<HTML>
I have kept Rabbi Stuart Zweiter's brief essay in my in-box since I
received it awhile ago. I have finally found a brief respite to respond.
First of all, kol hakavod and thank you, Stuart.
Second, I agree with much of what you said and will not even attempt to
re-couch in my own words. What would or could I add?
Third, let me, however, elaborate based on my limited experience. I am no
longer "in the trenches" of a school. I can justify my choice with
dealing with bigger picture issues, but I often wonder whether this is a
rationalization, a "morah heter" to remove myself from the pressure
cooker. Another suggested study: interview heads of school who have left
the field, a kind of exit interview that good schools do with parents who
leave, examining conditions that push people out of the field. These
conditions may relate to those that keep people out.
Fourth, being head of a Jewish day school is a very demanding
high-pressure position. Independent School Management, a consulting
outfit specializing exclusively in matters of independent schools, draws a
circle diagram describing all the functions of any independent school. =20
In the center of the circle, maintaining a 360 degree perspective of the
complete operations, from grass cutting, to teaching gemara and math, to
coaching the basketball team, to bill collecting is the Head of School. =20
And, all the pressure is inward. Everyone needs or wants access to that
head of school, from parents to teachers to the groundskeepers. ISM
quotes a study which points to a head of school as one of the highest
stress jobs out there. So, let's face it. It's a very tough,
challenging, highly stressed position. Parents' blood, i.e., their
children, is on the line. And Jewish parents are generally more demanding
than others.
Fifth, expanding on your thoughts that leadership lies in the hands of the
laity. To a great extent, this is an ancient problem. Socrates suffered
greatly at the hands of his "lay" leadership! Alasdair McIntyre
interprets much of Plato's writings as a noble, great and complex attempt
to have reason and truth triumph over rhetoric and its inherent untruths. =
=20
Those who seek and treasure truth and beauty have historically found
themselves at the mercy of the less cultured but seemingly more
financially and politically successful. Mozart and Beethoven were
consistently ambivalent if not hostile towards their patrons. I don't
know enough about Jewish history and the history of the kehilla but my
sense is there were tensions always between the "machers" and the
"rabbis." Nowadays, artists want the support of the state but detest the
censorship that so often accompanies that support. Effective leadership
gurus talk about partnering lay leadership, but let's be somewhat sober
about the limitations. There will inevitably be tensions between the
pragmatic utilitarians and the visionary truthseekers. Effective
educators are generally visionaries of some sort who must constantly
contend with the utilitarian lay leadership. When it works, this is an
effective and creative tension. Most often, it flounders. Another
research project. Mandel folks have looked into lay leadership in some
communities in North America. My experience is that schools are very
different, because so much more emotion comes into play.
I wonder how many teachers and heads of school see themselves as loving
their work and their profession. If so, do they consciously communicate
this love of teaching to their students? Some do but not enough. For
many years after high school, I considered becoming a history teacher
because of some excellent teachers I had in high school who clearly loved
their subject matter and cared deeply about their students. In my many
observations of countless Jewish educators I see lots of unhappiness,
cynicism, complaints about parents, complaints about unruly kids. I don't
see the joy of teaching, the love of learning, the love of kids learning. =
=20
As Nell Noddings says, it's not really "caring about kids," good teaching
involves "caring FOR kids."
Last, what I have also observed about day schools is a lack of time for
kids and teachers to be effective learners. Learning takes time and lots
of down time. Jewish day schools seem to be perpetually lobbying for
longer days, more coverage, more courses (gemara AND halakha AND mishna
AND chumash AND navi AND hashkafa AND Jewish history); parents want AP
courses for their kids to get into Harvard, older kids want more
extracurricular activities. Meanwhile, no one has time to learn, reflect,
collaborate. The lack of time increases the pressure on teachers and
administrators to perform. Sizer maintains that efficiency and coverage
are the enemies of effective learning.
This compounds the bifurcated nature of most day school faculties, where
Judaic and general studies teachers have little or no interactions, even
though they relate to the same kids. A small observation in closing: I
have also observed that Judaic faculty do not show up at the plays,
basketball games, debate and math competitions. These kinds of events are
probably the most important thing to adolescents. Teens need to test
themselves, to achieve and succeed (or fail) on their own, where the
adult/teacher does not play, does not act, does not perform, but they do. =
=20
When teens revisit their high schools after graduation, they seek out
those teachers who related to them personally and helped them succeed in
kid terms. The role of effective leadership is obvious here as well.
R. Toren</HTML>
