Presence

Thanks for the blog; my wife and I couldn't make it to either one of the meetings.

#1 I don't know why you where at this meeting to begin with. You don't have kids in the school and i think this should have been closed to parents only.

#2 That said, I don't think you understand what was meant by issues of "trust". It is was the fact that the PROCESS that was severly flawed. It was the fact that different parents got different answers to the same questions about the reasons for things. It is about the fact that extremely dedicated parents have been "blacklisted" because the do not agree with everything the school put forth.

The school depends heavily on volunteers and to ostricize individuals will hurt the school in the long run. If people feel the school is not partners WITH them, then they will not give of their time and that is the trust that must be rebuilt.

#1 I don't know why you where at this meeting to begin with. You don't have kids in the school and i think this should have been closed to parents only.

#2 That said, I don't think you understand what was meant by issues of "trust". It is was the fact that the PROCESS that was severly flawed. It was the fact that different parents got different answers to the same questions about the reasons for things. It is about the fact that extremely dedicated parents have been "blacklisted" because the do not agree with everything the school put forth.

The school depends heavily on volunteers and to ostricize individuals will hurt the school in the long run. If people feel the school is not partners WITH them, then they will not give of their time and that is the trust that must be rebuilt.

S - in response to #1, I don't have kids in the school now, but I have in the past, and I will next year, and probably for many years to come, so I think I had every right to be there. I wasn't attending for reasons of curiosity or so I could get the scoop for my blog. I didn't "sneak in" to the high school meeting for this reason, although I think, had I decided to go, it would have been warranted. I also did not waste anyone's time with my thoughts.

As regards #2 - I understand the trust issue, and have been on the other side of the table as well (please read the last 2 months worth of blog posts in the Jewish Educaiton category for a sampling). I think Dr. Shloush's answer was a good answer, and I do think that she and the board have the best interests of the students at heart. As much as I disagree with decisions that may have been made in other institutions, I understand why they were made (and, to the best of my ability, how and by whom they were made). I've had to deal with the same issues you are dealing with. And I've had to make decisions based on how they have made me feel. I'm not saying your "trust" wasn't broken, or whatever, I'm saying you need to figure out if this is a big enough deal that you want to leave the school or continue to be a part of it. It's impossible that any school will keep 100% of the people happy 100% of the time.

Nobody argues that they had the "best interests". Honestly, why the hell would she purposely screw the school up and put her job in jeopardy.

However, it is still possible that she made a mistake even with the best intentions.

Oh and maybe you should check with a board member when you say that she and the board made these changes. As was brought up in last week's meeting, the board was TOLD about the changes the night before the letter went out. The general board was not consulted during the process.

Is it the board's job to make these decisions?

This is a side note, but I'm becoming increasingly intriguied by the similarities between what's going on at Rambam and at TA; I'm not equating the two, but I find it interesting that pretty much the same arguments are being used. It's also interesting because I'm on different sides for each issue.

You asked if "Is it the board's job to make these decisions?"

1. Yes. Dr Shloush can make educational decisions unilaterally. i.e. curriculum type stuff. Clearly these changes go beyond that.

2. Whether it is their job or not, the school shouldn't go around telling everyone that this is what the board decided when they had no input.

I personally believe that Jewish Education is a community issue, and as such, meetings should be for community members. I see no issues with Greg attending whether he intends to place a student in the school or never intended to place a student in the school.

sephardiclady -

I strongly disagree with you. The fact that Greg is a perspective parent gives him some ground to stand on, but this is certainly not an open forum to the community at large.

The school has announced changes that have irked a large portion of the parent body. These meetings were an airing of the grievances and to let people express their opinions. They were organized by the school after many parents complained and this was done instead of having many individual meetings. Nobody from the community at large would have come in for a private meeting with the administration.

This was not about Jewish Education in general, but rather about how a specific schools operates.

I attended the middle school high school meeting and heard second hand about the elementary meeting. This elementary meeting, from what I heard with my own ears and saw with my own eyes at the middle high school meeting, was tame compared to what I heard stated by some of these parents.

