Schools devote time and energy towards crafting and publicizing the core of who they are. Whether through trying to encapsulate their breadth and depth in a written mission statement or through experiential open houses, schools start from the assumption that they seek to attract parents who are mission-aligned.
However, there are several reasons why this is not always possible. For example, if the only Jewish school in the area is Orthodox, then it’s likely non-Orthodox Jewish families will explore the school. Moreover, schools in smaller Jewish communities can find themselves facing the need to recruit families who are not always fully aligned with all the elements of the school.
While recruiting families who are not fully mission-aligned may begin as a function of necessity, there are in fact ideological reasons why this can support broader elements of the school’s mission. For example, if a school aims to “instill critical thinking skills” or to create “engaged Jewish members of tomorrow’s global community” (as per the mission statement of our school, the Oakland Hebrew Day School), then it becomes essential that students learn how to engage with and understand peers with different views, perspectives and practices. When schools take seriously their role in building empathy and teaching students to hear differing perspectives and experiences, they are not only creating strong individuals. They are laying the groundwork for being a community where a diversity of perspectives and needs can coexist.
For the day school that serves a diverse community, administrators will often find themselves being pulled in multiple directions by different needs and desires of parents. Issues like Israel education, Covid policy, homework, technology use, curriculum, recess time, behavior management and more are rarely met with an across-the-board consensus from the school’s families. The three elements that are crucial to recruiting and retaining students who are not mission-aligned are:
- Having clarity on the school’s values, philosophies and purpose
- Communicating the school’s values and approaches in clear, proactive and public ways
- Cultivating community bonds and a commitment to the community itself
Recently I had a phone conversation with a parent about Israel education at our school. She prefaced the conversation by acknowledging she loves our school and she knows that her feelings about Israel don’t align with its identity. The purpose of the call was for her to better understand how we approach certain specific elements of teaching about Israel (i.e., that non-Jews also live in Israel), and to unpack the more implicit elements of Israel education (i.e., when Hatikvah is said).
The conversation was connected and generative. The goal was not to appease a frustrated parent or try to sell our program, but rather, to enhance clarity. Each of us wanted to better understand the other. Our questions were from a genuine place of curiosity. Moreover, our answers not only enhanced understanding but contributed to strengthening and fine-tuning the philosophies and practices themselves. For example, our school closes the weekly all school gathering singing both Hatikvah and The Star-Spangled Banner. While the parent shared the ways she felt unsettled with Hatikvah being sung in this context, she simultaneously expressed why she appreciated the students singing the United States’ national anthem, even though there are elements of the United States that feel unjust and complicated. This helped me better articulate back to her the ways in which Hatikvah functions as an expression of pride, hope and connection, while not negating the challenges we might feel with ways the politics of the country are being enacted.
Before this conversation, the school had not given great intentional thought to articulating the why of our reasoning for singing Hatikvah at this time and in this way. But when navigating a school community with a diversity of perspectives, it becomes vital that decisions the school is making are made intentionally and with a clarity of purpose. This conversation models the deeper engagement that becomes possible, even when families are not completely mission-aligned.
Without a school both possessing and articulating publicly their values in clear and transparent ways, families can often become confused and frustrated when they encounter dissonance between their family’s practices or values and those of the school. Last year our school published a position statement of best practices and recommendations around technology use. Using this as a focal point, parents will now lead annual technology conversations around these topics. These types of school statements not only support parents in asking hard questions, but they also serve as anchors in conversations that touch on more controversial topics.
The quick trigger that families have on sending an email of concern or complaint puts schools in the never-ending cycle of articulating community boundaries and expectations. But schools must not shy away from being bold around their values, their mission and the boundaries of their community. When parents receive that clarity, even when they may not be aligned with it, it becomes an act of community-building.
Shortly after October 7 of last year, I received an email from a new parent upset that students were writing notes to IDF soldiers and suggesting that instead the students should be writing letters to the International Court of Justice. In this situation, with a new family, and a critique that seemed so far off course from a core tenet of our school, it felt imperative that I was not only very clear about what our driving values were, but also where the boundaries were for those who were not in alignment. In response, I wrote,
The ideology upon which the school is built recognizes that the viability of a Jewish state is central to what it means to live Jewishly. Your child will be socialized towards this narrative.
You’re welcome to have a set of political beliefs about Israel. We are a school that allows for a wide variety of conversations about Israel. And while all facets of Israeli society are on the table, delegitimizing the state of Israel is not a position we accept.
We recognize and are deeply concerned about Palestinians. We want our students to care about humanity. We are raising them on a narrative that takes seriously that Jews are allowed to have sovereignty and power. And that this comes with a sense of responsibility… We want our students to develop the capacity to give loving critique. We want to help cultivate students who are committed to Jewish peoplehood. And we want to help create Jews who are committed to a Jewish vibrant democratic state of Israel.
Not only has this family stayed at our school, but the door has remained open to continued conversation. Though this family felt like an attrition risk due to the misalignment, the directness and clarity of response may have been the transparency needed for this family to feel confident staying.
For families who have misalignments with core parts of a school’s mission, it becomes important to invest in other ways of cultivating community bonds and a commitment to the community itself. Schools must be thinking about the ways to bring families into connective spaces, find access points of connection that are diverse and not always themed to topics that are divisive or alienating.
Ultimately, when the school can speak to a family from a place of clarity rooted in values, it instills confidence and can become a community builder. Disagreement can actually connect people, when space is given to it and difference is heard and respected.
In response to our sharing our commemoration program plans for October 7, this family wrote to me:
Oct 7 seems like an opportunity to teach about the futility of war. No one in the last year has gotten what they said they wanted…The kids could reflect on a time that they made a decision or took an action when they were angry, and ask, How did that go? Did they achieve what they wanted? Or maybe an example of a parent or sibling getting angry and making a decision. How did it feel to be around that?
In response I wrote:
I receive this email with such an open heart. You and I agree on more than we disagree. Ultimately, my response to you is that we are just not focusing on war on October 7. I recognize that there is an element of avoidance of the harder conversations in this approach, but this is what we believe meets the multitude of needs, is developmentally appropriate, and is educationally aligned. I appreciate you voicing this and hope that we can engage more this year in this conversation. It is important on many levels.
Most importantly, perhaps, the school’s offers to engage in the harder conversations and genuinely hear them cannot just be lip service. It takes planning, time and energy to create the spaces and structures that allow for the follow up and conversations to take place. This remains a constant challenge. Whether for practical or ideological reasons, when recruiting families who are not fully mission-aligned, schools must remain steadfast in the imperative of cultivating shared commitment to the school community.
