Disciplining Other People's Children II

Here I posted about a topic that interests me based off of numerous experiences I've had that have lead me to believe that I am in the minority when I say that I don't mind when others discipline (i.e. give correction) to my children. I firmly believe that children need to learn to accept correction from authority figures. While certain types of correction and punishment are better administered by parents, my life experience tells me that those who accept discipline best, tend to have parents who did not shield their children from discipline from others, and ultimately even from themselves.

Comments on the last thread have been mixed, but it seems that I am not alone when it comes to other parents not taking kindly to disciplining their children. There are so many incidences that I could recount, but I will only recount a few. I'm sure you all have a myriad of stories you could tell.

While disciplining other people's children is not something I enjoy doing, I find that when I have had occasion to discipline/reprimand/correct another's child it revolves around four categories:

1) Physical protection of a child. This is by far the most common scenario. It isn't easy to go through other means of disciplining when hitting, kicking, or biting is happening or is about to happen. Worse yet is when a toy is being used to do the hitting. However, just as often, this situation can involve a child, older or younger, who is endangering himself either through negligent behavior or self-destructive behavior.

I have asked middle school/high school students (Jewish and non-Jewish) to cross at the light or crosswalk, rather than dart across a busy street in front of drivers. They were none too happy. But, I don't want to find them under my car or anyone else's car either..

2) Preventing property damage. This too is a fairly common scenario that authority figures run into whether they are hosting other children, teaching in school, running a business, shopping in a store, or in their own shul. I can think of many examples, but this category is very self-explanatory.

3) Middot: I expect my own children to speak respectfully and politely to me and I expect other children to do the same. I think it is healthy for children to know that adults expect to be treated with respect and I have asked for that respect and see no reason adults should not ask for that respect. Children (and young adults) need to know that basic respect is expected.

A post on DAG's blog brought back a memory of a rather unpleasant outing that I had at a New York Toys R' Us. On my trip, two frum children who were running around wildly crashed into me and nearly knocked me over. After waiting for what I hoped was a forthcoming apology, and not receiving one, I asked for one. Not only did I not get an apology, but the mother shot me the "die now" look, gathered her children, and grumbled about me under her breath. No wonder the children had no sense of common courtesy!

4) Child is taking something that does not belong to them or something they are not allowed to have at that moment.

Often this scenario happens during a kiddush or seudah shlishit that I am manning. The children are grabbing at the food and taking before the time. Usually I make a brief statement such as "all children must wait until the Rabbi makes kiddush to take." Believe it or not, there have been occasions where I or another have stated the rule and a parent then proceeds to take food for their children, sending just about every message that should not be sent.

It seems that my style and halacha are not residing in different planets (baruch Hashem). A new commenter, "Rabbi Dr.," posted this comment, which offers a new dimension to the discussion:

And now for a little halacha.
See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayyim siman 343 and the Mishna Brurah there se'if katan 7- when it come to Biblical prohibitions everyone is obligated to stop any child from violating them. When it comes to rabbinic prohibitions only a father (and according to most the mother also) is obligated to stop his own child.

For example, if you see your own child climbing a tree on shabbos, which is rabbinically prohibited you must stop them. However, if you see someone else's kid climbing a tree you are under no obligation to stop them.

However, if you see a child trying to rip off a branch from the tree, which is Biblically prohibited, you must stop them, whether they are your child or someone else's.

Now if it seems obvious to me and see the Mishna Brura ibid. se'if katan 2, that hitting, name calling, lashon hara, and almost any behavior relating to bad middot is prohibited Biblically and as such any adult in the vicinity must stop the child in question.

Now this all applies to a child who is "higi'a le-chinuch" which means they
are of an age that they can comprehend the concept of "no." Under that age there
is really no obligation of chinuch.

So to bring this all home, if a two year old his pushing your kid, you should protect your kid, but you are not obliged to give the kids a lesson because they are probably too young to really understand the implications.

However, if you see a 6 year old hitting another child or hurting their
feelings- you are obligated to step in.

(One caveat- Sfardim may have different standards in this area).** In any
case, next time another parent gives you a hard time, tell them it's the halacha
and if they don't believe you tell them to ask their rabbi.

