On Maharat Hurwitz becoming Rabbah Hurwitz
“Will they allow her to officiate at a wedding, be a witness or daven for the amud?”
If what I’ve read is any indication, Rabbah Hurwitz has no intention of breaking these laws. She even specified that Yeshivat Maharat, the yeshivah establish to ordain, er, Rabbot, will give the title Yoreh Yoreh but not the title Yadin Yadin because women are not permitted to be judges in a Bet Din/Jewish court, according to halachah/Jewish religious law.
“Does this break into the laws of tznius, and make people less aware of the boundaries between men and women? Or have we over sexualized everything and just be normal like everyone else?”
One of these days, when I can organize my thoughts, I hope to blog about this. If I understand correctly, the law of “Serarah” says women can’t hold certain leadership positions in the Jewish community–in classical Jewish terms, a woman can’t be “king” (meaning, presumably, a “reigning” queen as opposed to the wife of a king), dayan/judge in a Jewish court, or “nasi” (prince?, officer?). I think that, in modern terms, that means that a woman couldn’t be the president of a Jewish national entity (following Golda Meir’s example), a judge (following Devorah’s example), or a legislator. The law of “kavod ha-tzibbur,” the honor of the community, means (among other things?) that a woman is not permitted to have an aliyah (some say only if men are present). The laws of tzniut, modesty, seem, on a practical basis, in certain circles, to prohibit practically every other public role for women.
So what do you mean by “boundaries,” Hesh? To me, a lifelong Conservative Jew, this is the way those rules sound: “Pay no attention to that woman behind the curtain–and make sure she stays there.” Is there anything in the halachic rules governing the relations between men and women that *isn’t* “over-sexualized”? Isn’t there any such thing as “neutral territory” in halachah?
posted by Shira Salamone at 1:27 PM
24 Comments:
First, this post certainly sent me to Google to look up the meaning of several words--I hope the education I've gained today sticks with me. Second, I'm still in the middle of my conversion process, which primarily means that much of this entire topic is new to me. I am still trying to understand the long traditions amongst the Conservatives, the Orthodox, all the sub-sets of Orthodoxy, the Reforms, the irreligious but culturally identified Jews--all my brethren.
Could someone point me to a few sources that discuss the point about Judges, and how various traditions deal with Deborah? I'm still unclear who denies which roles to women and why. Being a woman who has always been part of the leadership in volunteer organizations, I'm still learning how to appreciate and respect (and respectfully disagree with some of) the various opinions around me in the Jewish community as a whole.
I recommend that you read the "Spreading Serarah" article to which I linked. That may help explain the halachic approach to women and leadership, and how some of Orthodoxy's more open-minded adherents are trying to bring about change while remaining "within the system."
I do make an effort to translate, but I occasionally miss a word or two. Also, some of the untranslated words were Heshy's. I've been kvetching (Yiddish for "complaining") for years that Orthodox bloggers (and Orthodox Jews in general) often write and speak as if they assume that every Jew has had a yeshiva education. Well, I'm one of those who didn't, so we're *both* getting an education, here. :)
From Heshy: "daven for the amud"
daven (Yiddish--pray
amud (Hebrew? Aramaic?)--I think this means "reading stand," and, in practice, indicates just about any surface on which a prayer leader places his (her) prayer book. But I may be wrong--"amud" may mean "those standing in prayer." It's derived from the Hebrew la-amod, to stand.
To davven for the amud means to lead communal prayers. This may be "Yeshivish" (a combination of English, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Yiddish in terms of both vocabulary and grammar)--if an amud is a reading stand, then, logically, one should davven *from* the amud.
Also from Heshy: tznius
This is the Ashkenazi Hebrew pronuniation of the word for modest. Those who speak Hebrew with the Sefardi pronunciation pronounce it "tzniut."
I hope that helps.
And good luck on your journey. I hope to be able to welcome you to the mishpachah/family someday, should you chose to become, as they say in slang, an MOT ("Member of the Tribe").
