← Back

Teach to One Featured on EdCuration Podcast

April 12, 2021 EdCuration

On the latest EdCuration podcast, Joel Rose shares how Teach to One not only accelerates achievement and closes learning gaps in middle school math, but also improves classroom culture and increases student engagement.

Listen now here, or read a copy of the interview below.

Kristi: Hi, everyone. This is Kristi. Today’s episode is going to get you all inspired and fired up about personalized and adaptive learning, particularly to address learning loss and learning gaps in math.

You’re listening to the EdCuration podcast. We bring you stories from educational leaders about the instructional resources, practices and movements that are reshaping learning.

Our guest today, Joel Rose, is a teacher at heart and you’ll know that right away just by listening to him talk and the way he outlines and numbers his points, but he’s also the co-founder and CEO of New Classrooms. New Classrooms, formerly School of One, was born out of Joel’s experience in 2000 of attending the high school graduation of the students he taught in fifth grade, and discovering that many of them would not receive a diploma. This moment was a catalyst for developing a new school model that puts students on the path to success. Joel created School of One while serving as the Chief Executive for human capital at the New York City Department of Education.

That model evolved into Teach to One, which is now used by thousands of students across the country. Joel has published articles about personalized learning, innovation, and school models in The Atlantic, Education Nation, and EdTech Magazine. He’s a highly sought-after speaker, and we were so lucky to get a slice of his time.  Joel Rose, welcome to the podcast.

Joel Rose: Thanks Kristi for having me.

Kristi: Yeah, it’s great to have you. First of all, for our listeners sake, about how long you’ve been in education and a little bit about your background prior to founding New Classrooms?

Joel Rose: Sure. I started off as a teacher almost 30 ago. I taught fifth grade for three years. I remember my very first week on the job. My principal came by during the teacher prep days and knocked on my door and said, “Mr. Rose, here are your textbooks for the year, your fifth grade textbooks.” I said, “Okay, thank you very much.” Then a few hours later, he came back with these mounds of paper, which showed the data of where all of my incoming students actually were. I saw there were some that were coming in on a second grade level, some coming in on the eighth grade level and everything in between. Somehow, I looked at the textbooks and I looked at these sheets of paper and I wondered how in the heck I was going to succeed.

Kristi: Yeah. I know that any teacher listening to you right now is resonating so strongly with that. That idea of here’s your stuff, good luck, off you go. Then you’re being held accountable for test scores that you had very little influence over. Can you tell us, was that the impetus for founding Teach to One 360? Was it born out of that whole experience?

Joel Rose: Very much so. I worked hard and I cared a lot. I did everything I could, but I knew no matter how much I tried, there was no way that I could truly meet the needs of the students that were well behind, nor could I accelerate the learning as much as I would have liked for students at the top. I was only human. I could only teach one thing at a time. This way of doing school, putting one teacher and 25 to 30 students in a 800 square foot room with a textbook is the way we’ve done school for over a hundred years. The truth is it doesn’t actually have to be that way.

Kristi: Let’s roll that one more time.

Joel Rose: It doesn’t actually have to be that way. And that was a big part of my impetus for starting the work that we do now.

Kristi: It’s amazing, because I think so many educators who feel that way also feel that it’s futile to try to dismantle and remake an entire system, but that is actually what you are doing. I’m curious why you chose to establish New Classrooms as a nonprofit.

Joel Rose: There are a couple of reasons. The first reason was that if you look in the for-profit sector, in most companies, there is a concept, a widely known concept called product market fit. If you’re building a company, you want to build a product to fit the market. In education, if you are building, if you’re making textbooks, or you are selling software, you’re going to build that product to fit the market. The market right now wants age graded curriculum. It’s got its bell schedules. That’s how the whole system works. Our view is if you build a product just to fit the market, it’s not going to have much of an impact. We actually want to change the market. We think the market is actually what needs changing. The second reason was we thought if you go to most for-profit investors, understandably so, the idea is we want to invest the least amount of money to do the R&D-

Kristi: For the non-business types listening R&D stands for research and development.

Joel Rose: … and they want to scale as fast as we can. In this sector, in many ways, it’s the exact opposite that’s needed. It’s serious R&D to re-imagine the classroom experience in a sector that is not known for scaling anything fast.

Kristi: Ain’t that the truth. Educators are definitely not known as quick change artists. I asked Joel to say more.

