posted
7 Canadian provinces, of course, has publically funded Catholic schools which I can enlighten you a little about. These schools were grandfathered in by an agreement made waaay back when Canada was gluing itself together between Ontario and Quebec. Back then, English-speaking meant Protestant and French-speaking meant Catholic and there were minorities of each in each province. As part of the agreement, each province agreed to offer schooling of the other religious denomination and in the other language.
Quebec has secularized both its Engliah and French school boards. Ontario has secularized its Protestant board, but not its Catholic one. This is, of course, a ludicrous problem of inequity.
It's also a problem for society, as Catholic boards have different standards of certain areas of education, especially sexual education. This, of course, doesn't stop young people from being educated in useful things like birth control, which further adds to the bizarre nature of these schools. They also have a lower standard of teachers, because they require people to have a note from a priest in order to become employed.
I, as you can tell, am strongly opposed. I've been in a few Catholic schools and whether it was the ones I've been in or if its all Catholic schools, I found the effort in the classrooms to be less in the Catholic classrooms.
I've also come across some rather hideous comments, such as things suggesting that Catholic schoolchildren are more honest. That kind of talk is detrimental, although thankfully is largely disregarded by the student population once they reach high school.
*
In the UK, county authorities have jurisdiction over Religious Education, although it usually has to be "non-denominational". However, this does mean that they can offer prayer assemblies, provided the God discussed is vague enough to be unoffensive. Atheist students may, of course, sit out. Although one school snidely remarked on its website, "no provisions are presently made" thus making it clear that the parent who asks for provisions is alone and putting everyone to a lot of trouble.
I myself attended a publically funded religious school in Essex as a child. There was no requirement of the students to be religious although most people went along with it. We had Church of England assemblies and thanks-god before-mealtime prayer. Most of the children attended because it was the nearest school.
I can still recite the Lord's Prayer, though. Our Father who art in Heaven...
I am against publically funded religious education, whether it's non-denominational or not ("non-denominational", ha-- as long as you're religious). Secular schools in Ontario educate fine, moral and ethical youngsters without religion filling the day.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Armoth, I think the main point to bring up is that paying for public education is not really paying for your own child's education. When you pay for public education, you are paying for the privilege of living in a society where everyone is educated. Consider for a moment what it would be like if 50% of the population was illiterate or unable to do basic math. In Texas, with the text book issue, people were making a huge point about what it was going to mean to our state to have people think we failed at education- how many companies were going to choose not to settle in Houston because the high school graduates were uneducated? While a lot of people go to college, I know my husband's work hires and trains straight out of high school, so the quality of high school education does matter to their company. But, I would spend some time thinking about how having an educated population benefits you beyond your own child's education. That might help with the feelings of paying twice, because honestly, you aren't paying for the same thing with those two bills.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not so much the points to bring up. It's the process of thinking outside your own context and considering other people.
You may laugh at that, but it's hard to do. We have our own problems, and this was a "solution" or at least some sort of remedy to help alleviate that.
It took talking to real people, like you, for me to consider that. Arguments aside, I have to think of some other strategy to make it as real to them as you did for me.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Armoth: I think it's very admirable that instead of getting too bent out of shape that folks took umbrage with your religious community's solution, instead, you tried to understand just what made them feel so aggravated.
Folks could have been a bit more civil, but you kept things on track, that's a very good thing.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suggest pointing out to them how they are shooting themselves in the foot if they weaken the education other kids are getting. It is in their best interest to support a strong public school system.
They did what they thought was right for their families, which is understandable, even though it might have been misguided in this case. But what is actually in their best interest is making sure that public education is well supported.
I'm sure we can come up with lots of reasons why, if that will help.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I suggest pointing out to them how they are shooting themselves in the foot if they weaken the education other kids are getting. It is in their best interest to support a strong public school system.
While I agree, I have found that this is unlikely to convince anyone who does not already grant the premise.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Why is public school for most subjects and then separate religious education so unacceptable?
I can think of a few explanations, but I'll give you a chance to explain.
Seconded. Again, not because I can't think of reasons why, but because I'd like to find out the true reason.
.