One more caveat (wisdom is the necessary corollary of all chinuch
questions. So regardless of any formal halachik obligations or lack thereof, one
must consult the 5th chelek of the shulchan aruch).

*My own note: I plan to do my own research into this area regarding Sephardi vs. Ashkenazi. My own gut instinct is that there will not be any significant differences. On a social note, in our Sephardi circle, which is not particularly learned, disciplining (i.e. correcting/guiding) other people's children just comes with the territory. I doubt anyone has sat around and analyzed it; it is just "what is done." And, it seems to work. Not once has one of the kids in this group ever mouthed back, "you can't tell me what to do. You're not my mother."

It is truly sad that we have come to a point in society where issues of discipline are so touchy. Instead of ending up with more effective discipline, it seems we have ended up with very little discipline. I decided to Google "Disciplining Other People's Children" and ran into some great pieces on this subject. . . . . . . . but more articles and insights will have to wait for post III. I've been busy disciplining my own all day and I'm too tired to continue an already lengthy post.

Disciplining Other Parent's Children
(when the other parent is present)

The ifs and hows of disciplining other parent's children is a touchy subject. And, as any experienced or even semi-experienced parent knows, it is bound to come up. . . numerous times. This post is dedicated mostly to disciplining other parent's children when that child's parent is present, as is apt to come up during a play date, at a shul function, at the park, etc. Of course, there are many more scenarios that could be dealt with where the other child's parent(s) is not present--but that is what the comments are for. After all, I want to keep this particular post brief!

(Just a note: when I speak about discipline in this post, I am not speaking about punishment, but rather correcting actions through either words, diversion, or another non-physical technique).

I have noted, mostly through looks thrown my direction when I "dare" correct another parent's child (usually one that has just bopped my kid on the head), that I am in the minority when I say to other adults (aka as authority figures): please feel free to correct my children.

I am a disciplinarian. But, I am not superhuman. I do not have eyes on the back of my head. And, believe it or not, sometimes the eyes on the front of my head miss moments that call for discipline, especially immediate discipline. So, if I did not react to an incident that calls for discipline, chances are that I missed that moment, and I have no problem if another adult corrects my child.

If fact, I even believe it is healthy for children to receive discipline from other adults besides their own parents (and caregivers or teachers). But, like I said, I believe that my position on the issue is a minority position. (Also, if you are not comfortable correcting my children, you can feel free to point out the wrongdoing to me before you get upset that I am not doing anything about it. Like I said, chances are I missed the moment).

Sure, it can hurt when another parent ends up disciplining my "baby," but ultimately my goal is to raise children that become "mentchen." And one of the things that I believes separates the "mentchen" from the "vilde chayas" is their ability to recognize an authority figure when they see one, grant that authority figure the respect that they deserve, and accept deserved discipline.

So, feel free to discipline (i.e. correct) my children, if I haven't already beat you to the punch. They are not malachim. They are unfinished products that need direction to become "mentchen." And, if I missed a moment that should not be overlooked and you provide that direction, I thank you. The last thing I ever want to hear my own children say to another adult is "I don't have to listen to you. You are not my Mommy (or Ima, Daddy, Abba, Tatty, or Teacher.)" And, I've heard that phrase all too often.

So, what do you think? Am I in the minority? Or, does anyone in the peanut gallery think like me?

Time for something light and fun!

I'd still love to hear your comments on the last three posts, but I figured it was time for something light and fun.

So, so ahead and use this forum to share some classic "Drive By Jewish Mothering" moments you have had.

Here is mine: I'm at the pool with my little one and after he is done splashing around in the pool, he steps out. He is cold, so he covers himself with a towel to warm up, and sits down nicely on a sun chair to warm up. I figure that as soon as he warms up and dries off, I will put him into new, dry clothes and a new diaper. He is sitting calmly and chatting away, when suddenly he decides he would rather run around with nothing on. So, he undresses completely.

As soon as I notice this, I grab him and start, literally, wrestling with him, as I struggle to diaper him. Meanwhile, an older lady starts lecturing me how I should be more discrete with him, how it is so inappropriate that he is running around naked, etc, etc, etc.