Joel Rose: The progress that we see in our society, from the smartphones in our pockets, to the way that media works, to the way that healthcare advances, is all a product of research and development. It is a very common expense in almost every other sector to invest some money in what the future could be, because one day it will be. Our sector doesn’t. We actually spend a little bit of money on the R, the research. There are plenty of professors in universities that are focused on doing research. But the D, part actually designing something different that teachers can truly adopt and embrace and enable them to do the kind of things they couldn’t otherwise do, we haven’t invested hardly anything in the D part. That’s what we’ve been focused on.

Kristi: Okay. I love that you didn’t want to have to cater to a market that you felt it was the wrong market. For those people who don’t know anything about New Classrooms at all, what is your nutshell description? What is your elevator speech?

Joel Rose: I usually say, “We can give you the elevator speech, but it’s a Shabbat elevator.” The way that … We have a program called Teach to One 360. The way it works is if you imagine you’re a seventh grader. You have reading first period in room 206 and you have PE second period in the gym, third period, you have math. Instead of walking into room 105, you walk into what’s typically a big open space with lots of different stations. In some stations, kids work with teachers. In some stations, kids work with software. In some stations, kids work with one another. When you walk in for math, you look up and you see a big TV monitor that looks like what you might see at the airport, and you see your name and you see which station you were supposed to go to.

You might spend the first 30 minutes working with a teacher in trinomials at station number four. Then you might spend the next 30 minutes working with some software in trinomials. Then you spend the last 10 minutes with an online assessment in trinomials, and then you’re off to science class. We then take the data and create a new schedule for you for tomorrow, based on how you did today.

Kristi: What is the teacher doing? This really shifts the role of the teacher. Describe all the different things that the teacher is doing in that room.

Joel Rose: Sure. The first thing the teacher is doing is teaching. When a child goes to station number four to learn about trinomials, there are 15 other kids at station number four ready to learn trinomials as well. When that teacher is teaching that lesson, what is different is that she knows that each of those 14 students has mastered all of the predecessor skills to learn that skill, and none of them already know it. We’ve hopefully made that teacher more successful by changing the context by grouping students very strategically so that that teacher can be more successful in that moment. That’s the first metering is their teacher. The second thing they’re doing is they are looking to diagnose misconceptions. If I’m a teacher and I spent my first session in a live instruction, and then my second session I’m supporting independent learning. I have my iPad in front of me.

And I see, this student is on her first try learning about parallelograms. Great. Let’s see how she does, but this student over here, he’s on his fourth try, he’s getting stuck. I’m going to go over. I’m going to see where he’s getting stuck. I’m going to look at his assessment from yesterday and try to figure out what mistake he may be making. I’m going to really make sure that I use my time incredibly strategically to help students get unstuck, who may be stuck. Then the third thing they’re doing is what they’ve always done. Build relationships. Learning itself is a social and emotional process. There is no piece of software or no computer that can take the place of the hand on the shoulder, or the encouragement. That is the critical part of the teaching process. We’re just trying to do things behind the scenes with technology to enable teachers to focus their time on the things that they do best.

Kristi: There are two things that are making my heart swell huge right now. And what you just said is the first one, because I feel like that is a piece that so many teachers feel they don’t have enough time and energy to devote to, because they’re so stressed out by coverage, content. That’s beautiful. But the second thing is that I can imagine that this takes the pressure off those kids who are sitting in the classroom where a teacher’s explaining something to 28 kids and they don’t get it. Their only option is to raise their hand and say, “I don’t get it.” This takes that whole scenario out of the picture because they’re just automatically grouped to learn what they need to learn.

Joel Rose: That’s exactly right, Kristi, but not only that, because we are grouping and regrouping students every day, based on their common need at that point in time. Sometimes the whole … The mental idea of who are the “advanced kids” and who are the “less advanced kids”, goes away. Because what will happen is the student may think, “Wow, I can’t believe I’m sitting next to Susie and we’re both learning about probability. I thought she was so much smarter than me, but here we are learning together.” Because they both haven’t been taught probability in that moment. Sometimes the mental models that students create of where they stand in the pecking order can really get blown up because of the continual regrouping of students.

Kristi: How else does it shift classroom culture? Because when I first heard about this, learned about this, I felt this personalized learning, I think that picture that a lot of people have in their heads, is that every kid is sitting at their own computer, and that takes away that sense of community in a classroom, but that’s not what you’re describing.