This question intrigued me as well. I have no knowledge of Orthodox Jewish schooling. So I have been doing some reading, and though I still have no clear answer WHY yeshiva (Jewish schooling) is so important, Here is a blog post that gives some insight into HOW profoundly important it is (seems to be required, or at least all but required) in Orthodox Judaism.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wouldn't help convince people, but aren't there other things that Orthodox Jews essentially pay twice for. For example, taxes pay for the FDA, but Orthodox Jews need kosher food so they pay more for that. I am assuming that if it meets kosher demands, it meets FDA quality demands plus. This cost is of course hidden. The amount of taxes set aside to pay for inspectors is not delineated and the higher priced food isn't broken into two charges- food part and inspector fees. So, maybe the solution is for the community to just call it local taxes and not say which part is for the schools, which for the roads, etc. Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lots of people pay for things they don't often use. Vegetarians pay tax for meat standards. Non-drivers pay for roads. People with jobs pay for people without jobs. People who aren't ill pay for people who are ill. People who've never been to a national park in their lives pay for National Parks. People who will never go to space pay for other people to get launched into space.
This is a secular society that supports a generalized version of reality which has roads and schools and hospitals and such. It's made as such to make it as easy as possible for lots of different types of people to live within.
You're paying for this generalized society that supports not only the people who live within it but also the people who live outside it, for whatever reason (and religious belief doesn't get more of a pass than being a vegetarian non-driver without any kids). These schools are educating the people who may save your life if you get hit by a car walking along the road, who grow food for you, who run the bank and who fix the roads. Even if you choose one aspect of living outside the secular society, your support system IS the secular society and you pay taxes to keep that support system going strong.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that a big part of the reason that this is troublesome for me is the underlying sense that "community" in this situation is defined as exclusively the Orthodox Jewish people. The duty and civic responsibility that I think should belong to the entire population covered by the school board has been dismissed in favor of a loyalty to only those who share ethnic and religious ties. I think that this is an example of a mindset that is dangerous.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you're right about that Kmb. It's not a hassidic sect, it's Modern Orthodoxy, which prides itself on its ability not to shun the secular world, but to incorporate the secular world into its religious identity. But I guess it's difficult to see outside that perspective of "community" especially when you've come in to the majority.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm fine with public funds paying for our public schools. Private schools are private. I am against public funds going to them, just as I am against public funds going to ANY private company.
I thought public school was just fine. The teachers do not get paid much, but they taught because they cared about education. And the three month summer vacations
I'll probably be flamed for saying this, but I also wouldn't mind if dropouts be temporarily charged or taxed at a higher rate for public education than those that make the effort to finish. If they can provide a valid reason why the dropped out then it could be waved.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am kinda disturbed about Tom's problems with Orthodox Judaism though...wish we had resolved that...
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nor do they necessarily need to be resolved. Someone can belong to a toxic culture while still being a decent person.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well that is good as I think that most of the various communities to which most of us belong include some toxic elements.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, in summary, Armoth comes from a toxic culture of bigoted Orthodox Jews, but he’s a nice guy.
Yeah, I’d say he’s a nice guy. Reading through this thread, I’d say he’s one of the only nice guys in it. He took the attacks not just on the issue at hand but on his people and his culture in general, and turned around and was still polite and generous. He humbly offered to look at it from the perspectives he was being pounded with. He admitted he could be wrong, which is something that doesn’t happen very often around here. Sure glad he was able to mask the toxic, bigoted culture he comes from. I mean, that’s just looming in the background, isn’t it? It must take all his strength to hold it back and not let it through into what he posts on Hatrack. He does it so admirably. If I didn’t know any better, judging from all of his contributions at Hatrack, I’d say he was the product of a humble, polite, and generous upbringing, not a toxic, bigoted one. But thankfully, no explanation is necessary when you level those accusations. It’s just a given.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow. I guess I missed this thread. And to think, I can remember when Tom still insisted he was "only" an agnostic. I'm surprised no one whistled on him.
Thing is: this kind of thing isn't unusual. It's pretty common for the elderly to try to take over a school board because they feel that it's unfair that they should be paying taxes for someone else's kids and not receiving any benefit.
Likewise, it was white school boards that closed schools after Brown vs. The Board so they wouldn't have to integrate the schools. In some of those cases they actually set up a sort of voluntary school "tax" that went to private academies, specifically so that they could support white only schools using what amounted to the same funds that had previously been going to the public schools.