Anyone that claims that Jewish law states that a woman CANNOT be a leader or rule over Jewish men is lying.
Salome Alexandra was a reigning Monarch in the Hasmoneon dynasty.
In fact, it was her reign that brought the Pharisees, a persecuted minority, into the position of control that they have occupied ever since. She placed them in charge of the Sanhedrin.
Still no Yeshiva education, learned of her reign when looking for girl names. :)
Thanks for the link Shira - some fans have been disgruntled that I have defended the decision to make her a rabbi. Of course it doesn't help that living in the bay Area is getting me to think about other Jews besides orthodox. Either way - did you see the original post where I defended the decision, the post you linked to was a devils advocate kind of thing.
FYI: I have a very comprehensive Glossary on the top of my site - http://www.frumsatire.net/glossary/
Miami Al, thanks for the history lesson.
"Of course it doesn't help that living in the bay Area is getting me to think about other Jews besides orthodox." It's about time, Heshy. :)
"did you see the original post where I defended the decision," Er, I'm sorry to say that I can't remember. What's the URL?
I'll check out that glossary.
By the way, here's a link lesson:
Ms. Tech-Challenged here thanks Kiwi the Geek for her instructions for creating a hyperlink in a comment, which I'm passing on to my commenters:
[A HREF="put the link here"]put the text here, whatever you want the reader to click on[/A]
For every [, substitute an <.
For every ], substitute an >.
Al and Shira:
One thing: I'm not going to get involved in this discussion, but want to challenge the theological interpretation of historical information.
Shlomtzion (Salome Alexandra) is not a prooftext to anything. The Hasmonean rulers were never fully recognized as legitimate rulers, both because they were not from the tribe of Yehuda (they were kohanim) and then because they intermarried with Idumeans, so some of them (e.g., Herod, Agrippas) weren't even Jewish. Shlomtzion is an example of an uneasy acceptance of the realpolitik without necessarily accepting her theologically or legally as the ruler.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the issue of "srerah" is dispositive on this topic, since it's a topic way too complicated for a blog (whether pro or con), but you have to use examples that are theologically acceptable. To that end, Miriam (as a Navi) and Devorah (as a shofet) are better examples.
Point taken JDub--which means that the real question may be why Miriam HaN'viah (the Prophet) and D'vorah the Judge are dismissed as precedents allowing women to hold positions of leadership and/or authority.
Shira wrote: "...the real question may be why Miriam HaN'viah (the Prophet) and D'vorah the Judge are dismissed as precedents allowing women to hold positions of leadership and/or authority."
This is *exactly* what I'm trying to understand. Why are Miriam and D'vorah not held as examples? Is it simply to say that men created a tradition of ignoring them? I cannot imagine it is simply that.
CaySwann, I'm not sure I have a *good* answer, but perhaps my next post, Women in Judaism: Taxation without representation will help you understand the issue of women leaders as I see it.
Jdub,
Yes and no on the authority, when we choose to reject things, you are absolutely correct, but much of Jewish law regarding Kingship is an attempt to rationalize and realize rules based on what "was done" as opposed to what was "ideal."
Halacha regarding that era is much more a codification of what was, rather than what ought to be.
I'm not suggesting the the laws regarding women in leadership aren't real, just that they are more nuanced than often perceived. Women aren't allowed to assume a leadership role where a man is capable out of respect for the community's dignity, which is codifying the sexist cultural mores rather than suggesting what ought to be.
I am suggesting that there is NOT an absolute rule regarding a woman as a leader, given that there was a female reigning monarch. Hence the Orthodox world might be uncomfortable with the fact that Israel had a female Prime Minister, and potentially a President (President is more King-like, despite not having much power, has "life and death" power because of the pardon), it doesn't cause Religious Zionists to reject Medinat Yisrael (the State of Israel), because there is precedent, even if they wish there wasn't.
"Women aren't allowed to assume a leadership role where a man is capable out of respect for the community's dignity, which is codifying the sexist cultural mores rather than suggesting what ought to be."
