S: Data Collection Method by Stakeholder Group
J/I Studies
Administrators
J/I Studies
Department
Chairs
J/I Studies
Faculty
(Total)
J/I Studies
Faculty (Interviewed)
Survey * * * *
Interviews * * *

Surveys
The survey used in this study was administered in English and can be found in appendix
A. It included 15 items that explored various issues relating to the conceptual framework that
this study is based upon. It does this by attempting to elicit responses from participants that
relate to their beliefs and attributions about the value of Jewish education and towards using
progressive pedagogical methods in its teaching. Additionally, it attempted to garner responses
concerning their attributions about student engagement and satisfaction with Judaic studies. The
validity and reliability of the survey items are assured by first and foremost making sure that the
survey is administered in a manner that is consistent with the accepted ethical norms of
qualitative research (Miraim & Tisdell, 2016), and that survey items are properly formed and
aligned with the research questions and the study’s conceptual model (Maxwell, 2013). This
alignment was accomplished by utilizing Irwin and Stafford’s (2016) five step collaborative
survey development process mentioned above, which included the use of cognitive interviewing.
Within this part of the survey’s development process, the researcher conducted live interviews
with experienced Jewish educators utilizing the survey items as the interview questions, probing
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

97
the interviewee about their understanding of the items’ contents and intents. Information from
these interviews was then used to make any necessary adjustments to the wording and or
structure of the survey items. Additionally, survey results were triangulated with the other data
gathered using other methods as a way of increasing validity and reliability.
Interviews
The goal of the researcher was to conduct one separate interview with approximately
seven individuals at JCS including the rabbinic director, two Judaic/Israel department chairs,
three high school Judaic/Israel instructors, and one middle-school Judaic/Israel instructor. Based
on the guidance of Weiss (1994), the interviews were designed to last an hour, as this is enough
time to gather rich data without overwhelming both the interviewer and interviewee. These
interviews were formal and were conducted at the school, during school hours, by the researcher.
The interview protocol used for this study was semi-structured, with interview questions being
open-ended and in alignment with the research questions and conceptual framework of the study
(see appendix B). This approach is recommended (Bogdan & Bilken, 2007; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016) for producing rich data that uncovers the interviewee’s opinions and perspectives on topics
being explored. In the case of this study, these were questions that attempt to tease out the
participant’s feelings and opinions about Jewish education in general, and Judaic studies
practices and student engagement at JCS. Additionally, some of the interview questions
attempted to uncover the participants’ openness to change as it relates to progressive pedagogical
methods such as the flipped class approach and organizational factors that relate to their ability
to implement new curriculum, which are all aspects of the study’s conceptual framework.
Possible issues that could affect the validity of the data gathered using interviews include
researcher’s bias and reactivity of respondents to the presence of the interviewer (Maxwell,
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

98
2013). As Maxwell (2013) recommends, these “validity threats” (p. 123) were considered in the
design, procedures, administration and analysis of the interview data as a precaution to prevent
such biases from influencing the study’s findings. Although as Maxwell (2013) states, it is
impossible to remove these threats completely, nor is there a need to do so. The researcher’s
awareness of them is sufficient to account for their influence on the data, along with other
precautions such as the triangulation of results that was mentioned above, along with peer review
of the researcher’s conclusions. These precautions were employed in all aspects of the study
including in the data analysis phase, along with the keeping of extensive researcher’s notes and a
diary/log that was used to identify any existing biases on the part of the researcher, or reactivity
on the part of the participants, as recommended by Maxwell (2013) and Merriam and Tisdell
(2016).
Documents and Artifacts
As a way of supporting and enriching the other data collection methods of this study,
documents and artifacts were collected throughout the study process. Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) recommend that these come from a variety of sources including public, private and
researcher generated. In this study these documents and artifacts included public records such as
the organization’s mission statement, portrait of the graduate, and the JCS web site, which are all
publicly available, personal documents such as current curricular materials, classroom teacher
handouts and lesson plans, Judaic studies departmental meeting notes and agendas, and
researcher generated documents such as interview notes and research memos.
Data Analysis
The Jewish/Israel education for the 21
st
Century study consisted of three data collection
components including survey, interviews, and artifact/document collection. Following is a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

99
description of how analysis and its reporting was conducted and accomplished. The survey data
analysis phase utilized descriptive statistics of responses, which relate to the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs/influences outlined in the study’s conceptual framework,
and when possible, the mean, mode, and standard deviation for survey responses were figured.
Before calculating these statistics, the data set generated by the survey was cleaned by leaving
any missing data blank, as well as removing and leaving blank any conflicting data that could not
be easily identified as an obvious mistake. Then statistical calculations, including central
tendency and nominal data, were attempted to demonstrate the percentage of Jewish/Israel
studies faculty’s (JISF) positive and negative responses to survey items as they relate to
validation of assumed KMO factors within Jewish Community Schools (JCS). The ratio of
positive versus negative answers were used to understand the general opinions of participants in
relation to the study’s research questions and conceptual framework. Through the process of
triangulation, survey analysis results serve as a foundation for deepening the analysis of the
interview data generated. This triangulation was attempted once a preliminary data analysis
from interviews was complete, allowing statistical data from the surveys to be utilized to identify
any inconsistencies or potential themes that could help to further interview data analysis and
conclusions.
The final analysis phase for interview data took place once all the interviews had been
completed. The researcher engaged in both reflective and analytic memo writing immediately
after every interview to help clarify and articulate possible insights, relationships and or themes
that could later be used within the analysis process. Additionally, a reflective researcher’s
journal was kept throughout the data collection process to gauge the researcher’s positionality
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

100
and for reflexivity as a way of documenting and recognizing potential biases and or external
influencers on the data collection and analysis process.
Qualitative data analysis was an iterative process, which involved the researcher
categorizing interview data using open coding categorized under conceptual framework axial
codes and included empirical and priori codes based on the conceptual framework and the
literate review. These open codes were then recorded in a codebook, with the intent of
generating statistical patterns that could help identify additional analytic and axial codes.
Finally, these analytic and axial codes were used to clarify and articulate potential patterns and
themes in relation to the validation or denial of the study’s assumed KMO influencers/needs.
For the sake of triangulation, the above-mentioned documents and artifacts collected throughout
the study were also analyzed during the qualitative data analysis process.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
As a qualitative study, the researcher must address the issue of its validity, reliability and
generalizability (Maxwell, 2013). Unlike quantitative research that generally attempts to
objectively test reality, qualitative research is generally attempting to holistically describe reality,
which is subjective (Creswell, 2013). This difference changes the way qualitative researchers
think and talk about issues of validity, reliability and generalizability (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The issue of validity, reliability, and generalizability of results is one that is
widely recognized in the literature about qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
literature asserts that due to the varying assumptive philosophical underpinnings of this research
methodology, and the social nature of data collection, their results are not intended to represent
“objective truths” (Maxwell, 2013, p.122), and therefore perhaps the use of terms such as
validity, reliability and, generalizability convey the wrong messages about qualitative research
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

101
results, in which “validity is relative” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 121). Being that qualitative research is
trying to describe reality, the questions remain; What is it that a study is describing, and how
well does it truly describe the phenomenon it purports to describe (Maxwell, 2013)? This led
researchers Lincoln and Guba (1985) to propose alternate words such as credibility,
dependability and transferability to describe qualitative research’s trustworthiness. The use of
credibility and trustworthiness is therefore used in this context in relation to this study, which
according to Merriam and Tisdell (2016) begins with conducting the research in an ethical
manner.
The central role of people in qualitative research, both as research instrument (the
researcher) and data sources (research participants), requires that special attention be paid to
ethical issues such as “personal disclosure, authenticity, and credibility of the research report; the
role of researchers… and issues of personal privacy” (Creswell, 2013, p. 94). This study
attempts to accomplish this task by adhering to the accepted ethical norms of qualitative research
recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), as well as by seeking the approval of the
University of Southern California’s institutional review board (IRB), as is thoroughly detailed in
the ethics section below. These ethical standards and procedures help to establish trust with
study participants, thereby increasing the quality and integrity of their interview responses and
other information they may share throughout the study process (Israel & Hay, 2006). Building
on the trust established through the ethicality of the study, the researcher engages in member
checking, a suggested strategy for increasing the credibility of qualitative research, in which the
transcripts of interviews and the researcher’s proposed thematic findings of the interviews are
shared post-study with interview participants in order to confirm with them that the transcripts
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

102
and findings as reported match their own perceptions and memory of the data correctly (Miles,
Huberman, & Saldana, 2014).
Also, within this study the researcher engages in an iterative process of accurately
articulating the purpose of the study, research questions, and its conceptual framework through
peer review and other research-based strategies such as familiarization with prior theory and
research, thought experiments, and the creation of a conceptual map (see above), which are all
meant to increase the credibility of the study (Maxwell, 2013). Maxwell (2013) describes how
designing qualitative research in the above manner helps to assure that the “underlining context
of assumptions” (p. 39) that it is based on are correct. Besides this benefit, the research
questions and conceptual framework are used in the formulation of all data collection methods,
instruments and protocols as a reminder and navigator that the researcher continually refers back
to in order to maintain alignment between them and the study procedures, activities, interactions,
data collection and analysis processes (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally,
interview questions are peer reviewed and are pilot tested with several experienced Jewish
educators who are not study participants to gaining their input on the wording and intent of the
questions in relation to the research questions. Finally, the conceptual framework and the entire
project is supervised and audited by the members of the researcher’s dissertation committee as a
way of increasing the overall credibility of the study (Creswell, 2013; Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Other dynamics stemming from the human factor of qualitative research that affect the
credibility and trustworthiness of its findings are research bias and reactivity, which relate to
how both the researcher’s own biases and the participants’ reactions to the researcher’s presence,
will also need to be addressed (Maxwell, 2013). In order to address these issues, together with
the member checking (Creswell, 2013) strategy mentioned above, the researcher uses other
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

103
research-based strategies for accounting for and limiting the effect of these dynamics by clearly
informing and reminding study participants of the high level of anonymity and confidentiality
afforded to them, thereby giving them the confidence to be as open and truthful in their
responses as possible. Additionally, triangulation (Fielding & Fielding, 1986) of data from
several collection types being employed in the study is used to compare their emerging topics as
a way of checking for consistency of themes between them (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally,
to account for possible researcher biases, the researcher engages in “reflexivity” (Creswell, 2013,
p.186), an ongoing process of self-refection, in order to “clarify the bias the researcher brings to
the study” (Creswell, 2013, p.202) by properly identifying and describing potential researcher
biases (i.e. position at the school, Orthodox Jewish affiliation) prior to conducting the study.
This reflexivity is accomplished and documented through the researcher keeping a
detailed reflective journal throughout the study, including during the interviews and
observations, to gauge or understand how these biases might have influenced either participants’
responses or the analysis of data. The researcher’s notes and journal are referenced before,
during and after the analysis of the data in order to better understand how the researcher’s own
personal background, position and biases have helped to shape both the “direction of the study”
(Creswell, 2013, p. 186) and the subsequent interpretation of the data (Creswell, 2013; Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Finally, organizational documents and artifacts are collected throughout this
study as a way of further validating its data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Continuous, transparent
documentation of procedures and steps are kept in the researcher’s field notes and reflective
diary/log throughout the study to help detect any biases or reactivity that the researcher may
bring into the study and to increase its credibility (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Yin, 2009).

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

104
Validity and Reliability
In quantitative research validity denotes how accurate a testing instrument is in
measuring what it purports to measure, whereas reliability denotes the extent to which a test
produces consistent results (Salkind, 2016). Although this study is a qualitative study, it does
employ the use of a quantitative measurement tool in the form of a survey; however, due to the
study having an extremely small sample who are all purposefully chosen by convenience,
establishing sufficient quantitative validity is not really feasible (Kurpius & Stafford, 2005), and
the survey results are therefore intended for the sole purpose of triangulation (Green, 2007) of
the survey data with the study’s qualitative data in order to increase that data’s credibility
(Maxwell, 2013). Triangulation is also recommended in order to deepen the researcher’s
understanding of emerging themes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), which also helps the qualitative
credibility mentioned above. Successfully using the data from the surveys to enhance the
researcher’s understanding of the study’s qualitative data should also increase the validity of the
survey within the context of this study.
A survey is used to provide a “numeric description of trends, attitudes, or opinions of a
population by studying a sample of that population” (Creswell, 2013, p.155). In this study the
survey used is developed by the researcher utilizing Irwin and Stafford’s (2016) five step
collaborative survey development process outlined in the previous section. This process
involves cognitive interviewing, which is a sort of pilot testing of the survey items in the form of
an interview with several experienced Jewish educators who are not study participants to gain
their input on the wording and intent of the questions in relation to the research questions and the
conceptual framework as a way of increasing the survey’s validity and reliability (Irwin &
Stafford, 2016). Additionally, as stated above in the data collection section, the validity and
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

105
reliability of the survey items are improved by it being administered in an ethical manner
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Also, as a precaution, the researcher is not present at the time the
survey is administered to have a decreased reactivity effect (Maxwell, 2013) on the participants
due to their familiarity with the researcher. The survey is also properly aligned with the research
questions and the study’s conceptual model (Creswell, 2013), which, when coupled with the
above mentioned reflective practices that have been built into the entire design and
administration of this study, and along with the oversite and peer review provided by the
researcher’s doctoral committee and peers, the validity and reliability of this survey to provide
data that can be used for the sake of triangulation, and broadening of the qualitative data, should
be achieved to an adequate degree.
Ethics
It is the primary researcher’s responsibility to ensure that no damage comes to any of the
participants through their participation in the study, its analysis or publication. Towards this end,
this study is guided by accepted ethical practices in the field of education, such as Glensne,
(2011) who lists five standards by which to ensure that study participants are adequately
protected. These include the following: sufficient information about the study is given;
participants must be able to withdraw at any time without fear of penalty; all unnecessary risks
must be eliminated; the benefits must outweigh the risk; and experiments should only be
conducted by competent researchers.
Tracy (2013) raises the concern of a “relational ethic” (p. 245) which can exist between a
researcher and a subject such as employer/employee. As the primary researcher, this represents
another area where care is taken to ensure that any relationship that might exist between the
researcher and a potential study participant does not translate into any coercion on the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

106
researcher’s part to force someone to do or say something they do not want to, or to not
participate at all without fear of penalty. This relational aspect of research also necessitates
sensitivity to how research questions and methods might impact a subject’s emotions (Merriam
& Tisdale, 2016). This requires the researcher to consider how interview and survey questions
may possibly trigger certain responses within the study subjects.
Lastly, the researcher has the responsibility to clearly and fully communicate the study’s
procedures and methods to potential participants, including time requirements, potential risks
and benefits, compensation, privacy protection details, and informed consent (Kruger & Casey,
2009). This study’s approach to informed consent was to have study participants fill out an IRB
approved informed consent form which does the following: specifies that participation is
voluntary; all personal identification data will be kept confidential; asks participants for
permission to be recorded; informs participants of the potential risks and benefits of
participation; notifies participants of any compensation for their involvement, and describes how
the data will be treated and destroyed (Glensne, 2011). Audio recordings generated during this
study were done using a digital recorder (iPhone X) and then immediately (within an hour)
transferred to an external hard drive located at the Israel Center of JCS, where it was kept locked
up in a secure office until it was transcribed within a month and then permanently erased from
the hard drive.
The setting of this case-study is the Jewish Community School (JCS). The primary
researcher’s relationship to JCS is serving as its director of their Israel Center, which oversees all
Israel education at the school, including aspects of Jewish/Israel studies curriculum development.
As part of the Israel center’s curriculum development work, it has been developing JISC, an
innovative new Jewish/Israel studies curriculum that utilizes 21st century educational principles
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

107
and approaches, such as game-based learning and the flipped class model. The primary
researcher’s role as JISC’s chief developer could pose a potential bias towards the participants’
responses to the interview and survey questions, which, according to Merriam and Tisdale
(2016) is an important relational bias that a researcher must be on the lookout for. Also, due to
similar power dynamics discussed by Rubin and Rubin (2012), it is conceivable that the survey
and study might be misconstrued by participants as being connected to JCS professional
development. Therefore, great care was taken by the researcher to not imply to any participant
that they are being pressured to participate in the study portion, and they were specifically told
that they are not required to participate, at no risk of harm or loss to them or their position.
Other biases for the researcher to be cognizant of related to the types of roles that Glesne
(2011) lists, such as intervener/reformer and friend, which are both applicable in this case being
that one of the curriculum’s possible uses is to help reform the school’s Jewish/Israel studies
programs, and the researcher does have friendly relationships with many of the Jewish/Israel
studies faculty. Lastly, the primary researcher’s Orthodox Jewish affiliation is another factor
that could both be a cause for concern in terms of bias and participant reactivity to the researcher.
This, according to Rubin and Rubin (2012), requires the researcher to be cautious about limiting
the expression of his own point of view during interviews and in interpreting data. A strategy
that these authors recommend to deal with these potential biases threats is the keeping of a
thorough researcher’s journal throughout the process, which this researcher adhered to in order to
be able to refer back to as a reflection on the experience, and in order to see if any potential
biases came through in the research.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

108
Limitations and Delimitations
The purpose of this study was to better understand the KMO needs of JCS JS faculty to
help them achieve their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation, and the design of the study
was guided by this purpose. This narrow purpose is therefore a limitation of this study because it
deals with unique questions in the context of one organization with a very specific demographic
that is not readily generalizable to others. However, other religious day schools may benefit
from the application of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis method demonstrated here, as well
as the resulting findings and recommendations sections in expanding their perspectives on the
types of needs and influences affecting student engagement in religious studies, teacher
motivation, implementing a flipped class curriculum and creating a learning organization
sufficient to support 21st century curricular change efforts.
A second limitation of this study is the scope being limited to the analysis of one group of
stakeholders at JCS. Although to answer this study's two research questions, it made the most
sense to limit it to JS faculty, every member of JCS is vital to the success of its mission,
including JS, so it would have been more enlightening to include more stakeholder groups in the
study. However due to the constraints of the doctoral process, this narrow focus was necessary.
A third limitation is that this study being conducted by the researcher at his place of
employment created certain challenges that forced changes to be made to the initial study
design. These changes included the forgoing of the JS symposium that was meant to happen
before the study surveys were administered and in-class observations of JS teachers who
participated in interviews. Although all 15 possible survey participants did so, and extensive
interviews were conducted on a broad sampling of JS faculty, having participants be introduced
to JISC materials at the symposium would have allowed for richer questions that probe their
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

109
actual thoughts on JISC, and observations would have served for another method of
triangulating the interview data.
Lastly, the issue of researcher bias is one that, however much accounted for, cannot be
discounted. Based on journal notes, the researcher’s position in the school, and role in JISC
development, it is possible that some interview participants said things they thought the
researcher wanted to them to say, or perhaps others were overly cautious and would not fully
share their true opinions. It is the opinion of the researcher, based on the experience of
conducting the interviews, that these are real possibilities.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

110

Table 6: Summary of Assumed KMO Needs for JS Teachers' Implementation of JISC

Assumed Influences Organizational Behavior
Research Literature
Theoretical Foundation
Knowledge (Declarative)

Teachers need to
develop a meaningful
understanding of both
the sacred vision and
complex realities of
Israel, past, present,
and future to
successfully teach
Israel Education in a
pluralistic environment.
(Factual)

Teachers need to be
able to identify and
understand best
practice that might
serve as exemplars or
points of reference for
Israel Studies.
(Conceptual)

Grant, 2011; De Jong &
Van Driel, 2004; Harris
& Sass, 2007; Hanushek,
Kain, & Rivkin, 1998;
Van Driel and Berry,
2010; Baumert, Kunter,
Blum, Brunner, Voss,
Jordan, Tsai, 2010

Baumert, Kunter, Blum,
Brunner, Voss, Jordan,
Tsai, 2010; De Jong &
Van Driel, 2004; Harris
& Sass, 2007; Hanushek,
Kain, & Rivkin, 1998;
Pomson, & Deitcher,
2009; Van Driel and
Berry 2010

Clark & Estes,
2008; Krathwohl,
2002; Shulman,
1986

Clark & Estes,
2008; Krathwohl,
2002; Shulman,
1986

Knowledge (Procedural)

Teachers need training
in utilizing the flipped
classroom method and
to model its use in their
own learning process.

Hanushek, Kain, &
Rivkin, 1998; Van Driel
and Berry, 2010;
Vaughan, 2014

Clark & Estes,
2008; Krathwohl,
2002; Shulman,
1986

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

111
Knowledge (Metacognitive)

Teachers need to
develop understanding
of students’ learning
difficulties and
misunderstandings,
based on questions
posed by students in
class.

Based on their
pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK),
teachers need to know
how to use critical
teaching moments
occurring in the
classroom to best handle
these opportunities, and
to better integrate vital
information.

Teachers need to reflect
on their actual teaching
to develop insights about
students’ learning
difficulties.

Del Carlo,
Hinkhouse, & Isbell,
2010; Valli, 1997;
Van Driel, de
Jong, & Verloop, 200
2; Van Driel and
Berry, 2010

Park,
& Oliver, (2008b);
Hinkhouse, & Isbell,
2010

de Jong, & van
Driel, 2004

Clark & Estes, 2008;
Cochran-Smith and
Lytle, 1993; Dewey,
1933; Liston and
Zeichner, 1990;
Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer,
2011; Rueda, 2011

Clark & Estes, 2008;
Dewey, 1933; Cochran-
Smith and Lytle, 1993;
Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer,
2011; Rueda, 2011

Clark & Estes, 2008;
Dewey, 1933; Cochran-
Smith and Lytle, 1993;
Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer,
2011; Rueda, 2011

Motivation (Self-efficacy)

Teachers should possess a
perceived usability of new
educational technologies,
as well as self-efficacy in
using that technology to
increase their acceptance
of the new technology.

Holden, & Rada,
(2011)

Bandura, 1997

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

112
Motivation (Utility Value)

Teachers’ beliefs about
teaching and learning
should be in alignment
with their perceived value
of new curriculums for
those beliefs to play a role
in increasing the
successful implementation
of those curriculums.

Teachers need to be
motivated by their own
interest, enjoyment or
perceived value of
education to nurture a
more student-centered
learning environment.

Bonner, Hastie,
Sprinkle, & Young,
2000; Gilheany, 2013;
Roehrig, & Kruse,
(2005).

Bonner, Hastie,
Sprinkle, & Young,
2000; Katz, & Shahar,
2015; Roehrig, &
Kruse, 2005

Bandura, 1997; Clark
& Estes,
2008; Eccles &
Wigfield, 1995;
Mayer, 2011

Bandura, 1997; Clark
& Estes,
2008; Eccles &
Wigfield, 1995;
Mayer, 2011
Motivation (Attribution)

Teachers need to reflect
how their pre-conceived
notions about their
students can influence
student learning.

Teachers need to expect
that their implementation
of new strategies and
approaches in education
will have a positive effect
on student learning for
them to implement those
strategies and approaches
more often.

Brady, & Woolfson,
2008; Evans, 2014

Foley, 2011

Mayer, 2011;
Weiner, 1985, 2005

Mayer, 2011;
Weiner, 1985, 2005
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 113

Organizational Barriers (Cultural
models)

There is a need to increase
the culture of
organizational learning in
an organization to improve
that organization’s
capacity for reform.

Together with modeling
and reflection, there is a
need to foster a community
of learners among teachers
engaged in professional
development to increase
changes in practice and
knowledge.

Bailey, 2000; Thacker,
Bell, & Schargel,
2009; Kazar, 2005

Akerson, Cullen, &
Hanson, 2009; Kazar,
2005

Clark & Estes, 2008;
Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001;
Rueda, 2011; Schein,
2010; Weick, 1995

Clark & Estes,
Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001;
2008; Rueda, 2011,
Schein, 2010; Weick,
1995

Organizational Barriers (Cultural
settings)

There is a need for
accountability to assure
organizational change.

There is a need for
effective organizational
change management for
the various aspects
necessary to adopt the
flipped-class approach to
be successfully
implemented.

Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004;
Hutchings, & Quinney,
2015; Kozulin, Gindis,
Ageyez, & Miller,
2003; Marsh & Farrell,
2015; Thacker, Bell, &
Schargel, 2009;
Quinney, 2015

Bolman & Deal; Clark
& Estes, 2008;
Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001;
Schein, 2010;
Vygotsky, 1978,
Weick, 1995
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 114

Summary
The assumed influences of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources
applicable to JCS’s Judaic studies teachers’ attainment of their performance goal was highlighted
and verified against theories and related literature. Subsequently, qualitative measures (e.g.,
questionnaires, interviews, and document analyses) as well as descriptive statistics derived from
survey data were used to validate assumed needs. The use of these methods and the findings that
emerge from their analysis are aimed to expand the in-depth understanding of the problem and to
generate potential solutions.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 115

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The results and key findings of this study are organized and presented in this
chapter according to the primary elements of the study’s conceptual framework and are
guided by its purpose and research questions. As stated in Chapter One, the purpose of the
study was to validate Jewish Community School (JCS) Judaic/Israel studies faculty
knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational needs for them to achieve their
stakeholder goal of full implementation of a new 21
st
century Judaic/Israel studies
curriculum (JISC) toward reaching JCS’s organizational goal of increasing student
satisfaction and engagement in these areas of learning. The guiding questions of this study
were the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for JCS
Judaic/Israel faculty to achieve full implementation of a new 21
st
century learner
centered Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th
(JISC)?
2. How can the data collected from this gap analysis be used to inform the
development of additional training materials for full implementation of JISC?
To answer these questions, a mixed method approach was utilized with quantitative and
qualitative data collected through survey, interviews, and review of organizational artifacts.
This chapter begins with a description of who participated in these surveys and interviews and
then moves on to present the study’s results in relation to the first research question. A
synthesis of these results is then presented in an attempt to answer this question and its
subsequent implications. Chapter Five will address the second research question with
recommendations for how to utilize the knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational
needs validated in this chapter to inform and achieve full implementation of JISC.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 116

Survey, and Interview Participants
The entire JCS Judaic faculty was invited to participate in the study through a survey
(Appendix A), and all 15 did so, representing 100% of the current target population. A select
group of seven teachers and administrators were further invited to participate in interviews.
This group included one male rabbinic director (RD), one male upper school Judaic studies
department chair (UJDC), one male middle school Judaic studies department chair (MJDC),
one female upper-school teacher/administrator who, in the past, was a primary contributor to
the school’s current Judaic studies curriculum (Teacher 4), one female upper-school Judaic
teacher who has been at the school for seven years (Teacher 1), one male upper-school
teacher in his first year of teaching and a former student of JCS (Teacher 2), and one male
middle school teacher who has been teaching at the school for ten years and a graduate of
JCS (Teacher 3). Originally, the intention was to interview six individuals, but the decision
was made to add an additional interview during the study to include the voice of Teacher 2
who was not part of the organization when the study was first designed. This researcher felt
this additional teacher would bring a unique perspective to the study based on being both a
first-year teacher in the school and a graduate of JCS.
The survey was originally designed to be administered at the end of a Judaic/Israel
studies symposium where faculty would be introduced to and would learn about some
aspects of JISC. Due to various challenges, primarily being opposition to the concept by the
rabbinic director, the survey was revised slightly so it did not reference the symposium
which did not take place. Instead, the researcher could introduce the survey and its purpose
to the Judaic/Israel studies faculty members during departmental in-service meetings at the
start of the school year. This researcher did so during two 20-minute presentations, one for
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 117

the upper school faculty and then one for the middle school faculty. At each presentation, it
was explained that the survey was voluntary and was aimed at helping in the development of
training materials and strategies for implementation of new Judaic/Israel curriculum in
community day schools. At the conclusion, faculty were given time to ask questions or state
concerns and were told to expect an e-mail with a link to the online survey. The survey was
electronically delivered via an e-mail link the following day, and all 15 responses were
received within approximately two months of being sent out.
Survey Results
Within this section the quantitative statistical results of the surveys administered to
participating JCS Judaic faculty are presented and explained and are primarily meant to serve
as a method for triangulating with the interview data collected. In this section the data from
the survey’s results are categorized by knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
needs. As these areas are interrelated, many of the survey questions touch upon or attempt to
solicit information that pertains to one or more of the KMO areas. Here, this data is
categorized by the primary thrust of the questions; however, their sub-section subtleties are
discussed and analyzed later where and when it adds clarity to this researcher’s understanding
of the qualitative data within the conceptual framework of the study. Later, when data from
the interviews are presented, patterns and themes that emerge from them are cross reverenced
with the survey data to help confirm or deny analysis of the qualitative data.
Knowledge Survey Results
Meta-Cognitive Knowledge. Various survey items attempted to validate knowledge
(K) needs. These K needs, as described in Chapter Two, are divided by Krathwohl’s (2002)
four K types described as factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. Since the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 118

rationale for utilizing a survey in this study was based on Fink’s (2012) assertion that survey
is a good method for measuring attitudes, beliefs and values, many of the K items in the
survey go to uncovering meta-cognitive knowledge, which relates to these attitudinal factors.
Question two (Appendix A) asked participants their opinion on the level of academic rigor
they believe Judaic/Israel (J/I) studies should have. Since J/I studies differ from other
academic disciplines, in that they include religious and affective aspects in their expected
outcomes, balancing the academic with the religious/affective aspects of J/I courses is
something all Judaic/Israel studies teachers are tasked with doing. Depending on which side
of the academic/religion spectrum a teacher leans towards could indicate their attitudes
toward J/I studies as well as their own motivation for teaching it. In addition, beliefs relating
to levels of rigor could relate to a teacher’s own self-efficacy with the pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK) within Judaic/Israel studies, with those more versed in it being more
inclined towards more rigorous academic standards in J/I studies then those who lack that
PCK.
As shown in Figure 1 below, there seems to be consensus among JCS J/I faculty that
their discipline should have the same level of rigor as any other, with 80% falling in either the
“somewhat” or “strongly” agree categories (46.7% somewhat agree and 33.3% strongly
agree), and only two of the respondents (13.3%) answering “strongly disagree.” It is
interesting to note that these two responses came from individuals who play or have played
very important roles in terms of making vital decisions pertaining to the J/I curriculum at JCS,
the former Judaic studies department chair who, according to artifacts was one of the main
originators of the school’s current J/I curriculum, and the middle school Rabbi who just joined
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 119

the school community this year and who acts as the spiritual leader of the middle school.

Figure 1: Survey Q2: J/I Faculty Opinions on Level of Academic Rigor in J/I Studies.
Another survey item that goes toward uncovering the meta-cognative knowledge of
J/I studies teachers is Q3, which asked respondents if they thought the dicipline should be
changed in any way and gave respondents space to write in how they would change
Jewish/Israel education if they wanted to. As displayed in Figure 2 below, out of the 15 total
responses, 60% chose “yes” and the other 40% chose “maybe,” with none choosing “no.”
This result indicates that the entire group is at least open to the idea that change is needed
within the dicipline at the school. The 13 written-in responses also indicate a general desire
to see a shift toward a more student centered 21
st
century approach with repetative themes
and words such as “less text study,” “innovation,” “relevancy,” and “technological tools.”
Mean = 4 Mode = 4 SD = 1
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 120

Figure 2: Survey Q3: J/I Faculty Opinions on Changing J/I Studies.
These results are consistant with the results of Q4 (Figure 3), which also went to
uncovering J/I faculties openess to change, but shifted towards not tampering “with traditional
methods.” Comparing the two sets of results (Q3 and Q4), however, there seems to be a little
less of a consensus with 55.3% choosing “Somewhat disagree,” 33.3% choosing “Strongly
disagree,” and 13.3% choosing “Somewhat agree,” indicating that when asked to think about
change in terms of departing from what has been done in the past, indviduals were not as
ready to change, but still largely open to change.
Figure 3: Survey Q4: J/I Faculty Opinions on Tampering with Traditional Methods.
Mean = 2 Mode = 2 SD = 1
Mean = 1 Mode = 1 SD = 1
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 121

Another survey item (Q10) that adresses meta-cognative knowledge relates to the
teachers’ beliefs about how much influence they believe they have on their students’ Jewish
identity. The results from this question (Figure 4) seem to indicate that all of the respondants
believe that they can impact their students’ Jewish identity to some extent, with an equal
amount (40% each) choosing either “Moderate” or “Somewhat,” and only the remaining 20%
choosing “Significant.”
Figure 4: Survey Q10: J/I Faculty Beliefs about their influence on Student’s Jewish Identity.
Procedural Knowledge. This study seeks to validate K needs relating to JISC
implementation, necessistating procedural knowledge of the flipped classroom model. Survey
Q13 (Figure 5) seeks to measure the extent to which J/I faculty are familiar with the flipped
class model. Based on these results it would appear that all have some knowledge about the
flipped model, at least according to their understanding of what it is, with 40% choosing
“Significantly,” 33.3% choosing “Moderately,” and another 26.7% choosing “Somewhat.”
The interview data described below reveal that their procedural knowledge of the flipped
model may not be acurate or fully developed, which will be disscussed in the section below.
Mean = 3 Mode = 2 SD = 0.8
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 122

Figure 5: Survey Q13; J/I Faculty Knowledge of the Flipped Class Model.
Motivation Survey Results
Attributions. As stated above, Fink (2002) suggests surveys for measuring attitudes
and beliefs, which would make them ideal for measureing a key component of this study’s
conceptual model, that being teachers’ attributions about why students do or do not enjoy or
engage in Judaic/Israel studies. Based on Mayer (2000), this attribution motivational theory
asserts that one’s beliefs about the extent to which his/her own agency plays a factor in
producing certain outcomes can have an impact on his/her motivation to adequately engage in
the activities meant to produce those outcomes. Various survey items were developed to
uncover attributions made by J/I faculty in relation to student satisfaction and engagement
with J/I studies, as well as how the religiously pluralistic nature of the school and attitudes
towards religion in the general American culture. One such item is Q1, which asked
participants to rate how difficult it is to teach J/I studies in a religiously pluralistic school
compared with teaching in one that is not. Based on results from this item (Figure 6), it
would appear that almost 3/4 of the respondents believe it to be more difficult, with 57.1%
choosing “Somewhat” and another 14.3% choosing “Moderately,” and only four respondants
(28.6%) choosing “Not at all.” These results could indicate that being a pluralistic school
Mean = 4 Mode = 5 SD = 1.2
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 123

may contribute to teachers’ attributions about student learning in J/I studies at JCS.

Figure 6: Survey Q1, J/I Faculty beliefs about the difficulty of teaching in a pluralistic school.
Two other survey items that reveal J/I faculty attributions toward student engagement
with J/I studies are Q7 & Q8, which respectively ask respondents to first compare today’s teens’
interest in J/I studies with their own when they were younger, and to then relate the overall
cultural attitudes towards religion in the greater American culture to student engagement in J/I
studies. Based on the results of both of these answers, it would appear that the respondents do
see a difference between the past and the present in terms of student engagement in J/I studies,
and do attribute the general culture’s attitude towards religion as contributing to these challenges.
Figure 7 below demonstrates the similarities between the statistical responses to both of these
questions, indicating a connection between them with 46.2% of respondents to Q7 choosing
“Somewhat,” and another 46.2% choosing “Moderately,” with only 7.7% choosing “Extremely”
interested. This aligns with the Q8 responses in which “Somewhat agree” and “Strongly agree”
both were chosen by 35.7% of respondents each, with only three respondents (21.4%) choosing
“Somewhat disagree,” and only 7.7% choosing “Strongly disagree” to whether they attribute
student challenges with J/I studies to the modern culture toward religion.
Mean = 2 Mode = 2 SD = 1
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 124

Figure 7: Survey Q7 & Q8: Teachers Attributions about Student Engagement in J/I Studies.
Utility Value. Based on Eccles and Wigfield (1995), utility value theory asserts that
motivation to engage or complete a task can be impacted by the value one places on that activity
and can include many aspects of value ranging from monetary gain to self-improvement or
values alignment. This study’s conceptual framework includes utility value as a potential
contributor to motivating teachers to implement new curriculum and is measured through several
survey items. Q5, for example, asks teachers to gauge the consistency of their enjoying teaching
J/I studies and reveals (Figure 8) that all the respondents do so, with 46.7% choosing “Most of
the time” and the other 55.3% choosing “All of the time,” which would indicate that they do see
Mean = 4 Mode = 5 SD = 2
Mean = 2 Mode = 2 SD = 1
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 125

value in teaching these classes. These results align well with Q6, which asks teachers to gauge
positive student behavior in their J/I classes (Figure 9), with 80% responding “A good bit of the
time” and the other 20% choosing “All of the time.” These results would indicate that both
teachers and students are enjoying these classes.

Figure 8: Survey Q5: How often teachers enjoy teaching J/I studies.

Figure 9: Survey Q6: Teacher’s Reporting on Student Behavior During J/I Studies Classes.
These excellent numbers reported by these teachers regarding their students’ engagement
do not completely align with their responses to rating student engagement in J/I classes. Here in
Q9, which focuses on student engagement, there is more of a disparity, with only two
respondents (13.3%) choosing 5 (extremely engaged), 46.7% choosing 4 (engaged), 33.3%
Mean = 3 Mode = 3 SD = 1
Mean = 3 Mode = 3 SD = 0
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 126

choosing 3 (sometimes engaged), and 6.7% choosing 2 (seldom engaged) (Figure 10). One
might question the relationship between good behavior measured in Q6 and Q9’s levels of
engagement in relation to classroom management and teacher vs student focused instruction.
This is a question that may relate to the development of JISC implementation training materials,
which is the subject of this study’s second research question and will be discussed later the
recommendations section in Chapter Five.

Figure 10: Survey Q9; Student Engagement Scale
As stated in Chapter Two, learning new things and a desire to improve one’s own sense
of mastery is included in utility value and as such, an interest in learning a set of knowledge and
or skills would constitute a utility value motivator. This is the aim of survey items Q12 and Q14
(Figure 11), which both ask the respondent to consider the level to which they are interested in
learning new pedagogical methods, and then specifically the flipped class model. The results
from Q12 indicate that there exists a very high interest and openness to innovative approaches,
with 53.3% choosing “Somewhat agree,” another 40% choosing “Strongly agree,” and one with
“No opinion.” Q14 indicates a relatively high interest and openness to the flipped class model,
Mean = 4 Mode = 4 SD = 1
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 127

with the largest group choosing “Somewhat agree” (60%). These numbers could inform the
motivational strategy of JISC implementation recommendations below in Chapter Five.
Figure 11: Survey Q12 and Q14; Teacher Utility Value of New Pedagogical Learning
Organization Survey Results
Cultural Modal. This and the following section of cultural setting will present the final
survey items Q11 and Q15, which targeted information relating to the conceptual framework’s
concepts of the organization’s cultural model and setting as discussed in Chapter Two. Q11
deals with the cultural model of JCS being a learning organization (a key concept of this study’s
conceptual model), which is one in which all members of the organization are included in the
Mean = 4 Mode = 4 SD = 0.6
Mean = 4 Mode = 4 SD = 0.6
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 128

continual development of the institution’s growth and learning as discussed in Chapter Two
above. This question asks J/I teachers to consider to what extent they are consulted on curricular
decisions within their department. The results (Figure 12) indicate that they are evenly split in
thirds, with 33.3% choosing “Frequently,” 33.3% choosing “Sometimes,” 26.7% choosing
always and one respondent (6.7%) choosing “Never,” which is unusual for this group based on
most of the other answers, as there seems to be either a total split or a general consensus either
way. This researcher offers a possible reason for this split in that there might be very different
opinions on this topic based on whether the respondent is a teacher or an administrator (they are
all included together in these numbers as they all took the same survey). Administrators are
obviously consulted on curricular matters as it falls within their traditional roles, so their answers
may be more predictable than the teachers, and this predictability is reflected in the individual
answers. Based on these results, it appears that the existence of JCS being a learning
organization is an area to explore in both the qualitative results section below as well as in the
recommendation section of Chapter Five, as it relates directly to how to best develop JISC
implementation goals, training materials, assessment tools, as well as accountability mechanisms
within the JISC implementation process.

Figure 12: Survey Q11: Cultural Model Learning Organization Item
Mean = 3 Mode = 2 SD = 0.9
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 129

Cultural Setting. The last survey item Q15 askes J/I faculty to consider the adequacy of
resources at JCS available to them for learning more about the flipped class model. As discussed
in Chapter Two, this potential resource availability would constitute an aspect of JCS’s cultural
setting. This aspect of cultural setting specifically relates to the conceptual framework’s concept
of organizational change management, because to fully manage the implementation of JISC
adequate resources would first need to be identified and put in place for full implementation to
be achieved. Surprisingly, the overwhelming response was “Unsure” (73.3%), which included
both the upper school and middle school rabbis as respondents. The 20% who responded “Yes”
were all senior administrators (the rabbinic director and both department chairs), and one
respondent (6.7%) chose “No.” These results (Figure 13) would indicate therefore that there is a
disconnect between how teachers and administrators see these things, a pattern that seems to be
repeating itself in the results that have been reported above. These are areas that will therefore
be explored at length within the qualitative data findings section that follow, and in the
recommendations section of Chapter Five, as they relate directly to the proper management of
the organizational change effort of full JISC implementation by 2020.

Figure 13: Survey Q15: Availability of Resources for Flipped Class Methodology
Mean = 3 Mode = 3 SD = 0.8
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 130

Qualitative Interview Results
Within this section the qualitative interview results of the seven participating JCS
Judaic faculty are presented and explained. Like in the above survey results section, these
qualitative results are categorized by their pertaining to the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) needs, which form the primary conceptual framework of this study.
Following Corbin and Strauss’ (2008) four stage qualitative analytical method of open coding,
a priori axial and analytical categorization coding, development of themes and patterns, and
the reaching of findings, the data collected through these interviews went through several
steps to reach the point where it could be presented as follows. In the open coding phases, the
transcripts of the interviews were first edited to reflect the accurate words used by
participants, as well as to delineate the interviewer’s voice from that of the participant’s.
Next, the researcher reread the interview transcripts while simultaneously adding review notes
as a coding process, which attempted to best capture the ideas being spoken about by
participants, specifically in relation to concepts found in the study’s conceptual model and/or
related to the study’s research questions. These codes formed the basis for the next phase in
which the researcher reviewed the open codes and categorized them according to a priori
codes from the conceptual model. This process was repeated for each of the seven transcripts,
with new open codes added to the codebook, categorized by the conceptual framework’s a
priori codes, and tabulated for each participant.
Once all the transcripts were coded in the above manner, the researcher analyzed,
consolidated, and regrouped the various codes generated through the first two stages into
analytic axial codes for identifying patterns and or themes that emerged, which could then be
used to validate the assumed KMO influencers or needs listed above (Table 4). These
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 131

patterns were used to develop themes, which could further assist in answering the study’s
research questions and in making recommendations based on the qualitative data. These
themes were again tabulated and analyzed in relation to the research questions and conceptual
framework that pertains to one or more of the KMO areas. The results of this tabulation and
analysis were used to create the charts and graphs depicting this data by the themes they
pertain to later in this section. In the findings section that follows, this researcher attempts to
reach conclusions based on the above data analysis from the interviews, which are also cross-
referenced with the above survey data to help triangulate the qualitative data themes used to
inform the recommendations suggested in Chapter Five.
KMO Themes Results
Figure 14 shows the KMO influencer themes (horizontal axis) by the categorized
number of times each one is mentioned by interview participants (vertical axis). The
tabulated results of the quantitative data analysis suggest that organizational influencers are
the most significant area of KMO needs for JCS faculty to achieve their stakeholder goal of
full JISC implementation, followed by knowledge and then motivational needs, and will
therefore be presented in this manner. In the sections that follow, the specific themes that
emerged for each of the KMO areas is presented and explained, with further comparisons,
analysis and conclusions discussed in the findings section below. Figure 15 displays the
complete list of the KMO themes (horizontal axis) by frequency of references within the
qualitative data (vertical axis).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 132

Figure 14: Comparison of KMO themes referenced in Qualitative Interviews
Figure 15: KMO needs themes by frequency of reference in qualitative interviews
0
50
100
150
200
250
Organizational Influencers Knowledge Influencers Motivational Influencers
KMO Needs Comparison
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
KMO Needs by Frequency of Qualitative Themes
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 133

Organizational Needs Qualitative Results
Figure 16 depicts the results of qualitative data analysis, which lead to the identification
of three organizational need themes based on assumed influencers from the study’s conceptual
model a priori codes (vertical axis). These needs were validated based on the number of times
these themes are referenced within statements made by interview participants (horizontal axis).
These organizational needs themes in order of highest frequency are the cultural model of JCS
being a learning organization, the cultural setting of accountability, and the cultural model of
pluralism. In the sections that follow, the data results used to validate these factors are presented
and explained for each organizational need.

Figure 16: Organizational Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes
Cultural Setting Accountability. Cultural setting is defined by Schein (2010) as
consisting of the official rules, processes and or procedures governing an organization and its
members’ conduct within the organizational context. One such set of rules applies to the level of
accountability within the organization. Accountability relates to expressed and or implied
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Organzational Cultural Model Pluralism
Organzational Cultural Setting Accountability
Organzational Cultural Model Learning
Organization
Organizational Needs
by Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes
Organizational Cultural Model
Learning Organization

Organizational Cultural Setting

Accountability

Organizational Cultural Model
Pluralism
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 134

contractual expectations between the providers of a service and the people charged with assuring
that these expectations are being met (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). In a school setting,
accountability dynamics exist between various stakeholder groups such as between
administrators and teachers, teachers and students, and between the school and parents. One of
the assumed organizational influencers within this study pertaining to JISC implementation is the
level of accountability that exists within Judaic studies at JCS, as understanding the
accountability dynamics within the school directly relates to the success of new curriculum
implementation. The themes that emerged from the qualitative data in relation to the cultural
setting of accountability at JCS are Organizational, Student, and Curricular Accountability.
The theme of Organizational Accountability refers to references within the qualitative
data in which participants raised issues about the extent to which the organization and its
representatives (school leadership, board, and or administrators) can be, or are being held
accountable for their supervision and or management of the Jewish/Israel (JS) aspects of the
school (e.g. poorly operationalized mission, or lack of administrative expertise in supervision of
JS). The theme of Student Accountability refers to references within the data in which
participants raised issues about a lack of accountability among students in JS (e.g. students
giving teachers the answers they think they want to hear, not what they really think or feel, or
gaming the system to get a better grade). Curricular Accountability refers to references within
the data in which participants raised curricular issues that relate to accountability (e.g. unclear
learning expectations or outcomes). Figure 17 shows the comparison of these three
accountability themes for each of the seven participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times
each one referenced one of these themes in their interview (vertical axis).

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 135

Figure 17: Cultural Setting Accountability Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
Cultural Model Pluralism. Per Schein (2010) cultural model refers to the unspoken
rules that dictate how things get done within an organization. Pluralism is one such aspect of
JCS’s culture in that it seeks to create a religiously pluralistic environment for the three main
segments of the Jewish community, Reform, Conservative and Modern Orthodox.
Understanding how pluralism may relate to organizational dynamics affecting JISC
implementation is one of the goals of this study. The three primary themes relating to pluralism
that emerged for the qualitative data analysis are as follows: issues relating to the school’s
mission, culture and identity; influences of societal and demographic shifts; and differing
stakeholder definitions, priorities and or visions for student academic success. Issues relating to
the school’s mission, culture and identity pertain to references within the qualitative data that
mention there being lack of clarity when it comes to the articulation or perception of what the
school stands for or represents. Influences of societal and demographic shifts pertain to
references within the qualitative data that mention societal and demographic changes that have
occurred over the past years that effect the pluralistic nature of the school, and in turn JS
engagement and relevancy. These two first themes lead to the last of the pluralism themes,
0
5
10
15
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Accountability Refrences by Interview
Participant
Organizational Student Curricular
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 136

which is that differing stakeholders have very different priorities or visions for student learning
outcomes and resource allocation (primarily time). Figure 18 shows the comparison of these
three pluralism themes for each of the seven participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times
each one referenced one of these themes in their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 18: Cultural Model Pluralism Needs Comparison by Interview Participants
Cultural Model Learning Organization. Schein (2010) states that the extent to which
an organization can be classified as a learning organization is directly correlated with the extent
to which that organization can effectively implement change. Therefore, determining to what
extent JCS is a learning organization applies directly to the research questions and achievement
of JCS JS faculty’s stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation. Three primary themes
emerged that represent both positive and negative indicators of the existence of JCS being a
learning organization. The positive indicator theme is Innovation, which represents references
within the data to openness to change and new ideas and methods within the JS department.
Opposite this theme is the theme of Resistance to Change, which represents specific references
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Cultural Model Pluralism
Needs Comparison by Interview Participants
Issues of School's Mission, Culture, identity Influences of Societal and Demographic Shifts
Differing stakeholder priorities / vision
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 137

within the data that indicate a general unwillingness to change aspects of the JS curriculum or
pedagogical approaches. Lastly, the theme of Non-Learning Organization Indicators refers to
references within the data to behaviors that do not fit the description of being a learning
organization (i.e. top down curricular changes, or lack of professional development training
follow up). Figure 19 shows the comparison of these three learning organization themes for each
of the seven participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times each one referenced one of
these themes in their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 19: Cultural Model Learning Organization Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
Knowledge Needs Qualitative Results
In the case of knowledge needs, interview questions were designed to gauge the current
level of JCS JS faculty knowledge in the areas of declarative, procedural and meta-cognitive
knowledge. References within the interviews that reflected JCS JS faculty possessing these
types of knowledge were tabulated. Unlike with organizational and motivational needs, here the
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Cultural Model Learning Organization
Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
Innovation Resistance to Change Non Learning Organization Indicators
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 138

higher the number of frequency of references (vertical axis) represents faculty possessing more
of this type of knowledge, and it being less of a knowledge need.
Figure 20 depicts the three aspects of the assumed knowledge needs or influencers from
the study’s conceptual model (horizontal axis), which were validated based on the qualitative
data analysis. These knowledge needs themes are the factual/conceptual knowledge
(Pedagogical Content Knowledge), procedural knowledge of 21
st
century methodology (flipped
class model), and meta-cognitive (reflective practices). In the sections that follow the data
results used to validate these factors are presented and explained for each of the knowledge
needs.

