Florida’s Ben Gamla Charter School is more than just a place of learning. It represents a radical new vision for the future of Jewish education in America.
The Ben Gamla school, which opened this summer, is the country’s first publicly funded, Hebrew-themed charter school. Its founder, former Democratic congressman Peter Deutsch, has said he wants to open 100 such schools across the country. Already, the idea of publicly funded, Jewish-themed charter schools has sparked the interest of mega-philanthropist Michael Steinhardt, a major force in Jewish education.
Critics have raised two main concerns about the Ben Gamla school: First, they say it undermines the wall of separation between church and state (although school officials maintain their curriculum is not religious). Second, critics argue that the school poses a competitive threat to private Jewish day schools. These are valid concerns. There is, however, a larger problem, namely that the Ben Gamla model represents a profound betrayal of American Jewish liberalism.
At the core of American liberalism is the idea that government should actively promote the common good. This presupposes a common American identity, one that binds our diverse society into a single nation — e pluribus unum. Public schools have been a cornerstone of this idea, building a common civic identity and offering educational opportunity to all.
American Jews have remained remarkably loyal to this vision. That’s why our community has fought efforts by conservatives to divert public funds to private schools. It’s why many Jews have taken the lead in opposing those on the multiculturalist left who reject the idea of a common American heritage that should be taught to children of varied backgrounds.
And why shouldn’t we defend this vision? After all, it has served us well. For Jews, public education provided a route to upward mobility. Public schools not only helped Jews enter the mainstream, they also helped craft an American civic culture that includes us.
Today, however, the challenge facing American Jews is no longer how to integrate into the mainstream. Instead, we struggle with the question of how to preserve our distinct heritage amid the assimilatory currents of American life.
Many communal leaders have concluded that the solution is for more Jewish kids to enroll in private Jewish day schools. They can point to survey data suggesting that day school graduates are more likely than their peers to have strong Jewish identities, affiliate with synagogues and marry other Jews.
The allure of Jewish day schools presents a difficult choice. Day school education has its benefits in terms of strengthening Jewish identity. But opting for Jewish schools also involves turning inward, away from a full embrace of the larger American scene — and away from the public education system that has served us so well. Something valuable is gained, but something is also lost.
No one can blame parents who — faced with this dilemma — choose to enroll their children in Jewish schools (after all, many non-Jews have long made similar choices). At present though, relatively few non-Orthodox children attend Jewish schools full-time, in part because tuition can be prohibitively expensive. That’s why Ben Gamla’s charter school model is so tempting. It offers many of the benefits of a Jewish day school (minus the religious component, of course) but with the taxpayer footing the bill.
It’s one thing, however, to opt out of the public school system; it’s another thing to cash out. It’s one thing to privilege your group’s private interests; it’s another to demand that government privilege those interests, as well.
True, this is not only a Jewish issue. The charter school movement has opened the door to public funding of particularist agendas; there are, in various places around the country, schools that are dedicated to promoting Greek, African-American and even Muslim culture. Thankfully, these remain the exception rather than the rule.
But what if government-funded charter schools devoted to reinforcing the pride — and prejudices — of particular ethnic groups became the norm? It’s difficult to see how this would lead to a more cohesive, tolerant America. And that’s why it’s hard to imagine this model would ultimately be good for America’s Jews.
Daniel Treiman is the Web editor of the Forward.
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
When Hank Greenberg Met Jackie Robinson
Reconsider Decision on Rabbis and Intermarriage
Ultra-Orthodox Men Ditch All-Black Attire as Fashion Trumps Tradition
Is Steven Hawking’s Decision To Boycott an Israeli Conference Boon to BDS?
Claims Conference Blames Dead Official for Fraud Snafu
You've successfully signed up!
The idea of a charter school that promotes Hebrew language skills has absolutely nothing to do with the question of "church and state". There are charter schools the graduates of which will be bilingual French/English (or Chinese/English or German/English) speakers. Now there will be charter schools the graduates of which will be bilingual Hebrew/English speakers. Surely, the Forward - originally a Yiddish language newsaper that still publishes in Yiddish - sees fluency in a Jewish language as an obvious expression of legitimate. There is a very basic contradiction in this article of Daniel Treiman. He expresses some concern about assimilation ("...how to preserve our distinct heritage amid the assimilatory currents of American life"). Yet, together with the question of maintaining our distinctiveness (i.e our particularity), we are presented with a point of view that the Ben-Gamla School is a "betrayal" of American liberalism in which "a common American identity" is forged. Moreover, Jewish day schools involve a turn inward "away from a full embrace of the larger American scene". Well, simply, if you believe in the full embrace of the larger American scene, you believe in the assimilation of the Jews. Their peoplehood should become American. However, if you wish to preserve our ancient heritage against the forces of assimilation, then you wish to maintain a sense of Jewish peoplehood even as you live on the American continent. That means - obviously - a type of turning inwards. If the charter school is constitutionally legal, then I don't really understand what the issue is. If the American system allows for such an option, then American Jews (who have respect for the American system) should be pleased that the Jewish community has taken full advantage of that which American society and legality permit. Those who wish to send their children to public schools will continue to do so. Those who wish to send their children to private religious schools will also continue to do so. And those who prefer a Hebrew language charter school can choose that option.
