Is it preferable to send your child to a school that has the general environment which you would like to have - with excellent limudei chol academics, but the yiddishkeit of the student body is less than what you have at home (ie. student body watches t.v., movies, etc)?
or is it preferable to send your child to a school that has the yiddishkeit that you would like, but the limudei chol is weak? why?

Shalom Rivkaleah:

You seem to be describing two types of institutions, with their respective strengths and environments.

If a student masters secular studies in an institution of the first type, perhaps they would be headed for a secular career? And in that secular career they would be in contact with adults who were students with TV and movies and perhaps even worse materialism in their past?

Hence, learning how to remain strong to our Torah values in such an environment could be good training for a future life utilizing the secular training in a secular career?

Where as in the second type of institution, your family would be the weak link or potential risky bad influence, since your family has an interest in excellence in secular studies, where as the others are interested perhaps in only excellence in yiddishkeit?

Is the purpose of going to this school to be educated toward a professional career? Or is it to master Torah learning and a Torah way of life to the best possible way?

Perhaps I have done nothing more than repeat back your dilemma.

But perhaps in order to clarify these additional questions will require deciding what is the purpose of utilizing either school type -- which might elucidate the answers you were seeking?

Rob, thank you for your clarification. You brought up the exact reason why we chose the school which we chose - to build our character and be stronger in Yiddishkeit - easy isn't always the answer. The problems are many and the questions remain, unfortunately.
The school in question is an elementary school for my children.

each school has it's merit and for me i would send my child to either school. however the rational behind this is the fact I watch movies, tv, and perhaps the etc.. if it was not my way to watch movies and etc and i had a strong feeling anginst such matter i would send my child to the other school and get some sort of a tutor or teach them myself for secular subjects since the school is weaker in those areas.

though my major concern would be who are the teachers and are the weak or strong in the sense of movativing students to learn...

If your chilren are exposed to secular material and values, it needs to be countered by the family. But, especially as the children grow older and identify with their peers more, you may find your children reject your teachings. This regularly happens with immigrant families. Children absorb a lot from all over, so how to make the result turn out well? Beware the power of cultural immersion.

If the school is weak academically, you may need to work out how to help your child strive for and achieve academic excellence. You may need to supplement the school's program yourself (in preferably an enjoyable way, eg, go visit museums and science centres with your childre; read relevant books to the children and discuss matters; do science experiments at home, etc). And perhaps you could think of how you might help the school do better, eg, get involved, suggest things to do, etc. Do research on the web about such things, even if via topics like parental invovement in the school (or whatever works in the search engine to get you relevant answers).

It seems you will need to be more practive academically with one type of school, and more religiously and culturally with the other type.

quote:

Originally posted by Rivkaleah:
Is it preferable to send your child to a school that has the general environment which you would like to have - with excellent limudei chol academics, but the yiddishkeit of the student body is less than what you have at home (ie. student body watches t.v., movies, etc)?
or is it preferable to send your child to a school that has the yiddishkeit that you would like, but the limudei chol is weak? why?

I believe the answer is simple. The most important concern for a Jew is the Torah education of his children, therefore the only responsible decision that a parent can make is to send their child to the school with the stronger Torah and religous environment, despite the weaker secular curriculum.

Yes. When I read this, I realised this was the only true answer possible. The other way is too dangerous. I know this from personal experience. You must shut the gate to prevent the "horse" from bolting, not try to catch and corall after trouble has come as it may be impossible then and the "horse" may trample you and break your heart.

quote:

Originally posted by Rabbi Y. Kacev:
I believe the answer is simple. The most important concern for a Jew is the Torah education of his children, therefore the only responsible decision that a parent can make is to send their child to the school with the stronger Torah and religous environment, despite the weaker secular curriculum.

quote:

I realised this was the only true answer possible.

Do you think that this might be too strong?

After all there are scholarly rabbis who lead Jewish schools which aspire to maintain excellence in secular studies. And perhaps you would agree that the Rambam seems to espouse such a dual excellence approach?

Perhaps nearly everyone here at GY craves only excellence in authentic Torah learning -- and perhaps for varying reasons too. But I don't think we should ignore the good reasons why those who choose a slightly different path do so!

Would anyone care to comment on whether one who is going to have a secular professional career might benefit from knowing how to interact with those in the secular world, without putting their own yidishkeit at risk?

I had the privilege of meeting two amazing young men, brothers, who were learning in a top yeshiva about 10 years ago. Their family was the only religious family in their town. Being raised fully confident in their yiddishkeit apparently helped them to not only have the strength to not be at risk, but they became sought out by the assimilated Jews they played with, and thus developed leadership skills, and were seen as role models early on, by their contemporaries.

Rob, the question that was asked was not whether it is a good idea to receive a good secular education. The question was a situation where one could not get both. What should be sacrificed? The better Jewish education or better secular one. In that case the answer should be obvious.

Perhaps I should clarify further. The limudei kodesh in the school with the student body that watches tv, etc. is not 'weak' but the other schools are stronger still. The boys learn in the first school and go on to further their learning, but the boys in the other schools may, perhaps go on to yeshivas which focus entirely on limudei kodesh and nominally on limudei chol. My 4th grader is this year learning Mishnayos Sukkah; whereas, in the other schools I believe that they learned that in 3rd grade.

I understand Rivka, but why would'nt you want to send your child to the place where he will have the ability to grow most in his Torah learning? If he choses later on when he goes to high school to also concentrate on secular studies, there are many fine Yeshivos that excel in both areas. These are his important formative years, the Jewish education he would miss out on will be something he may not later be able to recover. The secular education will always be there for him to go into.

Such food for thought...i really need a rav. Rabbi Kacev you know the school: we are in the same community.

