is the bais yaakov system failing us???

↑ jelly belly ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 1:55 pm

amother wrote:

No teen girl will be willing to be stigmatized by choosing a weaker track.

I want the girls to lean chumash, navi etc. However they are so over analyzing it that ground is never covered and they don't learn all the parshios and all the perokim in navi.

My daughter is in 8th grade and she just finished perek aleph in Devorim, half the school year is gone. This is unacceptable.

I don't know if you are a new another or a previous one? Anyway, I don't really understand your concern. Is your goal for your kids to learn and analyze, or simply to say that they covered every perek of tanach? If covering every perek of tanach is the goal, I think the system is sorely lacking. Give them the skills to learn and analyze, and they can continue independently at any time of their lives. Rush them through it, and not only will they forget it all, they won't even know where to start if they pick up a navi one day.

↑ ora_43 ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 3:19 pm

amother wrote:

No teen girl will be willing to be stigmatized by choosing a weaker track.

If there's any meaning to the honors track, not everyone is allowed in. The "weaker" track would be the norm. It would have to be.

Worst case scenario, girls who don't want intense learning will have to choose between having the school experience they'd like, and getting recognition as an honors student. Not a fun choice, perhaps, but it wouldn't exactly be fun for girls who enjoy learning to sit through four years of painfully easy courses just so nobody's ego gets hurt, either.

Quote:

I want the girls to lean chumash, navi etc. However they are so over analyzing it that ground is never covered and they don't learn all the parshios and all the perokim in navi.

My daughter is in 8th grade and she just finished perek aleph in Devorim, half the school year is gone. This is unacceptable.

I agree with jelly belly that "cover all the material" is a bizarre goal. IMHO it's much better to learn how to really learn the material in depth. Then they can cover the rest on their own if they'd like. If they cover more material in less depth, they might not learn how to learn in depth if they'd like to do that later.

Although again it doesn't have to be either-or, it's possible to have one class where things are covered slowly in a lot of depth and one where the goal is to race through the material. But assuming there's no time for both, I think in-depth leaves more options open for the future.

↑ ora_43 ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 3:28 pm

Barbara wrote:

IMNSHO, high school should present OPTIONS. If you don't teach kids geometry, you've closed the doors on them being engineers. If you don't teach them biology, you've closed the doors on them being marine biologists or medical professionals.

In the same ways, maybe its not closing the doors, but you're certainly making lifelong learning more difficult if you don't teach these things to girls (and boys, of course) in high school. We've given them a start, now its up to them.

I'm all in favor of making some things elective, perhaps in 11th or 12th grade. But isn't it wonderful to give everyone a chance to discover that they really ARE interested.

Also, almost everyone who learns a profession or learns for a degree is going to have to learn things they aren't interested in. Learning things you aren't particularly interested in is a very valuable skill.

↑ Fox ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 3:35 pm

amother wrote:

Again, I ask the question,

How many of us know of GO presidents, play heads, or any other leadership role that was given to a girl who didn't succeed in limudei kodesh???

Does the silence speak for itself? What have we created here?

Not a single one. In fact, in my DDs' schools, it is very explicit: only girls who are considered academically strong will be considered for such roles. Why? Because the responsibilities involved require a time commitment that would be inappropriate for weaker students to make. They should theoretically be concentrating on academics.

I can't even count the problems with this approach!

* Just for starters, it reaffirms the status of strongest, most appealing girls at the expense of girls who might, if given the opportunity, shine in a different type of endeavor. Surely we know enough about peer relationships among women and girls to see what a bad idea it is to repeatedly and publicly recognize some students while keeping others virtually hidden.

* This system actually goes out of its way to alienate girls who are struggling in some aspect of their lives. I can't even count the number of non-Jews I've known who said things like, "I would have probably been kicked out or dropped out of high school if it hadn't been for band [student council; football team; track team; drama club; fill in the blank . . .]." So rather than looking for ways to help girls find their strengths, we use all these activities as a way to further send the message that "your services are not needed." And then everyone tsk-tsks when girls say, essentially, "Fine; I'll go elsewhere."

* And if that's not enough, many principals actively or at least passively discourage lessons or activities outside the school. Mention that your DD is taking guitar lessons or ballet lessons or whatever, and you'll get a pained, condescending look, while being told, "Well, I just hope it doesn't interfere with her studies."