Al, the codification of sexist cultural norms is precisely the problem. What was considered very open-minded toward women 2,000 years ago, or even in the days of the Rambam (Maimonides), certainly doesn't sound so open-minded in the 21st century, but it's difficult to change something that's been cast in halachic stone--it takes years of chipping away, which is how we end up with Maharat (after about a year of chipping) as opposed to Rabba (which may need about ten years, or more, of chipping).
The essential question is, "What's accepted as a precedent for leadership eligibility?" JDub said, "Shlomtzion is an example of an uneasy acceptance of the realpolitik without necessarily accepting her theologically or legally as the ruler." JDub, do you really think that it would have mattered if Shlomtzion had been a direct descendent of David HaMelech/King David? It seems to me that *all* female leaders are rejected by the rabbis as precedent-setters. From what I understand of halachah/Jewish religious law, D'vorah's service as judge and military leader isn't considered a precedent, either--she, too, just served because of "realpolitik." Female leaders, in the eyes of the rabbis, seem to be one-time exceptions to the rules concerning eligibility for leadership, rather than setting a precedent for those rules.
Shira,
Right. Unlike you, I'm willing to accept those that are cast in stone, while rejecting the ones copies down on parchment. :)
Codified Halacha is reversible, Hillel II did it, Vilna Goan did it, Moshe Feinstein did it, the Lubavicher Rebbe did it, either throwing something out for something new, or legally defining things to make the Halacha so narrow as to not apply. However, it requires a great Torah Scholar with tremendous political support to make the change "stick."
Anyone can add a stringency, only a great scholar can add a leniency.
That said, I find the Conservative Movement's idea that the Shulchan Aruch applies, unless we politically disagree, an intellectually bankrupt position. There is a Halachic way to arrive at a female Rabbi, and there is a non-Halachic way to arrive at it.
If Rabbi Weiss violated Halacha, he'd be tossed out of the RCA, or at a minimum forced to withdraw his Semicha of her. Neither happened, we know women have been ordained, it's halachicly permitted.
There are some REAL cultural concerns, and you and I have discussed, at length, why I think egalitarianism fails in Judaism (pragmatically, not theoretically), so I understand the cautiousness.
Driving women from performing the female Mitzvot, Mitzvot that are, practically speaking, more important than male Mitzvot to the Jewish world, would be devastating. So it's better to hold on to cruel (to a handful) Halacha that preserves the Jewish people than to undo it.
I think that this is a very wise path that all have drawn out. Weiss threw down a MAJOR gauntlet, the RCA and OU have acknowledged that a woman CAN be a Rabbi, they just aren't willing to let it happen right now.
That's a MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR change. However, the success of this will depend upon how she does (no pressure there), if she is an exemplary Jewish Woman/Mother AND Torah scholar, more will be entertained. If she is not, this experiment won't be repeated for a LONG time.
Miami Al, you said, "Codified Halacha is reversible, Hillel II did it, Vilna Goan did it, Moshe Feinstein did it, the Lubavicher Rebbe did it, either throwing something out for something new, or legally defining things to make the Halacha so narrow as to not apply. However, it requires a great Torah Scholar with tremendous political support to make the change "stick."
Anyone can add a stringency, only a great scholar can add a leniency."
I'm waiting, I'm waiting.
"There are some REAL cultural concerns, and you and I have discussed, at length, why I think egalitarianism fails in Judaism (pragmatically, not theoretically), . . "
Yes, here’s the standing-on-one-foot version:
Miami Al said...
“. . . it is impossible to be Shomer Shabbat, have very small children, and participate in communal prayer. If your expectation of family size is 3-5 children, which is necessary for growth, it is impossible to include women without them losing a large chunk of their 20s and 30s... The net effect is that egalitarianism renders childbirth and nursing small children an impediment to expressive Judaism, while Orthodoxy culturally makes that the primary expression. As a result, Orthodox culture encourages having children, egalitarian culture discourages it.
. . .