Rivka, If you would like to contact me privately
I would be happy to discuss the school options with you.

quote:

when he goes to high school to also concentrate on secular studies

Dear Rav Kacev:

Surely the famous story of Rabbi Akiva only starting his learning at age 40 is a significant case that one _can_ learn Torah later in life.

You have now I think twice in this thread indicated that secular learning can be picked up later.

While I think we all agree on the priority to Torah learning, are there precedent cases to support that one can in fact learn new secular subjects later in life more effectiely than learning Torah later in life?

In the case of language, and I mean fluent speaking in multiple secular languages, as a native, I have seen it explained, and I have even seen it demonstrated through residual capabilities and brain-mapping after injuries, that there seems to be a critical difference in learning language when young versus learning language when older.

From a practical perspective, there is probably far more mitzvah credit to learning Torah young particularly with the risk that lo aleinu someone might not live long enough to become old compared with putting of Torah learning for later, and not get to it in time...

And another principle that its all to be found in Torah... perhaps a Torah scholar hardly needs to do anything to bring their consequential excellence in secular matters to the forefront?

But is there any other source to directly substantiate your statements that one can simply learn their secular studies later?

I can speak from my experiences with high school students. The students that came from supposedly less secular oriented schools had no trouble keeping up with their classmates from the more secular oriented school. However the students from the latter school lagged well behind the students from the more religous school in their Torah studies.

In addition children are influenced to a great degree by their peers. If their peers are into TV, sports, movies etc, and less motivated to excell in their Torah studies it will rub off on them too.

It's definitely more preferable to send it where the Yidishkeit is up to par.

1st what is your priority? Even if it would be a trade off, it's more important to be a better Jew than a better lawyer. On this the Gemarah says that how can someone leave working on the world to come and work to achieve more for this world?

Secondly, in the long run, I don't feel it would be detrimental to his education. In general, any Yeshiva's Limudai Chol is worse than in public school. But that doesn't stop Yeshiva students to be the best in their fields. This is , from the most part, the teaching is secondary, the main part is the effort of the students. Since Yeshiva students are trained to be analytical and to use their brains, and also they have instilled in them the yolk of being responsible, this would make up for the lack of academics. Especially, when we're talking about being around people that are not around TV and movies, which besides dull the soul, but also dull the brains and the values of being responsible, this would be a big plus.

Quote "After all there are scholarly rabbis who lead Jewish schools which aspire to maintain excellence in secular studies. And perhaps you would agree that the Rambam seems to espouse such a dual excellence approach?"

This in itself is a very complicated subject. The Rambam had many detractors in his opinion. Also, He did not espouse a "dual excellent," but rather as a second career of learning after mastering Torah (as the Rashba explains his approach and still argued with him.)

There are two reasons to want a secular education, One is to be able to make a Parnassa the other is that the secular knowledge itself is an ends for itself. It well rounds etc.

The only real Halachic sound reason to learn secular studies is for Parnassa, otherwise, it's really Bitul Torah. Even the Rambam in Yesodei HaTorah 4:13 says one needs to know Torah well before venturing into other knowledge (which is mostly the sciences, but even the Rambam doesn't give allowance to all secular subjects.) See RAma in YD 246 4 that it's only permitted to learn secular studies on a temporary bases. See the Noise Kelim that are more stringent in this area.

When I took my LAST graduate class in a course called "Curriculum & Instruction" the professor revealed to us that the basis for American curriculum in schools is NOT research-based. That means that such curriculum is probably NOT a good predictator for success in later secular studies. I see many Americans with kids in chedarim with NO SECULAR STUDIES AT ALL & they compensatel, VERY NICELY, with tutors. I'm convinced that much of secular studies have NEEDLESSLY been expanded to fill up spaces of time (as in warehousing) & that MOST secular studies could be streamlined and intensified/accelated so as to take MUCH less time (I've personally done this in English reading through graded reading). I think that secular studies are VERY over-rated. I remember reading about an Israeli lawyer who had learned in Ponevezh Yeshiva in Benai Beraq & he said when he when to law school in Tel Aviv U he had to step down TEN STEPS to readjust to the must lower level of "learning." Elementary school learning is more EMOTIVE & less COGNITIVE, so why not use those years for sponging up chumash & mishna? Effective reading of a second language is best taught in THIRD grade & MAYBE SECOND grade, but NOT FIRST GRADE. Remember, secular education is more of a SOCIAL concensus of what "educators" think should be the core knowledge that all Americans (or whoever) should share. It does not really have any inherent value beyond that (but if it DOES, such as reading English and having math skills, then this can EASILY and MORE EFFECTIVELY be taught in a tutorial atmosphere outside of cheder). best, ra'anan

I forgot to mention that an outstanding research-based book on child (& beyond) education is Kelemen's To Kindle a Soul. The mistakes that parents can make is frightening and Kelemen brings plenty of current research to highlight better educational choices (he brings studies on sleep, diet, television-watching, etc.). best, ra'anan

quote:

Effective reading of a second language is best taught in THIRD grade & MAYBE SECOND grade, but NOT FIRST GRADE.

Shalom Ra anan:

Would you be willing to say more about "sponging up" and learning to "read"?

Do you think that very early exposure to multiple languages, well before 3rd grade, is useful for developing a later propensity to fluently knowing those languages and others later?

Perhaps the "sponging up" concept applies with the immersion approach to learning languages?


I would also ask your thoughts...

Hypothetically if a child is raised in an environment with a mixture of languages all mixed together, and no clear boundaries of where one language starts and another ends... such as mixing in Yiddish and Hebrew idioms in with English speech... is that more like exposure to one large language, or more like exposure to multiple languages?

I ask this because it seems from brain mapping results that multi-lingual native speakers use different parts of their brain for even subsequently learned languages than those who are uni-language and try to learn a language later in life.