- This topic has 13 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
“It is better for the school to close down later due to lack of funds then to not accept a child now due to lack of funds”.
Agree or disagree?
I absolutely disagree. This reminds me of when I was learning triage. The rule there was “do the greatest good for the greatest number.” If accepting one child now means 50 children will lose their education in the future, it isn’t worth it.
I once heard from Rabbi Rabinowitz zl who was the controller of Yeshiva Torah Vodaas that yeshivos don’t close because there’s no money. They close because they don’t have students. That in turn causes a lack of funds. Nobody will donate to a dying yeshiva or a yeshiva known not to accept children because they don’t have money to pay tuition. Of course the yeshiva can’t normally have too many such non-payers. But yet this seems to be only in non-chasidish yeshivos. Almost all the chasidish yeshivos and bais yakovs accept every child from their sect, with or without funds. And make up the difference from the rich members of the chasidic sect.
Disagree. If the school cannot cover its expenses, better the child be sent to a school that can handle him / her before the ball drops. Nothing is as disruptive as switching schools mid-year
Agree!!
This is why Aish Hatorah is supported by the wider Jewish community. They accept people in with the knowledge that they won’t see a penny fortheir education, BUT when the graduates make money, Aish is at the top of their list, both for their education and to ensure that future Aish students will be treated the same way that they were.
Schools who are mentchlich with parents and students reap the benefits in the long run. The schools who pressure and extort as much as possible win in the short term, but once the family isn’t FORCED to pay, they’ll never see another red cent.
Your question therefore runs deeper:
IF A SCHOOL IS SO DISRESPECTED IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY CAN’T RAISE THE REQUISITE FUNDS TO ENABLE ALL CHILDREN WHO NEED FINANCIAL ASISTANCE TO ATTEND IS SUCH A SCHOOL SERVING A PURPOSE, OR IS IT NEEDED FOR THE PRINCIPAL’S EGO?
What if the school just doesn’t have the physical space, or the staff?
Prof1 – (or anyone else that might know)
Any idea when R’ Rabinowitz made that statement? My guess would be at a time that most fathers worked, so meeting expenses could largly be met by having a full(er) enrollment.
Fast forward to present times, where many fathers don’t work, (yes, mothers work, but much of the income goes to daycare / cleaning help, takeout food, when she is just too frazzled to cook…and who can blame her?)
So today, the answer is not, just get more students. The answer is, get more PAYING students, and while we’re at it, lets also get students that will eventually be PAYING allumni.
You can only ride for free for so long
Agreed. As frum Jews dont we believe that Hashem is running the show? What seems likely to happen in the future, let Hashem deal with, and He will. And how would rejecting one child keep a school open?
i agree with kapusta. the basis of the question is wrong. the “incremental” cost of each child does not result in sufficient savings, that rejecting them will result in keeping the school open if they otherwise would not be able to. the fixed costs remain the same.
Let’s try to figure this out. How much more does it cost to have 22 kids in a class than 20? The Rebbe/teacher gets paid the same. The mortgage is the same. The electric, gas, utilities are the same. Most of the books are from the Board of Ed or the Parents pay for, so what exactly costs more?
OK, I understand when the class gets too big and it needs to be split and another set of teachers need to be hired or another building needs to be rented. But as long as there is room in the class there is no reason to turn a child away especially if the yeshiva is working with the community and the community will work with the Yeshiva. I think that is the biggest problem today and that is why so many yeshivas are not being supported by the community. Each yeshiva is autonomous and doesn’t have to answer to anyone and in many cases there is no one to talk to when you have a problem. The answer given to most parents is they can take their child out if they are not happy. If the Rosh and administration rules the parent body and the neighborhood instead of working with the local Rabbonim and the parents for the success of the children then the community is not likely to support the school. WE had a school like that in our community. The Rabbonim complained that the 2 principals did not take any direction and did not care what the local Rabbonim had to say and only took direction from their own Rav who didn’t live in the community. Needless to say the school closed.
Rabbi Rabinovitz is right. PROOF: yeshiva torah vodaath has no (it is one of the most worthy institutions) money but will never close due the fact that its a great yeshiva and they have such success! it doesnt reject for money
HIE: Yes Torah Vodaas is prime proof of what I said. Rabbi Rabinowitz said this to my father and I in 1967. The situation today isn’t good, granted. But there are still many wealthy people around. If a wealthy man sees a yeshiva that has students and functions, he’ll donate funds. To Gavra: the chasidic system only works for them? It’s not good here? Where is here? Is it because chasidim have the achdus to maintain a community based system of paying? Whereas the yeshivishe community doesn’t have enough ahavas yisroel achdus to accept a child from a talmid chochom father who is out of work? If so, that “It is a good system for them, but is not applicable here”, wherever “here” is, you have a much bigger problem erev Rosh Hashonoh than a tuition crisis.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.