MON MAY 04, 02:17:00 PM 2009
". . . the success of this will depend upon how she does (no pressure there), if she is an exemplary Jewish Woman/Mother AND Torah scholar, more will be entertained. If she is not, this experiment won't be repeated for a LONG time."
So let's pray that all the Rabbot, er, Maharatot, turn out to be a Jewish version of Supermom. Sigh. To paraphrase a famous quote, "That's one small step for a woman, one giant leap for Jewish-kind. :)
Al: Anyone can add a stringency, only a great scholar can add a leniency.
Shira: I'm waiting, I'm waiting.
Read this entry, this is a major change. We shall see. There is nobody of R. Moshe Feinstein's stature right now, but some things take time. The envelope pushers appear to be Weiss and Lookstein right now, let's see where they (and their students), take things.
Let's also see what the financial collapse on the right wing does to the culture, right-wing schools and Kollelim are collapsing left and right right now.
"So let's pray that all the Rabbot, er, Maharatot, turn out to be a Jewish version of Supermom."
I have young daughters, I'm at least as concerned as you are!
The future, however, is not in the pampered and whiny world of Center-Right Modern Orthodoxy, they've shot themselves in the foot financially. Read the whiney drivel that is Honestly Frum's blog of Teaneck entitlement, go back a few weeks, he got 400+ posts on some tuition discussions... angry Jewish men that hate their wives, children, and the Yeshivot, capping family size at two children, and generally acting like neutered cows for the slaughter... that group failed.
"The future, however, is not in the pampered and whiny world of Center-Right Modern Orthodoxy, they've shot themselves in the foot financially."
In your opinion, Miami Al, in which part of the Orthodox community does the future lie?
Depends on a few things. If some of the alternative education models take hold (Charter schools, etc.), then LWMO is in a strong position. Kiruv will become easier if there are lots of non-Orthodox Jews that had a more or less Day School experience, plus Hebrew literacy in the non-Orthodox would take away the huge linguistic barrier to Orthodoxy... The laity understand: Reform = mostly English, Conservative = mixed, Orthodox = all Hebrew, and Hebrew literacy would help shift affiliations rightward.
If the school alternatives do NOT take, LW MO will be dead in 15 years, because the heavily secular interests mean that heavy family planning is taking place.
Center-Right MO is dead, they are going broke because they are trying to out modern the LW MO professionally and out Charedi the RW. Unfortunately, they are taking YU with them, which will no doubt be a Chareidi institutions within 30 years.
The Yeshivish world is VERY strong. They might be financially AND morally bankrupt, but they have a core of extremely devoted followers. By glomming onto the Ultra Orthodox label, anti-cult activists leave them alone. Sure the Kollel world will die, but the leadership will explain that Kollel was a 50 years plan, and now it is college educations for all and hit up well meaning Reform Jews to fund the education. The leadership will embezzle most of the money, people will still be poor, but then they won't be financially bankrupt. :)
I don't know much of the Hassidish world, I presume that they are similar to the Litvish world socio-economically, in general the difference seems to be socks more than anything else.
Who are we kidding, our grandchildren will all be Chabad...
Hebrew literacy leading to a rightward shift would be a possibility, were it not that Orthodoxy still has to contend with egalitarianism.
"If the school alternatives do NOT take, LW MO will be dead in 15 years, because the heavily secular interests mean that heavy family planning is taking place." It's not only the secular interests, such as college education. You've probably heard the joke about yeshiva tuition being the best form of birth control. Charter schools are really cutting it close to the church/state razor edge. Let's see whether they survive, not to mention how many Jewish students they can both attract and admit without creating controversy among taxpayers.
"Center-Right MO is dead, they are going broke because they are trying to out modern the LW MO professionally and out Charedi the RW." Ouch.
"Unfortunately, they are taking YU with them, which will no doubt be a Chareidi institutions within 30 years." Double ouch. Will there be anything institutions of higher education left for the Modern Orthodox in the US, or will the MOs all have to send their kids to Israel to study in Bar Ilan University? That would be the ultimately irony--instead of sending American MO kids to Israel to study and having them "flip out" and come home Yeshivish, American MO kids would be sent to study in Israel because that would be the only place where they could study and stay MO. :)
So we'll all be a college-educated, not-kollel-obsessed version of Yeshivish? Ah, ever the optimist.