Figure 20: Knowledge Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework Axial Codes
Declarative Knowledge Needs Results. Declarative (factual/conceptual) knowledge
pertains to references within the qualitativedata of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK),
which refers to a teacher’s knowledge of pedagogical content and its effective teaching within
Judaic studies. Three primary themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to JCS JS
faculty’s PCK are Complete Rigorous Text Based Judaic Studies (CRTBS); Need for
Differentiation and Relevancy (NDR); Belonging to Something Greater (BSG). CRTBS refers
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Factual/Conceptual /
Pedagogical Content
Knowledge
Procedural 21st Century
Methodology
Meta Cognitive Reflective
Practices
Knowledge Needs by Axial Codes from Conceptual
Framework
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 139

to references within the qualitative data that reflect the extent of JCS JS faculty’s knowledge of
traditional approaches to JS that aim to help students reach a high level of literacy in Jewish
textual study, history and ritualistic practice. NDR refers to references within the qualitative data
that reflect JCS JS faculty’s knowledge of and beliefs that JS should be differentiated and made
relevant to students’ lives in order to increase learning and engagement. BSG refers to
references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty’s knowledge of and beliefs that
JS should result in the building of relationships both within and outside the classroom that
strengthen a student’s sense of being part of the Jewish people, Israel and the human race.
Figure 21 shows the comparison of these declarative knowledge themes for each of the interview
participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times each one referenced one of these themes in
their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 21: Factual/Conceptual Knowledge Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
Procedural Knowledge Needs Results. Procedural knowledge pertains to references
within the qualitative data of practical application and execution of 21
st
century methodologies,
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Factual / Conceptual Knowledge Needs
Comparison by Interview Participant
Complete Rigorous Text Based Judaic Studies Need for Differentiation and Relevancy
Belonging to Something Greater
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 140

and specifically the flipped class blended approach. Three primary themes that emerged from
the qualitative data relating to JCS JS faculty’s 21
st
century methodological procedural
knowledge are Technological Needs (TN); Need for Training or Mentorship (NTM); and Need
for Flipped Class Blended Approach Methodological Education (FAME). TN refers to
references within the qualitative data that reflect the need for JCS JS faculty procedural
knowledge of technologies used in the creation and teaching of flipped class lessons. NTM
refers to references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty’s prior training in the
flipped class method or their knowledge of available resources or mentors within the school that
they can access for help in learning about or implementing the flipped classroom approach.
FAME refers to references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty’s need for
further education in the flipped class method for them to be able to reach their stakeholder goal
of full JISC implementation. Figure 22 shows the comparison of these procedural knowledge
themes for each of the interview participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times each one
referenced one of these themes in their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 22: Procedural Knowledge Needs Comparison by Interview Participant

0
2
4
6
8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Procedural Knowledge Needs
Comparison by Interview Participant
Technological needs
Training & Mentorship
Need for Flipped Class Blended approach Methodological Education
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 141

Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Needs Results. Meta-Cognitive knowledge pertains to
references within the qualitative data about JCS JS faculty’s use or demonstration of reflective
practices within their teaching of JS. Three primary themes that emerged from the qualitative
data relating to JCS JS faculty’s reflective practice are Reflection on Practice (RP); Reflection
on Curriculum (RC); Reflection on Students (RS). RP refers to references within the qualitative
data that reflect JCS JS faculty reflecting on the delivery and instruction of JS. RC refers to
references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty reflecting on the appropriateness,
relevancy, or design of curricular materials. RS refers to references within the qualitative data
that pertain to JCS JS faculty reflecting on their students in relation to societal, cultural and or
demographic factors that may be influencing students’ sense of relevancy or engagement in JS.
Figure 23 shows the comparison of these meta-cognitive knowledge themes for each of the
interview participants (horizontal axis) by the number of times each one referenced one of these
themes in their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 23: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Needs Comparison by Interview Participant

Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
0
2
4
6
8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Needs
Comparison by Interview Participant
Reflection on Practice Reflection on Curriculum Reflection on Students
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 142

Motivation Needs Results
Two themes based on the assumed motivational needs or influencers from the study’s
conceptual model were validated based on the qualitative data analysis. As depicted in Figure
24, these themes (horizontal axis) in order of highest frequency of references within the
interviews (vertical axis) are faculty attributions (reasons) for lack of student engagement in JS
(negative influencer), and the perceived utility value that JCS JS faculty place on the teaching of
JS (positive influencer). In the sections that follow, the data results used to validate these factors
are presented and explained for each of the motivation needs.

Figure 24: Motivation Needs by Validated Conceptual Framework Axial Codes
Utility Value Needs Results. Generally, Utility Value refers to one’s perceived value of
performing an activity and relates to motivational influencers to generate sufficient energy to
successfully engage or complete that action (Clark & Estes, 2008). Specifically, in the case of
this study Utility Value pertains to references within the qualitative data about JCS JS faculty’s
perceived value of teaching JS. Three primary themes that emerged from the qualitative data
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Utility Value Attributions
Motivation Needs By Conceptual Framework Axial Codes
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 143

relating to JCS JS faculty’s utility value beliefs are Building Jewish Identity (BJI); Improving
Society through Jewish Education (ISJE); Jewish Communal Continuity (JCC). BJI refers to
references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty’s belief that JS helps to forge its
students’ Jewish identity, which is also a main theme of the school’s mission. ISJE refers to
references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty beliefs that JS helps to develop
the empathetic and moral abilities of its students, thereby contributing to the betterment of
society as a whole. JCC refers to references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS
faculty’s belief that JS helps to ensure the future communal and thus demographic growth and
continuity of the Jews as a distinct people and culture, which, as mentioned in Chapter Two, is a
major concern for American Jews. Figure 25 shows the comparison of these utility value
motivational themes for each of the interview participants (horizontal axis) by the number of
times each one referenced one of these themes in their interview (vertical axis).

Figure 25: Utility Value Motivational Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
Attributions Needs Results. Weiner (2005) theorizes that attributions made by an
individual connected to the anticipated results of their actions has a direct effect on their
motivation to successfully engage or complete that action. Specifically, in the case of this study,
0
2
4
6
8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Utility Value Needs
Comparison by Interview Participant
Improving Society Through Jewish Education Jewish Communal Continuity
Building Jewish Identity
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 144

Attributions pertains to references within the qualitative data about JCS JS faculty’s reasons for
students either not engaging sufficiently in JS or finding the subject irrelevant. Three primary
themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to JCS JS faculty’s attributional beliefs are
Demographic Factors (DF); Societal Factors Negatively Impacting Student Engagement in JS
(SNIE); and Lack of Strong School Communal Culture (LSCC). DF refers to references within
the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty’s belief that the demographic shifts that have
occurred at the school, with many more students coming from non-Jewishly committed homes
(see figure 32 below), is resulting in less engaged students in JS. SNIE refers to references
within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS faculty beliefs that cultural changes in American
society in general have contributed to JS being less appealing and therefore less engaging for
today’s students. LSCC refers to references within the qualitative data that reflect JCS JS
faculty’s belief that JCS overall lacks a strong sense of communal Jewish culture, which in turn
effects student engagement in JS. Figure 26 shows the comparison of these attribution
motivational themes for each of the interview participants (horizontal axis) by the number of
times each one referenced one of these themes in their interview (vertical axis).
Figure 26: Attributions Motivational Needs Comparison by Interview Participant
0
5
10
15
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Attributions Needs
Comparison by Interview Participant
MA Demographic factors (e.g. social economic and religious affiliations of general school population)
MA Societal Factors negatively impacting the relevancy of Jewish studies
MA Lack of stronger/clearer school culture/community
Teacher Teacher Teacher Admin. MSJDC USJDC RD
1 2 3 Teacher 4
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 145

Findings
In the following sections the above reported qualitative results will be further analyzed
and presented to reach conclusions relevant to the first of this study’s research questions, which
seek to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for JCS
Judaic/Israel faculty to achieve full implementation of a new 21
st
century learner centered
Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th
(JISC). Figure 27 depicts all the validated
KMO needs from the above qualitative results, with the primary themes for each of the KMO
influencers being Learning Organization for organizational needs, Procedural Knowledge of 21
st

century pedagogical methodology for knowledge needs, and Attributions for motivational needs.
In the sections that follow, findings for each of the KMO needs and their subsections will be
presented and substantiated by synopsis and direct quotations from the qualitative data. These
findings will form the basis for answering the second research question which seeks to
understand how these findings might inform the implementation of JISC, which will be
presented in the recommendations section in Chapter Five.

Figure 27: KMO Validated Needs Totals by Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes
14%
13%
28%
9%
11%
7%
18%
KMO Validated Needs Totals
by Conceptual Framework A Priori Codes
Accountability Pluralism Learning Organization Procedural
Meta-Cognitive Utility Value Attributions
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 146

Organizational Needs
Organizational needs refer to aspects of Jewish Community School’s (JCS) cultural
settings and models that would need to be considered and addressed in support of Jewish/Israel
(JS) faculty’s stakeholder goal achievement. Based on the qualitative data above, Figure 28
depicts the validated organizational needs that will need to be addressed for JCS JS faculty to be
able to fully implement JISC, with the extent to which JCS is a learning organization being the
primary need at 51%, followed by accountability issues at 25%, and dynamics related to
religious pluralism at 24%. In the sections that follow, each of these will be discussed separately
with comparisons between differing teacher and administrator perspectives also being discussed
where relevant to the findings and subsequent recommendations.
Figure 28: Organizational Needs by Qualitative Data References
Accountability Needs

Accountability is an essential aspect of any change effort (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Accountability needs refer to the potential accountability requirements necessary for JS faculty
to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation. Figure 29 depicts the three main
themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to issues of accountability with
25%
24%
51%
Organizational Needs by Qualitative Data References
Accountability Pluralism Learning Organization
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 147

organizational accountability at 54% of references, and curricular and student accountability
each at 23%. As explained further in this section, both curricular and student accountability may
be intertwined with each other, as well as both possibly being a direct outcome of a lack of
organizational accountability. Additionally, curricular and student accountability issues could be
used to rationalize the need for JISC implementation since JISC does address issues such as
clearly defined standards and learning outcomes, and improved relevancy and assessment
methodology.

Figure 29: Accountability Totals by Qualitative Data References
Organizational Accountability. Organizational accountability relates to the extent to
which JCS is itself accountable for its JS program, as well as the accountability of the Judaic
department leadership. These questions have a direct impact on JISC implementation as
teacher’s potential sense of a lack of organizational accountability would presumably have a
negative effect on their willingness to implement JISC, or to be held accountable to their
supervisors for JISC implementation. Examples from the qualitative data in support of this
assertion include statements by Teacher 1 in which she expresses her disappointment with the
new JS department chair saying “The department chair was appointed … for some reason, which
54%
23%
23%
Accountability Totals by Qualitative Data References
Organizational Student Curricular
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 148

no one knows why … He's very good at business … very good at administration, but he's
micromanaging. He's not creative. He really thinks that testing is the ultimate way to get a kid to
show you what they know. He has no sense of pedagogy and he's completely divorced from any
personal critique”. She goes on to say that he has poor rapport with the JS faculty and does not
represent their needs in the way other department chairs do their own constituents. She also
alludes to her suspicion that nepotism played a part in his appointment and therefore has very
little hope of anything changing. Further in the interview Teacher 1 reiterates her belief that
there is a lack of organizational accountability for JS at JCS that includes the rabbinic director,
the highest-level administrator for JS at the school. She sums her feelings up by saying:
So, this is what I'm saying ... The problem is not the material. The problem is the
people who are being hired to police the material and create the material and that nobody
else is stopping them. There's no accountability here. … [name of rabbinic director] …
can do whatever … I mean I have been here for seven years and nobody's changing.
In both examples above Teacher 1 is expressing a lack of respect for the competency and
pedagogical expertise of the JS department chair, as well as the process that resulted in his
appointment by the school leadership, even going as far as suggesting that nepotism played a part
in their decision to appoint him. Even if this true, this suspicion reflects a severe lack of trust on
the part of the faculty for the school’s leadership. If this teacher’s assertion that “everybody
knows about [it]” is true, then this lack of trust might be more widespread than just this singular
teacher. This lack of trust would assumably decrease faculty willingness to engage in the
implementation of JISC and would, therefore, need to be addressed upfront before
implementation begins to correct for this possible lack of organizational accountability.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 149

The above opinion is only one teacher’s, and the other two upper school teachers
interviewed were not critical of the administration at all, but one of them is a new first year
teacher who lacks the perspective of Teacher 1 who has been at the school for seven years, and
the other veteran teacher interviewed has a vested interest in the current curriculum as she played
a key role in its creation, as well as being the spouse of the current department chair, which may
be causing a bias. Even so, other aspects of organizational accountability needs do present
themselves in other interviews including the department chair himself who, when referring to
certain aspects of the JS curriculum states, “I am a little concerned about our 12
th
grade Jewish
thought class curriculum because I love the idea that we teach Jewish thought in 12
th
grade and I
am unclear whether it’s been evolving and growing over the last, you know, 20 years.” Here the
department chair is confirming at least to a certain level the statements made before by Teacher 1
that there is stagnation within the JS curriculum.
This curricular stagnation could be interpreted as a lack of organizational accountability
as the same individuals have been overseeing the curriculum for the past 20 years, which is a
long time for it to not have evolved or grown. This begs the question of, why hasn’t it? Based
on Teacher 1’s statement above that the school administration is not adequately holding the JS
administrators accountable, one might assume that curricular stagnation is a direct result of a
lack of organizational accountability, which would need to be addressed to increase JCS JS
faculty’s ability to implement JISC.
Curricular Accountability. Curricular accountability refers to the extent to which JCS’s
JS curriculum is designed and or delivered to be accountable to the Judaic learning needs of the
population that it serves. The qualitative data seems to imply that this is a possible issue
affecting student engagement and satisfaction with JS. Although not as direct as organizational
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 150

accountability, curricular accountability relates to JISC implementation as unless JS faculty
associate JISC as correcting for their perceived lack of curricular accountability, they might not
be motivated to engage in its implementation. Examples of curricular accountability issues
expressed in the qualitative data include statements by Teacher 1 where she states:
I think we have a very static curriculum that no longer reflects the population that
we teach or the values … This curriculum is 15 years old, … [name of rabbinic
director]’s … curriculum is 25 years old …, and these kids are bored to death, bored to
death … It’s not about a pedagogical method. It’s about a failure to admit that a
curriculum and a culture has changed. I don’t know who is not listening, but somebody
is not listening… There is also no invitation to do anything else.
The above statements by Teacher 1 clearly express her opinion that the curriculum is out
of step with the school’s current population, which has shifted over the past years (see figure 32
below). This teacher’s feelings that the students are not getting value out of the JS courses
commensurate with the school’s high tuition and their Judaic learning needs represents to this
researcher a lack of curricular accountability. Teacher 2, who is first year teacher, also expresses
similar concerns when he says;
I think that you know we're trying to share with them really all sorts of amazing
intellectual and you know our tradition. We're trying to share with them our tradition in
ways that I think can speak to them and also give them knowledge of where our tradition
has been. And you know, you know I think in some ways yes there could be more
relevance to the life of a 16-year-old a 14-year-old a 15-year-old…And I think that that's
more challenging with kids who are like… they're not Jewish interests, and they don't see
themselves that way; they don't want to be that.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 151

A similar sentiment is expressed by Teacher 3, an eight-year veteran teacher from the
middle school and a former graduate of JCS. When asked to speak about how his students react
to Judaic studies, he explains the differences between students who come from traditional Jewish
elementary feeder institutions (a shrinking population at JCS) and students from more secular
backgrounds. He explains that the more Jewishly engaged students “are really receptive to
Jewish programs … because the family has prioritized Judaism as a part of this student's life”,
while for the more secular students he compares JS learning to eating “Brussel sprouts” and
something they do only because they must meet certain JCS JS requirements, and he does not
feel it really makes an impact on them. Here, both Teacher 2 and Teacher 3 echo Teacher 1’s
concern that the current curriculum may be out of touch for at least a large and growing portion
of the school’s non-observant or Jewishly engaged demographic. As stated above, this teacher
perception about the accountability of the current curriculum would need to be addressed in the
presenting of JISC to the JS faculty. If they were to be convinced that JISC addresses this
apparent lack of curricular accountability, they may be more motivated to accomplish its full
implementation to solve the problem of lack of student engagement and or satisfaction with JS,
which seems to be linked to the last of the accountability issues raised in the qualitative data,
student accountability.
Student Accountability. Student accountability refers to a purported lack of
accountability in student learning in JS. Except for the rabbinic director, this issue was evident
in all the interview participant’s responses as a concern that students were not really interested or
internalizing their learning in JS, but rather gaming the system for the sake of just earning better
grades and or satisfying what students perceive as teacher’s expectations in JS classes.
Examples of references to this lack of student accountability in the qualitative data include a
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 152

statement made by Teacher 1 about a common practice in JS classes, which is to begin the lesson
with blessings and dedications of that day’s learning to something personal in the kids’ lives. On
this topic, she states “… I don't do that because I know for a fact because …they are running out
the clock and they're gaming you.” Interestingly, when asked to give an example of student
reactions to JS, the department chair sites student participation in prayers for the ill as a prime
example of positive student reactions. Teacher 1, however, in describing students' feelings,
states, "If they know that they can bull[expletive] you and they know that you won't pick up on it
they will in fact, they will do exactly that." If Teacher 1 is correct about the true attitudes
towards these spiritual practices, this difference between Teacher 1’s perspective and the
department chair’s perspective would be one example of a pattern of disconnect between
teachers’ and administrators’ perspectives on several key issues explored in this study as
depicted in almost all the charts below, in which references are delineated by teachers and
administrators. For example, a comparison between the data depicted in Figures 30 and 31
demonstrates that teachers primarily reference organizational accountability as an issue at 64%
of accountability references within the interviews, while administrators only referencing it 23%
of the time. This disparity seems to confirm the differences between teachers' and
administrators' perspectives and might be indicative of general accountability issues, along with
learning organization, meta-cognitive knowledge and motivational needs discussed later in their
respective sections below.
Although the department chair does not specifically mention student accountability as a
major concern, he does allude to it when asked how he gauges student meaning making in JS,
saying “…So, I don't grade these things (relevancy) because I don't want … for kids to write
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 153

stuff that they don't mean just to get a good grade ... Every student has to write about how what
we've studied could be impactful in their life. And again, they could be blowing smoke…”.
Here too, the department chair saying that “I don't want to … for kids to write stuff that
they don't mean just to get a good grade,” and “they could be blowing smoke” is representative
of what Teacher 1 says is a rampant problem in the school. This possible teacher perception that
students are not being sincere in their participation of JS due to a lack of relevancy and meaning
could be informative in the design and presentation of JISC implementation and training. If
teachers could be convinced that JISC implementation would improve curricular accountability
and thereby relevancy and student accountability, then perhaps they would be more motivated to
see it fully implemented.

Figure 30: Accountability Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective
23%
39%
38%
Accountability by Administration Perspective
Organizational Student Curricular
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 154

Figure 31: Accountability Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective
Pluralism Needs
Uncovering whether or how pluralism dynamics and or challenges might impact JSC’s JS
faculty JISC implementation is one of the emphases of this study. As a Jewish “community”
school, JCS values religious pluralism as a fundamental aspect of its culture. This value is
clearly articulated in the school’s name and mission statement, which states, “We value each
member of our pluralistic community” (JCS mission statement). As stated in Chapter Two,
religious pluralism is not simple to achieve, and its pursuit can present many challenges because
of the complexities that accompany both diverse individual and group religious expression and
practice.
This pluralism challenge is relevant to the school’s approach to JS, as being that it
essentially attempts to educate students from a wide variety of Jewish denominations and the
non-observant or affiliated (just Jewish), it is difficult to satisfy the needs, desires, or
expectations of families that have fundamentally different perspectives on these matters. Figure
32 below depicts the three main themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to issues
of pluralism with influences of societal and demographic shifts at 35% of references, differing
64%
18%
18%
Accountability by Teachers' Perspective
Organizational Student Curricular
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 155

stakeholder priorities and vison at 33%, and issues related to the school’s mission, culture and
identity at 32%. The sections that follow discusses the findings of this researcher related to these
potential pluralism influences and subsequent considerations and needs for JISC implementation.

Figure 32: Pluralism Totals by Qualitative Data References
Societal and Demographic Shifts. As described in Chapter Two, there are possible
major societal and demographic developments influencing the relevance and practice of all
religions in America, especially in the Jewish community. These broader societal and
demographic shifts can be seen playing out in current enrolment trends at JCS, with the number
of students coming from non-traditional feeder schools consistently growing as a total percentage
of new students. Based on the statements made by several of the interview participants and past
enrollment records, historically the school’s population has been made up of students from
Jewish elementary day schools in the area whose students tend to be from families that value
Jewish education more and engage in some form of Jewish affiliation and or observance/practice.
This shift is reflected in Figure 33 in which the vertical axis depicts the total number of
enrolled students by the amounts coming from traditional versus other feeder institutions per
32%
35%
33%
Pluralism Totals by Qualitative Data References
Issues of School's Mission, Culture, identity Influences of Societal and Demographic Shifts
Differing stakeholder priorities / vision
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 156

school year from 2014 to 2017 (horizontal axis). These figures demonstrate how the old trend of
depending on traditional feeders has been reversing as the school has changed its marketing
strategy in the past few years to be more competitive with other non-sectarian college prep
schools in the area. Based on interview data, some feel this shift has resulted in a less Jewishly
engaged school population that is more interested in the secular aspects of the school's
curriculum, thereby impacting JS engagement. For instance, Teacher 3, who having been a
student at JCS for grades eight through twelve and a teacher for the past eight years, brings a
broader perspective on demographical shifts and their impact at the school. When asked about
changes at the school, he describes how he can “definitely” see changes in the school since he
was a student on many levels including “demographically,” “academic standards,” “focus of
curriculum,” “approaches to success,” “what was viewed as success and just general kind of
values,” and “priorities,” which he attributes to a broader initiative to pull less from traditional
feeder schools into what the administration is calling kind of a “broad based other approach.”
Clearly, this teacher reports significant demographic shifts at the school being motivated
by an attempt to broaden the base of the school and subsequent resulting changes in curricular
emphasis away from the Jewish aspects of the school. Teacher 2, who also attended JCS for
high school, speaks about demographic shifts and changes in relation to student engagement in
JS that have occurred. At one point in the interview he states that he was what he calls a "Jewish
nerd," meaning that he was really into Jewish learning. As a follow-up to this statement he was
asked if there were more students like him who thought JS was cool then, than there are now at
the school, to which he responds “I think there were at that time … a lot of folks who were
[Jewish nerds.” Both examples demonstrate that demographic shifts have occurred at JCS and
that these changes have resulted in a less Jewishly engaged student population who are less
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 157

interested in JS. As referenced by Teacher 3's statement above that the school’s “priorities have
shifted," these societal and demographic shifts have a direct natural impact on the next most
referenced pluralism issue of differing stakeholder priorities and vison (DSPV). DSPV relates
to how the school's changing population bring with them different objectives they would like to
see the school prioritize and will be discussed further in the following sub-section.
This idea also links back to Teacher 1’s comments quoted above in the curricular
accountability section, such as, "We have a very static curriculum that no longer reflects the
population that we teach" and " It’s about a failure to admit that ... a culture has changed" in
which she references demographic shifts and their effects on JS engagement. This perspective
shared by all three teachers interviewed is relevant to their stakeholder goal attainment as
presenting JISC in a way that convinces teachers that it is in alignment with the school's growing
"just Jewish" population would presumably help motivate them to see it fully implemented as a
way of increasing relevancy in JS and student engagement.