Joel Rose: It shifts in beautiful ways. You’re right. Sometimes when people hear personalized learning, the image comes with kid on machine and that’s not exactly what we’re focused on at all. We would say that what we are an innovative learning model, the new way of organizing the classroom that leverages teachers and technology in ways that provide each students with a path that connects them from where they’re starting from to where they need to be. So, what does that do from a cultural perspective? One, it gives students much more ownership over their own learning. I’ve got to learn how to factor trinomials. I’m going to learn from this teacher. I’m learning that with some software. Then it’s up to me to show that I can do it on the assessment. If I don’t show it, I’m going to try it again and take another pass at it and see if I can do it again.

So, it becomes less passive. I’m owning my learning more. The second thing is that the culture becomes much more communal because you’ve got this continual regrouping. Students are working with all kinds of students in all kinds of different ways and, in some cases, forging relationships that might not otherwise have been forged, which is a big part of what we’re trying to do. Then the third thing, which I don’t think we fully expected when we began this, maybe even among the most important, it’s this change in the culture among the teachers. Teaching is such an isolating profession. Teachers shut their door, they do their thing. Now, instead of one teacher and 25 students, we have four teachers sharing 100 students, continually supporting the learning of all of them. They’re modeling in some ways what the workforce is in the future. A much more collaborative, interactive way of working together. Not only does that make the job of the teacher more fulfilling, but kids actually see that as well. And they can begin to model that with their peers.

Kristi: Seriously, people, are you ready for an altar call right now? I am. I’m thinking that if this were every student’s experience of school, we might not have to invest quite as much time and money on social, emotional learning, because students would be having positive experiences and making connections and feeling confident about their achievements and themselves. Just to make this clear to everybody listening, this is math. You started with math. You published a report called the Iceberg Problem, and it focuses specifically on math. I’m wondering if you can unpack the findings of that report for us a little bit and talk about why you chose to start with math.

Joel Rose: Sure. The Iceberg Problem basically called out what we viewed was a central challenge that inadvertently emanated from federal law. It is about how federal policy signals to teachers that they should always focus exclusively on grade level standards. So, if I’m the seventh grade teacher and a student walks into my class on a fourth or fifth grade level, I still have a seventh grade textbook. I have a scope and sequence that reflect the seventh grade standards and my students are going to take the seventh grade test. I better just plow through and cover all the seventh grade stuff. But for that student who comes in two years behind, because math is cumulative, by focusing on the seventh grade material, I actually fall further behind.

Policies are signaling to teachers to always focus on grade level because we want to make sure they have high enough expectations. But because math is cumulative, if I still hadn’t quite gotten fractions, I’m going to have a really hard time learning some more skills further down the road that require fractions in different ways. So, what we argued in the Iceberg Problem is we believe deeply in [inaudible 00:16:11], believe deeply in the idea of high academic standards, but the path for each student to get there is this mix of pre-grade on-grade and, in some cases, post-grade skills, in order to connect them from where they are to where they need to be. And these policies were actually getting in the way of schools being able to do that.

Kristi: Yeah. And I’m thinking about the number of kids, and I don’t have the statistics on this, maybe you do, who come to a place where they just consider themselves, you’re either a math person or you’re not a math person. If you start to identify yourself as not a math person, you close that door to yourself. We, as educators, need to look at that and say, “So, is that true?” Because if that’s not true, that people are either math people or they’re not math people, then we need to change something about the way we’re teaching this so that that doesn’t happen.

Joel Rose: I saw this with my own daughter. We’ve been working through the pandemic on Roadmaps and she began by saying, “I’m just not a math person.” Turns out she missed a couple of skills, not big ones, but important ones, not a lot of them, and not understanding those skills was meaning that she was becoming less successful in more advanced skills. She chalked it up to, “I’m just not a math person,” but when we went back and actually could diagnose what those gaps were and then addressed those gaps, she’s thriving. What happens is, when there’s kids miss key skills for whatever reason and they begin to fall behind, they can sometimes just think of it as a character flaw, rather than understanding that they just missed a few blocks along the way, and that’s okay. We can go back and fix those.

Kristi: I had the same experience with my daughter, who is now a freshman in college, and had classified herself as not a math person, and had closed whole career paths to herself because of that. She’s a straight A student. Took all the honor classes, everything, but she had closed all these doors to herself because of this one area where she didn’t feel smart.

Joel Rose: Right. It’s heartbreaking. In some ways, this way of doing school, where you learn all the fourth grade stuff in fourth grade, and all the fifth grade stuff from fifth grade, and it’s built for the average student. In some ways, this process has become our national social sorting machine. Because, if for whatever reason you fall behind, we just don’t provide really viable pathways for you to catch up. Kid goes into eighth grade or ninth grade, takes algebra, fails it. What happens? They come back, they take it in the summer and then they take it again in the spring, they barely pass. Why did we just give kids the same course over and over and over again? Why can’t we go back, figure out where they are and then build them a real solid bridge to connect them to where they need to be?

Kristi: Yeah.

Joel Rose: Our schools just aren’t organized or structured to do that, because of this same challenge of one teacher and 30 kids all learning the same thing at the same time.

Kristi: Yeah. I feel like I’m in church right now. Teach to One 360 is different than some of your personalized learning competitors in a lot of ways. But in one of the biggest ways, you’ve actually found ways to collaborate with your competitors. Talk about how you’re different and how you’ve created that relationship with some of the other personalized learning companies.

Joel Rose: Sure. One way of thinking about it is there’s a continuum between what we would call products and models. Products are tools that largely continue to assume the same delivery model of one teacher, 30 students, all learning the same thing at the same time. These are tools to help support that process. Then models break the one teacher, 30 kids, all learning the same thing at the same time, and give each kid their own multimodal experience. We have both. Roadmaps is a product. Teach to One 360 is a model. We’re not anti-product at all. Most of the companies, organizations that provide digital solutions to schools are products. And they’re great. For schools that are looking for a digital product to supplement or augment their core curriculum, there are a number of numbers out there they’re terrific, but there are some schools that go, “I think this problem is bigger than just the product. We don’t want to just graph the product on top of the same delivery model. We want actually a different delivery model.” That’s where Teach to One 360 is different. It is that totally different delivery model that comes with a lot of professional supports for teachers.

Those models need content, need digital content, need all kinds of content. In that case, we partner with those digital curriculums and, in some cases, even the non digital textbook companies, and we use a number of their lessons in our model. To give you an example, there are roughly 300 mathematical concepts in our program. For each one of those skills and concepts we need the 30 or 40 lessons, digital lessons, collaborative lessons, independent lessons. We’ve looked at over 90,000, middle and high school math lessons against those skills, and we picked from that the 7,000 that we think are the very best fits for our model. Then we added 2000 of our own.

Kristi: I think a lot of product-based companies assume that they need to reform or that they need to offer resources from inside of the existing system. But, as I referred to earlier, Teach to One really calls for more of an extensive dismantling of the learning framework and environment. Can you talk about where you start when you’re first working with a school or a district, what even happens when they contact you?

Joel Rose: The first place that we start is at the philosophical level. Trying to understand whether what we do is a fit for where they’re looking to go. Sometimes it’s not. Sometimes the school would say, “What we’re looking for is a digital product that aligns to grade level expectations so that when our teacher teaches all the students something about probability, she can then assign them at home digital content that aligns to that skill.” We said, “Totally get that. Understood. We’re probably not the right partner for you because that’s really not the philosophy of what we’re trying to do.”

We start with the philosophy. The philosophy is, “Let’s truly understand where each student is. Let’s truly understand where they need to get to and how much time we have, and let’s give them a ambitious but a viable path that connects those two things.” That is the place to begin. From there, the question then is [inaudible 00:23:38] one, are the teachers and the administration fully aligned around this philosophy? Because you can have a superintendent goes, “I’m all in on this,” and you go to the school and they say, “What in the heck are you talking about?” So, we’ve got to make sure that everyone up and down the chain is aligned. The next question just has to do with operational logistics. Do they have enough computers? What’s the schedule like? What’s the staffing like? Can we actually make this work in this school? We have lots of different configurations and ways to make that work, but we want to make sure that we can be successful and that school can be successful in the implementation.

Kristi: They have to remodel their classroom as well. Right?

Joel Rose: They can, sometimes. We have different configurations. In some cases, schools decide to do it in an open space, which really does have a lot of benefits, but we’re also able to implement them with what we call a walls up environment. To give you one illustration, you could have a wing of the school be the math wing. And we have had schools create a little bit of a traffic circle in the hallway. So, if a kid is in room number one, and then at the 30 minute mark, the session bell rings, he’ll come out of room number one, hit the traffic circle, realize he now needs to go into room number four for the second session. So, we’ve found ways to make this work within a more traditional architectural school.