Or we'll all be Chabad? :) Only if they drop that "the Rebbe is Masiach" nonsense.
Shira,
Secular interests: they work with other professionals, and therefore expect to drive a car that is safe, be able to see a movie, go out to dinner, catch a ball game, and pay their taxes. That, combined with day school, limits family size. If they expected to live in poverty and send their kids to a RW Yeshiva, they'd be fine.
Re: Charters: Language and Cultural charters are established and on pretty solid Constitutional footing. I'm not too worried, Charters appears to be the compromise voucher, public accountability with private regulations.
Re: Conservadox/MO Merging... I understand egalitarianism is the strong divider, I just don't think it's that strong. I don't think most of the laity care that much. You're the exception, not the rule, a committed, Shomrei Mitzvot (albeit imperfectly) egalitarian Jew. You really think that Conservative Movement became the largest denomination of American Jews by grabbing people like you?
"Or we'll all be Chabad? :) Only if they drop that "the Rebbe is Masiach" nonsense."
Why would you say that? Have you compared the numbers of Christianity to Judaism? Heck, just look at the percentage of intermarried couples that choose one or the other, it's Christianity 2:1.
Why would following a dead Rabbi be a problem (sociologically, not halachically or theologically)? Dead Rebbes don't get busted for fraud, dead Rebbes don't molest children, dead Rebbes don't have to make tough choices, the perfect idol.
I think that the Rebbe as Moshiac is their source of strength.
"Secular interests: they work with other professionals, and therefore expect to drive a car that is safe, be able to see a movie, go out to dinner, catch a ball game, and pay their taxes. That, combined with day school, limits family size. If they expected to live in poverty and send their kids to a RW Yeshiva, they'd be fine."
So you thing that the Left-Wing Modern Orthodox are doomed because they insist on living like other contemporary human beings?
I hope you're right about charter schools being on solid constitutional grounds. But even if you're right, there simply won't be enough Hebrew-language charter schools to accommodate the thousands of Jewish children in need of at least a Hebrew-language education.
"Re: Conservadox/MO Merging... I understand egalitarianism is the strong divider, I just don't think it's that strong. I don't think most of the laity care that much. You're the exception, not the rule, a committed, Shomrei Mitzvot (albeit imperfectly) egalitarian Jew. You really think that Conservative Movement became the largest denomination of American Jews by grabbing people like you?"
Historically speaking, that's quite impossible that Conserv. became the largest denomination because of egalitarianism, because Conserv. has only been egal. for about 30 years. Currently speaking, I think Reform bypassed Conserv. a while ago. But I do think that traditional egalitarians like me stay Conser. because there's no other movement that's both trad. & egal. As to what percentage of the Conser. Movement is both egal. & reasonably observant, that's a good question.
"Dead Rebbes don't get busted for fraud, dead Rebbes don't molest children, dead Rebbes don't have to make tough choices, the perfect idol."
Miami Al, either you're very good at tongue-in-cheek comments and/or you're a hard-core cynic.
Tuition/Charters:
Correct, LWMO are doomed if they want to live like normal human being AND give everyone a private school education regardless of willingness to pay. I am sympathetic to someone that is poor because of a situation (health, injury, divorce, etc.) and wants a Jewish education. I'm not sympathetic to someone that chooses a low stress/low paying lifestyle and rents a small place in an upper middle class Jewish suburb and wants free/nearly free education for 5 kids. I've very UNSYMPATHETIC to someone that intentionally over-levers themselves, is house rich and cash poor, leases expensive automobiles, and therefore has no money for Day School... To let people adopt expensive lifestyles that prices out tuition is part of the fall of the system.