Figure 33: Demographic Shifts in Enrollment for Years 2014-2017
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017
JCS Total 7
th
and 9
th
Enrollment by Feeder School
2014-2017
Totals Traditional Feeders Others
Linear (Totals Traditional Feeders) Linear (Others)
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 158

Differing stakeholder priorities and vison (DSPV). As stated in the previous section,
one of the results of the changing population at JCS is that there are now potentially competing
forces within and between different stakeholder groups at the school in terms of what the main
academic priorities should be. A prime example of this is the school's recent controversial
decision to reverse a mandatory four-year Hebrew language requirement, which has been in
place since the school's inception three decades ago. There are those at the school, including on
the board, who welcome this move as a positive step towards being more inclusive of less
Jewishly interested students, as well as others who feel that this is a horrible mistake that sends
the wrong message and undermines the integrity of the school as a Jewish institution. Teacher 3
mentions this change and his thoughts about it while talking about changes he has witnessed at
the school since being a student, saying;
And yeah, I'd say it's a lot less Hebrew focused than it was prior, especially from my time
as a student. I think there is less academic ... I'm torn. ... I have Mishniot [teachings of
the Jewish oral law] that I memorized because we had it drilled into us and ... there was
no sense of like, oh this is an optional piece. This is intrinsic to your learning.
Here, Teacher 3 is expressing a disappointment with how the JS has been watered down
from what it was in the past to accommodate for the less engaged or less prepared students the
school has been actively recruiting, an idea that he mentions quoted above about demographic
shifts at the school and their effects. Teacher 2 also mentions the challenges presented by having
students from varying levels in one class that sheds further light on the pluralism issue of DSPV
when he talks about the various levels of Hebrew language that students from different
backgrounds have and want. Here, too, the impact of pluralism and the different levels of
Jewish education that the students have prior to attending JCS has on JS engagement are
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 159

highlighted, together with the fact that there are varying opinions about the importance of skills
such as Hebrew reading, which once would have been viewed as a given and essential to any
Jewish education. Statements by Teacher 1 as well, demonstrate that there is disconnect between
what teachers, students and administrators believe should be the focus of JS lessons when she
relates a recent conversation with the rabbinic director in which they had very different
perspectives on what types of topics and texts current students are interested in and capable of
finding meaning in.
Taken together, these teacher sentiments reflect that as the demographics at JCS have
shifted away from the traditional feeder schools, so has the appropriateness and or emphasis on
different academic priorities in JS, which relates as well to the issue of organizational and
curricular accountability raised above. From the tone and words used by these teachers, such as
"I'm torn" by Teacher 3, "surprising" and "confusing" by Teacher 2, as well as Teacher 1
expressing her feelings that there is total disconnect between the administrators, teachers and
students’ perspectives, this issue of DSPV seems to have a potential demoralizing effect on JS
teachers at JCS. Such demoralization could have adverse effects on JS teachers' motivation to
implement JISC if they saw it as not taking DSVP into consideration. Addressing this issue
would therefore be an important consideration in the design and training aspects of JISC
implementation but would need to be done in consort with the last of the pluralism themes that
emerged from the qualitative data, issues related to the school’s mission, culture and identity
(SMCI). Although SMCI is the least referenced of the pluralism themes in the qualitative data,
one might argue that it may be the core issue when it comes to the challenges generated by the
school's pursuit of religious pluralism because unless the school’s mission, culture and identity
are in harmony with one another, mixed messages, foci, and expectations may arise.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 160

Issues of the school’s mission, culture and identity (SMCI). As stated above, there has
been an initiative over the past few years to attract a more diverse student body, especially those
interested more in S.T.E.M and other aspects of the school that make it more competitive in the
college prep market in the area. The sense one gets though from some of the statements quoted
above as well as others is that the school has not stayed true to its stated mission in doing so and
may have compromised its Jewish culture and or identity in the process. Not to say that these
things are mutually exclusive, but the question of how the school is currently formally or
informally communicating and or operationalizing its mission is one that appears as a theme
within the qualitative data. For instance, when talking about changes that have occurred at the
school, Teacher 3 states;
I think it's really easy to plug into what was much more kind of front loaded in what the
mission of the school was in the late 90s early 2000s, which was this idea of ... we're not
interested in making a student, we're interested in making a people, which is to say that
the values and empathy that was derived from Jewish studies was kind of what was at the
forefront of the mission of the school, and less so a desire for kind of a certain kind of
academic standing, and which is to say, the priorities have shifted now, and I'm not going
to say that's necessarily a bad thing, although I do think it is.
Here Teacher 3 is saying that from his perspective the school has traded away at least part
of its Jewish mission in exchange for "academic standing" within the marketplace, an idea he
mentions in statements quoted above. When asked how the school should handle the pressure
put on it by less Jewishly engaged families to adjust the Jewish nature of the school and its JS
curriculum, he answers that the school should “make a persuasive case” about the benefits and
rationale behind JS learning to less religiously inclined families and says that he doesn't think the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 161

school is doing enough to communicate what its stated mission really means and why it is
important. Instead, it is being reactionary and doing away with things like the Hebrew
requirement, which this teacher views as a watering down of the Jewishness of the school.
Teacher 1 seems to concur with these sentiments when she says that there is a “lack of a unified
voice” when it comes to the Jewish aspects of the school and expresses a disconnect between the
school and its growing population of "Just Jewish" students, resulting in inappropriate
curriculum or measures to deal with this problem, rather than clarifying its mission and identity
to meet these students’ Jewish educational needs. For instance, when asked about how to better
JS, she describes an ever-evolving experiential curriculum that is in tune and aligned with the
majority of the secular student body.
This lack of a "unified voice" when it comes to the Jewish aspects of the school is what
the issue of SMCI is about, and coupled with the already existing challenges of a religiously
pluralistic school, the effects of a poorly operationalized mission are having an apparent effect
on the school's general culture. This researcher himself was present at JCS administrative and
board level meetings, where the top priority issue discussed was the serious lack of a sense of
community within the school. This lacking seems counterintuitive for a school founded on
pluralistic ideals, which one would think would translate into a greater sense of community, but
it is not. When talking about the lack of a sense of Jewish culture at the school, Teacher 1 puts it
as follows;
The camps are way more successful than Jewish Day schools in terms of creating identity
and meaning. Kids will die to go back to camp, and most of these kids couldn't care less
where they go to high school on a daily basis. They just don't care … We barely get
alumni to come back to [JCS] for Thanksgiving because they did not earn their
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 162

experience. There is no real culture here.
Here, Teacher 1, who has been at the school for almost a decade, states that "there is no
real culture here," referring to the Jewish culture that the mission states is at the core of what the
school stands for. Based on the previous sentiments of Teacher 3, who is also a veteran teacher
and former student, the expanding pluralistic nature of the school may require a reevaluation of
the school's stated mission to help promote the positive Jewish culture and identity that it desires.
This core issue relates to every aspect of the school and therefore would be essential to address if
JISC implementation were to be successfully implemented by the JS teachers. As depicted in
Figures 34 and 35, again there seems to be a disconnect on how issues of pluralism are impacting
the school’s culture, with administrators placing more of an emphasis on the demographic shifts
and teachers focusing more on the differing academic priorities held by various stakeholder
groups within the school. This difference of perspective is a common thread throughout the
qualitative data and would also need to be considered in the design of JISC training and
implementation. Additionally, the above two organizational themes of accountability and
pluralism relate directly to the most referenced organizational theme in the qualitative data,
which is the lack of JCS being a learning organization and will be discussed in the following
section.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 163

Figure 34: Pluralism Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective

Figure 35: Pluralism Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective
Learning Organization Needs
In alignment with Rueda (2011) as discussed in Chapter Two, being that JISC
implementation would constitute a major curricular change for JCS, it would require extensive
learning to occur throughout the organization, but especially in the JS department and its
supporting sectors (i.e. I.T. department). Therefore, the extent to which JCS is a learning
28%
30%
42%
Pluralism By Teachers' Perspective
Issues of School's Mission, Culture, identity Influences of Societal and Demographic Shifts
Differing stakeholder priorities / vision
40%
47%
13%
Pluralism by Administrators' Perspective
Issues of School's Mission, Culture, identity Influences of Societal and Demographic Shifts
Differing stakeholder priorities / vision
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 164

organization will impact the success of JISC implementation and is a focus of this study. Figure
36 below depicts the three main themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to JCS
being a learning organization with resistance to change (RTC) at 60% of learning organization
(LO) references within the interviews, and innovation (INN) (a positive indicator) and non-
learning-organization indicators (NLO) (a negative indicator) both at 20%. The sections that
follow discuss the findings related to these potential learning organization needs with subsequent
considerations and recommendation for JISC implementation discussed in Chapter Five.
Together, there were 64 such interpreted references within the interviews amounting to 60% of
the total LO references. There were another 21 references categorized as Non-Learning
Organization Indicators (i.e. top down decision making) making up another 20% of the total
references. When taken together, these two negative indicators make up 80% of the LO total
references, indicating the possible lack of existence of a LO at JCS (Figure 36).

Figure 36: Learning Organization Totals by Qualitative Data References
These numbers shift when broken down by teachers’ and administrators’ responses with a
31% difference in how much innovation each one believes exists at the school with teachers only
referencing innovation 8%, while administrators referencing it 39% (Figures 37 and 38). Also,
20%
60%
20%
Learning Organization Totals by Qualitative Data
References
Innovation Resistance to Change Non Learning Organization Indicators
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 165

the negative indicators of RTC and NLO when taken together amount for 93% of teachers LO
references, with administrators referencing these at a combined 61%. These disparities may be
interpreted as a LO issue as they reflect a possible disconnect between how teachers and their
supervisors view issues relating to organizational learning and change at JCS.

Figure 37: Learning Organization Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective

Figure 38: Learning Organization Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective
Resistance to Change and Non-Learning Organization Indicators. Resistance to
change refers to statements within the interviews interpreted as indicating resistant to change in
8%
63%
29%
Learning Organization by Teachers' Perspective
Innovation Resistance to Change Non Learning Organization Indicators
39%
54%
7%
Learning Organization
by Administrators' Perspective
Innovation Resistance to Change Non Learning Organization Indicators
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 166

JS amongst the interviewees. Examples could be either positive, such as Teacher 4, who played
a leading role in the design of the current JS curriculum and states that she thinks the JS curricula
for 9th thru 12th grades are all strong and engaging for students and therefore not in need of
major revisions. These sentiments are echoed by her spouse, the new USJDC who "loves" the
9th through 11th, however does feel the 12th may have room to grow as he is "unclear whether
it’s been evolving and growing over the last, you know, 20 years.” Other negative examples
pointing to a resistance to change is Teacher 1's comment that "the curriculum has not changed
in 20 years," and Teacher 2's "Who says they happen?" response to the question of how
curricular changes happen at the school.
Non-learning Organization Indicators include references within the interviews indicating
a top down decision-making process in which teachers are not consulted on curricular changes,
or there being a lack of organizational structure in place to support meaningful collaboration with
the JS department. For example, Teacher 1 talks about the JS curriculum being at least “15 years
old” and reports being instructed to utilize “packets designed 14 years ago” and complains that
there is no real effort to make any substantial changes. When asked about how teachers are
included in curricular changes at the school, all the administrators except the MSJDC indicated
that there is an open invitation for teachers to suggest changes they would like to see
implemented, but no formal process is in place to give adequate time or attention to allow for
this, and it therefore has not happened. The middle school does seem to give more time at
department meetings for "brainstorming" curricular discussions, and there is a collaborative
process in place to support a consistent rethinking of the MS JS curriculum and to encourage
teachers to participate in curriculum development. When asked about this process, the MSJDC
states: "There is definitely involvement ... from the entire department and everyone contributing
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 167

to these ideas, and the idea is that the teachers are passionate about what they're creating. That's
going to be reflective in the quality of the course and the quality of the teaching."
This collaborative creative approach contrasts with statements of Teacher 1 from the
upper school (US), who indicates that overall, the teachers in the US are not interested in
changing the curriculum and suggests that if real change within the school’s JS department were
to happen it would require the hiring of “a different kind of teacher and have a different kind of
vision.” It is these kinds of sentiments and statements that indicate a lack of JCS being a
learning organization, which would be one where collaborative learning and change are built in
to the school’s structure and culture. JISC implementation will require staff, resources and
procedures that would support it being a learning organization and will therefore be addressed in
the recommendations section in Chapter Five.
Knowledge Needs
Knowledge needs refer to aspects of Jewish Community School’s (JCS) Judaic/Israel (JS)
studies faculty’s' level of knowledge necessary to be considered and addressed in support of
them achieving their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation. As elaborated in Chapter
Two, based on Clark and Estes (2008) these knowledge needs are divided into the three
categories of declarative, (referring to factual) and conceptual types of knowledge (the what),
procedural, referring to observable skills (the how), and meta-cognitive, referring to the inner
cognitive activity described as knowledge that is generated by thinking about thinking and upon
the learning process itself (Krathwohl, 2002).
Based on the qualitative data, Figure 39 depicts the validated JCS JS faculty knowledge
needs that will be necessary to be addressed for them to be able to fully implement JISC. Unlike
the organizational needs data presented above (except for Innovation in the Learning
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 168

Organization section which is a positive indicator), the knowledge needs analysis of the
interviews produced positive indicators instead of negative ones. Therefore, unlike the data
above where a higher percentage of references point to the possible existence of an
organizational need, here in regards to knowledge needs, the higher the percentage of references
points to less of a potential knowledge need. These references in order of greatest possible needs
are procedural at 18% of interviewee knowledge references, meta-cognitive at 23%, and
declarative at 59% (Figure 39). In the sections that follow, both the procedural and meta-
cognitive knowledge needs will be discussed fully and separately with comparisons between
differing teacher and administrator perspectives also being discussed where relevant to the
findings and subsequent recommendations.
Figure 39: Knowledge Needs by Qualitative Data References
Declarative Needs
Based on the 108 declarative knowledge references with the interview data (59% of the
total knowledge references), three themes were identified indicating that JCS JS faculty already
59%
18%
23%
Knowledge Needs Totals by Qualitative Data References
Factual/Conceptual / Pedagogical Content Knowledge Procedural Meta-Cognitive
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 169

possess an extensive amount of declarative knowledge in relation to their specific discipline.
These themes include the need for differentiation and relevancy within JS at 51% of the
declarative knowledge references, the need for a comprehensive rigorous text-based JS
curriculum at 36%, and the inclusion of learning that teaches students they belong to something
greater then themselves (i.e. communal involvement, and Israel) at 13% (Figure 40). All three of
these themes closely align with specific types of declarative knowledge JS teachers need
described by Grant (2011) and Pomson and Deitcher (2009) in Chapter Two.

Figure 40: Declarative Knowledge Totals by Qualitative Data References

Figures 41 and 42 depict the declarative knowledge references separated by teachers and
administrators and indicate that they closely resemble each other, another positive indicator of
the strength and consistency of declarative knowledge among the members of the JS department.
Therefore, based on the total amount of references and the types of answers given in regards to
declarative knowledge within the interview and survey data, declarative knowledge does not
seem to be a major area of concern for JCS JS faculty, nor a validated need for their stakeholder
goal achievement and will not be a major focus within the recommendations section in Chapter
36%
51%
13%
Declarative Knowledge Totals
by Qualitative Data References
Complete Rigorous Text Based Judaic Studies Need for Differentiation and Relevancy
Belonging to Something Greater
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 170

Five.

Figure 41: Declarative Knowledge Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective

Figure 42: Declarative Knowledge Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective
Procedural Needs
Procedural needs refer to procedural knowledge that JCS JS faculty would need to gain
to be able to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation. Based on the assumed
procedural needs for successfully implementing a flipped class blended approach curriculum,
33%
51%
16%
Declarative Knowledge Needs by
Teachers' Perspective
Complete Rigorous Text Based Judaic Studies
Need for Differentiation and Relevancy
Belonging to Something Greater
38%
51%
11%
Factual/Conceptual Knowledge Needs by
Administartors' Perspective
0 0 0
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 171

which JISC implementation would necessitate (Table 4), three themes emerged from the
interview data analysis relating to these needs. These themes include a need for flipped class
blended approach methodological education at 55% of references, technological needs at 33%,
and the need for ongoing training and mentorship at 12% (Figure 43). Overall, the interview and
survey data indicate that there is a need for procedural training in the flipped class blended
approach across the JS department, as almost all the study participants demonstrated very limited
understanding of the approach or had apparent misunderstandings about what it fully entails. For
instance, there seemed to be a widespread superficial understanding of the flipped approach that
lacked the pedagogical underpinning of the methodology, or the accompanying types of
activities and learning experiences that one experienced and educated in the approach would
possess. Instead, almost all the interview participants held limited views on the flipped class
approach, thinking it simply meant that the teacher used pre-recorded video lessons to teach
certain aspects of the curriculum to their students. A few mentioned that they were aware of the
approach because the school had offered an in-service training that lasted two hours about four
years before the interviews took place. When asked about the previous training, these
participants could only remember that it involved teaching them about the use of videos in their
lessons.
Teacher 4 for example stated, "I know a lot about the flipped method" based on the one-
time training she received from the school, but then proceeded to explain how it was all about
recording her in class lessons so that students could view them at home. This was similar to the
MCJDC who also attended the flipped class workshop and described it as being more for
practical skills, such as math, that could be taught in little videos and then reviewed by students
at home. When asked what kind of follow up there was to the school's previous training, the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 172

MSJDC stated that there was basically none; however, if an individual teacher was interested in
furthering their understanding of the flipped method, he or she could take the initiative to request
a professional development opportunity as they could for any other area of interest. This
indicated that there was no well thought-out objective or plan substantiating the original
workshop, which produced the surface learning described by the interview participants who
mentioned it. Based on the overall responses to questioning that probed the JS faculty
procedural knowledge of the flipped class methodology, technological aspects and approach, it
seems that there is a significant need for training and education in the flipped class blended
approach if the JCS JS faculty is to be able to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC
implementation. This, of course, will be discussed at length in the recommendations section of
Chapter Five.

Figure 43: Procedural Knowledge Totals by Qualitative Data References

Meta-Cognitive Needs
Meta-cognitive needs refer to meta-cognitive knowledge or reflective practices that
would be necessary for JCS JS faculty to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation.
33%
12%
55%
Prodedural Knowledge Totals by Qualitative Data
References
Technological needs
Training & Mentorship
Need for Flipped Class Blended approach Methodological Education
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 173

Being that JISC implementation would entail the learning of new knowledge, procedures, approaches
and skills, as with any new learning, meta-cognitive reflective practices would be an essential
component of its mastery and subsequent implementation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Analysis of the
interview data produced 21 such references demonstrating the use of reflective practices by faculty in
their teaching of JS and can be divided into three general categories: reflection on practice at 38% of
meta-cognitive references, reflection on students and their learning at 33%, and reflection on
curriculum at 29% (Figure 44).

Figure 44: Meta-Cognitive Totals by Qualitative Data References
For instance, Teacher 4 demonstrates the use of reflection on students and practice in
relation to her role in understanding her students to find ways to make JS relevant for them when
she says
I think the most important thing in Jewish education is to make sure that the student finds
themselves within it that day. That you as the teacher make sure that they find their
connection and that they can make it their own and that it gets into their heart.
This sentiment is mirrored by Teacher 1 and demonstrates her use of reflective practice in
establishing rapport with students and a positive classroom culture when she states,
38%
29%
33%
Meta-Cognitive Needs Totals by Qualitative Data
References
Reflection on Practice Reflection on Curriculum Reflection on Students
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 174

It [JS] has to be meaningful in the end. You know [name of Teacher 2], it's his first year
teaching, and he is having a really hard time with some of his classes, and I explained to
him that you have to get the report first, you have to get the classroom culture.
Teacher 2 confirms the challenge he faces as a first-year teacher and alludes to his use of
reflective practices in relation to students and the curriculum in trying to relate to students who
are not as engaged in JS text study as he is, and in the process of finding ways of making the
learning relevant to them. He states,
I think that I am now learning how to help them to see that [relevancy of JS] because I
think it's not going to happen if you just bust out the Torah and say, here you go enjoy.
You know it is sort of how I like, you know, the nerdy part of me. That's how I am
oriented. But you know something, like ninth grade kids can't just start reading. The rest
is history obviously. And I think so for me it's sort of like this wonderful project of trying
to bring the language of the Torah, package it or put it in different ways that can be
understandable, relatable. But that being said I think I'm really you know, I'm in this
moment an experience of like really growth in myself as a Jewish educator and
learning...I started a new job ...here is your life in the trenches, and so there is growth for
sure. You know, I think that's just...an important part of this conversation. I think I'm kind
of working out my ideas and vision and thinking and I have this amazing privilege to do
that.
The above examples demonstrate that JCS JS faculty are engaging in reflective practices
to improve their understanding of students' perspectives and how to make JS more relevant and
engaging. Additionally, as implied by comparing the data depicted in Figures 45 and 46, there
also seems to exist a disparity between how administrators and teachers emphasize their focus
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 175

when it comes to reflective practices, with administrators putting a greater emphasis on practice,
which one may suppose is a result of their supervisory role within the school. Overall however,
the low number of references to reflective practices within the interviews may indicate that meta-
cognitive training should be included in JISC implementation training, follow up and supervision
to improve the JS faculty's appreciating and understanding of how 21st century methodologies
can help in improving student learning and engagement in JS, and will therefore be included in
the recommendations section in Chapter Five.

Figure 45: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Interview References by Administrators’ Perspective

Figure 46: Meta-Cognitive Knowledge Interview References by Teachers’ Perspective
65%
20%
15%
Meta-Cognitive Needs
by Administrators' Perspective
Reflection on Practice Reflection on Curriculum Reflection on Students
38%
29%
33%
Meta-Cognitive Needs
by Teachers' Perspective
Reflection on Practice Reflection on Curriculum Reflection on Students
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 176

Motivational Needs
Motivational needs refer to aspects of Jewish Community School’s (JCS) Judaic/Israel
(JS) studies faculty’s level of motivation necessary for them to achieve their stakeholder goal of
full JISC implementation. As elaborated in Chapter Two, based on Eccles and Wigfield (1995),
the first of the two motivational needs are utility value, which is a positive motivational
influencer that relates to the perceived value that teachers place on tier teaching of JS. The
second of the motivational needs this study focuses on is attributions, which is a negative
motivational influencer based on Weiner (2005) and refers to beliefs and/or alternative reasons
teachers may attribute the success or failure of engaging and or motivating their students and
student learning. Based on the qualitative data, Figure 47 depicts the validated JCS JS faculty
motivational needs that will be necessary to address for them to be able to fully implement JISC,
with utility value being 28% of total motivational references, and attributions being 72% of
motivational references. In the sections that follow, both these motivational needs will be
discussed fully and separately as relevant to the findings and subsequent recommendations in
Chapter Five.

Figure 47: Motivation Needs by Qualitative Data References
28%
72%
Motivational Needs Totals by Qualitative Data
Refrences
Utility Value Attributions
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 177

Utility Value Needs

Utility-value needs refer to specific motivational beliefs that would be necessary for JCS
JS faculty to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC implementation. Being that JISC
implementation would entail new learning, sufficient motivation would be essential, as
motivation is a necessary component of the learning process (Clark and Estes, 2008), which
would therefore have a direct effect on JISC implementation. As discussed in Chapter Two,
Eccles and Wigfield (1995) describe one such motivational belief as utility value, which refers to
the personal values placed on the performance and completion of a task. Based on Clark and
Estes (2008), these values include social standing and moral values, and Gilheany (2013) showed
how utility value extends to the religious or cultural motivations of teachers of religion. These
ideas are the foundation for the three utility value themes that emerged from analysis of the
utility value references within the interview data discussed below. These three-utility values are
Jewish communal continuity (JCC) at 38% of total utility value references, improving society
through Jewish education (ISJE) at 37%, and building Jewish identity (BJI) at 25% (Figure 48),
which align with Gilheany (2013) who as discussed in Chapter Two, lists the primary motivators
of religion teachers as “developing values, strengthening religious beliefs, strengthening national
identity, encouraging critical thinking, strengthening resistance to the lure of secular society, and
teaching about other religious traditions” (Gilheany, 2013, p. 501). Each of the three above
mentioned utility themes do seem to fall into one of these categories and will be discusses
separately.
Jewish communal continuity. JCC refers to the belief that JCS teachers may hold
relating to their teaching of JS contributing to the furtherance of the growth and continuance of
the Jewish people through their students' learning and practice of Judaism and or Jewish ritual
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 178

and values. In his answer to the value of Jewish education, the RD described it as "to contribute
to building the future of Judaism and the Jewish people." This statement reflects others within
the interview data demonstrating the utility value of JCC, such as the USJDC who speaks about
JS helping to make students feel connected to the broader Jewish community and “part of
something greater larger than themselves,” or when Teacher 3 attributes the building of one’s
Jewish identity to JS learning, saying that as a result, students realize that being Jewish “is part
of my personal history and part of a broader communal attachment.” The MSJDC also refers to
this community building/belonging aspect of JS when he states:
It's also about building community. When we study in community, we are building
relationships with the other people in the room, and we're also expanding our learning
beyond the walls when we are dedicating or learning or doing it in honor of other people
who aren't there. And I think it's important when we go out in the world to have a basic
knowledge of what Judaism is because we are often put in a position where we have to
explain or defend or identify for the people why we do what we do. (MSJDC)
These examples of the utility value of JCC demonstrate how teachers could be motivated
in their teaching by the value placed on helping to build Jewish community. Inclusion of
connecting JISC implementation to the strengthening of Jewish continuity within JISC training
would therefore perhaps be one effective way of increasing JS faculty motivation to achieve full
JISC implementation and will therefore be discussed in the recommendations section in Chapter
Five. This is in alignment with Katz and Shahar (2015) who demonstrated the positive effects
from a strong correlation between motivation and a teacher’s effectiveness in implementing new
pedagogical methods.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 179

Improving society through Jewish education. ISJE is the next most common of the
utility value references within the interview data and refers to the value JS faculty place on the
general societal effects of Jewish education that their teaching of it potentially produces. For
instance, Teacher 4 states, "I also really believe that kids who have faith-based learning are more
grounded, more confident, have something to believe in, and I think those things are really
important to raising healthy young adults. I also think that Jewish studies increases critical
thinking skills and awareness to the world at large and where we come from and where we're
going." Here Teacher 4 is describing more general outcomes of Jewish education that relate to
global impacts beyond just the Jewish community or people. This sentiment is reflected in the
RD statements in response to being asked what he feels is the value of Jewish education:
[It] (Jewish education) .... is to refine, repair the brokenness in the world to contribute
beyond ourselves to serve as a model as an individual and people not only to build the
Jewish people but also to make a contribution beyond the Jewish people onwards.
These comments, along with others from several of the interview participants, show that
having teachers understand how the teaching of JS has global benefits for both the individual
student and society at large can act as a motivator for them in their teaching of JS. For this
reason, ISJE would be an important consideration in the JISC implementation training and will
therefore be discussed in the recommendations section in Chapter Five, as it too aligns with the
types of potential motivators mentioned above by Katz and Shahar (2015) that can assist in the
implementation of new curriculum.
Building Jewish identity. BJI is another, least mentioned, potential utility value
motivator that emerged from analysis of the interview data and refers to the belief that the
teaching of JS helps to develop the Jewish identity of its students, which, as mentioned in
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 180

Chapter Two, may play a significant role in overcoming the effects of assimilation and declining
Jewish demographics. Statements within the interview data such as those quoted in the two
previous subsections mention Jewish identify as an important outcome of Jewish education and
could also be another potential motivator for JISC implementation if JS faculty understand the
importance of developing their students' Jewish identity and connect it with JISC
implementation. This assertion agrees with Roehrig and Kruse (2005), who showed that beliefs
about teaching that are in alignment with teacher’s perceived value of new curriculums can
increase its successful implementation and will therefore be considered and discussed in relation
to the development of JISC implementation training in the recommendations section in Chapter
Five.