If a mother, chol v'chomer a grandmother of probably 75 years old, tells me that she has never had a child de-robe, I believe that she is a liar or is suffering from amnesia. If not the latter, than I can only assume that her child had no motor skills or was dressed in a straight jacket.

I agree that my kids should not run around naked. . that was probably why I was attempting to get him dressed (!). But, at least cut me some slack when I am doing just what I should be doing right in front of your face. I know you aren't blind because you were offended by the sight of a little tushie. So, why couldn't you see that I was try to get this one dressed?

Guest Post from a Former Executive Director

Like I stated in my last post, I'm not so sure that I can answer or even articulate an answer to my own question quite yet.

So, in the meantime, I want to present you with a response to the "The Minimum Tuition Debate" thread from a Former Executive Director. He has generously allowed me to post his response as it's own post. While we do not agree that minimum tuitions make good business sense, I find the post to contain so many interesting elements regarding tuitions, assistance, creativity, and more, that I thought I would post the response in its entirety. I like the professionalism to his approach on tuition and the trust that he believes should be extended to parents initially.

As his response is quite lengthy, I have numbered each paragraph for commenting ease. I will note that (paragraph 14), tht I especially like the idea of allowing parents to pay tuition over 12 months, instead of 10 and have mentioned that before in a past post. I believe that this should be an option, at least for those without emergency reserves. Cash flow is essentially to staying out of debt, or getting out of debt. Those who send their children to camps have told me that it really doesn't make a difference, but not all do send their children to camp or other summer programs, and I firmly believe that this little bit of flexibility is vital for many. And, while I cannot say with certainty, I do not believe that offering this flexibility would hurt the schools, as the major budget line item is staff, and I believe most staff choose to be paid over 12 months. Yet (at least in my neighborhood) paying tuition over 12 months versus 10 is not an option. And, some schools even charge more to those that extend their payments over 10 months (but, I will leave that for a future post).

Thank you to this Former Executive Director for his participation. The post follows the line:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) I’d like to side-step the current ‘flame-war’ and get back to basics, if possible. As a former Executive Director of a Yeshiva High School, I feel the need to highlight a few points about tuition assistance and Day School finances from the perspective of the school.

(2) As with any business, pricing yourself out of our customer base is a bad idea. I’m not talking about the common practice of setting tuitions insanely high as possible, offering tuition assistance to a larger segment of the population, and enjoying the income from the highest income families who pay in full. Regardless of the moral and ethical considerations of this practice, you have to admit that there is a certain business logic to it. Setting minimum tuitions prices has no business logic, even less if exceptions are the rule. If the minimum tuition is non-negotiable, you disenfranchise a whole segment of the community from Jewish Education. And if it IS negotiable, than what’s the point of setting it?

(3) Another common practice is ‘topping off the class’. Say a school intends to have a freshman (or kindergarten – whatever) class of 25 students. Applications come in from November through June, and 22 slots are filled, with mostly paying customers. Say 80% of what the full tuition would have been. Now in July, three more applications come in, or were at the bottom of the stack on a waiting list. The administrator thinks, “Well, I already have the teacher ready to teach 25, and I have to pay her the same regardless. The heating, electricity of the school, etc. are fixed expenses regardless. Whatever these families pay, its gravy – money in the bank.” Now, there are pros and cons to this philosophy, but again, there is a business logic to it. If these parents can pay $2,000 each, but not the $3,000 each minimum tuition, do you throw away $6,000 on principle? And if you don’t, and you would accept the kids to fill the class, then what IS a minimum tuition?

(4) I think it is a critical mistake to link the financial problems of many of our educational institutions with a lack of tuition. Sure – if there was an unlimited source of money, most schools could provide a quality educational product. But schools (on earth, without unlimited money) need to learn to live within their means, even as they seek to educate the community about how much a school really costs.

