2008 Woodie Awards
STAFF EDITORIALS: Flame v. Shield; Re-Crediting Israel Credits
Issue date: 2/15/05 Section: Editorials/Op-Ed
- Page 1 of 1
Flame v. Shield
Rabbi Dr. JJ Schacter's dual appointment as a University Professor and Senior Scholar at the new Center for the Jewish Future is certainly a welcome addition to the Yeshiva family. Rabbi Schacter's resume speaks for itself. But at the same time, his appointment leaves unclear the direction Yeshiva will take towards implementing President Joel's vision. Make no mistake: The number of high profiled Modern Orthodox leaders that President Joel has attracted, whether or not they will prove useful for Yeshiva, is surely impressive. But we must wonder what purpose they will serve and how they will fit into Yeshiva's future. To that end, Rabbi Schacter's success at Yeshiva will be determined by the type of role he will play. His work in the past has been focused far more on community outreach. And as Yeshiva and the undergraduate schools in particular move toward a more pronounced academic future - including a curriculum review and search for a dean of Yeshiva College - the roles that President Joel's recent senior appointments will play in the strengthening the academicism of the university remains unclear.
Currently, Yeshiva's flight plan reads nebulous and open to interpretation. President Joel, upon arrival, immediately undertook a number of seemingly cosmetic changes, many of which are taking on a newfound meaning. Whereas Yeshiva has always operated under the banner of Torah u-Madda, university officials are now toying with a new slogan: "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity." Astute observers of changes to Yeshiva iconography will notice that the "flame" has virtually replaced the "shield." In fact, few departments in the university use the "shield" at all, opting for the new, jazzy "flame" to adorn their stationary and posters. If metaphors are to mean anything, the academicism of the once Torah u-Madda mantra may be withering away to make room for a more communal friendly face, "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity." And as the university directs its resources and attention to improving outward relations with the greater Jewish community and the world at large, the academic foundations to which we are based upon will slip through our fingertips, forever unimpressive and unnoticed.
To a certain extent, the freshness of the "flame" and its iconographic implications are understandable, if not deserved. The university appeared idle and aloof under the previous administration, garnering little public respect. As such, Yeshiva's relationship with American Judaism and Modern Orthodoxy specifically came to a near standstill. Last year, the degree of Yeshiva's abandonment of the greater Jewish community became apparent when one supporter of a "rival" institution referred to Yeshiva as a place for the "gutless and the spineless." Yeshiva needs to earn back the popularity it once deserved and to redirect the educational and socio-religious ideology for today's generation.
At the same time, however, the underpinnings of Yeshiva cannot be compromised. The increase in programs jumpstarted by the Max Stern Division of Communal Services is an impressive testament to the expansiveness of President Joel's direction. But in today's market, education is one of the keys to success. And in Judaism, ignorance is that pernicious venom which jeopardizes everything. Without upholding the intellectual heritage, we cannot share that which makes us unique among the Jewish people and the nations of the world. We are "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity" only because "Torah u-Madda" is our calling.
Re-Crediting Israel Credits
Seventeen months after President Joel outlined his vision for Yeshiva to become "the address for Israel in the U.S.," the Israeli Ministry of Education gave the president and Yeshiva students a rude awakening. News reports from Israel during the semester break confirmed an Israeli government policy not to recognize undergraduate degrees that award credit for a year of study in religious institutions in Israel. Of course, the ministry's salary-slashing policy should not be construed as an intentional targeting of Yeshiva degrees; as one graduate of the University of Maryland learned, the ministry also does not recognized Advanced Placement credit.
However, considering that Danny Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the U.S., attended President Joel's investiture and heard his publicly stated commitment to the State of Israel, the message apparently was not conveyed to the ambassador's counterparts at the Ministry of Education. For an immigrant-starved state, Israel should be wiser with the battles she chooses to fight, and slashing salaries of Yeshiva undergrads should not be one of them. If ministry brass, like Deputy Minister Michael Melchior, were unaware of a policy that almost certainly originated from within the governmental red tape, they should have either stood on principle - reportedly concerned over fraudulent degrees of foreign origin and financial constraints - not to recognize Yeshiva's degrees, or immediately reversed the policy. Instead, we continue to play the waiting game while members of the Knesset, groups like the aliyah agency Nefesh B'Nefesh, and, Yeshiva's Senior Advisor on Israel Affairs, lobby the ministry to overturn the policy.