Figure 48: Utility Value Totals by Qualitative Data References
25%
37%
38%
Utility Value Totals by Qualitative Data References
Building Jewish Identity Improving Society through Jewish Education
Jewish Communal Continuity
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 181

Attribution Needs

Weiner (2005) introduces three aspects of attributions: locus, stability and
controllability, which all relate to beliefs about factors outside of one's agency that can influence
motivation to engage or complete a task associated with these reasons. Attribution needs refer to
potential attributions or reasons held by JS faculty that would need to be addressed within JISC
implementation training to mitigate their effects on successful JISC implementation. This
assertion is in alignment with Mayer (2011) who, as discussed in Chapter Two, showed that a
teacher’s attributional beliefs can affect their motivation to implement new curriculum. Figure
49 depicts the three primary themes that emerged from the qualitative data relating to attributions
with demographic factors at 38% of total attributional references, lack of strong school
communal culture each at 32%, and societal factors negatively impacting JS at 30%. Each of the
above three attribution themes relate to other literature discussed in Chapter Two as will be
elaborated separately in the sections that follow.
Demographic factors. As mentioned above in the pluralism section, JCS has seen a
demographic shift in their student body over the last five years due to a concerted effort to attract
more secularly leaning families. This dynamic relates to demographical attributions made by JS
faculty at JCS, in which they see these changes as making the teaching of JS more difficult
because the less religious students have a harder time finding relevance in JS. For instance,
when talking about the difficulties of keeping JS relevant for today's learners MSJDC states;
I think that because "normal classes" like English, math, science, there is a trajectory that
ends with getting into college. That you have to achieve a certain proficiency in order to
do that in those subjects. I think many people will prioritize those and say, well I need to
make sure that my child achieves this or their kids are stressed … and Jewish studies
doesn't have that…”.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 182

Here, MSJDC is expressing perceived attitudes he believes held by students and their
parents that prioritize secular learning over JS classes. The possible existence of this attribution
poses the question of whether such beliefs have motivational effects on JS faculty teaching or
willingness to try new approaches. Teacher 1 expresses similar attributions when she talks about
the current curriculum and pedagogical approach being out step with today’s learners and
expresses her belief that the school’s curriculum no longer reflects the culture or priorities of the
student body, which, if true, may indicate negative attributions effecting the teaching of JS. This
assertion is in alignment with Foley (2011), who demonstrated how teachers expected outcomes
of their implementation of new strategies and approaches will affect their implementation of
them. Being that JISC implementation would require JS faculty to be sufficiently motivated to
see the implementation through to completion, taking demographic attributions into account
could be an important consideration in the design of JISC implementation training materials and
will therefore be discussed and considered in the recommendations section in Chapter Five.
Lack of strong school culture. Lack of strong school culture refers to references within
the interview data that imply there being a pervasive issue with the strength of the sense of
communal attachment at JCS. Being that the school is a "Jewish" school, this general lacking in
school culture is seen by some as attributing to the lack of excitement towards the Jewish aspects
of the school, including JS. For example, when talking about lack of student engagement in JS
Teacher 1 states;
We give them Jewish culture, we give them a Sukkoth lock in and we give them this and
they plan one little aspect and all of a sudden, we are just jumping all over ourselves to
praise them. When the kids get something without earning it they know it and it's
poisonous to them ... I think we really have to figure out a way how do kids earn what
they learn.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 183

Here, Teacher 1 is expressing how she feels that many of the Jewish experiences at the
school are concocted or manufactured for the students, rather than these opportunities naturally
occurring out of the established school culture. MSJDC echoes similar feelings when he states;
We certainly try to create stuff that's going to relate to them and we come up with
specific examples as ways for them to connect to what we're learning and some kids we
really see they're excited about it they're into it … and other kids in the culture of our
school, I get the sense that they are doing it because they have to and it's a requirement …
but they're not touched on a personal level by what we're trying to do.
Here too, MSJDC is referring to it being part of the school culture for kids to not really
be engaged in the Jewish aspects, rather to do it just because it is expected, an issue raised above
in the accountability section. If this supposed lack of school culture is true, it could be a
potential attribution that, unless addressed, could affect JISC implementation and should be
addressed within JISC implementation training. This, of course, will be discussed further in the
recommendations section in Chapter Five.
Societal factors negatively impacting Jewish studies (SFNIJS). As discussed in
Chapter Two, as result of societal shifts today's teens are generally of a different mindset when it
comes to religion and its practices (Smith, Faris, & Regnerus, 2003). Certain references within
the interview data point to JS faculty recognizing this as a reality out of their control, which
raises the possibility of these beliefs acting as negative attributions in their teaching of JS. This
assumption is based on Brady and Woolfson (2008), who showed that a teacher’s preconceived
notions about students resulted in attributions towards student performance. For instance, when
asked about challenges to making JS relevant for today's students RD states;
I'm thinking about the life of a student and what are the internal motivations? What are
the external motivations? How do you create an organic world within a classroom that's
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 184

capable in some ways of being a counter to what is the external relationship?
Here RD is reflecting on the continual challenges of making the learning relevant due to
how various topics are evolving within the broader societal conversation. This recognition of the
effects of societal pressures on student's worldview in relation to Judaism raises the possibility of
these presumed pressures acting as potential attributions that could negatively impact JS faculty
motivation due it being out of their control. The effects of these attributions could be
exacerbated if teachers do not feel that the curriculum is evolving to meet these societal changes,
as indicated in the accountability section above. Similarly, MSJDC states when asked about the
challenges of engaging today's students in JS;
Sometimes there are kids who have already sort of written off an aspect of their Jewish
identity and said that's not as relevant to me. Sometimes it's because of you know the way
their families engage or don't engage in Jewish life. There's certainly kids who have said
things like "well I don't believe in God and so I'm not really sure what I'm supposed to do
here. I'll just read an answer that satisfies the needs of the assignment, but it's not going to
really impact who I am as a person." And then as an educator I'm not sure how to respond
to that sort of thing because I'm not going to say you have to believe in God. That's not
appropriate.
Here again MSJDC is indicating the gap that exists between his own religious
perspectives and those held by students. As discussed in Chapter Two, being cognizant of this
"religious gap" is important for religious teachers being able to overcome the different
worldviews held by themselves and their students (Evans, 2014). As MSJDC admits, "I'm not
sure how to respond to that sort of thing," which still leaves the possibility that this recognition
may develop into a negative attribution being that he perceives it as out of his control and with
not solution. For these reasons, addressing possible SFNIJS attributions amongst JCS JS faculty
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 185

would be an important consideration in the development of JISC implementation training
materials, and will therefore be discussed in the recommendations section in Chapter Five.

Figure 49: Attributions Totals by Qualitative Data References
Synthesis of Qualitative and Quantitative Data
As mentioned above, the purpose of conducting both a survey and interviews was to be
able to triangulate the results of both as a way of increasing this study’s validity and reliability.
In this section the pertinent relationships between the qualitative and quantitative results by
KMO themes are discussed as a way of further informing the recommendations section that
follows in Chapter Five.
Knowledge Needs Qualitative and Quantitative Synthesis
In the sections that follow, qualitative data from the interviews and quantitative data from
the study's survey relating to declarative, procedural and meta-cognitive knowledge needs will be
individually synthesized and discussed in relation to recommendations for JISC implementation
training to be included in Chapter Five.
38%
30%
32%
Attribution Totals by Qualitative Data References
Demographic factors (e.g. social economic and religious affiliations of general school population)
Societal Factors negatively impacting the relevancy of Jewish studies
Lack of stronger school communal culture
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 186

Declarative knowledge needs synthesis. Question 2 (Figure 1) of the survey addresses
primarily meta-cognitive knowledge since declarative knowledge is not typically measured using
survey. Still, one may deduce from this question JS faculty’s level of commitment to declarative
knowledge because it addresses their beliefs about the level of rigor necessary within the
discipline by asking JS faculty to weigh in on the level of rigor they believe the discipline should
have. Together, 80% of respondents chose either the strongly agree (46,7%) or somewhat agree
(33.3%), indicating a strong commitment to rigor and thereby the necessary declarative
knowledge necessary to deliver that rigor. These results agree with the interview data that also
confirmed a possible high level of declarative knowledge within the JS faculty with many of the
respondents using the word "rigor" when describing what they believed should be aspects of the
JS curriculum, as well as references to text study and the development of critical thinking skills.
As described above in the declarative knowledge section within the qualitative findings section,
there were 39 references within the interview data that were categorized under the "Complete
rigorous and text-based JS" theme, which accounts for 36% of the total declarative knowledge
references within the interviews (Figure 40). This consistency between the survey and
interviews would therefore help to confirm that there is a high level of declarative knowledge
amongst the JS faculty. Declarative knowledge is therefore not identified by this study as a
major need in terms of helping JS faculty to reach their stakeholder goal of full JISC
implementation.
Procedural knowledge needs synthesis. Question 13 (Figure 5) of the study survey
specifically goes to procedural knowledge of the flipped class approach necessary for full
JISC implementation. As depicted in Figure 5, 40% of the respondents reported having
significant knowledge of the approach, with another 33.3% reporting moderate knowledge,
and the other 26.7% reporting somewhat being familiar with it. These results would imply
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 187

that procedural knowledge of the flipped class approach is not a significant need to be
addressed in JISC implementation training; however, based on the findings section above, it
seems that there are significant misunderstandings about what the flipped class approach truly
and completely entails. For example, Teacher 4 and MSJDC report having attended a two-
hour workshop on the topic at the school four years ago, and primarily based on this
experience say they are very familiar with it. At the same time, when describing what they
know, MSJDC says that he believes the flipped class method is primarily for teaching skills
like mathematics, and both he and Teacher 4 focus on the use of videos in instruction as the
main distinction of the flipped class model. Based on Lage et al. (2000), the flipped
classroom is where “… events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now
take place outside the classroom and vice versa” (p. 32). This a much broader definition with
many implications for any discipline it is applied to. This kind of perspective on the flipped
class model was absent from all the interviews, which, despite the conflicting results of
survey question 13, leads this researcher to believe that procedural knowledge of the method
is a significant need and should be addressed during JISC implementation training.
Meta-cognitive knowledge needs synthesis. As discussed earlier in the quantitative
results section, questions 2 (Figure 1), 3 (Figure 2), 4 (Figure 3) and 10 (Figure 4) of the study
survey all explored various aspects of the meta-cognitive thought process of JCS JC faculty in
relation to their teaching of JS. These questions attempt to do this by asking questions
dependent on participants reflecting on the nature of their discipline, whether it should be
changed in any way, and to what extent they believe they influence their students' Jewish
identity through teaching them JS. Based on the results of question 2, it is apparent that
46.6% of the respondents hold strong opinions on this question (33.3% strongly agree and
13.3% strongly disagree), with another 46.7% having somewhat of an opinion on the matter,
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 188

which could indicate meta-cognitive reflection to reach the strongly held opinions as well as
the somewhat agree ones to a lesser extent but still significant. These results seem to match
the reflection on practice themes that emerged from the qualitative data, which accounted for
38%, or 8 of the 21 meta-cognitive interview references (Figure 44).
Questions 3 (Figure 2) and 4 (Figure 3) ask participants to consider changing JS in
relation to today's learners and in relation to traditional methods respectively, which aligns
with the qualitative themes of both reflection on curriculum and reflection on students (Figure
53). Sixty percent of respondents to questions 3 said yes, and the other 40% chose maybe,
indicating a high level of both reflective practice. This question also gave participants the
option of elaborating on their opinion by writing in how they would adjust JS for today's
learners. These responses included statements such as, "I think we need to focus less on text
and more on pedagogy," "We need to incorporate research from positive psychology, playful
learning and project-based learning to create constructivist experiences that allow students to
drive their own learning," "Curriculum should be dynamic, and while many of the solid
foundations should remain, we should continue to improve both the content and pedagogy,"
"Beginning learners need much more context and support for their learning," "Relevancy is
critical to our students. If we can't present Judaism and Israel as relevant to our learners, they
will not learn, and they will not feel a part of something bigger," "I think there should be a
greater focus on the individual student's relationship with the texts and teachers," "Provide
more technological tools similar to those used in other fields," "Jewish Studies occurs in
relationship to changing learners and contexts. The nature of learners and their contexts
impacts along with other factors, how and what we teach," "Relevance is key, but I am also
excited about the question," "We need the text study and critical thinking skills, but we need
to find new ways to approach them that involve the rapid media consumption of our students.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 189

They do not have the built-in patience for text study they once had," "It depends on what the
existing methods are. Jewish/Israel studies should engage the entire student and hopefully
create an attachment to the Jewish people/tradition." As all these responses demonstrate,
there is a high level of meta-cognitive reflection going on in the minds of JS faculty in
relation to the relevancy of the curriculum for today's learners. These reflections serve as
examples of possible topics for discussion during the JISC implementation training to
increase faculty engagement and buy-in and will therefore be considered in the
recommendations section in Chapter Five.
With 86.6% of respondents saying they disagreed (33.3% strongly, 53.3% somewhat)
that JS should not be changed from traditional methods, responses to question 4 (Figure 3)
also indicate a tendency of JS to be open to change, another factor that relates to
organizational needs discussed further in the organizational needs synthesis section below, as
well as demonstrating the use of meta-cognitive reflection on JS practices. These results
reflect the reflection on practice and curriculum themes (Figure 44) that emerged from the
qualitative data analysis and affirm that JCS JS faculty do possess and engage strong meta-
cognitive skills and practice.
Question 10 (Figure 4) specifically addresses the amount of influence JS faculty
believe they have on their students’ Jewish identity, which to answer would require a certain
level of meta-cognition. This question can also relate to utility value and will be included in
the synthesis section discussing utility value later. In relation to meta-cognitive needs
question 10, 100% of respondents (40% somewhat, 40% moderate, 20% significant) (Figure
4) felt that they do have at least some influence on their student's Jewish identity
development, indicating a certain level of reflection on their part. This assertion matches the
Reflection on Students theme within the findings section of the meta-cognitive interview data
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 190

analysis above (Figure 44), which indicate that JS faculty at JCS do engage in this sort of
reflection in relation to their teaching. Therefore, based on these results and those mentioned
above in this section, meta-cognitive training itself does not seem to be a pressing knowledge
need. However, utilizing these meta-cognitive skills and demonstrating how JISC addresses
these types of suggestions and concerns would be an important need within the JISC
implementation training, as reflection within the training process is key to any change effort
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick 2016).
Motivation Needs Synthesis
In the sections that follow, qualitative data from the interviews and quantitative data from
the study's survey relating to utility value and attributional motivation needs will be individually
synthesized and discussed in relation to recommendations for JISC implementation training to be
included in Chapter Five.
Utility value needs synthesis. Questions 5 (Figure 8), 6 (Figure 9), 10 (Figure 4), 12,
and 14 (Figure 11) all attempt to reveal various aspects of JCS JS faculty perceived value in
relation to the teaching of JS and the potential learning of new pedagogical models, and
specifically the flipped class approach. Although these questions do uncover potential utility
value in relation to the enjoyment and satisfaction faculty experience through their teaching of
JS, and through the potential experience of learning new pedagogical methods including the
flipped class approach, none of them relate directly to the three utility value themes that emerged
from analysis of the interview data (Figure 48). Still, the quantitative results expressing that JS
faculty do enjoy teaching JS could be possibly attributed to reasons that stem from their
association between the utility value themes and their teaching of JS. Their seeing value in the
learning of new pedagogical methods and the flipped class approach is also potentially
informative and could be utilized to increase their motivation to engage in JISC implementation
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 191

training. Question 10 (Figure 4) does reveal that 100% of respondents (40% somewhat, 40%
moderate, 20% significant) do believe their teaching of JS has at least some influence on their
student's Jewish identity development, which is one of the utility value themes at 25% of utility
value references within the interviews. These results do confirm this aspect of the qualitative
data analysis and could be a useful value to stress within JISC implementation training and will
be discussed in Chapter Five recommendations section.
Attributions needs synthesis. Questions 1 (Figure 6), 7 and 8 (Figure 7) all attempt to
uncover various aspects of JCS JS faculty attributions in relation to challenges in student
engagement in JS, and specifically in a religiously pluralistic environment. These three
questions reflect the qualitative themes of demographic factor and societal influences. Question
1, which address possible challenges to teaching JS in a pluralistic school, goes to demographics
and to the organizational setting of pluralism that will be discussed later in that section. In terms
of demographics, pluralism means a wider variety of Jews from varying levels of cultural and
religious engagement. Here, 51% of respondents reported it as somewhat difficult, with another
14.3% choosing moderately, and 26.6% saying not at all (Figure 6). This would seem to confirm
the 19 demographical attributional references stated throughout the interviews accounting for
38% of the total attribution references (Figure 49). Taking demographic attributions into account
in the development of JISC implementation, training and development should be considered and
will therefore be discussed further in the recommendations section of Chapter Five.
Both questions 7 and 8 address faculty beliefs about how times have changed and societal
shifts might influence student engagement in JS. Question 7 asks respondents to compare their
students with themselves in relation to JS engagement with somewhat and moderately both at
46.2% and 7.7% choosing extremely (Figure 7). This would indicate that JCS JS faculty could
attribute these preceived differences as attributions for lack of student engagement in JS. This
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 192

indication would support the findings of the qualitative data analysis with the 15 societal
attributional refrences within the interviews accounting for 30% of the total attributional
refrences (Figure 49). For this reason societal attributions would constitute a motivational need
and will therefore be included for discussion in the recomendation section in Chapter Five as
well.
Organizational Needs Synthesis
In the sections that follow, qualitative data from the interviews and quantitative data from
the study's survey relating to learning organization needs will be synthesized and discussed in
relation to recommendations for JISC implementation training to be included in Chapter Five.
Learning organization needs synthesis. Questions 11 (Figure 12) and 15 (Figure 13)
directly address the existence of JCS being a learning organization sufficient to support the
implementation of JISC. This is in alignment with the qualitative theme of non-learning
organization that emerged from the qualitative data analysis (Figure 36). Question 11 inquires
how much JS faculty are consulted on curricular decisions, which goes to establishing the extent
to which JCS is a learning organization, with sometimes and frequently both receiving 33.3% of
responses each, 26.7% answering always, and 7.7% answering never (Figure 11). This data is
potentially qualified by the fact that primarily administrators and MS faculty chose always, or
frequently, with only one US faculty choosing frequently (been with school for over 10 years and
has helped to develop curriculum) and the rest answering never (one teacher who has been with
the school for seven years) or sometimes. As mentioned above in the qualitative data findings,
there does seem to be more of a learning organization approach amongst the MS JS department
than in the US, which the above data would support. That seven-year veteran of the school
reports never being consulted is in line with statements from the interviews that point to no
formal process in which JS faculty can significantly contribute to curricular changes, with
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 193

administrators describing more of an openness to suggestions rather than a formal collaborative
process. The above assertion is also in agreement with the apparent disparity between teachers'
and administrators' perspectives that emerge when comparing their interview references in
relation to non-learning organization indicators with teachers referencing them 29% (Figure 37)
out of their total learning organization references and administrators referencing it 7% (Figure
38).
Question 15 also addresses learning organization needs by inquiring about available
resources for learning more about the flipped class model within the school, with 80.6% of
respondents being unsure or answering no (73.3% unsure and 7.7% no), and 20% saying yes (all
of which are administrators) (Figure 13). These results help to confirm the qualitative findings
above that there is an apparent disconnect between administrators and teachers when it comes to
organizational support. These results and the ones mentioned above therefore help to confirm the
need for addressing the existence of JCS being a learning organization, which would be essential
for JISC implementation and will therefore be discussed in the recommendations section in
Chapter Five.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 194

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Organizational Context and Mission
Jewish Community Schools (JCS) is a non-denominational religiously pluralistic private
Jewish Day School serving a major metropolitan Jewish community for over 25 years. The
school’s stated mission is to “develop students with sharp minds, generous hearts, and kind
souls” as it seeks to “foster a deep connection to Israel, a lifelong dedication to the Jewish
people, and a passionate commitment to the service of humanity” (JCS website). JCS currently
has 346 female students and 400 male students enrolled in grades 7-12. Its student population
comes from diverse segments of the Jewish community, but mostly from Conservative (54%)
and Reform Jewish families (37%), with the rest coming from Modern Orthodox (6%) and non-
affiliated or other (3%) families. The school employs over 225 staff members, about evenly
divided between male and female, of which 65% are part of the teaching faculty. Approximately
70% of the school’s teachers hold advanced degrees and they draw from various religious and
ethnic backgrounds, with about half being Jewish, 40% Christian, and 10% other or non-
religiously affiliated. The school values innovation and prides itself in excellence in everything
it does across its dual Judaic & General studies curriculums, with small class sizes averaging at
around 17-20 students per class (JCS, 2016 school report).
Organizational Performance Goal
The JCS’ organizational performance goal is that by June 2020, all students will be able
to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own lives and Judaic/Israel studies
(JS) content materials and concepts. Attainment of this goal will require curriculum/asset
development, learning management system development, teacher training, parent/community
education, and student/program evaluation. The JCS’ Israel Center director established this goal
after consulting with the Judaic/Israel studies sub-committee of the school board’s education
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 195

committee, which includes the school’s President, Headmaster, Rabbi/director of Judaic studies,
and Chair of the education committee. This sub-committee is tasked with increasing student and
parent satisfaction and engagement with the school’s Judaic/Israel studies programs, which have
been identified by surveys and anecdotal evidence as areas in need of improvement. Successful
achievement of JCS’ goal to revitalize its Judaic/Israel studies programs will be measured by its
ability to make Judaic/Israel studies personally relevant and engaging for all students.
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the efforts of all stakeholders will be necessary to achieve the organizational goal
of all JCS students being able to articulate relevance to JS, it is important to evaluate JCS JS
faculty’s ability to reach their performance goal of full implementation of a new 21
st
Century JS
curriculum (JISC). Therefore, the stakeholder of focus for this study was all JCS JS faculty
members, and their goal is for 100% of the JS faculty to implement JISC in their classes by
September 2019. Implementation includes completion of a three-session summer training
workshop on the principles and structure of the curriculum, utilization of all course materials and
assessments in the planning and delivery of lessons, and ongoing participation in professional
development and supervision of the curriculum’s implementation. Failure of Judaic/Israel
studies teachers to accomplish their stakeholder goal may lead to continued dissatisfaction and
lack of engagement with Judaic/Israel studies, diminishing the school’s reputation and possibly
hurting its fiscal solvency.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary to reach the organizational performance goal
of all JCS students being able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own
lives and JS. The analysis began by generating a list of possible needs, and then moved to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 196

examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs. While a complete needs
analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes this study focused on one.
Because it is important to evaluate where the JCS’s JS faculty members currently are regarding
their performance goal of being able to implement JISC, they were the stakeholder of focus for
this analysis. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to poor implementation of the curriculum,
possibly resulting in the continued dissatisfaction and lack of engagement with JS, which in turn
would negatively impact student enrollment and retention. As such, the questions that guided
this study were the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for JCS
Judaic/Israel faculty to achieve full implementation of a new 21
st
century learner
centered Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th
(JISC)?
2. How can the data collected from this gap analysis be used to inform the
development of additional training materials for full implementation of JISC?
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences/Needs
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge needs listed in Table 6 represent all the assumed knowledge needs that
guided this study, which were based on knowledge stakeholder goal attainment needs commonly
mentioned during informal interviews, and the literature review including Clark and Estes
(2008). These authors mention the increasing of declarative, procedural and metacognitive
knowledge as being necessary to the mastery of information and skills that can be applied in new
and novel situations, such as will be necessary in the implementation JISC. Based on this
assertion and upon other theoretical principles, Table 6 represents the knowledge needs either
according to their level of being validated, being a high probability of being validated, or as not
being validated. Table 6 also includes the guiding principle(s) upon which these determinations
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 197

were made, as well as recommendations based on their level of having been validated along with
the level of each need's priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal of full JISC implementation.
Table 7: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause, Need, or
Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
JCS Judaic/Israel studies
Teachers lack a meaningful
understanding of both the
sacred vision and complex
realities of Israel, past,
present, and future to
successfully teach Israel
Education in a pluralistic
environment. (D-C)

N N Educating people
with meaningful
information that is
connected to prior
knowledge leads to
better learning
outcomes (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2007).

Education is an
effective method to
increase
organizational
capacity for its
personnel to
“generate new
conceptual
knowledge that will
solve novel
problems and
handle novel job
challenges” (Clark
& Estes, 2008, p.
63).

The best way to
help employees
maximize the
information learned
is to have them
summarize and
translate it into new
strategies or
methods that they
can apply in their
own work
environment (Clark
& Estes, 1999).
Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers an educational
workshop/training, which
provides the theoretical,
conceptual, and historical
frameworks that serve as the
basis for JISC and its 21st
century approach, with
opportunities to summarize
the information learned and
to generate strategies based
on the information that may
be applicable to their
teaching practice.

JCS Judaic/Israel studies
Teachers are not able to identify
and understand best practice
that might serve as exemplars
HP Y Mastery requires
the learning of
relevant skills
accompanied by
integrative practice,
Provide Judaic / Israel
studies teachers properly
sequenced training in
identifying and
understanding best practices
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 198

or points of reference for Israel
studies. (D-C)

and the knowledge
of when and how to
apply them (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2007).

Structuring the
training of new
skills in either the
order that the job
requires them to be
done, or from
information that is
simpler to that
which is more
complex leads to
greater mastery of
those skills (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

that might serve as
exemplars or points of
reference for Israel studies,
which provides them with
the opportunity to practice
these skills and receive
feedback on their
performance.

JCS Judaic/Israel studies
Teachers lack the procedural
knowledge necessary to
implement the flipped
classroom method and to model
its use in their own learning
process. (P)

V Y Mastery requires
the learning of
relevant skills
accompanied by
integrative practice,
and the knowledge
of when and how to
apply them (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2007).