So if the BY system works for a girl, it works. Yasher koach! The real question in my mind is whether BY is strong enough to embrace a new mission and improve how it relates to all girls, or whether it will insist on nurturing the best, brightest, and prettiest at the expense of everyone else.

freidasima wrote:

And who uses geometry and trigonometry? And who remembers the names of things in biology, and how many get nothing but headaches out of high school French?

So why are we saying that about rambam and rashi?

I agree -- I don't think the primary problem in BY today is what and how much they teach. BY schools cover a lot of different hashkafos regarding women learning, and that's fine. Individual schools, classes, and teachers can hash out the details of how much Rashi they want memorized.

The problem is that for a significant number of students, a BY education is something to be endured, not something to look back on with even a small degree of nostalgia. I don't think the reason for that is too much Rashi, but rather, how girls are made to feel if they don't happen to find it inspiring to teitch Rashi.

There seems to be a mentality among principals and teachers in the BY system that "If I found learning Rashi inspiring, then you should, too. And if you don't, you're just not trying hard enough." I guess they have the right to feel that way, but it would be nice if they had a slightly larger vision of what BY could represent.

↑ ally

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 3:35 pm

ora_43 wrote:

Barbara wrote:

Haha. I do wonder whether mass memorization is going to go progressively out of fashion.

farm

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 4:28 pm

Fox wrote:

amother wrote:

freidasima wrote:

Fox, that is just sad and I am surprised. In many many schools, leadership positions are given to any student who is capable of the responsibility, regardless of academics. Sometimes it works out that the concert head is also the valedictorian while other times it is the student who is failing remedial math. School clubs, GO, production are all specifically meant to give all girls a chance to shine, especially the ones who are weaker academically. It sounds like your girls' school is awful.

↑ Fox ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 5:03 pm

farm wrote:

It sounds like your girls' school is awful.

No, I don't want to give that impression -- at least not categorically. As a former teacher, I see how hard these administrators and teacher work -- and under what difficult financial constraints! -- and I'm just awed. I really find that the vast majority of teachers are really very good, and a handful are absolutely incredible.

So how do we end up with these problems if everyone is so well-meaning and dedicated?

Again, every BY school is different, so it's not really fair to make generalizations. However, I have been fortunate enough to send my sons to a truly outstanding cheder, and the difference is really amazing.

The biggest difference, the one that transcends the question of memorizing Rashi, learning to sew, or giving the GO presidency to the best student, is the constant thirst for improvement. At my sons' cheder, the menahel listens to every half-baked idea, seeks advice and suggestions from everyone regardless of background, and constantly reiterates the message to everyone connected with the school that "we can do better." Every single parental talent is put to use.

At my DDs' schools, though, the message is more, "This is how we do things." Whether the matter being discussed is curriculum or whether the girls should sell pickles at lunchtime, anyone who suggests that improvement is desirable is basically brushed off. Parents are not encouraged to contribute their talents -- unless that talent happens to be writing large checks.

You might be surprised to learn that the academic standards are much, much higher in my sons' cheder than in the girls' school. And not just limudei kodesh. The entire program is simply more rigorous in terms of participation, middos, and extra-curricular activities. At the same time, they offer very comprehensive special education services. While there are certainly boys they haven't been able to accommodate, they offer help ranging from minor remediation to individualized instruction in various subjects.

But it all starts with the underlying philosophy. If the leadership thinks that there's always room for improvement and teachers, parents, and staff are all encouraged to find ways to do things better, you send a very important message to your students. If the leadership gives the impression that "We think we're just fine the way we are," then no one is going to take any risks to solve even the most minor of problems.

↑ amother ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 5:07 pm

I will add my presonal experience in school.

I was a brilliant student that knew every answer to questions asked in class, but when it came to test I was a complete disaster. I was barely able to make a 70. My marks on my report cards never reflected how I did in oral class, meaning how well I understood the work rather how much I was able to memorize for a test. I was considered the dummy in my family cause my mom always saw my marks and her reflection on me was that. In school I was considered aboslutely brilliant because I was able to hide my marks. Though I am quite sure my fellow classmates must've wondered why I was never chosen to be anything in school. For the schoolwide contest every year I studied my brain off for weeks and weeks just so as not to ruin my image.