(5) All too often, serious budgeting, reporting, and other fiscal management and analysis do not drive decision making. Sometimes these processes are neglected entirely, and other times there are enough steps between the budget process and whoever actually authorizes salaries and expenditures as to make the budget process almost meaningless. How many schools publish annual reports? Post publicly the salaries of their top administrators? Tax the tuition breaks given to employees (or know the legal reasons why they don’t, if any)? How many board members can ask for and receive within a week, the amount the school has spent on office supplies in the past year? Is there even someone to ask?

(6) Tuition is the single greatest 'fundraiser' that schools have, but I have seen schools stubbornly spend much more time, energy and money on things more typically considered fundraising – lavish dinners and concerts, expensive and fancy Directors of Development (who rarely have, or are interested in obtaining, any actual training in fundraising), etc. – than on recruitment, retention, precision tuition assistance and collections. The entire net of ‘regular’ fundraising might be only 5-10% of a school's annual budget, while tuition usually accounts for 80-90%. Some might argue that the 80-90% is the ‘easy’ part, and the money and time spent on the 5-10% is well spent. I would submit that 5% (of the total budget) is quite low in terms of many school’s uncollected, bad-debt tuition, let alone the ‘fundraising’ done by cutting costs, increasing enrollment, and more closely scrutinizing and enforcing tuition assistance arrangements.

(7) (The way that dinner obligations have become a part of tuition fees, and, depending on the PR/fundraising need, are counted as “dinner revenue” sometimes, or “tuition revenue” other times is another issue. Did the dinner *really* make $100,000? Or did 200 families paying dubiously tax-deductible $500 Dinner Obligations make the “profit” and actual contributions covered only the cost of the lavish $40,000 affair?)

(8) In my opinion, a proper tuition assistance process provides anonymity for its applicants, investigates claims of need carefully, works creatively with parents on payment methods (more on this later), and provides as much information as humanly possible to a small, scrupulous, knowledgeable tuition assistance committee. The separation or connectedness of the educational and business sides of a school is a whole other topic, but suffice it to say that I don’t think it is healthy for educational administrators, such as roshei yeshiva, principals and the like, to get involved in this process, other than being a character reference as needed, and maybe handing out a form at an interview or open house.

(9) A business professional in the school (Executive Director, or what have you) should be the link between the family and the family’s financial history with the school, and the tuition assistance committee. Families should not be subjected to the demeaning ritual of having to appear before the committee to plead their case, and committee members need not be influenced one way or the other by the emotions generated on both sides but such appearances. The information collected and organized by the business professional and provided to the committee to make their decisions should minimally include: Occupations and titles of working parents, all current tax returns, debt information and documentation, what the family paid in tuition the previous year for all children at all institutions, how much tuition assistance they received in the past year, what percentage of the full tuition was paid, amount past-due (if any), and any additional important issues that the committee should consider (most often: medical, employment, and divorce issues).

(10) The tuition assistance committee should be made up of around five volunteers from within the school’s community. Too many more and the meetings can take forever or people become disengaged, to many fewer and there is a higher potential for group-think. A single person making the decisions is a bad idea for obvious reasons. The committee need not all be accountants or have backgrounds in business or finance, but having these skill sets on the committee is important. The critical requirements are discretion, dedication to the school, patience, attention to detail, evenhandedness, and availability for the meetings.

(11) In my case, I attended the meetings as a non-voting facilitator. Committee members often asked me important questions about how a given family had dealt with the school in the past, and what their intentions were for the future. Having spoken often with the families throughout the year and during the application process, I was often able to shed light on a situation from personal experience and knowledge. After the committee ruled, I sent contracts to the parents, which they could appeal (back to the committee) as long as they were willing to write a letter documenting specific things they felt the committee might not have taken into consideration at all, or enough, the first time. Appeals had limited success, though occasionally the committee had truly missed something the first time through. Often, the committee would offer a nominal compromise to show good faith. I was then responsible for getting the contracts signed and overseeing the payment plans.

(12) Meetings were long and draining, and would have seemed to many people the worst kind of torture. But to those of us who cared deeply about the financial robustness of the school, as well as being intensely aware of our tremendous opportunity for chesed, the importance of the decisions overcame all obstacles, and we were often still debating cases long into the night after the scheduled end of the meetings.