Structuring the
training of new
skills in either the
order that the job
requires them to be
done, or from
information that is
simpler to that
which is more
complex leads to
greater mastery of
those skills (Clark
and Estes, 2008).

Aiding in the
transfer of new
skills promotes their
mastery (Mayer,
2011).

The modeling of
new skills within
training improves
mastery of those
Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers recurring and
properly sequenced/
scaffolded training in
implementing the flipped
classroom method, which
provides them with modeling
of the method in their own
learning of it and the
opportunity to practice its
use and receive feedback on
their performance.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 199

skills (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).
JCS Judaic/Israel studies
lack the schema in
understanding students’
learning difficulties and
misunderstandings, based
on questions posed by
students in class. (M)
N N Education is an
effective way of
preparing people to
handle novel and
unexpected
situations (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

The modeling of
new skills within
training improves
mastery of those
skills (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).
Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers metacognitive
schematic in house education
in the recognition and
understanding of students’
learning difficulties and
misunderstandings, which
includes the modeling of
how to metacognitively
recognize them based on
questions posed by students
in class.
JCS Judaic/Israel studies
Teachers lack sufficient
pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK) of
JISC, to take advantage
of critical teaching
moments occurring in the
classroom to maximize
the learning potential of
these opportunities. (M)
HP Y Education is an
effective way of
preparing people to
handle novel and
unexpected
situations (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

The modeling of
new skills within
training improves
mastery of those
skills (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).

Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers on-going education
on both the conceptual and
methodological components
of JISC.

Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers on-going training on
content and procedural
components of JISC, which
includes modeling of
metacognitive reflective
practices in relation to the
delivery of its content.
JCS Judaic/Israel studies
Teachers need to learn to
reflect on their actual teaching
to develop insights about
students’ learning difficulties.
(M)
HP Y Using
metacognitive
strategies, such as
debriefing, aid in
the mastery of new
metacognitive skills
and learning (Baker,
2006).

The modeling of
new skills within
training improves
mastery of those
skills (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).

Provide Judaic/Israel studies
teachers on-going training on
metacognitive reflective
practices in relation to
student learning, which
includes modeling, practice
and feedback of these
practices together with
subsequent debriefing of
actual challenging teaching
experiences.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 200

Mastery requires
the learning of
relevant skills
accompanied by
integrative practice,
and the knowledge
of when and how to
apply them (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2006).

Guided practice
accompanied by
constructive
feedback leads to
high impact
learning (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
*Indicate knowledge type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (D)eclarative;
(P)rocedural; (M)etacognitive
Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Being that JISC
implementation would require the mastering of new pedagogical content, which includes being
able to identify and understand best practice that might serve as exemplars or points of reference
for JS, there is high probability that they would require new learning in relation to this type of
knowledge. Schraw and McCrudden (2007) found that educating people with meaningful
information that is connected to prior knowledge leads to better learning outcomes. This would
suggest that providing learners with educational opportunities in which they found meaning in
the information being presented and are able to connect it to their prior knowledge on the subject
matter, would result in better understanding, cognitive integration, and recall of the content being
taught. The recommendation is to perhaps provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers an educational
workshop/training, which covers the theoretical, conceptual, and historical frameworks that serve
as the basis for JISC and its 21st century approach and builds on their prior knowledge of this
subject matter, while meaningfully connecting it to their own values as Judaic studies educators
in the 21st century.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 201

Clark and Estes (2008) prescribe education as an effective method to increase
organizational capacity for its personnel to “generate new conceptual knowledge that will solve
novel problems and handle novel job challenges” (p. 63), and that the best way to help
employees maximize the information learned is to have them summarize and translate it into new
strategies or methods that they can apply in their own work environment (Clark & Estes,
1999). They describe these educational techniques as helping learners to translate the knowledge
gained in educational experiences into “technologies” (p. 1) that can be employed in novel ways
to meet unexpected challenges that may arise within the work environment, and that the process
of creating these technologies helps learners to identify the “active ingredients” (p. 17) (i.e. what
works) within the information they are learning that have the capacity to help them solve future
problems. For these reasons, the recommendation being made in this study is to provide JCS
Judaic/Israel studies teachers with an educational workshop/training in advance of their
implementation of JISC, in which they will discover the theoretical, conceptual, and historical
frameworks that serve as the basis for it. They will also be educated about JISC’s 21st century
approach to teaching, and will be asked to summarize and translate that knowledge into
pedagogical strategies that they can later apply in the teaching of JICS.
Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. As described and
discussed in the findings section of Chapter Four, JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers require the
procedural knowledge necessary to implement the flipped classroom method and to model its use
in their own learning process (P). Schraw and McCrudden (2007) establish that mastery of
procedural knowledge requires the learning of relevant skills accompanied by integrative
practice, and the knowledge of when and how to apply them. Additionally, Denler, Wolters, and
Benzon (2009) demonstrated that the modeling of new skills within training improves mastery of
those skills. Translated into training, this principle suggests that offering learners in need of
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 202

procedural knowledge the opportunity to have new procedures explained and modeled for them
results in increased acquisition of the new procedural knowledge. This training should include
proper use of procedures and when to use them, followed by the opportunity for learners to
practice what they have observed in the presence of their trainer and then to receive corrective
feedback. The recommendation is therefore to provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers training in
the implementation of the flipped classroom method, which provides them with modeling of
procedures, the opportunity to practice them during the training, and the offering of corrective
feedback on their performance.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that structuring the training of new skills in either the
order that the job requires them to be done, or from information that is simpler to that which is
more complex (scaffolding) leads to greater mastery of those skills. The rationale behind this
idea is that when the training of new skills mirrors the way that they will need to be applied in
the actual job context, then it is easier for the learner to transfer the new skill to their teaching
practice. This concept is supported by Mayer (2011) who showed that aiding in the transfer of
new skills promotes their mastery. Therefore, based on the above, the recommendation of this
study is to provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers recurring and properly sequenced/scaffolded
training in implementing the flipped classroom method, which provides them with modeling of
the method in their own learning of it and the opportunity to practice its use and receive
feedback, as well as a graphic job aid that reminds them of the model, its procedures and their
applications.
Metacognitive knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. As described
and discussed in the findings section of Chapter Four, JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers need to
learn to metacognitively reflect on their actual teaching to develop insights about students’
learning difficulties (M). Although these skills cannot be necessarily readily observed, as they
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 203

are internal cognitive activities (Flavell, 1976), practitioners/trainers of metacognitive reflection
can be observed while in the process of doing so, and through verbal articulation of the internal
processes they are performing, can model their use for learners (Clark & Estes, 2008). This
metacognitive training method can help learners be able to practice reflection effectively by
using the same articulation method, and then receiving feedback leading to metacognitive skills
mastery (Clark & Estes, 2008). This method helps learning occur because as with procedural
knowledge above, the modeling of new skills, together with integrative practice and feedback
within training, improves mastery of those skills (Denler et al., 2009; Schraw & McCrudden,
2007). The recommendation is therefore to provide Judaic/Israel studies teachers with ongoing
training on metacognitive reflective practices in relation to their teaching practice and student
learning, which includes modeling, practice and feedback of these practices together with
subsequent debriefing of actual challenging teaching experiences.
Using metacognitive strategies such as debriefing, has been shown to aid in the mastery
of new metacognitive skills (Baker, 2006). Baker describes the debriefing process as one in
which once a learner has improved metacognitive awareness through training, giving the learner
the opportunity to practice metacognitive strategies after the real-life context in which the
training was intended to address can lead to greater mastery of the metacognitive skill and its
frequency of use and proper application. It is therefore the recommendation of this study to
provide JS teachers ongoing training on metacognitive reflective practices in relation to student
learning, which includes modeling, practice and feedback of these practices together with
subsequent recurring debriefing sessions of actual challenging teaching experiences to help them
further master the skill of using metacognitive reflection as a way of understanding student
learning difficulties. A graphic job aid that reminds them of the model, its procedures and their
use, will also be supplied for greater retention and application (Clark & Estes, 2008).
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 204

Motivation Recommendations
The motivation needs listed in Table 7 represent the complete list of assumed motivation
needs that guided this study based on the most frequently mentioned motivation influences to
achieving the stakeholders’ goal garnered during informal interviews and supported by the
literature review and review of motivational theory. Clark and Estes (2008) list three stages of
motivation towards completing a task – active choice, persistence and mental effort. Active
choice is making the active decision to begin an activity, while persistence is putting in an
adequate amount of time necessary to complete the task despite possible distractions, and mental
effort is expending the necessary amount of cognitive energy into the task to finalize it.
In relation to the stakeholder goal of implementing the JISC curriculum, active choice
would be JS faculty deciding to engage with the curriculum materials and training, persistence
would be them continuing to utilize the materials in their teaching practice and actively
participate in training follow up activities, and mental energy would be them adequately
engaging in training opportunities enough to master the curriculum, its rationales, methods and
context, as well as their subsequent teaching of JISC in their classrooms. The motivational
needs/influencers listed below in Table 7 relate to these various stages of the implementation
process, and as such, have either been validated or have a high probability of being validated and
have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 7 also shows the
recommendations for these influences or needs based on theoretical motivation principles
including: self-efficacy, utility value, and attributions.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 205

Table 8: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers require
a perceived usability of
flipped class
technologies, as well as
self-efficacy in using
them to increase their
acceptance of these
technologies. (SE)

HP Y One’s utility value of an
activity can be increased
by improving self-
efficacy of skills
necessary to perform
that activity. This
improved self-
efficacy can be
improved through those
skills being modeled,
practiced and then
receiving feedback on
performance, resulting
in increased motivation
to perform that skill
(Pajares, 2006).

Motivation to engage in
a task results from
experiences and beliefs
especially in relation to
one’s ability to
effectively complete it.
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers training in the
use of flipped-class
technologies which includes
modeling, practice and
immediate and ongoing
constructive feedback.
JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers’
beliefs about
teaching and learning
need to be in
alignment with their
perceived value of
JISC for those beliefs
to play a role in
increasing their
motivation to
successfully
implement it. (UV)
V Y Providing rationales that
include the utility value
of the knowledge being
learned can help learners
develop positive values
about that knowledge
(Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003).

Connecting people's
personal values with
work related goals are
an effective way of
increasing their
motivation to reach them
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers JISC training
that includes rationales for its
usefulness and value in relation
to increasing student learning
and engagement.

JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers need to
be motivated by their
own interest,
enjoyment or perceived
value of education to
nurture a more student-
HP Y Connecting training
materials and activities
to learner’s interests and
having them be relevant
and applicable to real
world tasks can increase
motivation (Pintrich,
2003).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers JISC training
that includes relevant and real
world applicable tasks,
materials and activities aligned
with their own interests.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 206

centered learning
environment. (UV)

Intrinsic motivators such
as mastery or personal
interest are the most
effective and enduring
ways of motivating
people (Clark & Estes,
2008).
JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers need
to reflect how their
preconceived notions
about their students
can influence student
engagement and
learning. (A)
V Y Individuals can be
motivated by adapting
their attributions and
control beliefs to ones
related to their own
effort rather than
external factors
(Pintrich, 2003).

Motivation is increased
when one attributes
success to intrinsic
factors over external
ones (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers JISC training
that includes regular and
monitored reflective
opportunities to consider their
own attributions and control
beliefs in relation to student
engagement in Judaic studies
and offer alternative ones that
focus on their own effort in
implementing JISC as being
able to have a positive effect on
increasing student learning and
engagement.
JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers need to
expect that their
implementation of the
new strategies and
approaches of JISC will
have a positive effect
on student learning for
them to implement
those strategies and
approaches more often.
(A)
V Y Attributing success to
one's own effort
increases one's
motivation to learn and
implement new skills
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2009).

Motivation is increased
when one attributes
success to intrinsic
factors over external
ones (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Provide JCS Judaic/Israel
studies teachers JISC training
that includes observing veteran
teachers teaching JISC
materials and then receiving
student feedback about the
effects it has had on their
learning and engagement.
*Indicate motivational theory type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (S)elf-
(E)fficacy; (U)tility (V)alue; (A)ttribution
Self-Efficacy. Based on JISC being a new curriculum for the school, JCS JS teachers
presumably require a perceived usability of flipped class technologies, as well as self-efficacy in
using them to increase their acceptance of these technologies. Pajares and Valiante (2006) states
that one’s self-efficacy of a skill can be improved through modeling, practicing, and then
receiving feedback on performance, resulting in increased motivation to perform that skill. This
principle leads to the conclusion that since JISC and its implementation will require the learning
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 207

of new technologies to meet the needs of the flipped classroom approach, teachers’ sense of self-
efficacy and usability of these skills and technologies will be key to successful implementation
of JISC. It is likely then that they will need time to learn, practice and receive coaching on the
flipped class model and its various components. The recommendation of this study is therefore
to perhaps provide JCS JS teachers training in the use of flipped-class technologies that includes
modeling by more skilled teachers, practice and constructive feedback to build learners’ comfort
level and self-efficacy of JISC use.
Clark and Estes (2008) state that motivation to engage in a task results from experiences
and beliefs, especially in relation to one’s ability to effectively complete it. This relates to the
active choice stage of motivation that these authors describe as the first necessary step to
accomplish a task. In relation to JISC implementation, this would entail JCS JS teachers being
willing to engage with the flipped class components and technologies of the curriculum, despite
their lack of experience and self-efficacy with it. According to Clark and Estes’ outlook,
overcoming this lack of self-efficacy and perceived usability through training would assumably
increase these teachers’ motivation to implement the curriculum. This is the rationale of this
study recommending perhaps to provide JCS JS studies teachers training in the use of flipped-
class technologies to demonstrate its value and utility in order to increase their self-efficacy and
motivation.
Utility Value. As described and discussed in the findings section of Chapter Four, JCS
JS teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning need to be in alignment with their perceived
value of JISC for those beliefs to play a role in increasing their motivation to successfully
implement it. Both Eccles (2006) and Pintrich (2003) showed that providing rationales that
include the utility value of the knowledge being learned can help learners develop positive values
about that knowledge. In relation to implementing JISC, this idea applies to JCS JS teachers
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 208

understanding how it will help them in teaching and motivating 21st century learners, thereby
making their jobs easier and more rewarding. It is the recommendation of this study to therefore
perhaps provide JCS JS teachers JISC training provided and modeled by expert teachers and
reinforced through job aids, which all include rationales for its usefulness and value in relation to
increasing student learning and engagement.
Clark and Estes (2008) emphasize connecting people's personal values with work related
goals as an effective way of increasing their motivation to reach those goals. This relates
directly to the persistence stage of motivation that these authors describe as being necessary for
reaching a goal. The thinking is that in regards to motivating people to reach an organizational
goal, if you want employees to stick with the learning and implementation process long enough
to reach its conclusion, then having that goal connected to their own personal values helps to
increase their motivation. Based on this assumption, it is therefore the recommendation of this
study to perhaps provide JCS JS teachers JISC training that includes rationales in connection to
their own values as Jewish educators for them to better accept its usefulness and value in relation
to increasing student learning and engagement.
Attributions. As described and discussed in the findings section of Chapter Four, JCS
Judaic/Israel studies teachers need to expect that their implementation of new strategies and
approaches found in JISC will have a positive effect on student learning for them to implement
those strategies and approaches more often. Anderman and Anderman (2009) describe how
helping learners attribute success to one's own effort increases their motivation to learn and
implement new skills. Being that JISC implementation will require teachers to learn and
implement new skills, they will require enough motivation to engage and persist and will have
the energy to do so. If they attribute the implementation of JISC and the subsequent benefits it
will bring to their students' learning to their own effort in its implementation, then according to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 209

Anderman and Anderman’s thinking, it should increase their motivation to implement JISC. It is
therefore the recommendation of this study to perhaps provide JCS JS teachers JISC training that
includes observing the implementation of JISC materials by more skilled teachers and then
receive student feedback about the positive effects it has had on their learning and engagement,
so that teachers can make the connection between their own efforts in its implementation and
student learning.
The above assertion is in line with Clark and Estes (2008), who state that motivation is
increased when one attributes success to intrinsic factors over external ones. The rationale
behind this idea is that it empowers learners with the belief that the determining factors of
success are within their own control and related to their own values, not someone else's. Intrinsic
factors here relate to the effort teachers will need to exert to master JISC elements in the
implementation process, as well as their positive associations with that effort and the benefits
JISC implementation will bring to their students' learning and their own teaching practices. This
is the basis of this study’s recommendation to perhaps provide JCS Judaic/Israel studies teachers
JISC training that will increase their own intrinsic motivation by including observations of the
implementation of JISC materials by more expert teachers in the flipped class model, and then
receive student feedback about the positive effects it has had on their learning and engagement.
Organization Recommendations
Table 8 lists all the assumed organizational influences with their expected probability of
being validated. These assumed influencers were generated based on the most frequently
mentioned organizational influences to achieve the stakeholder's goal during informal interviews
with JCS stakeholders and are supported by the literature review and the review of organizational
culture theory. Clark and Estes (2008) argue that the failure of organizations and stakeholders to
attain goals are commonly due to organizational barriers such as lack of resources, or their not
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 210

being driven by the organization's mission. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) delineate
organizational culture into two separate constructs — models and settings — with models
referring to the unspoken yet observable shared beliefs and values held by those within the
organization that form the unspoken rules of how people conduct themselves within the
organization, and settings referring to the physical settings, resources and context, such as
policies and procedures in which the organizations activities take place. Therefore, both cultural
model and setting barriers must be identified and validated to assess their level of alignment with
organizational performance goals. As such, Table 8, outlines these assumed organizational
influencers as either having been validated or having a high probability of being validated and of
having a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 8 also shows the
recommendations for these influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 9: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence: Cause, Need, or
Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
There is a need to increase
the culture of
organizational learning at
JCS to improve that
organization’s capacity to
implement JICS. (CM)
V Y The extent and speed to
which an organization can
adjust to the demands of
performance improvement
efforts is directly related to
the extent to which it
collaboratively engages in
new learning (Kazar,
2005).

Learning that takes place
in a social context and
includes cooperative
learning and cognitive
apprenticeships leads to
improved mastery of new
knowledge and skills
(Scott & Palincsar, 2009).

Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned with
Establish cohorts of
Judaic/Israel studies
teachers who together with
leadership will give input
towards the design of JISC
professional development
activities based on their
own perceived needs.

Establish cohorts of
Judaic/Israel studies
teachers who together with
leadership will set
implementation and
learning goals and
timeframes for full JISC
Implementation.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 211

goals established
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008)
There is a need to foster a
community of learners
among Judaic/Israel
teachers at JCS engaged in
professional development
to increase changes in
practice and knowledge
related to JISC
implementation. (CM)
HP Y The extent and speed to
which an organization can
adjust to the demands of
performance improvement
efforts is directly related to
the extent to which it
collaboratively engages in
new learning (Kazar,
2005).

Learning that takes place
in a social context and
includes cooperative
learning and cognitive
apprenticeships leads to
improved mastery of new
knowledge and skills
(Scott & Palincsar, 2009).

Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned with
goals established
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008)
Establish small cohorts of
Judaic/Israel studies
teachers who together with
leadership will give input
towards the design of JISC
professional development
activities based on their
own perceived needs.

Judaic/Israel studies
teachers together with
leadership will set
implementation timeframes,
accountability parameters,
and learning goals for JISC
Implementation.
There is a need for
increased accountability in
Jewish/Israel studies at
JCS in order to make
curricular changes. (CS)
V Y In order to accountably
improve organizational
performance, it is essential
to measure learning and
performance in relation to
desired outcomes (Dowd
& Shieh, 2013; Golden,
2006).

Organization wide
assessment of an
improvement program’s
results are key to
supporting any change
effort’s success (Clark &
Estes. 2008).
With input from all relevant
stakeholders, draft a
strategic plan for the
visioning, communication,
processes, training,
assessment, accountability
parameters, outcomes and
timeline necessary to fully
implement JISC.

Set, clearly communicate,
and assess S.M.A.R.T.
goals for the entire
Judaic/Israel department
and related stakeholders in
relation to complete JISC
implementation.
There is a need for
effective organizational
change management for
the various aspects
necessary to adopt the
flipped-class approach of
JISC to be successfully
implemented. (CS)
HP Y Setting clear, current and
challenging organizational
improvement goals
improves learning,
motivation and
performance towards the
accomplishment of those
With input from all relevant
stakeholders, draft a
strategic plan for the
visioning, communication,
processes, training,
assessment, outcomes and
timeline necessary to fully
implement JISC.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 212

goals (Kluger & DeNisi,
1996).

Organization wide
assessment of an
improvement program’s
results are key to
supporting any change
effort’s success (Clark &
Estes. 2008).

Set, clearly communicate,
and assess S.M.A.R.T.
goals for the entire
Judaic/Israel department
and related stakeholders in
relation to complete JISC
implementation.
*Indicate Organizational construct type for each influence listed using these abbreviations:
(C)ultural (M)odel; (C)ultural (S)etting
Cultural models. As described and discussed in the findings section of Chapter Four,
there is a need to foster a community of learners among Judaic/Israel teachers at MCJS engaged
in professional development to increase changes in practice and knowledge related to JISC
implementation. This is line with Kazar (2005), who in describing a learning organization, states
that the extent and speed to which an organization can adjust to the demands of performance
improvement efforts is directly related to the extent to which it collaboratively engages in new
learning. This idea is also supported by Scott and Palincsar (2009), who showed that learning
that takes place in a social context and includes cooperative learning and cognitive
apprenticeships leads to improved mastery of new knowledge and skills such as are necessary for
JISC implementation. To foster such an organizational cultural model at JCS, this study
recommends perhaps establishing policies and procedures that result in the formation of cohorts
of JS teachers who, together with leadership, will give input towards the design of JISC
professional development activities based on their own perceived needs. They will also set
implementation and learning goals and timeframes for full JISC Implementation, and then
engage cooperatively in new knowledge and skills training and learning as a community of
learners.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 213

The cooperative aspect of goal setting and knowledge and skills attainment mentioned
above is in line with Clark and Estes (2008), who state that organizational performance increases
when processes and resources are aligned with goals established collaboratively. This idea is
like the motivational principle that these same authors explain in relation to individual learning
based on Weiner’s (2005) attributions theory, which states that giving learners more control in
the setting of learning activities and goals leads to an increase in their motivation and thereby
mastery. Here too, Clark and Estes are applying this way of thinking to organizational learning,
which is really nothing more than many individuals learning together. This reinforces the
recommendation of this study, which is to establish cohorts of Judaic/Israel studies teachers who
together with leadership will give input towards the design of JISC professional development
activities based on their own perceived needs, and to set policies and procedures that will guide
the implementation of JISC, as well as learning goals and timeframes for full JISC
implementation.
Cultural settings. Being that JISC implementation represents a significant change effort
for JCS, there is a high probability need for effective organizational change management for the
various aspects necessary to adopt the flipped-class approach of JISC to be successfully
implemented. Practically, effective organizational change management would involve the
establishment by leadership, together with input from all stakeholders, of clear, current and
challenging organizational improvement goals, which according to Kluger and DeNisi (1996)
has been shown to improve learning, motivation and performance towards the accomplishment
of performance goals. It is therefore the recommendation of this study for JCS leadership, with
input from all relevant stakeholders, including board members, teachers, students and parents, to
draft a strategic plan for the visioning, communication, processes, training, assessment, outcomes
and timeline necessary to fully implement JISC.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 214

The assessment aspect of the above strategic plan is vital to its success, as organization-
wide assessment of an improvement program’s results are key to supporting any change effort’s
success (Clark & Estes. 2008). This assessment will provide the necessary oversight of every
stage of JISC implementation, thereby increasing the accountability of all stakeholders involved
with input from all relevant stakeholders. It is therefore the further recommendation of this study
to set, clearly communicate, and assess S.M.A.R.T. goals for the entire Judaic/Israel department
and related stakeholders in relation to complete JISC implementation. SMART is an acronym
first conceived by Doran (1981) to remember proven and effective goal setting parameters. For
them to be SMART goals they must be Specific, Measurable, Assignable (or Agreed upon),
Realistic and Time-bound.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The integrated implementation and evaluation plan described below is based on the New
World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which is an updated version of the
original model first developed by Douglas Kirkpatrick in the 1950s that moves through four
levels of evaluating training including reaction, learning, behaviors, and results. This New World
updated model reverses the order of the levels placing the identification of the desired results of
training as the primary focus so that outcomes guide the entire training and evaluation process. In
this new model, it is leading indicators or sub-goals, such as ones relating directly to a
stakeholder goal, which act as guideposts towards the summit or ultimate organizational goal
(level four). This new model allows for a backwards approach in which the evaluation of
training never loses sight of the ultimate purpose of that training in the first place. This benefit is
accomplished by identifying “critical behaviors” that would indicate that the desired learning
from the training has taken place (level two) and is being transferred into the actual work place
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 215

(level three). For this to happen, there must be the required drivers that will supply the needed
motivation and incentive for the critical behaviors to happen. This process begins with the level
of satisfaction and reaction of participants to the training (level one) and concludes with them
buying into the changes that are being introduced through the training initiative and
implementation process. Therefore, by integrating the implementation and evaluation plan
according to this reversed Kirkpatrick Model, the relevance of the necessary steps needed to
reach the larger organizational goal is less likely to be lost along the way, thereby increasing the
likelihood of participant acceptance and successful change (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The purpose of Jewish Community Schools (JCS) is to “develop students with sharp
minds, generous hearts, and kind souls” as it seeks to “foster a deep connection to Israel, a
lifelong dedication to the Jewish people, and a passionate commitment to the service of
humanity” (JCS website). For JCS to accomplish the specifically Jewish and Israel related
aspects of its mission, it must ensure that students are adequately engaged and satisfied with their
Jewish/Israel learning. In today’s secular culture, this Jewish/Israel aspect of the school's
curriculum can be challenging, and JCS is therefore engaged in a process of assessing its
Jewish/Israel studies curriculum, looking for ways of making it more appropriate and relevant for
21st century learners. Any Jewish/Israel curricular changes that JCS adopts will need to be
implemented by its Jewish/Israel studies faculty, so this study examined the knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs of JCS’ Judaic/Israel studies faculty members regarding
them being able to implement a new “Judaic/Israel studies for the 21
st
century” curriculum. The
proposed solution described above to meeting these needs includes providing comprehensive
educational and training opportunities, related follow-up support and supervision, along with the
necessary collaborative organizational change management to see the implementation process
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 216

through to completion. These are all intended to assure complete implementation of JISC, which
is meant to help JCS reach its organizational performance goal that by June 2020, all students
will be able to articulate relevance and personal connections between their own lives and
Judaic/Israel studies content materials and concepts.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators are shown in Table 9 in the form of
JCS’ external and internal outcomes, metrics and methods. External outcomes are dependent on
the reaching of internal outcomes of the training and organizational support for JISC
implementation.
Table 10: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. Increased student satisfaction with
Judaic studies.
An increase in the score of
questions that probe students’
satisfaction with Judaic studies
from flipped class lesson’s end
of unit LMS surveys.
Collect LMS data from the
flipped class end of unit surveys.
2. Increased parental satisfaction with
Judaic studies.
An increase in the Net Promote
score relating to questions that
probe parents’ satisfaction with
Judaic studies.
Collect yearly data from the
school's Net Promote survey.
Internal Outcomes
1. Increase the number of flipped lessons
in Judaic/Israel studies.
The number of flipped lessons
being taught in Judaic/Israel
studies.
Collect quarterly data from the
schools LMS and curriculum
mapping/development software
(Atlas).
2. Judaic/Israel studies teachers
demonstrate being continually engaged
in a process of incorporating 21st
century pedagogical methods and
technologies into their teaching through
attending PD opportunities offered by
the school for this purpose.
The amount of professional
development hours that is spent
on this helping Judaic/Israel
studies faculty master 21st
century pedagogical
methodologies and technologies.
Solicit quarterly data from the
rabbinic director, and
Judaic/Israel department chairs
who oversee professional
development.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the Jewish/Israel faculty members
involved in the implementation of JISC. The first critical behavior is that Judaic/Israel faculty
must attend and adequately engage in training opportunities offered by JCS related to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 217

the implementation of JISC. The second critical behavior is that they must complete the practice
of flipped-class lesson plan development exercises as part of the implementation training
process. Table 10 list the specific metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome
behaviors.
Table 11: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Judaic/Israel Studies Faculty
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Judaic/Israel faculty
must attend and
adequately engage in
training opportunities
offered by the
organization related to
implementation of JISC.
The number of times
Judaic/Israel faculty
attend and adequately
engage in training
opportunities offered
related to
implementation of JISC.
1a. Implementation Lead shall
track faculty attendance for all
training opportunities offered
related to implementation of
JISC.