Now in highschool I heard back from one of the secretaries that I was friends with; that I was supposed to get the lead role in Drama but they cant give it to me since I never try to study and I dont care for school. At the time it hurt.

So yes I think the school system is a disaster and I hope not to have to put my kids through this system.

↑ Fox ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 5:14 pm

ora_43 wrote:

FTR, in the public school I went to there were also academic requirements for taking part in activities like sports and drama club. Albeit really low ones. I think you had to at least be passing all your classes, but maybe it was just having a passing average.

Right . . . and the drama coach didn't cast the play based on whose grades were best!

I do think you've hit on another problem: we're not entirely clear on what the goals of BY are (or should be!). Is the primary goal academic? Cultural and social? Spiritual? Is there a core set of knowledge we want girls to have by 8th grade? By 12th grade?

Even if we have individual answers to those questions, most BY schools serve a diverse enough constituency that there will never be consensus. So we end up arguing over how much Rashi to teitch.

↑ Frenchfry ↓

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 6:03 pm

I think that even in schools where there is no academic requirement for extracurricular activities, weaker students rarely make it to leadership roles.

While it's true that very often strong students do better in all areas, there's more to this.

In the last ten years in the classroom, I've seen the stress on academics rise ridiculously. When I was in school the "popular crowd" was either pretty, rich, talented, or very charismatic. That is the way of the world. You did not have to be considered smart to be popular.

Nowadays, with some exceptions, that is not the case. Its a lot harder to "make it" socially if you aren't one of the "smart girls" couple that with a good dose of low self esteem from low marks.

Since the leadership roles take popularity to carry off, weaker students will rarely find themselves with those jobs.

Again, this is a phenomenon I've been seeing increase over the last 10-15 years of increasing stress of academics in school. It was not like that when I was in school. (I attended the same school where I now teach)

wife2

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 6:26 pm

Every Bais Yaakov school is different. Each student has so many different needs. Smaller schools with less students usually have a chance for each girl to shine or participate in one area of school and be noticed or involved on some level.
I don't remember all the information I was taught. I do wish there was more practical learning about real life, more discussion, and less in depth meforshim. I doubt I will ever have the chance to learn Chumash or any other Jewish subject again as in depth as I did in school. I enjoyed it since for me it was intellectually fulfilling, but for many of my friends who had a harder time with learning, they were lost and had no interest. There was so much detail of Rashis question and not enough discussion about reality and how we can live with what we learn. Too many tests, not enough freedom and flexibility to grow and have a true desire to learn for the sake of knowledge and improvement.
In a big school with a lot of rules, girls, and teachers there needs to be more room for connection, smaller groups where girls can feel confident with a trusted teacher. There is no money in schools to make this a reality.
So many girls with learning, social, or emotional problems suffer so much through every day of school. All this torture and feeling worthless...and they are the sweetest wives and mothers who can cook and love their kids as much as or even more than the popular smart girls in school.
It is a sad reality

AlwaysGrateful

Tue, Feb 28 2012, 8:39 pm

ora_43 wrote:

I agree with Fox that sports and drama and the like can be a great opportunity for some kids. OTOH, since the goal of school is learning the academic subjects and sports are just an extra, it makes sense to me that they're used as incentives to learning and not as a given (keep up a 70 average and you can stay on the soccer team). As long as the standards aren't too high.

One other caveat besides this one. It's not just a matter of "these girls can't make the time commitment." I've worked with some of these "struggling" girls, and many of them have an attitude of "let's get off as much time as possible for this." So they'll say they need several periods off to deal with yearbook, dance for production, whatever. They completely take advantage. If they're only in charge of a small section of an event, there are at least other girls who know what they're doing. But no one knows what the head of production is doing, or if they reallyneed the time that they say they need. You have to trust them. And many of these girls don't take academics seriously anyway, so they'd just be fudging their times to get off of work.

I know I sound cynical, and I normally am not. But I've worked with probably a dozen girls on each side of the spectrum in recent years, and there's a real difference in their respect for authority, MOST of the time. There are exceptions to the rule, and it's a shame for them. But I see why the schools are going based on what most girls are like...because those stereotypes, in many many cases, are true.