<HTML>
Rabbi Aryeh Blaut's opening line in his post to Volume 97, "As a Rebbe in a
Community Day School", immediately caught my eye. I am a parent/board
member at a community day school and believe that many of the issues
discussed in our forum are unique to our type of school. Unlike larger
schools in larger cities, especially New York, our day school is the sole
Orthodox alternative in town, and as such must attempt to fill the needs of
many. It is in this light that I disagree with Rabbi Blaut's comment,
which I quote in its entirety for the sake of context and clarity, that:
"As a teacher, I have little influence over the parent who trains the child
to listen to =BD of what the Rebbe says. (This kind of statement reflects
many non-observant homes who send their children to orthodox day school.=20
They want the Bein-Adam-L'chaveiro, but not Bein-Adam-L'Makom. The child
cannot listen part way - either the teacher is 100% correct in his
teachings or not at all.)"
The parenthetical limits his complaint to the children of non-observant
homes trained to listen to =BD of what the Rebbe says. However, the logica=
l
next step to this argument is articulated at the end of the above quote,
that the child cannot listen part way - either the teacher is 100% correct
in his teachings or not at all. This not only seems to preclude an
analytical approach to learning in favor of close minded dictation, which I
am sure was not Rabbi Blaut's intent, but is both impractical and, in my
humble opinion, unwanted in a school with a diverse student body and
faculty.
There are all sorts of shomrei shabbos teachers and students in our school,
including Ashkenaz, Sephard, Lubabitch, Ner Yisrael, REITS-YU, Torah
U'Maddah YU and those that "eat out". Each of these, and unlisted others,
has its own unique philosophy, its own rules and its own goals. And they
too often conflict. As a Torah U'Maddah parent, I don't want my children
taking 100% of what the Ner Yisrael rebbe or the Lubabitch 1st grade
teacher tells them, either on large issues like tzionut, secular education
and women's issues, or on less-global issues like cholov yisroel, tzniut or
the correct pronunciation of tof/sof. And I plan on "training" my kids not
to do so, with the complete confidence that, nonetheless, they will grow up
to be complete in both Bein-Adam-L'chaveiro and Bein-Adam-L'Makom.
Luckily, our children are smarter than we give them credit for. They don't
need to take their teachers' words as gospel (excuse the phrase) in order
to learn derech eretz from them. Menschlecheit transcends the differences
between different views of interpretation and application of torah, and it
is something they will learn from you by HOW you teach and behave, not
necessarily WHAT you teach and do. It was my liberal, non-religious high
school social studies teacher who taught me about respect for individuals
and about being true to your ideals, even though I completely disagreed
(and still do) with every political and religious statement I ever heard
her say.
I agree that a school is only partly responsible for teaching ethics, that
it is mostly parents who have this influence, but also the people our kids
see in shul and on the street and hear us talking about among ourselves.=20
However, to downplay the teachers' role in this most vital of areas by
demanding an 100% acceptance of their teaching is either a cop out or an
impossible dream.
=
=20
Joshua D. Goldberg
Keating, Muething & Klekamp, P.L.L.
Tel: 513-579-6400
Fax: 513-579-6457
Internet Address:
jgoldberg@kmklaw.com
Website: www.kmklaw.com</HTML>