Mr. Treiman's basic argument is that government support for ethnic schools amounts to the government's privileging "a group's private interests". But one of America's greatest strengths is its ethnic diversity and its pluralism. Ensuring that America's citizenry maintains and builds on the diversity that is strength in the context of American democracy may or may not be in groups' "private interests". But it is certainly consistent with public interest of Americans, from the nation's first Founding Fathers right up to the present time.
Public Schools have been the backbone of our society. Immigrants have transformed into Americans with a common culture and values. Charter schools and public schools which focus on a specific culture and language isolate instead of assimilate. These precedents have lead to the dangerous situation of the Khalil Gibran International Academy in Brooklyn, NY, an Arabic language and culture school that has documented ties to radical Islamic organizations. Parents of all groups must be resposible for their children's identity, knowledge and pride in their individual culture. It is a devastating comment on the state of Jewish values when parents want public educational institutions to give their children a sense of their identity as Jews and teach them Hebrew.
"At the core of American liberalism is the idea that government should actively promote the common good. This presupposes a common American identity, one that binds our diverse society into a single nation — e pluribus unum. Public schools have been a cornerstone of this idea, building a common civic identity and offering educational opportunity to all." NOT ANY LONGER! Today the core idea of American liberalism is identity politics. Blacks who do not tow the Democ-rat Party line are not "genuine" in the lexicon of the liberals and the same goes for Hispanics, homosexuals, Jews, etc. Former Democ-rat Congressman Deutsch is merely taking the liberalism of today to its logical conclusion! Hopefully he will educate his students to the point where they will be able to find their favored candidate's name on the Palm Beach County ballot which, according to him, the retired New York City teachers, Lawyers, businessmen and CPAs could not in 2000.
I wonder whether the author would consider Great Britain, Canada, and Australia as "cohesive, tolerant" societies. Many, if not all, industrialized nations - including the great English-speaking democracies - are embracing multiculturalism (and the acceptance of cultural diversity) as globalization increasingly blurs the distinction between a "common national heritage" and the distinct sub-cultures that form that heritage. In other words, I do not acknowledge a trade-off between my "American-ness" and my "Jewishness"; my identity as a Jew enriches the greater American fabric. In this sense, schools like Ben Gamla do not threaten the "American Vision"; they help preserve it by asserting our distinctive role as an important American sub-group. If America would not be the same colorful place without its Amish, its Native Americans, it Cajuns, or other ethnicities, then why would it be acceptable - for Jews or gentiles - if its historic Jewish component disappeared? And, if that would be a tragedy, why shouldn't public funds be appropriately used to maintain Jewish culture as a vital force within the broader society? While Mr. Treiman does make some valid points in his piece, the tone of the article reminds me of the maxim of the 19th century "Emancipation" period - to "be a Jewish in your home and an American (or Frenchman, German, etc.) in the street". Given the experiences of the 20th century, it makes sense that, at the start of the 21st century, we should strive to embrace a Jewish identity that gets expressed both in the street as well as at home.
Truer words were never said and have needed to be said. The day school movement may completely change Judaism. It has taken the presence of Jewish children from the public schools--robbing nonJewish children of a natural comfortable exposure to Jews, robbing Jewish children of the multi-cultural experience which has enhanced the Jewish experience in America, and robbing Jewish children of an indelible part of being a Jew--being a minority and navigating life among nonJews.
Dena Silver comments that the Jewish day school robs the Jewish child of the multi-cultural experience of the public school. The term "culture" really is quite meaningless without its chief tool - its unique language. The American public school is an English language environment, and the narrative that it presents to the children is quite particularistic - the rise of the American national identity. A Jewish child in such a school will never be exposed to any other cultural tradition, nor shall he learn of his own culture. Indeed, Mr Treiman's article opposes the charter school idea because he views schooling as a tool leading "to a more cohesive, tolerant America" - "cohesive" is not at all a synonym of "multi-cultural". The Jews of America have long, long ago embraced American culture. The Forward, in the days when the American Jews still read the Yiddish press, called upon its readers to be Americanize and to speak English. It really is quite strange to read in Mr Treiman's article an echo of such an outdated ideology. It's strange because the process of assimilation has already occurred. How could American Jews embrace the American world any more tightly? Intermarriage in the 1920's was almost unheard of, and today it is simply the norm - an expression of total acceptance and cultural assimilation in American society. The issue in American Jewish life is today the exact opposite of the issue of the Yiddish Forward's past editorials. There is no need to call upon the readership to become Americanized (because that is already a fact). The need is now to call upon the readership to fight for Hebrew literacy - and to take one small step back from assimilation. Let's hope that the Hebrew charter school succeeds in speading Hebrew literacy.