(13) The general attitude of the committee was to challenge parents to pay a larger percentage than they had in the past. Certainly, if a family’s financial prospects had taken a turn for the better, but even if not – if total tuition had increased by a few hundred dollars, perhaps they could pay that increase in addition to what they paid last year, for example.

(14) Innovation was the rule, rather than the exception. How about 12 monthly payments instead of 10, to lower the monthly payment? How about barter? Maybe a parent is a builder, a plumber, an electrician, a graphic designer, a photographer, a printer, an architect, a builder, etc. ? Certainly, they need to do quality work, and the amount of work needs to correlate with the amount of their benefit. But we do this with teachers, offering reduced tuition for their children, why not with other professions?

(15) How about interest-free ‘loans’? Perhaps a parent is out of work temporarily, but had a good job before, and is hopeful that they will find a similar job soon – why not give them a reduced amount due monthly through the year, but a $5,000 (for example) interest-free ‘loan’ that comes due or will be renegotiated upon the end of the year, or a defined time period after the a new job begins? Some may argue about present-value, inflation and the like. Our school board argued (wisely, I think, having seen it in practice) that we would gain far far more in the combination of goodwill, fewer man-hours chasing down past-due monies, and the actual paid loans than we would lose.

(16) As far as the school is concerned, it is in its best interest to be as flexible and creative as possible – as long as families are not taking advantage (more on this below). Anything it can do to increase its tuition revenue over a rigid system that forces families’ with financial situations in every shape under the sun into the same uniform pigeon holes is money the school was leaving on the table.

(17) The parents, by and large, appreciated what we were doing. They understood the financial strain the school was under, and how their inability to pay on time and in full might impact the education for their child, and for all the children. They understood the need to have a loan or barter system in place to make up for the shortfall. The goodwill generated by working with families going through hard times is hard to quantify, but it is an important aspect as well. There are certainly opportunities to build relationships with families, by having honest discussions and trying to work through the issues with them, relationships that can endure long after the hard times are in the past, to when they, or their family may be in a position to make significant contributions to the school.

(18) My attitude toward parents was to trust them until they gave me a reason not to. If a person has a cash or real estate business with sporadic cash flow, and they say they need tuition assistance unless they are allowed to come in with cash twice a year, why not give it a try? I might need the first payment – or a significant partial payment – to be the first week in September, so we aren’t waiting 6 months for a first payment, but why not get more overall for the school, rather than mandating 10 monthly payments and getting far less?

(19) If a parent betrayed my trust, however, I had no problem going after them for the money that they owed. If they agreed that they owed the money, but needed more time in which to pay it, the policy of the school was to work with them. But to be complicit in their denial that they owed anything more? It wasn’t my money to forgive, or be lax about, it was mammon hekdeish – it belonged to the school to facilitate the education of the next generation of Jewry. Who am I not to try to get it in any legal way possible?

(20) The best and most effective collections method begins months before the problem presents itself, by setting up a mutually agreeable set of obligations and schedule of payments. Most schools, though, do have situations where tuitions are past-due, and some schools have an inordinate amount. It is the responsibility of the school to accurately monitor their flow of tuition revenue month to month. If a family misses a payment, or a check bounces, the school needs to follow up with them right away in a courteous and respectful way (a business professional, not the rosh yeshiva). Waiting can only make the problem worse. Perhaps it was an oversight, perhaps the parents are trying to get away with something, but perhaps a more serious event has occurred – the loss of a job for example. In these cases, I tended to try to do some much-needed chesed, while protecting the interests (and PR) of the school, by implementing a reduced payment plan for the remained of the year, with a loan for the balance. In other words, a plan wherein the entire tuition allocated to the family at the beginning of the year would be paid by the end of the year, but would allow for the unfortunate event that had befallen the family with a reduced monthly payment in the interim. All past-due balances or loans needed to be resolved or renegotiated before a new application for assistance would even be considered for the following year.

(21) In situations in which a disagreement ensues, a signed contract that documents a family’s tuition obligation is critical. Without it, how is the argument not just the parents’ word against the school’s word? With it, the obligated amount in abundantly clear, and rarely needs to be arbitrated (or prosecuted) in a public forum, which is usually undesirable for both the school and the family.