I completely disagree with S based on what I heard and saw. I learned years ago people who blame process simply are hiding behind decisions they are against and are out of their control. Blaming process stirs emotions and gives people the impression they should get control and allows them to turn them and others against those in control. However, in the end it is and will always be about being against a decision. (if an organization makes a decision people like you don't hear calls against "trust" of the decison makers - what a con job).

How shameful to have parents show such disrespect in public and yet even with rabbis in the room (Rabbi Blau of YU and Rabbi Shmuel Silber). It was all summed up for me when one parent said "all the religious zionists are in this room tonight". There is such arrogance among some of these parents who feel if people don't think exactly in lock step with how they do, they are excluded from being religious zionists. Maybe some of them ought to look at themselves in the mirror as religious intolerance seems to be as much their problem as of that in the charedi world. One woman even shared so proudly (and she should be) how two of her kids are in top hesder yeshivas and will make aliya. What she neglected to say was that those yeshivas are not co-ed and if she spoke to her children's roshei yeshiva and rabbis in these yeshivas she is so proud of, they would be in total agreement in support of Yeshivat Rambam's administration moves. Additionally I was told and believe to be true that all the religious zionist leaders who come to be shlichim in america and all these parents look up to for leadership to their kids, were taught in separate schools yet somehow were still taught how to interact according to halacha with the opposite sex and they themselves cannot understand how american Orthodox parents believe the boy/girl intensity (that they themselves did not have) during the yeshiva day school day is healthy.

So in the end it has nothing to do with "trust" but simply being against a decision people want control over and are willing to show such public disrespect to get.

Kudos to the Rambam administration and their supporting Rabbis at Yeshiva University for simply doing the right thing. Intolerant rhetoric should stop. I for one have spoken to some of my "religious zionist" friends who have felt no option but to send their kids to TA and Bais Yaakov. Religious Zionism in america is more than a club decided by a few whose views, that have nothing to do with religious zionism (whether boys and girls should have lunch together, etc..), that they use to only create sinas chinam, keep it so exclusive.

Kuddos to Rambam and just maybe religious zionism in Baltimore (and elsewhere) has a chance.

Greg,

About an hour ago I posted, verified, and closed out and it is not listed here. Do I need to redo or do you keep some log?

Chaim: Thanks for your comment; I think you're 100% correct.

Chaim: I will also add that I don't think that religious zionism is the exclusive motivating factor here. It does seem to me that, at least at the elementary school level, there is a significant opposition to changes that resemble more traditional Orthodox institutions - it's not that some folks feel the image of religious zionism is being betrayed, it's that they are uncomfortable with moves that appear to be moving the school to the right.

Kudos and more kudos to Chaim. Why mixed classes has to be part of the philosophy of "religious zionism" is not something I've figured out. The answer? Many parents have their own agendas in creating their own brand of "religious zionism."

Since I was not at that meeting I can't speak to that. But from my knowledge of Dr. Shloush, religious zionism is a core to her beliefs and any perceptions of going to the right (the terms I heard used was sticking to their mission and making the best choices for the students as they are paid to do - which did not seem to the right to me) is just part of a mass hysteria disguised and invoked by high school parents who gave sinas chinam a new meaning at the middle high school meeting.

"invoked by high school parents who gave sinas chinam a new meaning at the middle high school meeting."

Well, let's not go overboard ourselves here. I'm not sure any one group has a monopoly on intolerance - we all use it to insulate ourselves from the possibility that our personal theologies might have (shudder) the faintest trace of illogicity. Which they all do - kid not yourselves.

It's not inconsistent to prefer more gender mixing if one ascribes to the theory that modernity has allowed for an improved understanding of reality. Similarly, religious zionism is predicated on the assumption that shtetl life in the seventeenth century does not necessarily represent the pinnacle of Torah life. (The argument I've made here appears quite tenuous, but that's because I'm in a rush to get back to cloroxing the floor. Ponder the point, it's not quite as silly as it seems.)