The Jews of America have long, long ago embraced American culture. The Forward, in the days when the American Jews still read the Yiddish press, called upon its readers to be Americanize and to speak English. It really is quite strange to read in Mr Treiman's article an echo of such an outdated ideology. It's strange because the process of assimilation has already occurred. How could American Jews embrace the American world any more tightly? The issue in American Jewish life is today the exact opposite of the issue of the Yiddish Forward's past editorials. There is no need to call upon the readership to become Americanized (because that is already a fact). The need is now to call upon the readership to fight for Hebrew literacy - and to take one small step back from assimilation. Let's hope that the Hebrew charter school succeeds in speading Hebrew literacy.
The Ben Gamla school is a major mistake, if for no other reason than that it is already being used to empower our enemies. As President of the coalition fighting the Kahlil Gibran International Academy (the public school madrassa that has been foisted on the NYC public school system by the intolerably arrogant Mayor Bloomberg and a group of determined Islamists) I can attest to the fact that not one supporter of the school has failed to justify it's existence by pointing to the Ben Gamla school. Jews had better wake up to the fact that when we take money from the government, we pay an unacceptable price. We should want a Jewish education for our children, and we should pay for it ourselves!
Treiman proclaims that "American Jewish liberalism" (a concept of highly dubious merit to begin with) demands our loyalty to public schools. Reason and the interests of our children demand otherwise. Treiman's claim that private or charter schools are somehow un-American is foolish. The fact is that many such schools are able to provide superior educations at a significantly lower cost per student than local public schools. What is truly un-American is the fact that Treiman and his friends in the teachers' unions are able to thwart any efforts on the part of citizens to ensure that private schools can be a viable option for people other than the wealthiest among us. In the end, Treiman's philosophy will result in nothing more than this: failing public schools will continue to fail; parents with the means to send their children elsewhere will continue to do so; less fortunate parents who are required to get by on middle or lower-class incomes will have no school choice whatsoever. Claiming that a school with a "particularist agenda" is somehow incapable of teaching American civic values to students is utterly ridiculous. Curricula of private and public schools are regulated by the state-- a Jewish or Greek school must still teach American history, math, social studies, etc. There is no reason that attendance at such a school should dampen anyone's patriotism or civic virtue. Finally, Treiman's statement that it was the public school system that gave American Jews the route to upward mobility is both conclusory and wrong. There are plenty of ethnic groups in attendance at plenty of public schools in this country-- few have met with the success of the Jews. "Upward mobility" is something that can certainly come from a good education. Which begs the question of why someone professing a "liberal" tradition would want to ensure that people at the bottom of the economic and social ladder will be denied the opportunity to choose a better school for their children. Because, in the end, that's what this is really about.
Perhaps it's unpleasant that the supporters of the Khalil Jibran are using the Ben-Gamla as a justification for their project, as Stuart Kaufman tells us. However, one shouldn't come to the mistaken conclusion that if there were no Hebrew charter school then those supporters wouldn't succeed in founding their school. If the school is legal, then it will operate. It is quite strange indeed that a Chinese or a Greek or an Arabic language school can operate with public funding, yet Jews would oppose a similar project in the Hebrew language. Perhaps someone will initiate a Yiddish language charter school as well. It should only be! It's absolutely silly that other groups in American society would make an effort to make a bilingual younger generation while Jews would continue to see their own languages as less worthy.
<p>While Daniel Treiman's article, "The Charter School Temptation," finally recognizes that multiculturalism has negative aspects to it, Mr. Treiman fails to recognize the specifically anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist aspects that multiculturalism inculcates into students at US public schools on a daily basis. He should read Andrea Rapp's article, "Slander in Schoolbooks," in the current issue of Reform Judaism, Winter 2007/5768, <a rel="nofollow" href="www.reformjudaismmag.org">www.reformjudaismmag.org</a>, page 80, to sample the hatefilled textbooks from which US students are being taught today. Mr. Treiman also errs in believing that American liberalism continues to be the ethos promoting a common American value system in our public schools. Volunteer for many years in any public school as I have, and you will quickly learn that "multiculty" political correctness has replaced the norm of tolerance and mutual respect of learning a wide variety of views from distinguished authors and teachers in many public schools of our country. How can American Jewish students in the public schools come away with a positive image of their own culture and themselves in such an environment? The fact that large numbers of young American Jews are turning away from Judaism results from their being exposed to negative views of their religion and culture from the time they enter until the time they graduate from the public school system. Although my own son attended only public schools in part because I used to believe in them and in part because I could not afford to send him to a private school, and even though I have served as a volunteer to the Gifted and Talented Learning Council for public elementary and middle schools' and as wellness coordiator for a public high school's Parent Teacher Student Associations, I advise young Jewish parents to not send their children to public schools unless they want to distance or turn their offspring away from Judaism and Jewish culture. </p>