1a. For one year, at
the conclusion of
each training
session.

1b. Implementation Lead shall
quantify faculty engagement
during training opportunities
through faculty and trainer’s
engagement/satisfaction survey
data.
1b. For one year, at
the conclusion of
each training
session.
2. Judaic/Israel faculty
completing practice
flipped-class lesson plan
development exercises.
The number of
successfully completed
practice flipped-class
lesson plans produced
by faculty.
2. Implementation Lead shall
track the number of successfully
flipped lessons created by each
faculty member.
2. Monthly during
first year of
implementation and
then quarterly for
another two years.

Required drivers. Jewish/Israel studies faculty need the encouragement and support of
JCS administrators and the organization for them to transfer what they learn in the JISC training
as intended into the classroom. Rewards and methods of monitoring JISC implementation are
therefore established for achievement of critical behaviors to increase organizational support of
JISC implementation. Table 11 shows these recommended drivers to support critical behaviors
of Jewish/Israel faculty involved in the implementation of JISC.
Table 12: Required Drivers to Support Judaic/Israel Studies Faculty Critical Behaviors (CB)
Method(s) Timing
CB
1,2
Reinforcing

Utilizing mandatory professional development sessions to offer
training in the implementation of flipped class methodology.
Ongoing 1, 2
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 218

Reminders during Judaic department meetings about completing
practice flipped lesson exercises.
Ongoing 1, 2
Conducting major training in a summer retreat style where
faculty are able to be fully immersed in the learning in a relaxing
and satisfying environment, with annual follow-ups during the
next two summers.
Annual for 3 years 1, 2

Encouraging

Having faculty present their completed flipped lessons for peer
review during department meetings.
Monthly 1, 2
Publicizing in the school’s monthly online publication lessons
teachers have flipped with links that parents can follow to view
the lessons and add comments.
Monthly 1, 2
Conducting major training in a summer retreat style where
faculty are able to be fully immersed in the learning in a relaxing
and satisfying environment, with annual follow-ups during the
next two summers.
Annual for 3 years 1, 2

Rewarding

Rewarding teachers with compensation or royalties for flipped
lessons produced at the school that later are made use of by other
educational providers.
Annually 1, 2
Conducting major training in a summer retreat style where
faculty are able to be fully immersed in the learning in a relaxing
and satisfying environment, with annual follow-ups during the
next two summers.
Annual for 3 years 1, 2

Monitoring

Administrative review of surveys at the end of Flipped lessons
for students to give feedback.
Ongoing 1, 2
Work of Judaic faculties’ flipped instruction review by
department chair and Implementation Lead
Two months after training and then
ongoing, then quarterly in second and
third year of implementation.
1, 2

Organizational support. To support Jewish/Israel studies faculty’s critical behaviors in
relation to JISC implementation, it is being recommended that JCS establish small cohorts of
Judaic/Israel studies teachers who will give input towards the design of JISC professional
development activities based on their own perceived needs. With this input, JCS leadership will
then draft a strategic plan for the visioning, communication, processes, training, assessment,
outcomes and timeline necessary to fully implement JISC, and adjust that plan accordingly as
needed. This plan will include setting, clearly communicating, and assessing S.M.A.R.T. goals
for the entire Judaic/Israel department and related stakeholders in relation to complete JISC
implementation. An implementation lead person will be designated to oversee and manage the
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 219

entire implementation effort, and to make alterations within the process as needed, which will
include all four levels of the Kirkpatrick New World Model.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, most notably the
JISC flipped class model implementation training, Judaic/Israel studies faculty will be able to:
1. Describe the theoretical, conceptual, and historical frameworks that serve as the basis for
JISC and its 21st century approach with 100% accuracy, (DF & DC)
2. Summarize the information learned, (D)
3. Generate strategies based on the training that is applicable to their teaching practice, (D)
4. Identify best practices that might serve as exemplars or points of reference for
Judaic/Israel studies, (D)
5. Create a flipped class model lesson plan outline, (P)
6. Create a complete online flipped lesson module using the chosen LMS software (P)
7. Present their completed online flipped lesson module for peer review, including a rationale
for its design and components, (P)
8. Implement all JISC flipped lessons into their teaching practice, (P)
9. Metacognitively recognize students’ learning difficulties and misunderstandings based on
questions posed by students in class, (M)
10. Metacognitively reflect on their delivery of its JISC content, (M)
11. Metacognitively reflect on student learning as part of formative lesson planning, (M)
12. Value the flipped class model’s use in Judaic Studies, (UV)
13. Attribute students ‘satisfaction with Jewish/Israel studies to JISC’s use of the flipped class
model, (Attributions)
14. Provide rationale for the use of the flipped class model, (UV)
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 220

15. Provide rationale for self-monitoring reflective opportunities to consider student
engagement in Judaic studies, (UV and Attributions).
Program. The above learning goals will be achieved through mandating Judaic/Israel
studies. Teachers attend a multiple year summer training program which provides declarative,
conceptual, procedural and metacognitive knowledge and skills needed for the full
implementation of JISC, as well as consistent follow-up support during the three implementation
years and beyond as needed. To increase initial participant engagement and motivation, the
location of the training will be at a retreat center where the participants can enjoy a relaxing
training experience. This training will begin with the theoretical, conceptual, and historical
frameworks that serve as the basis for JISC and its 21st century approach. To increase its utility
value and thereby participant engagement with and retention of its learning material, this training
will include opportunities for participants to summarize the information learned and to generate
strategies based on the information covered that may be applicable to their own teaching practice
beyond JISC implementation. To increase learning and thereby participation, this training is
properly scaffolded and sequenced. It is primarily focused on identifying and understanding best
practices that might serve as exemplars or points of reference for Jewish/Israel studies, and to
provide participants with the opportunity to observe modeling of the flipped method in their own
learning of it, and then to practice flipped lessons development and teaching skills followed by
receiving feedback from trainers on their performance. The program is therefore blended with
flipped (asynchronous) and synchronous activities, consisting of 12 monthly e-learning modules
preceded by three two-day in-person summer workshops. The total time for completion is 60
hours over three years, with ongoing reinforcements and implementation support management on
a weekly, and monthly basis, including during department meetings.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 221

During the asynchronous e-learning modules, learners will learn how to use an LMS
program that is used to quickly, modularly build flipped lessons (e.g. Versal). They will
accomplish this learning by seeing the use of this LMS system demonstrated by veteran users.
Rationales for the use of various flipped class methods (e.g. video, short quiz, discussion board,
matching game, sequencer, etc.) will be provided through a job aid describing key modules (e.g.
Quizlet.com) and their proper use/incorporation into a flipped lesson. After the demonstrations,
the learners will be encouraged to practice using the module and receive feedback from peers
and the instructor. During the synchronous in person sessions, the focus will be on applying
what learners have learned asynchronously to implementing JISC flipped classes, as well as
building self-efficacy in developing their own flipped lessons.
Components of learning. The proper implementation of JISC will require many forms
of knowledge ranging from declarative, to procedural, to metacognitive, and each one of these
areas is best learned and evaluated using different methods. Therefore, various components of
learning are utilized with each covering the various types of knowledge. For declarative
knowledge, since mastery is a necessary preparation for application of that knowledge, it is
important to evaluate it using appropriate methods such as multiple choice, matching, or short
answer. Procedural and metacognitive knowledge require the demonstration and or observation
of skills and comprehension of concepts in the presence of expert trainers and will therefore be
more of a focus for synchronous activities when meaningful feedback can be offered. For the
sake of learners’ motivation during training, it is important for them to see how it can be used in
the classroom as soon as possible. Judaic/Israel faculty will therefore be encouraged to produce
their own flipped lessons, which will be shared collectively for peer review on a rotating basis at
bi-weekly department meetings. Once finalized, these teacher-created lessons could be made
available for the use of other Jewish schools. If so, teachers would receive compensation or
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 222

royalties for their lessons as reward for their participation. The entire training will be framed
within the context of being able to implement new curriculum that the school is committed to
pursuing, and that faculty commitment and ability to implement the new curriculum and its
flipped methodology depends heavily on their commitment and ability to fully implement
JISC. They would be therefore reminded and encouraged to make that commitment to be
aligned with the school's current direction. Table 12 lists the timing and evaluation methods for
all the above-mentioned components of learning within this program.
Table 13: Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”

Knowledge checks using matching. In the asynchronous portions of the course during and after
video demonstrations.
Knowledge checks using multiple choice. In the asynchronous portions of the course during and after
video demonstrations.
Knowledge checks through discussions, “pair,
think, share” and other individual/group
activities.
In the asynchronous portions of the course, and periodically
during the in-person workshop and documented via
observation notes by training facilitator or Implementation
Lead.
Knowledge checks using short written answers In the asynchronous portions of the course, and periodically
during the in-person workshop and documented via answer
sheets.
Knowledge checks using guided reflection During the in-person workshop and follow-up sessions (e.g.
department meeting) documented via observation notes by
training facilitator or Implementation Lead.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”

During the asynchronous portions of the course
using scenarios with multiple-choice items.
In the asynchronous portions of the course at the end of each
module/lesson
Demonstration in groups and individually of
using the job aids to successfully perform the
skills.
During the in-person training sessions.
Positive reciprocal feedback from peers during
sharing of practice flipped class lesson plans.
During the workshops, and follow up sessions (e.g.
department meetings)
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
survey asking participants about their level of
proficiency before and after training.
At the end of the in-person training sessions.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Instructor’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that they
see the benefit of JISC implementation.
During the in-person training sessions.
Discussions of the value of what they are being
asked to do on the job.
During the in-person training sessions.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
item.
After the in-person training sessions.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 223

Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”

Survey items using scaled items Following each module/lesson in the asynchronous portions of
the course.
Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the in-person training sessions, and follow up sessions
(e.g. department meetings).
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
item.
After the course.
Group reflection on completed practice flipped
class lessons.
During follow up training sessions (e.g. department meetings).
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”

Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the in-person training sessions, and follow up sessions
(e.g. department meetings).
Create an individual and group action plan. During the in-person training sessions, and follow up training
sessions.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
item.
After the in-person training sessions.

Level 1: Reaction
Reaction to training experiences. Since according to the Kirkpatrick model participant
engagement, relevance and satisfaction with training can be an indicator of how much of the
material will be mastered and then transferred to the workplace, it is essential to gauge the extent
to which participants are engaged in and enjoying the training experience. To assess this
engagement, relevance and level of satisfaction, various methods and or tools will be applied at
different times during the asynchronous and in-person sessions, as well as after follow-up
training opportunities throughout the implementation of JISC. Table 13 lists the various
components that will be used to measure participant reactions to the JISC implementation
training program along with the timing for the application of these methods.
Table 14: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement

Data analytics in the learning management system Ongoing during asynchronous portion
of the course.
Completion of online modules/lessons/units Ongoing during asynchronous portion
of the course.
Observation by instructor/facilitator During the workshop
Observation by JCS Implementation Lead During the workshop
Attendance During the workshop
Completion of follow up practice exercises. Ongoing after follow up training
sessions.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 224

Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Relevance

Brief pulse-check with participants via survey (online) and discussion
(ongoing) upon completion of every module/lesson/unit and the in-
person workshops
After every module/lesson/unit and
the workshop

Follow up interviews with Implementation Lead. Within first three months after initial
training.
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Satisfaction

Brief pulse-check with participants via survey (online) and discussion
(ongoing)
After every module/lesson/unit and
the workshop

Course evaluation Two weeks after the course.
Retrospective post workshop satisfaction survey After the in-person training sessions,
and follow up training sessions.

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. The learning management
system (LMS) used for the asynchronous training modules includes a learning analytics tool that
will collect participant engagement data, including the time spent completing the
module. Additionally, the LMS will gauge each participant's level of factual, conceptual and or
procedural knowledge mastery, which is assessed and then reported through summative and
formative assessment tools built into the online training modules. Taken all together, this data
will indicate participant engagement with the asynchronous training. To further gauge relevance
and satisfaction, end of module surveys will also be administered by the LMS, which asks
participants questions relating to how much they feel they enjoyed and or benefited/learned from
the asynchronous training.
As a way of tracking engagement and satisfaction throughout the in-person workshops,
facilitators and trainers will periodically and consciously perform brief pulse-checks by asking
questions about participants’ feelings relating to the relevance of the learning to their jobs and
the implementation of JISC or the flipped class model of instruction (Level 1), as well
summatively at the workshop’s conclusion with the JISC Implementation training evaluation
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 225

instrument (see Appendix D). In order to gauge actual learning (Level 2), acquisition of
knowledge, skills, attitudes, confidence, and commitment to implement the information being
learned will be consistently assessed both formatively throughout the in person training and will
include checks for understanding using participant demonstrations of skills, verbal questions
form facilitators, cognitive games and or scenarios built into the training curriculum, as well
summatively with the JISC Implementation training evaluation instrument (see Appendix D).
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. A survey containing open
and scaled items using the Blended Evaluation approach (see Appendix E) will be administered
by the Implementation Lead around eight weeks after the start of each of the three primary in
person training sessions (each summer for the first three years of JISC implementation), and then
again at 20 and 40 weeks. The focus of these evaluations is to gauge all four levels of the
Kirkpatrick New World Model, which includes the participants’ feelings and thoughts about
their satisfaction and the relevance of the training (Level 1), as well as their self-efficacy and the
value of what they learned in training (Level 2), application of the training to the JISC
implementation process, and follow up support received from the implementation leaders and
colleagues, (Level 3), and the extent to which the training has helped them achieve their
stakeholder goal of fully implementing JISC in their classrooms towards the fulfillment of the
overall organizational goal of improving student satisfaction with Judaic/Israel studies (Level 4).
Data Analysis and Reporting
The external Kirkpatrick Level 4 goal of increased student satisfaction with Judaic
studies is measured by the collection of LMS data pertaining to students’ satisfaction from each
flipped module's student survey, which is automatically administered at the end of each module
by the LMS. The internal Kirkpatrick Level 4 goal of increasing the number of flipped lessons
taught in Judaic/Israel studies is measured through the Implementation Lead’s collection of
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 226

quarterly data from the school’s LMS and curriculum mapping/development software (Atlas),
which is calibrated and reviewed to track such data. Each semester, the Implementation Lead
will correlate this data with the average student satisfaction score from completed flipped
modules/lessons to measure JISC implementation and progress towards pre-determined student
satisfaction benchmarks, which are set at 35 for both the number of flipped lessons per year and
the desired student net promoter score as well. To easily represent this data in a usable form that
can help continually monitor and understand any correlational relationship between both
measures, this data will be displayed using the dashboard below (Figure 70). Similar dashboards
will be created to depict and monitor Levels 1, 2 and 3 of the Kirkpatrick New World Model
goals.

Figure 50: Sample of JISC Implementation Data and Analysis Dashboard.

Summary
Successful application of the New World Kirkpatrick Model in the design,
implementation and evaluation of a training program requires from its outset that attention be
paid first and foremost to the ultimate outcomes that the training is meant to achieve (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016). These outcomes serve as indicators and benchmarks within the training
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 227

evaluation process of whether the training is meeting its goals. Thus, it is essential to collect data
during and sometime after the training that seek to answer questions such as, did the training
meet expectations? And if not, why did it not? Or if it did, why did it? These questions help to
frame the analysis of evaluative data collected during and after the training to assess the success
or failure of the initiative.
In relation to the Level 3 critical behavior of increased flipping of lessons by teachers in
their instruction, based on data collected and analyzed thus far, the training program did not meet
the intended results or expectations. The reason for this failure appears to be due to a lack of
buy- in from Jewish studies departmental leadership who are needed to support the required
drivers within the implementation process of JISC. From data collected, it appears that this lack
of buy-in is due to them not being satisfied with the way in which decisions were made
pertaining to JISC development and implementation. This lack of support from Judaic
departmental leadership is an organizational barrier resulting in inadequate levels of
accountability from them necessary to reinforce the critical behaviors necessary for faculty to
achieve transfer of the knowledge and skills gained during training into the actual instruction
(Level 3).
I have outlined above how, based on the KMO gap analysis study findings at JCS, I
would utilize the New World Kirkpatrick Model within the implementation process of a new
21st Century Jewish/Israel studies curriculum (JISC) as it relates to the training of faculty whose
stakeholder’s goal is the full implementation of JISC. Therefore, all the training would be aimed
towards faculty gaining the necessary knowledge, skills, attitudes, and required commitment to
achieve their stakeholder goal. By following the New World Kirkpatrick Model through all four
levels of evaluation as it relates to JISC implementation and its required training of faculty, the
Implementation Lead will be empowered and informed to make any necessary adjustments
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 228

during the implementation process to support the faulty in their reaching full JISC
implementation. Through considering the results from the study in relation to full
implementation of JISC, the hope is that JCS can revitalize its Judaic/Israel studies programs,
enabling them to better serve the needs of their 21st century learners, and to achieve their
organizational goal of making these key components of the school's curriculum relevant for all
its students.
Recommendations for Further Study
Based on the limited scope of this study and the purposeful, non-randomized,
convenience method of participant selection, it is arguable that a larger study that incorporates JS
faculty from multiple Jewish days schools would produce more generalizable results and
recommendations for practice. Additionally, although 100% of the targeted population
participated in the survey section of this study, being that the targeted population only consisted
of 15 individuals affects the validity of the statistical data limiting it to a method of triangulation
of qualitative data collected. Another suggestion would be to conduct the same study at another
Jewish community school similar to JCS in size, philosophy, and population in order to be able
to compare the results of the two studies as a way of identifying cross-communal trends that may
be informative to the development of future Jewish educational strategies or approaches. It
would also be interesting to conduct similarly-designed studies within other religious
denominations such as Catholic schools who, presumably, would also face similar cultural and
religious dynamics such as those identified at JCS.
Conclusion
Conducting this study has helped clarify influencers affecting the level of student
engagement and satisfaction within Judaic/Israel studies (JS) along with the knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs necessary for JS faculty to implement 21
st
century
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 229

educational approaches. The interactions between administrators and teachers stood out as an
important cultural influencer that could inform curricular implementation efforts well beyond the
arena of Jewish day schools, and highlights the importance of collaborative change efforts as a
way of increasing their success. It is the hope of this researcher that the findings and
recommendations of this study will be used to inform curricular implantation efforts in
Jewish/Israel education and beyond.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 230

APPENDIX A
Survey Protocol
Thank you for participating in this survey designed to help Jewish Community schools better
understand how to implement 21
st
Century based Judaic/Israel curricular changes. Your
participation in this study is completely voluntary, and you will not be penalized in any way
shape or form for refusing to answer any or all its questions.
According to your opinion, and to the best of your ability, please answer the following
questions.

1. Teaching Judaic studies in a religiously pluralistic environment is more difficult than in a
non-pluralistic one?
a. Not at all
b. Somewhat
c. Moderately
d. Extremely

2. Jewish studies should have the same academic rigor as any other discipline.
a. Strongly disagree
b. Somewhat disagree
c. No opinion
d. Somewhat agree
e. Strongly agree

3. Do you believe that Jewish studies at JCS should be changed in any way to better suit today’s
learners?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
Why?_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 231

4. We should not tamper with traditional methods of teaching Judaism.
a. Strongly disagree
b. Somewhat disagree
c. No opinion
d. Somewhat agree
e. Strongly agree

5. I enjoy teaching Jewish studies at JCS.
a. None of the time
b. A little bit of the time
c. Most of the time
d. All of the time

6. Students are generally well behaved during Jewish studies classes I teach.
a. None of the time
b. A little bit of the time
c. A good bit of the time
d. All of the time

7. Compared to when I was a student, today’s teens are equally as interested in learning Jewish
studies.
a. Not at all
b. Somewhat
c. Moderately
d. Extremely

8. Our modern culture creates challenges to student engagement in Judaic studies.
a. Strongly disagree
b. Somewhat disagree
c. No opinion
d. Somewhat agree
e. Strongly agree

9. On a scale from 1-5, with 1 being barely engaged and 5 being extremely engaged, how
engaged are your students in Jewish studies.
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 5

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 232

10. How much influence do you believe you have over your students Jewish Identity?
a. Not at all
b. Somewhat
c. Moderately
d. Significantly

11. I am consulted on curricular decisions about Jewish studies at JCS.
a. Never
b. Sometimes
c. Frequently
d. Always

12. I am interested in learning new methods for teaching Jewish studies.
a. Strongly disagree
b. Somewhat disagree
c. No opinion
d. Somewhat agree
e. Strongly agree

13. I am familiar with the flipped class model of teaching.
a. Not at all
b. Somewhat
c. Unsure
d. Moderately
e. Significantly

14. I am interested in learning more about the flipped class model of teaching
a. Strongly disagree
b. Somewhat disagree
c. No opinion
d. Somewhat agree
e. Strongly agree

15. There are resources available to me at JCS for learning more about the flipped class model of
teaching.
a. Yes
b. No
c. Unsure

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 233

APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
Introductory Section
(1) Interviewer: “Good morning (afternoon, evening), my name is _____________ and I
will be conducting this interview. I want to begin by thanking you for taking the time
to participate in this study, which is part of my doctoral dissertation work, and that will
hopefully help Jewish Community schools better understand how to implement 21
st

Century based Judaic/Israel curricular changes. I also want to remind you that your
participation in this interview is completely voluntary, and that you will not be
penalized in any way shape or form for refusing to answer any or all my questions. Is
this clear”? (wait for affirmative response). “Thank you”!
(2) Interviewer: I also want to let you know that I will be recording today’s interview, but
that this recording is only for my own use so that I can accurately record your
thoughts. I want to reassure you that your participation in this study will be kept
completely confidential to the greatest extent possible, which includes not recording
your actual name, not sharing any of your personal data, as well as the destruction of
all audio tapes as soon as transcription has taken place, which will be within a month
of this interview. Is this clear and acceptable to you”? (wait for affirmative response).
“Thank you”!
Interview Questions
(1) Interviewer: “As I mentioned, the purpose of this study is to help inform the
development and implementation of 21
st
century Judaic/Israel studies curriculum.
Before we go deeper into this specific topic, could you please tell me a little about your
history with JCS”?
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 234