But some of the stuff schools have been pulling lately are pretty slimy too. Around here, the property tax for the town gets voted on at the town hall, while the school tax gets voted on at the elementary schools. So invariably, they hold concerts on election day, to make sure that parents are there to vote. Or they'll threaten to remove the most popular programs if the vote fails, rather than just trimming the budget through good management. We've had an increase in the school tax rate every year for at least 14 years, and it's getting really ridiculous. Our district has built 2 new schools and increased the size of the high school twice, costing millions of dollars, but when the vote failed, suddenly they decided to close buildings and argue that we didn't need the space. And they try to make it sound like the tax rate is going down by saying things like "this year we've given the voters what they wanted by decreasing the tax hike from 8% to 3%". Kinda like when they "lower prices" at Christmastime.
And let me add to what others have said here to Armoth: it really is refreshing to see someone take criticism as well as you have in this thread. Wish politicians could do that well.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:And they try to make it sound like the tax rate is going down by saying things like "this year we've given the voters what they wanted by decreasing the tax hike from 8% to 3%".
Bear in mind that this means that, all else being held equal, no one is getting a raise. That's a bigger sacrifice than it sounds.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Bear in mind that this means that, all else being held equal, no one is getting a raise. That's a bigger sacrifice than it sounds.
First of all, you're just plain wrong. Teachers and administrators are receiving their contractually obligatory raises.
And all else being held equal, yes, but property values do go up, and development happens. The tax rate can't go up indefinitely, or we'll eventually be paying more in taxes than we pay for our mortgages.
And by the way, I haven't got a raise in three years, my brother in law got a 25% pay cut, my best friend spent much of this past year working a reduced work week (hence 20% pay cut) and my wife lost her job. In a good economy, I'm all for teachers getting raises, but right now isn't the time.
[ June 08, 2010, 09:42 PM: Message edited by: Glenn Arnold ]
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the last year? Maybe not. But if it didn't it's just a blip in the overall increase. My house is worth twice what I paid for it 14 years ago, but my school taxes are 4X what they were when I bought it.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd be surprised if your school budget is four times higher, though. I don't know where you live, but schools around here have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in aid. Given that my total property tax is something like $3300, I'm not particularly bitter about it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:This question intrigued me as well. I have no knowledge of Orthodox Jewish schooling. So I have been doing some reading, and though I still have no clear answer WHY yeshiva (Jewish schooling) is so important, Here is a blog post that gives some insight into HOW profoundly important it is (seems to be required, or at least all but required) in Orthodox Judaism.
Fourthed. While that link is interesting, it didn't really address the why.
Armouth, I'll add to the chorus that is impressed with your response to this thread. Would you mind explaining the importance of private education in your faith? I think it would help me (and others) better understand the context in which these events occurred.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I appreciated all the kind words. I just feel like I owe so much to this community (Hatrack) - I dunno, I'm thinking of doing a landmark where I introduce myself more properly - but I grew up in a semi-isolated Orthodox community. And while I don't feel like I wasn't exposed to a non-Orthodox world (I read books, watched tv and movies), I didn't get to talk to real people about real issues that were outside the Orthodox sphere. And I think that's kind of important.
I like to consider myself a well thought-out guy, but I have tremendous respect for many of you on this forum. And I'm willing to listen. It's actually a lot easier to check ego at the door when all you have at stake is your online persona.
I know you guys all want to know what the deal is with yeshiva schooling. It's SO complicated. I tried to write it up yesterday and I ended up erasing it all. Maybe I'll say a bit and you can ask questions, but honestly, I feel like until you paint yourselves in blue and hang out in the trees with the rest of us, I'm not sure you're really gonna understand it.
In Judaism, it is a commandment, in fact, leveled a commandment that stands above all others - to LEARN the Torah. There is so much religious philosophy centered around how the mere study of God's commandments and wisdom is a devotional act that brings you closer to God. I go to law school, and I still return to a yeshiva at night to continue Torah study. It's one of the most fulfilling things I do, and for a lot of people, it is the best part of their religious practice.
I mean, in a Speaker for the Dead sort of way - to come to know is to come to love, and this is the way we come to know God.
So much background is required, Hebrew, Aramaic, Bible (in Hebrew) and its commentators, Talmud, Law, Philosophy, self awareness, they're all part of the curriculum and are deeply rooted in our lifestyle.
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: but honestly, I feel like until you paint yourselves in blue and hang out in the trees with the rest of us, I'm not sure you're really gonna understand it.
posted
Armoth, I think I can understand why studying Torah is so important, what I don't understand is why public secular school supplemented with a separate religious schooling (perhaps in early morning, late afternoons or evenings) seems so unacceptable to many Orthodox Jews. Here are some of the reasons I can imagine.
