Below I have tried to summarize the emails that have taken place up until now. (I did try to cut the length, but found the content too valuable to remove.) I highly encourage you to "speak up" so that any decision on future plans does not reflect the opinions of only a few. There is also a lot that we can learn from each other.
Thanks for your input. Ilene
Two original questions posed by Ilene Sussman (DAF):
1. How to create a program that enables students to participate more than once?
2. Should we continue to recruit high school-aged students?
Resulting questions from Nitzan Resnick (SASSDS):
- What were the original goals of CSI?
- Particularly since the event does not necessarily align with topics from the students’ present curriculum, does the event add value in connection the students or their parents to science?
- Does the event increase science awareness in the day schools?
Response from Ilene Sussman (DAF):
The main goal of the program is a marketing tool. Based on research done by DAF about 2½ years ago, we know that the misperception of parents, be they day school parents or non-day school parents, is that the quality of the math & science curriculum (and English curriculum, for that matter) at the day schools does not equal that of public or independent schools. We also learned that the quality of math & science programs is a key concern of parents when they are evaluating choices on schools for their children. Ideally we would like to use the program to get major PR about math & science in the day schools. Based on 2 years of the program, we know that this is a LARGE challenge over which we have little control despite all valiant efforts. That being said, we know that it does create word-of-mouth by current parents. The amount of which, only the teachers can assess; I would love to hear from you how successful we have been.
Just a quick lesson about word-of-mouth (WOM) and its role in marketing... We know that WOM is a primary tool that parents use when they choose their school. We also know that people are 10x more likely to speak negatively than positively.
This leads to 2 questions:
1. Knowing that generally parents feel an inadequacy about math & science in the day schools, does this help parents feel better about the math & science programs so that they are more positive about it? (We know that they are very verbal when they are unhappy.)
2. Why do the teachers, have to care about WOM or anything related to marketing. The answer to the latter is easy since positive marketing means more students something that all the schools are concerned about. This is important if you think about it in terms of job security.)
Obviously, it is unfair to ask the student to attend a program designed solely as a marketing tool.
So, I bring the question back to you:
Are we getting what we want out of the program which is good WOM and feelings about math & science at the schools? If so, then how can we use the program to support the good work that is already being done at the schools?
Response from Nitzan Resnick (SASSDS):
- What exactly are we marketing in this event?
- Is a one day event which is an outside school event suggests to the parents that the program to which they will send their kids is serious about math and science?
- Wouldn't it be better to try and seriously upgrade the programs in the schools and then market them to the parents?
- Other than a sense of a "fun day" do the students come out from the CSI day with a valuable scientific message? New skills?
- Maybe I am too serious and should see things more lightly. I feel that the reason why parents are unhappy with the science programs is because many of these programs are not good enough, serious enough, updated enough, long enough. To please the parents but even more importantly to create budding scientists from our students we need more than just marketing.
- Sorry about being so harsh, but I feel that these things should be said out loud.
Response from David Novick (Gann):
I'd like to relay some information that I have gotten from Gann students in the 9th and/or 10th grade that have attended this event, for it raises another question about this event. While they generally enjoyed it, they felt that it was more geared towards the younger crowd. They felt that a lot of the science and math was review for them. This might explain the small turn out of at least Gann students in spite of the valiant advertising effort.
For me, this really poses the additional question of whether this event should be limited to the lower grades, elementary and middle school.
In terms of the notion of this event being a marketing tool specifically for Jewish Day Schools, I too must share my doubts. I definitely see it as a way to get kids generally excited about science but if they aren't getting the same level at their individual schools then this event would only further point out the perceived deficiencies in Jewish Day School science programs (i.e. increase bad WOM).
It felt to me as just a fun science event that was attended by students from Jewish Day Schools and not something that specifically demonstrated what kind of experience these kids could look forward to in the individual schools.
I would say that perhaps events that physically occur at individual schools would more directly market that school.
Response from Jane Cohen (SASSDS):
I suggest we not hold CSI next year. Instead, we choose a day during school when one of three things happens:
1. The Jewish high schools invite the middle schoolers to their schools for a half day of science that introduces them to the scientific way of thinking at that high school.
2. All the schools hold a science day simultaneously with similar experiments.
3. All the schools hold a science day with local university scientists who come in and work with kids.
It is my belief that we have already accomplished the goals that the CSI set out to do and that that program no longer holds its marketing appeal. Now, we should look for something that authentically shows what we do in our schools.
Response from Nitzan Resnick (SASSDS):
Thoughts to add:
- This year South Area Schechter’s stem cell debate will take place in the spring at the Harvard Stem Cell Research Institute (HSCI). The invitation came from Brock Reeve the executive director of HSCI after they heard about our last year's debate.
- Wouldn't it be great if all the middle and high school students in the Boston area would attend?
- This would be a phenomenal educational and marketing event and the parents can attend as well.
4 comments:
It seems as though there is disagreement about fundamentally whether the day school science/math education is good enough to be focusing on publicizing it (rather than improving it). Is that a directly relavent question here? Or, is it not in the scope of DAF to address that?
Just to respond to Meredith's comment: No one is saying that the quality of science/math education is not good enough to advertise. In fact we know that the quality is very good. Clearly, like any good educational institutions it is the responsibility of the teachers to continually make sure that the quality of education they provide is the best.
As David Novick suggesting in his comments, the day schools need to DEMONSTRATE what kind of experience the kids have to look forward to in the individual schools. In other words, he is suggesting that the teachers/schools need to market, internally and externally, the quality of the education that the students receive. (I'm sure that this is music to the ears of the schools' marketing/admission's department; I would love and urge you to share this offer with them.)
To summarize what I've heard so far, it seems to me that the teachers feel that:
1) You, the teachers, realize that it is your responsibility to market the quality of your programs to the community (internal & external).
2) One of the suggested ways to do this is for the schools themselves, as a group or individually, to hold science/math events/programs that directly market the school.
One suggestion is to enlarge to a community level South Area Schecther's Stem Cell Research Debate at the Harvard Stem Cell Research Institute.
On having taught at both public and private schools, I think the days schools certainly have what to advertise (the only real differnce I find, and this is often the concerns addressed by parents, is that there is simply less science time in a dual curriculum)......I really like the HSCI debate idea and also think we should do something different every year or two years- that would really show that we are diverse and open in our teaching styles (I know it takes a lot of organizational efforts though!).
In response to David's comments: making the program more
challenging is possible. So, I don't see a relative lack of challenge for the high school students as a reason in and of itself for the program not to be continued to be geared in part towards them. He does make a good point with respect to school curriculum. Certainly exciting school programs should have a forum for being highlighted.
Lastly, I wouldn't agree with his suggestion of having an event at
different individual schools. If the goal is to market day schools in general, having an event at a specific schools might be distracting. Showing that the day schools all have a common relationship with MIT
would bolster the image that they all excel in math and science
education, I would think.
I agree with Jane's sentiment that marketing what actually happens in
the schools would be ideal.
Post a Comment