(22) Parents who, despite a signed contract to the contrary, and without a legitimate life change to account for their inability to pay, refuse to pay their past-due balance, forfeit the privilege of having their child attend the school and receive grades and transcripts. I worked very hard not to let this happen, but at the end of the day, we cannot provide services without payment. Parents get livid about this sort of thing, but it’s really their own fault. We are not punishing their children, they are. If one does not pay their electric bill, eventually, the power is turned off. And you can bet that the electric company does not call and discuss and try to work creatively with parents as much as we did.

(23) Coming back to the issue of minimum tuition, I don’t see the point. If it is a one-size-fits-all approach to tuition assistance, it’s a bad idea. Exceptions are made (or should be, where warranted) on the one side, and people will take advantage of it to pay less than they should on the other. (After much hand-wringing: “I think I can pay the minimum,” and grateful administrators or committee members agree and hand over the paperwork so they won’t need to actually spend time and energy on the case.) If it is an attempt to save the tuition assistance committee time and effort, this too is a mistake, for similar reasons. Injustices and money left on the table will be the results.

(24) If the purpose is to educate families, to “push people to make different decisions, perhaps decisions that will allow for them to pay minimal tuitions,” as sephardilady wrote above, I would argue that this is not the function of the tuition process. If the school wants to offer seminars, or reach out to community rabbanim, or anything else to promote awareness of the cost of education, that’s fine. Ultimately, though, the school has control over whether a child is enrolled in the institution, or not. That’s it, really, but it is a powerful tool at the same time. If a school examines all of the information, and decides on a tuition amount for a family for the coming year, after all the negotiating is done, the parents can take it or leave it. I guess if you squint a little, I’m in favor of a customized, personal minimum tuition for each family. If the parents do take it, however, just as the parents are obligated to that amount by signing the contract, so too the school cannot expect to receive more. If one family owns a house, saves their money, and pays $X, while another family rents, spends beyond their means, and pays the same $X, what difference does it make to the school financially? I have heard of tuition assistance contracts that specifically bar the family from taking vacations, buying new cars and the like. If a family who signed a tuition contract and is paying on time chooses to take an expensive vacation or buy a boat, what right does the school have to legislate the family’s personal financial decisions?

(25) Now – if the school wants to reevaluate the tuition assistance (or lack thereof) offered for the following year, that the school can do. If there is actual fraud in the tuition assistance application, the school can take legal action. If the parents take a vacation – or do no such thing, it doesn’t matter – and are defaulting on their tuition obligation, the school can work to collect it, and hold up the education of their child in the process. But that’s really it. Does it drive administrators and board members absolutely out of their minds to see a family on tuition assistance take the whole family to Israel for a month, or to see the High School junior drive up in a nice car (car + insurance, mind you)? Definitely. But ultimately, it is an unproductive and impotent rage. The family has the bechira chofshis to spend their money however they please, even if it doesn’t make sense to us, or to the values of the community, or even to halacha. If the school has recourse, they can take it. If they don’t, then the only thing they can do is to look at their tuition assistance process and make improvements – generally speaking, more information, better people, more time and energy – for next year.

(26) Larger, successful, center/left institutions may have better systems in place, by and large, than smaller, less successful, right of center institutions, in general, and without offense meant. It was this inverse correlation between the ‘frumkeit’ of an institution and its professionalism and fiscal responsibility that got me into the industry to begin with, and ultimately, dumped me back out into the business world.

The Buck Stops Here

First of all, I would like to thank my readers and commentators, especially Dr. Nachum Klafter, for discussing minimum tuitions. Of course, I should also thank Dr. Klafter's friend Anon1 who brought him here. Judging by the number of comments (the most I've ever had), it is obvious that tuitions and minimum tuitions are subject of interest. I will be putting up another post placed by a Former Executive Director this week.

But, for now, I want to discuss a subject that is really a related conversation, which I will call "The Buck Stops Here."

Recently, I overheard a conversation. A mother who had just received a staggering (full) tuition bill for 1st or 2nd grade is apparently is talking about alternatives, in this case public school. I am in no position to comment or speculate about their household's financial position or their ability to "afford" another decade of tuition. I do know they have already paid 25 years of tuition (most likely full tuition) for their other children, and can imagine that their endurance to continue paying another decade's worth of tuition is wearing them thin.

What I do want to discuss is the (scary) possibility that some of these full tuition or almost full tuition paying parents will actually follow through with their ideas and take their money out of an already strained system.

Every "product" has a price ceiling where "consumers" are no longer willing to pay for such a product. And, every consumer's breaking point is different. Of course, this should come as no surprise-it is basic economics. But, somehow, when it comes to Jewish Education, I think we would like to believe that Orthodox parents will keep paying what is asked of them and that there will be scholarships for those in need. It certainly is a testament to the value our communities place on Jewish Education that there are families paying $25,000, $50,000, or even $70,000 (plus) a year in K-12 tuition alone. But, despite the fact that the ceiling is high, we can't assume that their ceiling doesn't exist.

I don't know where the price ceiling is for the broad base of tuition paying Orthodox parents. I think it is extremely important for each school to know where their "clientele's" breaking point lies. I can only imagine that many schools are closing in on that ceiling (and not just because of this single overheard conversation).

So, I figure I will ask the difficult question: Where is your price ceiling is? Maybe you don't have one. Maybe you do have one. Or, maybe you are like me, and you don't know where your ceiling is (but know that you do have .

I'm not sure that a price ceiling can be stated in terms of dollars since that figure can change with time. Maybe your price ceiling is better stated in other terms: willingness or limits to working more hours or extra jobs, willingness or limits to amounts of debt financing, willingness or unwillingness to engage in family planning, willingness or limits to frugality, etc, etc, etc.

While I am concerned about people of limited means having to opt out of a Yeshiva education for their children, I am just as concerned that people who have reached their limits will opt out, leaving the current system in a state of collapse (as opposed to the current "crisis.")

I welcome anonymous comments. But, please, if you are commenting anonymously pick a number (Anon1, Anon2, Anon3, etc.)

The Minimum Tuition Debate

The Fall 5766/2005 Jewish Action, featured an entire spread of articles on tuition and financial issues in yeshivot and day schools, appropriately titled "The Tuition Squeeze." One particular article, by Dr. Nachum Klafter of Cincinnati, entitled "In Defense of Tuition" prompted a continued debate in the Spring 5766/2006 issue of Jewish Action.

In the original article, Dr. Klafter (executive VP and education committee chairman for the Cincinnati Hebrew Day School Board) made the case that "Jewish Day School education is Orthodox Day School education is already highly subsidized." He referenced figures indicating that, on average, tuition payers in Orthodox schools are "paying just a little over half of the cost of the children's education [57%]." He asked "if it costs $13,000 to educate your son or daughter, how much of this money can you expect others to provide?" And, he made the case for minimum tuitions, writing "Many people I have spoken with consider me insensitive for suggesting that the school require a non-negotiable minimum tuition fee (below which no scholarships are available, regardless of income level) of 25 to 30 percent of the total amount it costs the school to educate a child." Lastly, Dr. Klafter makes the case that schools must operate as businesses, as uncollected tuitions threaten the very existence of the schools.

There is no doubt, in my mind at least, that this piece in Jewish Action was the most uncomfortable read. It challenged everyone directly involved in day schools and yeshivot: the administrators, the lay leaders, and the parents.

And, to date, this is the only article that has fueled further debate in the Letters to the Editor. The Vice President of Politz Day School in Cherry Hill, NJ, Dr. Noah Lindenberg, wrote to Jewish Action stating "I strongly disagree with Dr. Klafter when he suggests a minimum tuition policy. This self-destructive policy would inevitably preclude many well-meaning but poor children from obtaining the ultimate Jewish a value, a yeshivah education. Grants there will always be those who take advantage of lax tuition policies, but that is the price we must pay to ensure that not even one legitimate sutdnet is turned away because of a lack of means."

While my heart wants to agree with the challenger (Dr. Lindenberg), but my head gets in the way. My head tells me that minimum tuitions are fast becoming a necessity. As Dr. Klafter so aptly states is his response to the challenger, "Jewish Day Schools run on money-not on sentiment."

And, apparently, I am not alone in my thoughts on minimum tuitions. According to this article in Los Angeles's Jewish Journal, sent to me by a friend and loyal reader, minimum tuitions are soon to become a reality in some locales:

At Yeshiva Rav Isacsohn Toras Emes, the two principals, Rabbi Berish Goldenberg and Rabbi Yakov Krause, handle financial aid personally. Last year, the school allocated more than $2 million in tuition subvention. Goldenberg estimates that only 350 to 400 of his 1,100 students are paying full tuition, which added to fees comes to about $12,000 a year for the first child (as at most schools, there is a sibling discount and teachers get an automatic break).

The parent body includes many teachers at other schools, as well as rabbis and Jewish communal professionals who serve the wider community. Many of them have large families.

Toras Emes is currently phasing in a minimum tuition requirement of $3,500, so that every family is paying something. (Goldenberg expects exceptions to that minimum, too.)

Like most yeshivas, Toras Emes functions in the red, constantly begging and borrowing to make payroll and pay bills.

I don't doubt that LA's Toras Emes, a Yeshiva World school, is alone in having only a small percentage of students enrolled paying full tuition (32%, in this case). Nor do I doubt that Toras Emes is alone in its inability to make payroll, as I know a number of (now former) employees of a number of different Yeshivot that were never paid for their services. Unfortunately, lack of regular funding (tuition being a regular source) and payment for services, is a vicious cycle that feeds off each other, especially when those who need paid are tuition payers themselves!

The subject of minimum tuitions brings tears to my eyes. Dr. Lindenberg rightly points out that there will be casualties, if non-negotiable minimum tuitions were ever instituted. I already know of a family that is unable to enroll all of their children in day schools due to the minimum tuition offered by the school (I don't believe that there is an official minimum tuition policy in their community, but the minimal tuition required per child is well beyond their reach). This coming year, they will be homeschooling all of their children.

Yet, others rightly worry about the financial viability of current schools and worry about the future. Parents, even parents with respectable and steady incomes, are finding themselves stretched to the max, barely able to cover their own tuitions, much less tuitions for others. And, there are fewer and fewer gvirim who are able or willing to underwrite the operating costs of a school.

While I doubt that a community could ever institute a completely non-negotiable minimum tuition, I do see some advantages of making a minimum tuition known and enforcing it, as permissible by halacha. One advantage that I can see if that everyone would be contributing and no family would be perceived as completely "freeloading." The sinah caused by the perception that some are freeloading, whether justified or unjustified, is a serious issue.

Another advantage, perhaps bigger advantage, would be that young people (hopefully even young unmarried people) would be forced to discuss and plan for the future. I have heard too many young people say tuition is not a concern for them because "that's what scholarships are for." While I believe in scholarships, communal support, and more for our schools (as I hope I've demonstrated), I also realize that community support and endowments, etc are not strong enough today to take care of the present and the near future. I would like to believe that if young people understood their fiscal responsibility to their own children and to the klal, that they would be forced to make different decisions regarding earning, spending and debt, and saving. They may never be able to pay full tuitions, even for a "smaller" family. But, they would think twice about many things. And, even if young people still decided not to think about financial issues on their own initiative, maybe grandparents and future grandparents would sit them down for a good talk and plan session.

From what I can see, minimum tuitions are becoming more and more of a reality as it is, whether or not the policy is official. The disadvantages are obvious. The advantages are also present.

What do you think?

Support Israel by Encouraging President Bush and Secretary Rice
Sign the OU-IPA Petition!

A most wonderful friend of ours sent an email requesting that we sign the OU-IPA Petition and publicize. The petition is to thank President Bush and Secretary Rice for their staunch support of Israel as she struggles for her existence and fights the terrorists on her southern and northern borders.

Please go to the link and sign this important petition. It will only take a few seconds of your time and while you are there, you can also donate to the OU's Israel Emergency Fund if you are still looking to give during this time of war.

The OU-IPA division will be delivering the petition on Tuesday, so don't delay.

The text of the petition can be found at the link. Other bloggers, feel free to post the same. Let's get the word out.