1. There is concern that if students study at a secular school their study of Torah will be seen as less important than achievements in secular subjects.
2. Secular (public) schools teach so many frivolous subjects (art, music, gym, dance . . .) that students would have insufficient time left to dedicate to the study of Torah.
3. At a yeshiva, all subjects are taught in the context of Torah. There is freedom to discuss religious topics when they are relevant in primarily secular classes like history, literature and science.
4. At secular schools students would be expected to participate in activities that Orthodox Jews would find unacceptable.
5. At secular schools, observant Jews could often be forced to choose between following their commandments and participating in activities like choir, dance or sports. Jewish schools can offer similar activities in a way that is in keeping with appropriate practices.
6. People are afraid that Jewish children will be ostracized in public schools.
7. People want their children to be immersed in the Jewish community and aren't comfortable associating with non Jews. They are perhaps even afraid that non-Jews will corrupt their children.
I could probably come up with more but doing so won't help me to understand whether any of those reason are the reasons you and your community don't consider public schools an option. Can you please help me understand which of any of those (or other reasons) are important to you?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
2 is not. I had art, music, gym, the girls had dance. 4 is relevant to that - the programs like dance, and gym are divided. Many high schools are actually not coed.
But yea, there isn't much cheerleading in Orthodox Jewish schools. But that's kinda why I want you to come out and check things out - because there are realms where you might consider us extreme, and there are realms where we are totally normal - and I think you'd be surprised about that.
As for #7 - that's the part that's most difficult to explain. It's not so much the lack of comfort, though, for some, I'm sure that's true - I think it's more the fear of the affect that another person's kid would have on you and your kid. Like I said, boys and girls don't touch before marriage. Orthodox Jewish kids dress a bit more modestly. You may laugh, but I find it mind-blowing in law school when I show up to class in the summer and sit next to a girl in a tank-top. ::shrug:: It's just not something I'm used to - and would definitely have made my high school experience a lot harder...
#3 is also huge. Modern Orthodox Judaism prides itself on its exposure to the secular world. They don't believe in separate realms - earthly, mundane, impure vs. holy, exalted, spiritual. They believe that the secular is a vessel for spirituality - that God is in science, art, music, philosophy, literature, etc. So there was always that undercurrent in my education, and especially in my college education.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a guy, I have to say that being in school with attractive, sometimes under-dressed women certainly didn't damage my education, and it made it a lot more fun Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: As a guy, I have to say that being in school with attractive, sometimes under-dressed women certainly didn't damage my education, and it made it a lot more fun
Agreed. But depends what your values are.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am currently listening to an interview with one of the board members, Dr. Asher Mansdorf. (I believe recorded a couple days ago, although I can't find it in the archives.) He STRENUOUSLY objects to the idea that he or the other JO board members are in it for themselves or the non-public schools, and bragged about improvements in the facilities and test scores of the public schools in the district.
quote:Doesn't really seem like they're "diverting funds from the public schools".
But that's exactly what they're doing. Now, he can assert that he's doing so by cutting waste and salaries and focusing monies on other capital projects, but that doesn't address the central criticism.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The public school teachers are now higher paid. The buildings are being renovated and becoming handicapped-accessible. Not to mention wired for the 'Net, including wifi.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The first link reports the scores, but doesn't report how they are changing over time. It seems like one of the links mentioned that scores were going down. Is there any unbiased information on the differences in the scores of students in the public schools after the change?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd love to see that as well, but I haven't figured out where to find them -- or if they're even available online.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The public school teachers are now higher paid.
One of his criticisms of the "old" way (in his editorial) was that the school teachers were overpaid, especially compared to neighboring schools. Is that no longer the case?
Also, let's keep in mind that we're talking about an enormously wealthy and underpopulated district. Of course the schools can afford infrastructure improvements and wifi; it's only this guy's assertion that it wouldn't've happened without him. A more salient question is: does he approve of infrastructure improvements only when yeshivas are allowed to use the facilities?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:One of his criticisms of the "old" way (in his editorial) was that the school teachers were overpaid, especially compared to neighboring schools. Is that no longer the case?
posted
Well, specifically, we have a list of specific infrastructure improvements that didn't happen, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and accept that they were neither planned nor scheduled before the board change. The question becomes, then, whether these improvements were actually more critical than the (hypothetical) expenditures which were occurring -- and, again, whether he would have supported any infrastructure upgrades at all were his central agenda not to extend the use of those facilities to religious organizations.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