There were any number of well-spoken, respectful opponents to gender segregation at the second meeting. And there are "gotcha" types within every socio-religious group as well. Let's not view this disagreement as a proxy for personal prejudices regarding those who disagree.

- Moishe Potemkin

Moishe:

I agree with your statement fully (intolerance has no monopoly) except I was speaking about the first meeting which had the predominance of HS parents unlike the second meeting. I am uncertain if you were there or not but one needed to be there to gain full appreciation of the disrespect shared by some (not all that were against just some) that evening.

I'm not justifying any of the disrespect displayed at the first meeting. (I attended only the latter, where there was only one significant display of impudence, to my mind.). My point is to disagree with the statement made above that there are no commonalities between Religious Zionism (even the watered-down and somewhat insincere version exhibited by hypocrites like me who live outside of Zion) and a preference for coeducation, for reasons other than religious indifference. People are free to choose both, either, or none of these preferences, but they are fairly perceived as consistent conclusions of a particular mindset.

- Moishe Potemkin

I'm not justifying any of the disrespect displayed at the first meeting. (I attended only the latter, where there was only one significant display of impudence, to my mind.). My point is to disagree with the statement made above that there are no commonalities between Religious Zionism (even the watered-down and somewhat insincere version exhibited by hypocrites like me who live outside of Zion) and a preference for coeducation, for reasons other than religious indifference. People are free to choose both, either, or none of these preferences, but they are fairly perceived as consistent conclusions of a particular mindset.

- Moishe Potemkin

I'm not justifying any of the disrespect displayed at the first meeting. (I attended only the latter, where there was only one significant display of impudence, to my mind.). My point is to disagree with the statement made above that there are no commonalities between Religious Zionism (even the watered-down and somewhat insincere version exhibited by hypocrites like me who live outside of Zion) and a preference for coeducation, for reasons other than religious indifference. People are free to choose both, either, or none of these preferences, but they are fairly perceived as consistent conclusions of a particular mindset.

- Moishe Potemkin

I'm not going into a whole thing here, but I just wanted to respond to that poster who says I am hiding behind the "process" excuse.

I will come right out and say that I disagree with the changes they are making. When they give different answers to different people, I seriously question their reasoning.

Honestly, I would have a lot more respect for them if they just came out and said that they are motivated to do this because orthodoxy is shofting to the right and it is necessary to attract new families.

S:

I respect totally your right to disagree. That is everyone's right and my opinion is as good or bad as yours.

You prove my point. If the decision was one you agreed with, you would not be angry about "their reasoning".

If Dr. Shloush came out and said the school was going to the right (which by it nature is an inflammatory statement), you say you would have "more respect". I am not sure what difference your more respect would mean as you also would not be any less upset at the decision because again the decision is the root of the issue and some of those hs parents were only going to be happy with a reversal.

Frankly, if going to "the right" means the school follows the role s of shlichim and of rabbinic leadership of Hesder Yeshivas in Israel that is just "right" for me.

As a parent who has been in the school for only a few years, all I care about is the teachers and the role s they are for the kids and that simply makes me happy.

I hope all this intensity over a decision simply stops so everyone in the school can again focus on the teachers and the kids.

S:

I respect totally your right to disagree. That is everyone's right and my opinion is as good or bad as yours.

You prove my point. If the decision was one you agreed with, you would not be angry about "their reasoning".

If Dr. Shloush came out and said the school was going to the right (which by it nature is an inflammatory statement), you say you would have "more respect". I am not sure what difference your more respect would mean as you also would not be any less upset at the decision because again the decision is the root of the issue and some of those hs parents were only going to be happy with a reversal.

Frankly, if going to "the right" means the school follows the role s of shlichim and of rabbinic leadership of Hesder Yeshivas in Israel that is just "right" for me.

As a parent who has been in the school for only a few years, all I care about is the teachers and the role s they are for the kids and that simply makes me happy.

I hope all this intensity over a decision simply stops so everyone in the school can again focus on the teachers and the kids.