Kristi: Okay. That’s good to know. It sounds like you have a rubric, but it’s maybe a working document that you customize for each customer, maybe, but can you explain how you determine if a school is ready for a program like Teach to One?

Joel Rose: We will send our implementation team to the school and we’ll spend a half day in the school. It’s a true partnership. There are many benefits that come with it, but we want to make sure that everyone understands what that means. That they can be successful and they feel like they can be successful in this model. There’s real openness to doing things a little bit differently. We have a lot of different configurations that enable some level of customization, but schools do have to make a unified choice. That is a different experience for teachers that some embrace, but some may just prefer to shut their door and do their thing. That’s what we explore in that process.

Kristi: Can you share a success story or two, maybe from an individual student?

Joel Rose: Yeah. I’ll start with just saying, I’m in schools, or was in schools, all the time. I would say almost every time I’d go in, I’d go to a table of four or five kids and I would say, “What’s your favorite instructional modality?” Almost every time they would all say something different. I like live instruction. I like collaborative learning. I like independent learning. It was always this reminder that there is no one best way. It’s the one best way for each student and the one they liked the most. But then I did this once and then the student looked me dead in the eye and he said, “Are you in charge of Teach to One?” And I said, “I am.” He said, “Don’t you dare get rid of this program.” I’ll never forget the look in his eyes. That was gratifying.

I think, at the broader level, one of our foundation partners, the Gates foundation, paid for a study of all of the students that we served over a three-year period to see what happens. We looked at on the NWEA map assessment, where they came in, in the sixth grade, and then where they left in the eighth grade. What they found was, across the three years, students grew 20 percentile points, from the time they came in to the time they left, which we were thrilled with. But that actually wasn’t the most interesting part of the study. The most interesting part of the study, where there were a set of schools that grew roughly 40 percentile points, and a set that grew roughly seven. The difference between the two groups was the education policy. This is what spurred us to an iceberg.

Joel Rose: What do I mean by that? In the schools that let us truly meet kids where they were, the seventh grader comes in. If that child has a gap in the fourth grade, third … Wherever that kid is, we’re going to meet her where she is. Those are the ones that grew almost 40% top points. Some schools said, “Well, I get this whole personalized learning thing, but every day you spend on a pre-grade skill is one less that you have to cover all of beyond grade skills. That’s what the test is going to be on. So, can you please put a floor in, don’t go more than one year below the students’ enrolled grade levels so we can optimize exposure to the grade level material.” Those that put the floor in were the ones that grew the seven percentile points. Those that let us meet kids where they were, where the ones that grew the 40.

Kristi: That data just speaks for itself. It makes me wonder why everybody isn’t doing this, but there obviously are some fears, objections, barriers. What are those?

Joel Rose: I appreciate your saying that, there are a number of barriers. The first barrier really is just inertia. If you’re the head of mathematics in X city, you’ve been buying textbooks every year. Now is the year for the adoption. Perhaps you were successful as a teacher with a textbook based program. This is just different. Oftentimes, school districts are creatures of habit.

Then you compound that with the fact that there are a number of regulations. Some States have these rules around textbooks and textbook adoptions and how the whole system works. Inertia combined with regulation has kept real change from emerging. I think the second is, on the financial side, you’ve got a number … Models are different things. If I’m the head of curriculum, I buy textbooks and I buy software. My textbooks cost 80 bucks a pop, and my software may be 10 or 15 bucks. That’s the world that I live in. We have an integrated program that has coaching and logistical support and all the content. School districts aren’t budgeted to use models. They think in terms of curriculum, products, and textbooks. We’re trying to create the space for new ways of thinking about, because once you actually factor in the software, the coaching, the economics actually aren’t all that different, but they don’t necessarily fit within the buckets.

Kristi: I can imagine that this customized, personalized approach is really timely right now with what we’re experiencing with the pandemic and students needing to take a lot more control over their own learning. How have you adapted, or how has new classrooms helped schools adapt to this time period?