The Day Schools, for a variety of asinine reasons, cost approximately twice the Catholic schools. As a result, they are priced like prep schools, not parochial schools, with no interest in changing. The Catholic Church is unable to avoid school closings, Modern Orthodoxy needs to develop a plan that doesn't involve Prep School for all or it is doomed, up to the leadership and laity.
If you are traditional and egalitarian, you need a Conservative synagogue. If you are traditional and not-egalitarian, you want a MO Shul or Chabad Center. I just don't know that egalitarian traditionalists are a strong enough group to base the movement on.
If (big IF), the collapse of RWMO into the Chareidi leaves the YCT/LWMO crowd out in the cold, or as the only expression of modern Orthodoxy. If they are accepted as Orthodox by the Israeli Rabbinate, then I see the RW of Conservative being swallowed up as part of the recognized movement.
The theology of LWMO and Conservative are NOT that different. The practices are night and day. LWMO are going to be nominal Shomrei Mitzvot, only a tiny fraction of Conservative Jews are observant. If partnership minyanim took hold, I'm not seeing much of a place for observant Conservative. You can get 70% of what you want at the service and 90% of the life within LWMO, vs, getting 100% of the service and 10% of the life within Conservative... I guess it depends just how important Synagogue is to you.
Regarding the dead Rebbe issue: living Rebbes are human, with all their faults and frailities. They can make decisions (which is good), but they can sin. Sainting a dead Rebbe has the advantage of no problems coming up.
Christianity deified a dead Jew, Paul created the religion, but the Chrisitans ask themselves "What would Jesus do," not "What would Paul do?" Jesus didn't have to cut deals with the Romans, his living human followers did.
"I just don't know that egalitarian traditionalists are a strong enough group to base the movement on." Indeed, Miami Al, that may be why the Conservative Movement is shrinking.
How on earth can the Conservative Movement's right wing be swallowed up by the left-wing Modern Orthodox if "LWMO are going to be nominal Shomrei Mitzvot, [but] only a tiny fraction of Conservative Jews are observant?" It's been my personal experience that many so-called traditional Conservative are not terribly observant, and use the "traditonal" label simply to indicate that they're not egalitarian. The way Conservative Jews describe themselves can be very confusing. Aside from the admittedly-major detail that I travel on Shabbat (Sabbath) and Yom Tov (Festivals), I'm probably more observant than most of the so-called "traditional" members of my local synagogue.
"If partnership minyanim took hold, I'm not seeing much of a place for observant Conservative. You can get 70% of what you want at the service and 90% of the life within LWMO, vs, getting 100% of the service and 10% of the life within Conservative... I guess it depends just how important Synagogue is to you."
That's a very interesting point, and well worth considering. There is, of course, the problem that I don't live within walking distance of a Partnership Minyan. What else is new? I don't live within walking distance of *any* minyan in which I (would) like to participate.
You did not address my point about the inadequate number of student placements available in Hebrew charter schools. I can't see how there could possibly be enough room to accommodate thousands of Jewish kids.
Re tuition, oy. I could write an entire post about Jewish day schools.
"The Day Schools, for a variety of asinine reasons, cost approximately twice the Catholic schools."
One of those "asinine reasons" is that no Jewish day school teachers are bound by oaths of poverty, and none of them save the community money by agreeing to live in dorms (convents, monasteries) all their lives. Jewish educators need their wages to help cover their living expenses.
"As a result, they are priced like prep schools, not parochial schools, with no interest in changing."
"As a result?" No, keep going--you're not there yet.
"Modern Orthodoxy needs to develop a plan that doesn't involve Prep School for all . . . "
Okay, *now* you're there. Jewish day schools are priced like prep schools not only because our community doesn't support "free" teachers (nuns, monks, priests), but also, and especially, because the prep-school aspirations of the day schools are one of their biggest selling points, in my opinion. This may be even more true among the parents of non-Orthodox day school students, who send their kids to day school in order to kill two--no, three--birds with one stone by (a) keeping them out of public (government-funded) schools, widely perceived as educationally-inadequate and (b) keeping them out of what after-school and/or Sunday-school Hebrew schools, also widely perceived as educationally-inadequate, and (c) provide them with a Jewish education in their secular-education location, thereby avoiding the necessity of having someone available to drive them from one school to another.