Even if the ministry did not establish its policy strictly in response to academic aspects lacking in Yeshiva's S. Daniel Abraham Program, we should not take the ministry's word lightly. "According to the rules," an Education Ministry spokesman was quoted as saying, "institutions of non-academic learning, like yeshivas, are not recognized as having received an academic degree." Indeed, many participating institutions of the Israel Program do not subscribe to academic standards typical of universities, such as tests and papers to be completed by students. Rather, the institutions, especially at men's yeshivot, rely on the intensity of traditional study in the Beit Midrash, lectures on the material digested there, and infrequent student-teacher "check-ups," to form the backbone of the educational experience. Coming from a collegiate atmosphere it is not exactly the epitome of higher learning.
And still, a good number of students return from Israel having made strides emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually, all undoubtedly heights for which Yeshiva students should strive for. However, the psychological feeling of accomplishment experienced by many after completing their time in Israel is also buffered by the knowledge that only three years of college study await them, not four. This, of course, begs the question: should Yeshiva's demanding dual curriculum excuse Israel returnees from a year of study, if by definition, the student gains less Torah and Madda; Does one year of "Torah" really excuse a complete year of "Torah and Madda"?
That question is not simple to answer. Naturally, many students would argue that they do deserve a year of credit. On the other hand, the university has a responsibility "to ennoble and enable" students as richly as possible. Keeping them matriculated longer would address that obligation. But were Yeshiva to take more drastic steps like reducing or reversing its credit policy (unlikely, according to Pres. Joel), it would see its ranks shrink noticeably. And given the fact that Chairman of the Yeshiva Board, Morry J. Weiss, has expressed his desire to increase the undergraduate ranks, any such policy seems doubly unlikely.
Regardless of Israel's final decision, the Joel administration should review its Israel policy top to bottom. It should question whether its certified institutions in Israel are tough enough on substance abuse, and more importantly, whether they possess the educational environment and resources to educate our youth. It is hard to predict whether the yeshivot and seminaries would advocate more of a role for Yeshiva in their curricula, but clearly, that is Yeshiva's prerogative. And so, adding more "Madda" components to the program, including social and intellectual events for men and women, would be a welcome change, as would more of a role for the Gruss campus in Jerusalem. Finally, the administration should make education at Yeshiva more attractive to students, making the decision to leave after even six semesters, as now required, a more difficult one to make. Even if we have these conversations without policy change, the debacle stirred by the unknowing bureaucrats at the Israeli Ministries of Finance and Education will have not gone unproductive.
Rabbi Dr. JJ Schacter's dual appointment as a University Professor and Senior Scholar at the new Center for the Jewish Future is certainly a welcome addition to the Yeshiva family. Rabbi Schacter's resume speaks for itself. But at the same time, his appointment leaves unclear the direction Yeshiva will take towards implementing President Joel's vision. Make no mistake: The number of high profiled Modern Orthodox leaders that President Joel has attracted, whether or not they will prove useful for Yeshiva, is surely impressive. But we must wonder what purpose they will serve and how they will fit into Yeshiva's future. To that end, Rabbi Schacter's success at Yeshiva will be determined by the type of role he will play. His work in the past has been focused far more on community outreach. And as Yeshiva and the undergraduate schools in particular move toward a more pronounced academic future - including a curriculum review and search for a dean of Yeshiva College - the roles that President Joel's recent senior appointments will play in the strengthening the academicism of the university remains unclear.
Currently, Yeshiva's flight plan reads nebulous and open to interpretation. President Joel, upon arrival, immediately undertook a number of seemingly cosmetic changes, many of which are taking on a newfound meaning. Whereas Yeshiva has always operated under the banner of Torah u-Madda, university officials are now toying with a new slogan: "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity." Astute observers of changes to Yeshiva iconography will notice that the "flame" has virtually replaced the "shield." In fact, few departments in the university use the "shield" at all, opting for the new, jazzy "flame" to adorn their stationary and posters. If metaphors are to mean anything, the academicism of the once Torah u-Madda mantra may be withering away to make room for a more communal friendly face, "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity." And as the university directs its resources and attention to improving outward relations with the greater Jewish community and the world at large, the academic foundations to which we are based upon will slip through our fingertips, forever unimpressive and unnoticed.
To a certain extent, the freshness of the "flame" and its iconographic implications are understandable, if not deserved. The university appeared idle and aloof under the previous administration, garnering little public respect. As such, Yeshiva's relationship with American Judaism and Modern Orthodoxy specifically came to a near standstill. Last year, the degree of Yeshiva's abandonment of the greater Jewish community became apparent when one supporter of a "rival" institution referred to Yeshiva as a place for the "gutless and the spineless." Yeshiva needs to earn back the popularity it once deserved and to redirect the educational and socio-religious ideology for today's generation.
At the same time, however, the underpinnings of Yeshiva cannot be compromised. The increase in programs jumpstarted by the Max Stern Division of Communal Services is an impressive testament to the expansiveness of President Joel's direction. But in today's market, education is one of the keys to success. And in Judaism, ignorance is that pernicious venom which jeopardizes everything. Without upholding the intellectual heritage, we cannot share that which makes us unique among the Jewish people and the nations of the world. We are "America's Jewish University in Service to Humanity" only because "Torah u-Madda" is our calling.
Re-Crediting Israel Credits
Seventeen months after President Joel outlined his vision for Yeshiva to become "the address for Israel in the U.S.," the Israeli Ministry of Education gave the president and Yeshiva students a rude awakening. News reports from Israel during the semester break confirmed an Israeli government policy not to recognize undergraduate degrees that award credit for a year of study in religious institutions in Israel. Of course, the ministry's salary-slashing policy should not be construed as an intentional targeting of Yeshiva degrees; as one graduate of the University of Maryland learned, the ministry also does not recognized Advanced Placement credit.
However, considering that Danny Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the U.S., attended President Joel's investiture and heard his publicly stated commitment to the State of Israel, the message apparently was not conveyed to the ambassador's counterparts at the Ministry of Education. For an immigrant-starved state, Israel should be wiser with the battles she chooses to fight, and slashing salaries of Yeshiva undergrads should not be one of them. If ministry brass, like Deputy Minister Michael Melchior, were unaware of a policy that almost certainly originated from within the governmental red tape, they should have either stood on principle - reportedly concerned over fraudulent degrees of foreign origin and financial constraints - not to recognize Yeshiva's degrees, or immediately reversed the policy. Instead, we continue to play the waiting game while members of the Knesset, groups like the aliyah agency Nefesh B'Nefesh, and, Yeshiva's Senior Advisor on Israel Affairs, lobby the ministry to overturn the policy.
Even if the ministry did not establish its policy strictly in response to academic aspects lacking in Yeshiva's S. Daniel Abraham Program, we should not take the ministry's word lightly. "According to the rules," an Education Ministry spokesman was quoted as saying, "institutions of non-academic learning, like yeshivas, are not recognized as having received an academic degree." Indeed, many participating institutions of the Israel Program do not subscribe to academic standards typical of universities, such as tests and papers to be completed by students. Rather, the institutions, especially at men's yeshivot, rely on the intensity of traditional study in the Beit Midrash, lectures on the material digested there, and infrequent student-teacher "check-ups," to form the backbone of the educational experience. Coming from a collegiate atmosphere it is not exactly the epitome of higher learning.
And still, a good number of students return from Israel having made strides emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually, all undoubtedly heights for which Yeshiva students should strive for. However, the psychological feeling of accomplishment experienced by many after completing their time in Israel is also buffered by the knowledge that only three years of college study await them, not four. This, of course, begs the question: should Yeshiva's demanding dual curriculum excuse Israel returnees from a year of study, if by definition, the student gains less Torah and Madda; Does one year of "Torah" really excuse a complete year of "Torah and Madda"?
That question is not simple to answer. Naturally, many students would argue that they do deserve a year of credit. On the other hand, the university has a responsibility "to ennoble and enable" students as richly as possible. Keeping them matriculated longer would address that obligation. But were Yeshiva to take more drastic steps like reducing or reversing its credit policy (unlikely, according to Pres. Joel), it would see its ranks shrink noticeably. And given the fact that Chairman of the Yeshiva Board, Morry J. Weiss, has expressed his desire to increase the undergraduate ranks, any such policy seems doubly unlikely.
Regardless of Israel's final decision, the Joel administration should review its Israel policy top to bottom. It should question whether its certified institutions in Israel are tough enough on substance abuse, and more importantly, whether they possess the educational environment and resources to educate our youth. It is hard to predict whether the yeshivot and seminaries would advocate more of a role for Yeshiva in their curricula, but clearly, that is Yeshiva's prerogative. And so, adding more "Madda" components to the program, including social and intellectual events for men and women, would be a welcome change, as would more of a role for the Gruss campus in Jerusalem. Finally, the administration should make education at Yeshiva more attractive to students, making the decision to leave after even six semesters, as now required, a more difficult one to make. Even if we have these conversations without policy change, the debacle stirred by the unknowing bureaucrats at the Israeli Ministries of Finance and Education will have not gone unproductive.