Joel Rose: We’ve done a couple of things. One is, with all of our school partners, we’ve been able to shift into supporting remote implementations. We have some schools that are doing live instruction through Zoom. They do their digital learning through the portal. They do the collaborative learning through the Zoom rooms. We’ve figured out ways to leverage the infrastructure so that each and every student can progress on their own personalized pathways, but not necessarily by themselves. Sometimes they’re continually grouped with other students who have a similar need. But the second thing we did, is we created a new solution called Roadmaps that allows any student, any teacher, any family, to take a free diagnostic assessment, to figure out exactly what are the skills that they still need to learn at the skill level, very precisely, to get to grade level proficiency and get to algebra proficiency. We released Roadmaps a few months ago, and then there’s also an add-on called Roadmaps Plus, where schools and families can access digital content and short assessments so they can actually make progress on their Roadmap.

Kristi: You made those available for free.

Joel Rose: The diagnostic is free. Then for schools to use the plus version, which has all the aggregated reporting and the content, it’s $15 for the year. There’s a family version as well, which is currently in pilot mode and that’s $9.95 a month.

Kristi: People can find that on your website.

Joel Rose: Yeah. teachtoone.org.

Kristi: teachtoone.org. I’m wondering. Do you envision this crisis as a real opportunity to push educational reform to the next level, particularly in this area of personalized learning? Because we’ve had to find new ways of doing things, we’ve had to break all our molds. Is this our opportunity?

Joel Rose: I think it is. The truth is it wasn’t like before the pandemic kids are going to show up this fall on grade level. That was not going to happen. People just weren’t talking about learning loss or unfinished learning, but it was a real thing. It has certainly been exacerbated and much more out in the open. I think, before the pandemic, there was this, I guess, perception amongst some in the policy circles, that if teachers just had high enough expectations kids could achieve grade level mastery in a single year, regardless of where they were starting from. Now I think that is just not deemed appropriate or reasonable anymore. I think there’s a widespread recognition that it may take multiple years to catch kids up. We are going to have to go back and address some of the key pre-grade gaps that they may have missed during this period.

Kristi: That makes me wonder what is next for you? I know you started with math and there were really intentional reasons around that, but what is on the horizon? Do you plan to expand into other content areas?

Joel Rose: The first thing that we set out to do was to build a math model in 360, that could catch it just about any student back up to grade level in three years or less. We’re on a strong path to be able to do that. We’ve actually even started using things like machine learning techniques to make the scheduling algorithms get smarter and smarter and smarter over time. We don’t want to venture too much into other subjects and grade spans. That’s how we can demonstrate that we’ve actually cracked the code on how to do that. We think we’re getting really close to being able to demonstrate that. That may take a year, that may take three years, four years, but that is our number one priority. Because if we can demonstrate the power of innovative learning model in math, our hope is that that will catalyze other innovative learning models in other subjects, other grades, maybe even math. If organizations and companies create innovative learning models that are more impactful than the one that we’ve created, we’re happy to go to business. Because, as an organization, we are just trying to spur the development of the sorts of innovative approaches to learning.

Kristi: You’re currently working with, I think, 40 schools and districts. Is that …

Joel Rose: That sounds about right. It changes all the time as new schools join, but that sounds about right.

Kristi: I didn’t know whether that number was current or not. What are your goals? Are you trying to expand that, or is your focus more on just perfecting the model with the schools that you are working with?

Joel Rose: We are looking to expand, but we’re looking to expand with the right school partners. We aren’t looking for the expand for the sake of expansion. This is also one of the benefits of being a nonprofit, as we can really focus on partnering in places where we think there’s the best chance to succeed. That really is all about the adults and the alignment with the adults. My sense is we’ll probably go through a bigger period of expansion beginning in two or three years. But between now and then we are looking to expand, but really being judicious in terms of trying to find the right philosophical alignment with school and district partners.

Kristi: Got it. If one of our listeners is thinking, “Gosh, I need to reach out and I want to be one of those schools. I want to be one of those teachers.” What do they do? Where do they find you? How do they start?

Joel Rose: teachtoone.org. You can find information about Roadmaps, Teach to One 360. You can click to get more information and one of our team members is happy to reach out to you and start the process and begin that exploration. What we find, frankly, is even when schools go through the exploration process and then, for whatever reason, decide not to partner or we don’t think it’s a good fit, they learn something in the process. It becomes a really helpful exercise to really begin to question some of the underlying assumptions around how their school operates, can set them on this journey that can be really useful.