Did I miss anything? :)
In sum, day schools are currently designed to go far beyond the basics of either secular or Jewish education, providing, essentially, a prep-school education in secular studies and a yeshivah education in Jewish studies. What would you cut, and how, to bring the tuition down to a reasonable level without starving the teachers to death?
Shira,
The assumption I have is that the Observant Conservative will become lax MO. The Traditional (non-Egal) Conservative will find themselves increasingly more comfortable in MO Shuls... this group is aged -- their reasons are normally not theological, just comfort level, and young Conservative Jews grew up in Egalitarian Judaism... however, that group is potentially a financial boon if the MO World grabs them.
Someone like yourself, Left Wing Conservative Observant (you're more observant than you're non-observant, your observance would be on the lax side at an Modern Orthodox Shul, but not extremely lax) -- is properly within an observant Conservative Synagogue. I just think that observant Conservative Judaism is an extremely small group -- doesn't mean it can't have a community in NYC, just means that it is unlikely to have a bit community elsewhere.
All the Conservative Hand Wringers point out that their "gems" are either Rabbis, Canters, or Orthodox... basically if you aren't drawn to the clergy, then if you want to express the values that Conservative Judaism taught you (the 165 hours that aren't Shabbat morning services), the Modern Orthodox world is a better fit.
Catholic schools, including diocese ones, haven't relied heavily on Vow of Poverty clergy teachers in decades, mostly because there aren't spare priets/nuns in America. If you look at a contemporary Catholic school, the staff are real employees, yet the price differential is there.
Non Orthodox Day Schools are Jewish Prep Schools, there is ZERO market for a non-Orthodox Jewish parochial school in the Catholic model. They view religious school as a luxury, and therefore expect it to perform like the similar luxuries. Remember, an upper middle class non-Orthodox Jew's peer group is upper middle class America (Jew and Gentile), not middle class through upper class Jews like the Modern Orthodox Jew's peer group is.
In the Orthodox World, the insistence on religious instruction in the morning, secular in the afternoon, means that the teachers are all "part time," and therefore paid "less." But since most of them don't have two jobs, they aren't really paid less than they would for full time. As a result, the substandard pay only appeals to someone that wants the tuition break, so more and more people seek employment in the schools.
A family with 4 children and a mother teaching in the school for $40k/year, will get $25k in tuition reductions, and pay the balance of the $35k in tuition in pre-tax "deductions" so take home nothing. To pay $60k in tuition after taxes, that same family would need $100k in income. This is warping the entire Frum economy and forcing everyone into working within the school system... It's much easier to be qualified to be a $40k teacher than a $100k job, and you end up in the same place.
That's the structural economic problem in a nut-shell.
There are many people sending their children to Modern Orthodox Day Schools that if they weren't Orthodox would be utilizing the public school system. The tuition rates result in substantial scholarship, so the "Prep School" push is made for a small percentage of the families that "should" be using a Prep School, and the costs are falling on fewer and fewer.
Basically, outside of NYC, families that would be Ramaz families in NYC instead get on the board at the local Day School and push the school higher, despite being 10% - 15% of the school population. And if you are paying $8k after scholarship whether tuition is $10k, $15k, or $20k, why wouldn't you push for excellence in the school, someone else pays for it. Only a small group of parents are full paying and struggling, and that group shifts from year to year as some make more money and stop struggling and others fall into scholarship land.
Regarding Charters: if the Charter School is performing above metric (and no reason a 70% middle-class Jewish school shouldn't) and over-subscribed, why would there be a limit on the size of the Charters or the number of them? They should potentially be stellar performers pulling the school system up, what's the problem?
In all seriousness, Miami Al, we're both way off-topic. As I said, "I could write an entire post about Jewish day schools." I think I'll do just that, and copy some of the relevant comments from here to there. See you at the new post.
Post a Comment
<< Home