[This open-ended probing question goes to establishing rapport, collecting demographical data, and
establishing their credibility in terms of being aware of the culture of the school, and experience in
teaching the current Judaic/Israel curriculum.]
(2) Interviewer: “Thank you for that introduction into your history with the school. Now I
would like to ask you some questions about Jewish/Israel education in general. What
do you believe is the significance of Jewish/Israel education”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering the participant’s historical and meta cognitive
knowledge (K) about Judaic/Israel education, and details that might relate to what motivates them to be a
Judaic/Israel studies teacher. (M)]
(3) Interviewer: Some people think that Judaic/Israel studies differs from other
educational disciplines in terms of level of academic rigor. What are your thoughts on
this topic”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering the participant’s meta cognitive knowledge (K)
about Judaic/Israel educational methods, concepts and content, and details that might relate to what
motivates them to be a Judaic/Israel studies teacher (M), as well as their understanding of organizational
model and setting influencers such as the school’s religiously pluralistic nature (O).]
(4) Do you believe that Jewish/Israel education in general should be adjusted in anyway?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering the participant’s opinions about the current state
of Jewish education at JCS as well as their feeling about making changes to the current curriculum, which
both speak to motivational influencers such as attributions(M), and looks at organizational influencers
such as accountability and being a learning organization. (O)]
(5) Imagine for a moment you are being asked to design new Judaic/Israel studies
curriculum for the future. Give me some ideas that you would absolutely include for
today’s learners”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering the participant’s knowledge about 21
st
century
pedagogical methods (K), as well as opinions about the essential nature of Jewish/Israel education (M).
Also, this question is meant to open a metaphorical window into their meta-cognitive thinking on best
ways of teaching today’s students. (K) (M)]
(6) Thank you for your thoughts on Jewish/Israel education. Now I would like to ask you
specifically about Jewish/Israel education at JCS. Based on your own teaching
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 235

experience, what are your thoughts about the Jewish/Israel aspects of the school’s
curriculum”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering both the participant’s knowledge (K) of the
current curriculum, and their motivation (M) based on their feelings (attributions and utility value) about
the Jewish/Israel aspects of the school (O).]
(7) Interviewer: “As a follow up to that question: Can you describe, based on your own
teaching experience, how do students respond both negatively and positively to
Jewish/Israel studies classes at JCS”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering both the participant’s conceptual knowledge (K)
of student satisfaction and engagement (such as misconceptions about Jewish studies), as well as their
own meta-cognitive reflective practices about student satisfaction and engagement, and their own
attributions of student’s feelings (M).]
(8) Interviewer: “Can you please give a real example from your own experience that
demonstrates how students respond to Judaic/Israel studies”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering both the participant’s opinions and attributions
about student engagement and satisfaction (M) as well as possible causes that relate to organizational
model and setting issues such as religious pluralism and accountability. (O)]
(9) Interviewer: “Thank you for speaking about your impressions of the school’s
Judaic/Israel studies curriculum, and about how students respond to it. To the best of
your knowledge, how do Judaic/Israel curriculum changes happen at the school”?
(10) As a teacher, what is your role if any in making Judaic/Israel curriculum
changes at the school?
[These are open-ended questions that go to uncovering the participant’s knowledge, understanding (K),
opinions, and feelings (M), about organizational procedures, policies and customs pertaining to
organizational change management and curricular implementation (O), as well as the extent to which JCS
is a learning organization (O).]
(11) Interviewer: “There is a relatively new approach to teaching called the flipped
class method. What do you know about the flipped-class approach?”
(12) What is your opinion about the flipped-class approach to education”?
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 236

[These are open-ended questions that go to uncovering both the participant’s knowledge (K) of flipped-
class pedagogy and methodology, and their feelings and opinions about it (M).]
(13) Interviewer: “If I wanted to implement a flipped class curriculum and needed
help in doing so, who in the school would I turn to for guidance or advise”?
[This is an open-ended question that goes to uncovering the participant’s knowledge (K) of organizational
setting resources available at JCS for implementing a flipped class approach (O).]
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION

237
APPENDIX C
Observation Protocol
Why am I here?
Research Questions
1. What are the JCS Judaic/Israel studies faculty’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs necessary for them to achieve full implementation of a new 21
st

century learner centered Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for grades 7
th
– 12
th
(JISC)?
2. How can the data collected from this gap analysis be used to inform the development
of additional training materials for full implementation of JISC?
Conceptual Models

Who am I? “I am a non-participant objective observer privileged to be invited into the sacred
space of teacher and student. Relax, Focus, Be alert, Be friendly, Take notes”.
Describe the setting – What do you see?
What to look for – Teacher Student Interactions - Social and Cognitive cues and themes.
• Conversation
• Debate
• Questions
• Analogy
• Application
• Story telling
• Smiles
• Laughter
• Humor
• Hand raising
• Gestures
• Communication
• Activity
• Learning
• “Aha” moments
Draw the room here

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 238

APPENDIX D
JISC Implementation Training Evaluation instrument for Kirkpatrick Levels 1 & 2
Immediately after the training program
Please rate the following statements based on your level of agreement on a scale from 1-7.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree

1. I know what a flipped class lesson should potentially include. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(L2: Declarative)

2. I believe learning to flip a lesson is valuable to my job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(L2: Attitude)

3. I feel confident about being able to teach a flipped lesson. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(L2: Confident)

4. I found today’s training interesting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(L1: Engagement)

5. I am clear on how to use the flipped class model in my classroom. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(L1: Relevance)

Please respond to the following questions.
6. How do you plan to apply what you learned today in your instruction of Jewish/Israel
studies (L2: Commitment)
7. Please describe the process of how to design a flipped lesson plan. (L2: Procedural)
8. Please describe your level of satisfaction with today’s training with one or two examples of
what you enjoyed about it or about what you learned. (L1: Customer Satisfaction)

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 239

APPENDIX E
JISC Implementation Training Evaluation Instrument for Kirkpatrick Levels 1, 2, 3 & 4
Delayed 90 days after the training
Please rate the following statements based on your level of agreement.
1. What I learned in the workshop has been very valuable to JISC Implementation. (L1)
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Agree
d. Strongly Agree

2. I was able to instruct a flipped lesson more confidently after the workshop than before the
workshop. (L2)
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Agree
d. Strongly Agree

3. My colleagues and I use the job aid for designing flipped lessons. (L3)
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Agree
d. Strongly Agree

4. I am able to successfully implement JISC in all of my classes. (L4)
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Agree
d. Strongly Agree

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 240

References
Ackerman, W. I. (1975). The Americanization of Jewish education. Judaism, 24(4), 416.
Ackerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice
through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers' views of
nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10),
1090-1113.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2009). Attribution theory. Education. com, 23.
Avdic, A., & Åkerblom, L. (2015). Flipped classroom and learning strategies. Paper presented at
the 41-X.
Avni, S. (2011). Toward an understanding of Hebrew language education: Ideologies, emotions,
and identity. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2011(208), 53-70.
doi:10.1515/IJSL.2011.012
Bailey, J. A. (2000). Implementation as organizational learning capability: A case study of
Colorado's standards-based reform *policy (Order No. 9983962).
Baker, L. (2006). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively
oriented reading instruction. In Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 83-102).
Routledge.
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory.
Barber, W. (2015). Building community in flipped classrooms: A narrative exploration of digital
moments in online learning. Paper presented at the 24-30.
Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., ... & Tsai, Y. M. (2010).
Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student
progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 241

Beck, M. (2014). 'I never had a teacher that looked like me': Challenges exist in hiring a diverse
staff. TCA Regional News
Bloomberg, L. D. (2008). Shaping a research agenda by building on what
we now know. In R. L. Goodman., P. A. Flexner, & L. D. Bloomberg (Eds.), What we
NOW know about Jewish education: Perspectives on research for practice (pp. 683–704).
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Fieldwork. Qualitative Research for Education: An
Introduction to Theories and Methods: International Edition.
Boje, D. M. (1995). Stories of the storytelling organization: A postmodern analysis of Disney as
“Tamara-Land”. Academy of Management journal, 38(4), 997-1035.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing Organizations: Artistry. Choice, and.
Bolstad, R. (2014). Taking a" future focus" in education—what does it mean? Journal
article, 2014(1).
Bonner, S. E., Hastie, R., Sprinkle, G. B., & Young, S. M. (2000). A review of the effects of
financial incentives on performance in laboratory tasks: Implications for management
accounting. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 12(1), 19-64.
Brady, K., & Woolfson, L. (2008). What teacher factors influence their attributions for children's
difficulties in learning? British Journal of Educational Psychology,78(4), 527-544.
Carneiro, R. (2007). The Big Picture: understanding learning and meta-learning
challenges. European Journal of Education, 42(2), 151-172.
Chertok, F., Phillips, B., & Saxe, L., (2008). It’s not just who stands under the
chuppah: Intermarriage and engagement. Maurice & Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern
Jewish Studies (CMJS), Brandeis University Steinhardt Social Research Institute.
Retrieved from http://bjpa.org/Publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=3417.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 242

Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (1999). The Development of Authentic Educational Technologies.
Educational Technology, 39(2), 5-16.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and
knowledge. Teachers College Press.
Conyer, B. (2009) Pluralism and its Purposeful Introduction to a Jewish Day School, Religious
Education, 104:5, 463-478.
Cooperman, A., Smith, G. A., Hackett, C., & Kuriakose, N. (2013). A portrait of Jewish
Americans: Findings from a Pew Research Center survey of US Jews. Washington, DC:
Pew Research Center.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage publications.
Cutter, W. (1996). Jewish studies as self-definition: A review essay. Jewish Social Studies, 3(1),
158.
De Jong, O., & Van Driel, J. H. (2004). Exploring the development of student teachers’ PCK of
the multiple meanings of chemistry topics. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 2(4), 477–491.
Del Carlo, D., Hinkhouse, H., & Isbell, L. (2010). Developing a reflective practitioner through
the connection between educational research and reflective practices. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 19(1), 58-68.
Della Pergola, S. (1991). New data on demography and identification among Jews in the US:
Trends inconsistencies and disagreements. Contemporary Jewry, 12(1), 67-97.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 243

Delors, J., Mufti, I. A., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., Gorham, W., et al.
(1996). Learning, the treasure within: Report to UNESCO of the International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-first century. Paris: United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
Benzon, M., Denler, H., & Wolters, C. (2014). Social cognitive theory.
Dewey, J. (1933). A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process.
DC Heath.
Dushkin, A. M., & Engelman, U. Z. (1959). Jewish education in the United States: A
summary of the report of the Commission for the Study of Jewish Education in the
United States. Journal of Jewish Education, 30(1), 4-33.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the achiever: The structure of adolescents’
academic achievement related-beliefs and self-perceptions. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215-225.
Evans, A. H. (2014). The bible for children in a postmodern context: How do children form
explanatory concepts? Verbum Et Ecclesia, 35(1), 1-7.
Fielding, N. G., & Fielding, J. L. (1986). Linking data (Vol. 4). SAGE Publications,
Incorporated.
Fink, A. (2012). How to Conduct Surveys: A Step-by-Step Guide: A Step-by-Step Guide.
Sage Publications.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to
designing college courses. John Wiley & Sons.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 244

Fisher, M., Goddu, M. K., & Keil, F. C. (2015). Searching for explanations: How the Internet
inflates estimates of internal knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
General,144(3), 674-687.
Fishman, S. B., & Goldstein, A. (1993). When they are grown they will not depart: Jewish
education and the Jewish behavior of American adults.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The nature of intelligence, 231-
235.
Foley, L. S. (2011). Exploring K-3 teachers' implementation of comprehension strategy
instruction (CSI) using expectancy-value theory. Literacy Research and
Instruction, 50(3), 195-215.
Freedman, S. G. (2001). Jew vs. Jew: The struggle for the soul of American Jewry. Simon and
Schuster.
Friedman, M. L., Friedlander, M. L., & Blustein, D. L. (2005). Toward an Understanding
of Jewish Identity: A Phenomenological Study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(1),
77.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.
Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the knowledge wave. Wellington, NZ: NZCER.
Gilheany, T. (2013). Israeli and Palestinian teachers' self-reported motivations for teaching
religion: An exploratory case study. Religious Education, 108(5), 499.
Glesne, C. (2015). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Pearson.

21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 245

. Goldstein, A., & Barack Fishman, S. (1993). Teach Your Children When They Are Young:
Contemporary Jewish Education in the United States. Brandeis University Cohen Center
for Modern Jewish Studies and JESNA. Research Report 10.
Goldstein, S., & Goldscheider, C. (1968). Jewish Americans. Three generations in a Jewish
community Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 07632.
Grant, L. (2011). Pluralistic approaches to Israel education. Journal of Jewish Education
(Online), 41, 25.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (Vol. 9). John Wiley & Sons.
Han, G., & Newell, J. (2014). Enhancing student learning in knowledge-based courses:
Integrating team-based learning in mass communication theory classes. Journalism &
Mass Communication Educator, 69(2), 180-196.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (1998). Does special education raise academic
achievement for students with disabilities? (No. w6690). National bureau of economic
research.
Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2007). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement
(Working Paper No. 3). Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal
Data in Education Research.
Hattie, J. A., Marsh, H. W., Neil, J. T., & Richards, G. E. (1997). Adventure education
and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of
Educational Research, 67(1), 43-87.
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. R. I. S. C. I. L. L. A. (2004). Cracking the code of
accountability. University of Southern California Urban Education, 17-19.
Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 246

encourage student engagement with feedback: a literature review. Research in Learning
Technology, 19(2).
Hertz, R. C. (1953). The Education of the Jewish Child: A Study of 200 Reform Jewish Religious
Schools. Union of American Hebrew Congregations.
Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and
technology self-efficacy on teachers' technology acceptance. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 43(4), 343-367
Hutchings, M., & Quinney, A. (2015). The flipped classroom, disruptive pedagogies, enabling
technologies and wicked problems: Responding to 'the bomb in the basement'. Electronic
Journal of E-Learning, 13(2), 106-119.
Irwin, C. W., & Stafford, E. T. (2016). Survey methods for educators: Collaborative survey
development (part 1 of 3) (REL 2016–163). Washington, DC: US Department of Edu
cation, Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. Retrieved
from http://ies. ed. gov/ncee/edlabs.
Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists. Sage.
Jacobs, H. H. (Ed.). (2010). Curriculum 21: Essential education for a changing
world (pp. 30-60). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Jacobs, B. M., (2013). Problems and prospects of Jewish education for intelligent
citizenship in a post-everything world. Diaspora, Indigenous & Minority Education, 7(1),
39-53.
Katz, I., & Shahar, B. (2015). What makes a motivating teacher? teachers' motivation and beliefs
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 247

as predictors of their autonomy-supportive style. School Psychology International, 36(6),
575-588.
Katzin, O. (2015). Teaching Approaches of Beginning Teachers for Jewish Studies in Israeli
Mamlachti Schools: A Case Study of a Jewish Education Teachers’ Training Program for
Outstanding Students. Journal of Jewish Education, 81(3), 285-311.
Katzoff, L. (1949). Issues in Jewish Education: A Study of the Philosophy of the Conservative
Congregational School. Bloch Publishing Company.
Kezar, A. J. (Ed.). (2005). Organizational learning in higher education. Jossey-Bass.
King, P. E., & Boyatzis, C. J. (2004). Exploring adolescent spiritual and religious development:
Current and future theoretical and empirical perspectives. Applied Developmental
Science, 8(1), 2.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A
historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention
theory. Psychological bulletin, 119(2), 254.
Kohn, E., & Goldstein, G. (2008). Formulating a curriculum framework for bible study: Creating
course objectives for bible curriculum in Jewish schools. Religious Education,103(3),
351-368.
Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S., & Miller, S. M. (Eds.). (2003). Vygotsky's Educational
Theory in Cultural Context. Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive, and Computational
Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 248

practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research 4
edition Sage Publications. Inc, Thousand Oaks, California.
Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2005). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
Sage.
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an
inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43.
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic
communication (Vol. 4). John Wiley & Sons.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.
Liston, D. P., & Zeichner, K. M. (1990). Reflective teaching and action research in pre-service
teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching,16(3), 235-254.
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision
making A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 43(2), 269-289.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive
approach. Sage.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Mayes, R., Natividad, G., & Spector, J. M. (2015). Challenges for educational technologists in
the 21st century. Education Sciences, 5(3), 221-237.
McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing.
Educational psychology review, 19(2), 113-139.
McPhail, G., & Rata, E. (2016). Comparing curriculum types: ‘Powerful knowledge’ and ‘21st
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 249

century learning’. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 51(1), 53-68.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Meyer, M. A. (1995). Response to modernity: A history of the Reform movement in Judaism.
Wayne State University Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California.
Miller, S. M. (2013). A research meta-synthesis on digital video composing in classrooms: An
evidence-based framework toward a pedagogy for embodied learning. Journal of
Literacy Research, 45(4), 386-430.
Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., & O'Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: a
strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class. CBE-Life
Sciences Education, 9(4), 473-481.
Muszkat-Barkan, M. (2015). Between Ritual and Spiritual: Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices
Regarding Prayer Education in TALI Day Schools in Israel. Journal of Jewish
Education, 81(3), 260-284.
Pajares, F and Valiante, G. (2006). Self-Efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing
development. In Handbook of Writing Research. McArthur, Graham, Fitzgerald, Eds.
New York: The Guilford Press.
Park, S., & Oliver, J. (2008b). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as
professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative interviewing. Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3,
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 250

344-347.
Pew Research Center. (2013) A Portrait of Jewish Americans.
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/10/jewish-american-full-report-for-web.pdf.
Pew Research Center. (2015). The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections,
2010–2050.
Pew Research Center. (2016). Religion and Education Around the World.
Phillips, B. A. (2010). Accounting for Jewish secularism: Is a new cultural identity
emerging?. Contemporary Jewry, 30(1), 63-85.
Pilch, J., & Ben-Horin, M. (Eds.). (1966). Judaism and the Jewish school: selected essays on the
direction and purpose of Jewish education. Published for the American Association for
Jewish Education by Bloch Publishing Company.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Pomson, A. D. M. (2001). Knowledge that doesn't just sit there: Considering a re-conception of
the curriculum integration of Jewish and general studies. Religious Education, 96(4),
528-545.
Pomson, A., & Deitcher, H. (2009). Much ado about something: Clarifying goals and methods of
Israel education. Hayidion, Spring, 32-34.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon,9(5), 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2008). Backup Education? Too many teachers see education as preparing kids for
the past, not the future. Educational Technology, 48(1), 1-3.
Regnerus, M. D., Smith, C., & Smith, B. (2004). Social context in the development of adolescent
religiosity. Applied Developmental Science, 8(1), 27-38.
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 251

Resnick, D. (2013). A Case Study of Modern Jewish Education. Modern Judaism, kjt001.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to
engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer
Sciences, 105(2), 44.
Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers' beliefs and knowledge in the
adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics,105(8), 412-
422.
Rosenquist, C. M., & Friedman, S. T. (1951). Jewish Population Trends in the United
States. Social Research, 203-218.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New
York, NY 10027.
Salkind, N. J. (2016). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. Sage Publications.
Sarna, J. D. (1998). American Jewish education in historical perspective. Journal of Jewish
Education, 64(1-2), 8-21.
Saxe, L. (2011). Jewish identity development: The Israeli dimension.
Retrieved from http://www.theicenter.org/jewish-identity-development-israel-dimension
Schargel, F. P., Bell, J. S., & Thacker, T. (2009). Creating successful cultures that embrace
learning: What successful leaders do.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
Schick, M. (2009). A census of Jewish day schools in the United States. New York:
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 252

AVI CHAI Foundation. Retrieved from: http://avichai.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/06/Supplementary-School-Census-Report-Final.pdf.
Schiff, A. I., & Schneider, M. (1994). Far-reaching effects of extensive Jewish day school
attendance: The impact of Jewish education on Jewish behavior and attitudes. David J.
Azrieli Graduate Institute of Jewish Education and Administration, Yeshiva University.
Scott, S.E. & Palincsar, A.S. (2009). Sociocultural Theory. In M. Anderman & L. H. Anderman
(Eds.) Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale
Group
Shenhar, A. (1994). A People and the World–Jewish Culture in a Changing
World. Recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry for Jewish Studies in the General
Education System, Headed by Prof. Aliza Shenhar, Jerusalem.[Hebrew].
Sheskin, I.M., & Dashefsky A., (2014). “Jewish Population in the United States,
2014.” American Jewish Year Book (2014) (Dordrecht: Springer) p. 143-211; American
Jewish Year Book (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1899): 284.
Sheskin, I. M., & Hartman, H. (2015). Denominational Variations Across American Jewish
Communities. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,54(2), 205-221.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard
educational review, 57(1), 1-23.
Smith, C., Denton, M. L., Faris, R., & Regnerus, M. (2002). Mapping American adolescent
religious participation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4), 597-612.
Smith, C., Faris, R., & Regnerus, M. (2003). Mapping American adolescent subjective religiosity
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 253

and attitudes of alienation toward religion: A research report. Sociology of Religion, 64(1),
111-133.
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the
imagination for a world of constant change (Vol. 219). Lexington, KY: CreateSpace.
Tighe, E., Saxe, L., de Kramer, R. M., & Parmer, D. (2013). American Jewish population
estimates: 2012. Brandeis University, Steinhardt Social Research Institute. Last modified
September.
Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods. UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Tung, Y. C., & Lin, Y. P. (2015). Cross-Level Effects of Deep-Level Diversity on Person-Group
Fit. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 7(2), 109.
Valli, L. (1997). Listening to other voices: A description of teacher reflection in the United
States. Peabody journal of Education, 72(1), 67-88.
Van Driel, J., & Berry, A. (2010). Pedagogical content knowledge.
Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of pre-service chemistry
teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86(4), 572–590.
Vaughan, M. (2014). Flipping the learning: An investigation into the use of the flipped
classroom model in an introductory teaching course. Education Research and
Perspectives (Online), 41, 25.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard university press.
Wallace, A. (2014). Social learning platforms and the flipped classroom. International Journal of
Information and Education Technology, 4(4), 293-296.
Waxman, C. I. (1975). Ethnic Identification among American Jews by Arnold Dashefsky and
21
st
CENTURY JEWISH/ISRAEL EDUCATION 254

Howard Shapiro and The Future of the Jewish Community in America edited by David
Sidorsky. Sociology of Religion, 36(2), 172-174.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and
emotion. Psychological review, 92(4), 548.
Weiner, B. (2005). Motivation from an attribution perspective and the social psychology of
perceived competence. Handbook of competence and motivation, 73-84.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers. The art and method of Qualitative Interview
Studies.
Wertheimer, J. (2011). American-Jewish Education in an Age of Choice and
Pluralism (pp. 1087-1104). Springer Netherlands.
Woocher, J. (2012). To be successful today, Jewish education must be meaningful
and relevant. Journal of Jewish Education, 78(4), 326-330.
Woocher, J. S. (1986). Sacred survival: The civil religion of American Jews. Indiana
Univ Pr.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zhu, Z., & Chen, X. (2016). Positive analysis and research on internet plus education flipped
classroom teaching model. Revista Ibérica De Sistemas e Tecnologias De Informação, ,
368-381.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract With alarming declines in Jewish demographics in the United States, Jewish education is being viewed as a way of reversing this negative trend. Some have therefore argued for the use of 21st century pedagogical methods to increase the relevancy and effectiveness of Jewish education. This study utilizes a modified Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model to investigate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs of Jewish/Israel studies teachers who are charged with implementing such a curriculum based on established literature relating to Jewish education, 21st century educational approaches, learning and motivation theory, as well as organizational culture influences. Qualitative analysis of study data was collected and triangulated through survey, interviews, and document analysis resulting in six needs being validated and another seven being validated with a high probability. Using the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick New World Model (2016), these needs lead to the formation of implementation and evaluation plans for this study's recommended solutions, which include collaborative, educational and training experiences in which Jewish Studies (JS) faculty will be able to learn, observe, practice, and receive feedback on their training, followed by strategic follow-up and reinforcement of training until established outcomes can be systematically demonstrated.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Evaluating the implementation of 21st century skills and learning

PDF

Implementing effective leadership development initiatives at the unit level in the Air Force: an innovation study

PDF

Sustained mentoring of early childhood education teachers: an innovation study

PDF

Making a case for teaching religious literacy in Ethiopian schools: an innovation study

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Modern corporate learning requires a modern design methodology: an innovation study

PDF

Building 21st century skills for school-age children in Colombia: lessons from a promising practice

PDF

College and career readiness through independent study: an innovation study

PDF

Reconstructing the literary canon: an innovation study

PDF

Principals’ leadership influence on teachers’ capacity to enact 21st-century skills curriculum

PDF

The academic implications of providing social emotional learning in K-12: an evaluation study

PDF

Dream deferred? Understanding the effects of educational debt on marginalized college professionals

PDF

School integration as a reform strategy: the principal’s role, an evaluation study

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Creating the conditions for change readiness in higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Partnerships and nonprofit leadership: the influence of nonprofit managers on community partnerships

PDF

High attrition rate of preschool teachers in Hong Kong: an evaluation study

PDF

Causes for a lack of gender diversity in leadership

PDF

Preparing students for the 21st century labor market through liberal arts education at a Chinese joint venture university

Asset Metadata

Creator Weiss, Menachem Mendle (author)

Core Title Judaic/Israel studies curriculum for the 21st-century learner – An innovation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 07/26/2018

Defense Date 05/08/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag 21st-century education,Israel education,Israel education innovation,Jewish day school,Jewish education,Jewish education innovation,OAI-PMH Harvest,Religious Education,student satisfaction religious education

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Data, Monique (committee member)

Creator Email menachemweiss@me.com,rebbemendy@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-33718

Unique identifier UC11668910

Identifier etd-WeissMenac-6521.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-33718 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WeissMenac-6521.pdf

Dmrecord 33718

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Weiss, Menachem Mendle

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA