2008 Woodie Awards
STAFF EDITORIALS: The Beit Midrash and the Academy; Election Fever
Issue date: 4/18/05 Section: Editorials/Op-Ed
- Page 1 of 1
The Beit Midrash and the Academy
In light of the recent review and revision of the Stone Beit Midrash Program's curriculum, we applaud the Academic Standards Committee's refusal to accept credits for SBMP Bible courses that do not fall under the educational guidelines of "collegiate" or "academic." Yet its work is not completely done; a similar overview must also be undertaken with regards to the acceptance of similar credits in the other morning programs, and the Isaac Breuer College in particular. Currently, IBC students can fulfill their Jewish history (2 semesters), Hebrew language (2 semesters), and Bible (4 semesters) requirments in the mornings. Despite faculty overlap between IBC and Yeshiva College, the fact remains that the majority of the IBC courses pale in comparison to the academic rigor of their YC counterparts. If the administration is to deal honestly and evenhandedly with our morning programs, then it must address the problems of awarding credit and course fulfillment in IBC as well.
Simultaneously, however, Yeshiva administrators seem neither to appreciate nor understand the value of the SBMP. Undoubtedly, as evidenced from the close to 200-student enrollment in SBMP, there are students who want to study Talmud in the traditional chavruta-then-shiur setting, but without the lengthy hours of the Mazer Yeshiva Program. And they are likewise interested in formalized halakha and machshava offerings, but apparently not with Sunday hours. By contrast, MYP is a Talmud-only program. Rarely do the MYP Rosh Yeshiva offer formal instruction in other disciplines besides Talmud, and while supplementary studies are offered in the informal classes given by the Sganei Mashgichim, they are neither compulsory nor do they reflect an attempt to build a comprehensive curriculum. SBMP has allowed for a medium where students can study Talmud intensely with capable instructors outside of MYP.
As to concerns that SBMP is not a serious program, one need look no further than these pages where a debate has already begun among SBMP students on the seriousness of the program. The fact that an intelligent and genuine disagreement has ensued suggests a need for its administration to perhaps better elucidate the program's agenda. Morning attendance at the Shenk Shul, where SBMP students are supposed to prepare for their Talmud shiur, is disappointing. And while internal changes need to be made to the program, administrators should not augment its influence to spheres it has no relation to, as was proposed, such as courses normally fulfilled in the college.
Similarly, requiring the transfer of credits from the morning program to the college also presents a number of problems. If the morning programs are to be academically intertwined, than all morning programs - MYP, BMP, IBC, and JSS - should require some credit transfer. That, however, will diminish the number of credits students can take in the afternoon. An attempt must be made to standardize cataloguing of morning courses with those offered in the afternoon. However, if the quality of morning courses differs from those in the afternoon, which they seemingly do, then we should not accept their credit at all.
In recent months, Dr. Mort Lownegrub, from his Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, has spoken enthusiastically about a "vertically integrated" Judaic Studies program, where morning and afternoon Jewish studies, ranging from Talmud to Intellectual History, will be taught by the same professors and Rosh Yeshiva in each division of Yeshiva. Doing so, Dr. Lowengrub believes, will universalize the Jewish education and laterally share curriculum. Yet we cannot help but remain skeptical of such an arrangement. What does this mean on a practical level? Will advanced academic Jewish Studies, for example, be imposed on students unprepared or unable to meet such a challenge?
We know these questions are complicated and require a tiresome survey of the type of Jewish education we seek to provide students at Yeshiva. But to go forward and effortlessly award credits for courses that do not meet the demands and standards of academia elsewhere is to confuse and vitiate the Jewish education Yeshiva strives to provide. These discussions are ones that should involve our Rosh Yeshiva and professors, our deans and academic vice president. But most imporantly they need to be undertaken by those who understand the methodological and substantive differences between the classroom and the Beit Midrash, between the Yeshiva and the College.
Election Fever
Student council elections will take place on May 10, 2005 this year, a little more than two weeks after Passover break. Over the past few years, under a new student union constitution and an increasingly diversified student body, student council elections have become more than a vaunted popularity contest; at stake often lays the definition of the ideal Yeshiva student and the types of leaders we want to represent us to the administration and its benefactors. Under the current system, a ridiculous amount of positions are available each term, as each undergraduate student council has its own, fully functional board. With so many students involved in leadership positions, responsibility inevitability falls to the wayside. And yet each year, the ballots are stuffed with names of students hoping to augment their extra-curricular portfolios. To be sure, there are a strong number of serious student leaders, sprinkled among the potpourri of eager resume stuffers. And knowing the difference makes choosing the right candidate all the more difficult.
This year, however, it appears that interest in student government has dwindled. Among the four major presidential positions - for YSU, YC, SSSB, and SOY - three of them have only one candidate on the ballot. While we do not know how many "write-ins" will appear on the ballot on voting day alongside the ubiquitous "Homer Simpsons" and "George Washington," the poor pre-election showing does not bode well for student leadership.
The lack of multiple candidates for these presidential positions seems strange; the opportunity to plan campus-wide events, consult with students, faculty, and administrators, and manage significant monies presents candidates with a dynamic, appealing opportunity both in the here and now, as well as in the future, on the ever-important professional resume. Politics thrive off of healthy competition, which, unfortunately, we will see a reduced version of this year on the Wilf Campus.
We have written in the past bemoaning the lack of creativity current student leaders offer in the way of planning activities. Let us also make mention of the importance of a strong, visible presence that student leaders must embody, and current leaders could do a better job of doing. Candidates should remain constantly vigilant of the needs of their constituents, and how they can be better served.
We sincerely hope that students take the time to read up on the candidates in these pages (see page 14). Beyond reading about the candidates, take the time to speak with them individually; see for yourself what they bring to the table. This campus is yours. Represent it well.
In light of the recent review and revision of the Stone Beit Midrash Program's curriculum, we applaud the Academic Standards Committee's refusal to accept credits for SBMP Bible courses that do not fall under the educational guidelines of "collegiate" or "academic." Yet its work is not completely done; a similar overview must also be undertaken with regards to the acceptance of similar credits in the other morning programs, and the Isaac Breuer College in particular. Currently, IBC students can fulfill their Jewish history (2 semesters), Hebrew language (2 semesters), and Bible (4 semesters) requirments in the mornings. Despite faculty overlap between IBC and Yeshiva College, the fact remains that the majority of the IBC courses pale in comparison to the academic rigor of their YC counterparts. If the administration is to deal honestly and evenhandedly with our morning programs, then it must address the problems of awarding credit and course fulfillment in IBC as well.
Simultaneously, however, Yeshiva administrators seem neither to appreciate nor understand the value of the SBMP. Undoubtedly, as evidenced from the close to 200-student enrollment in SBMP, there are students who want to study Talmud in the traditional chavruta-then-shiur setting, but without the lengthy hours of the Mazer Yeshiva Program. And they are likewise interested in formalized halakha and machshava offerings, but apparently not with Sunday hours. By contrast, MYP is a Talmud-only program. Rarely do the MYP Rosh Yeshiva offer formal instruction in other disciplines besides Talmud, and while supplementary studies are offered in the informal classes given by the Sganei Mashgichim, they are neither compulsory nor do they reflect an attempt to build a comprehensive curriculum. SBMP has allowed for a medium where students can study Talmud intensely with capable instructors outside of MYP.
As to concerns that SBMP is not a serious program, one need look no further than these pages where a debate has already begun among SBMP students on the seriousness of the program. The fact that an intelligent and genuine disagreement has ensued suggests a need for its administration to perhaps better elucidate the program's agenda. Morning attendance at the Shenk Shul, where SBMP students are supposed to prepare for their Talmud shiur, is disappointing. And while internal changes need to be made to the program, administrators should not augment its influence to spheres it has no relation to, as was proposed, such as courses normally fulfilled in the college.
Similarly, requiring the transfer of credits from the morning program to the college also presents a number of problems. If the morning programs are to be academically intertwined, than all morning programs - MYP, BMP, IBC, and JSS - should require some credit transfer. That, however, will diminish the number of credits students can take in the afternoon. An attempt must be made to standardize cataloguing of morning courses with those offered in the afternoon. However, if the quality of morning courses differs from those in the afternoon, which they seemingly do, then we should not accept their credit at all.
In recent months, Dr. Mort Lownegrub, from his Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, has spoken enthusiastically about a "vertically integrated" Judaic Studies program, where morning and afternoon Jewish studies, ranging from Talmud to Intellectual History, will be taught by the same professors and Rosh Yeshiva in each division of Yeshiva. Doing so, Dr. Lowengrub believes, will universalize the Jewish education and laterally share curriculum. Yet we cannot help but remain skeptical of such an arrangement. What does this mean on a practical level? Will advanced academic Jewish Studies, for example, be imposed on students unprepared or unable to meet such a challenge?
We know these questions are complicated and require a tiresome survey of the type of Jewish education we seek to provide students at Yeshiva. But to go forward and effortlessly award credits for courses that do not meet the demands and standards of academia elsewhere is to confuse and vitiate the Jewish education Yeshiva strives to provide. These discussions are ones that should involve our Rosh Yeshiva and professors, our deans and academic vice president. But most imporantly they need to be undertaken by those who understand the methodological and substantive differences between the classroom and the Beit Midrash, between the Yeshiva and the College.
Election Fever
Student council elections will take place on May 10, 2005 this year, a little more than two weeks after Passover break. Over the past few years, under a new student union constitution and an increasingly diversified student body, student council elections have become more than a vaunted popularity contest; at stake often lays the definition of the ideal Yeshiva student and the types of leaders we want to represent us to the administration and its benefactors. Under the current system, a ridiculous amount of positions are available each term, as each undergraduate student council has its own, fully functional board. With so many students involved in leadership positions, responsibility inevitability falls to the wayside. And yet each year, the ballots are stuffed with names of students hoping to augment their extra-curricular portfolios. To be sure, there are a strong number of serious student leaders, sprinkled among the potpourri of eager resume stuffers. And knowing the difference makes choosing the right candidate all the more difficult.
This year, however, it appears that interest in student government has dwindled. Among the four major presidential positions - for YSU, YC, SSSB, and SOY - three of them have only one candidate on the ballot. While we do not know how many "write-ins" will appear on the ballot on voting day alongside the ubiquitous "Homer Simpsons" and "George Washington," the poor pre-election showing does not bode well for student leadership.
The lack of multiple candidates for these presidential positions seems strange; the opportunity to plan campus-wide events, consult with students, faculty, and administrators, and manage significant monies presents candidates with a dynamic, appealing opportunity both in the here and now, as well as in the future, on the ever-important professional resume. Politics thrive off of healthy competition, which, unfortunately, we will see a reduced version of this year on the Wilf Campus.
We have written in the past bemoaning the lack of creativity current student leaders offer in the way of planning activities. Let us also make mention of the importance of a strong, visible presence that student leaders must embody, and current leaders could do a better job of doing. Candidates should remain constantly vigilant of the needs of their constituents, and how they can be better served.
We sincerely hope that students take the time to read up on the candidates in these pages (see page 14). Beyond reading about the candidates, take the time to speak with them individually; see for yourself what they bring to the table. This campus is yours. Represent it well.