Solomon Schechter Schools want to drop out of USCJ

Solomon Schechter Schools want to drop out of USCJ

The opinions expressed on this webpage represent those of the individual authors and, unless clearly labeled as such, do not represent the opinions or policies of TBS

Schools want to drop out of USCJ

  • by Dan Ab [➚]
  • Thursday, July 26, 2012

    • Back in June, the leaders of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism tried to defund3 their college program, Koach. While the USCJ board delayed this step4, it seems like USCJ is still trying to separate from non-synagogue programs. The Schechter Day School Network, the coordinating organization for Conservative day schools, is under the USCJ umbrella and is considering leaving. Barely a year ago, they spent $240,000 on a name change and tagline,5 but the network and the school system it supports are not doing well. As a response to losing schools and students, The Forward reported that6 they are deciding whether to keep their small staff as part of USCJ, become a fully independent non-profit, work under another Conservative organization like the Jewish Theological Seminary, or join RAVSAK, a nondenominational day school network. The Forward’s article focuses on what this means for these day schools being Conservative, and the response7 from the heads of the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly also focuses on this question. However, the discussions of the Schechter Network leaving USCJ should bring up concerns about the institutions and priorities of the Conservative movement.

    In the Forward article, Rabbi Steven Wernick, the CEO of USCJ is quoted as saying, “At the end of the day, I believe that Schecter probably needs to become an independent 501(c)(3), and it needs to build a powerful board that will be focused on the priorities that are unique to Schecter.” Also “As a 501(c)(3), Schecter would be ‘more nimble’ when it comes to raising money from donors with an eye on Jewish education said Jim Rogozen, the outgoing chair of the Schechter board who was recently named the chief learning officer at USCJ.” As best as I can tell, these quotes seem to be saying that the top leaders of USCJ think that a core education program in the Conservative movement is handicapped in fundraising and adapting better priorities simply by being part of USCJ. These same arguments could be used to conclude that United Synagogue Youth would be a stronger organization by leaving USCJ. This does not speak well for USCJ as an institution, and its leaders need to make a much better case for its continued existence.

    There is also the matter of the priorities set in last year’s USCJ strategic plan.8 One of the plan’s goals was to break the silos of Jewish education; to focus more on getting the best possible resources to educators and children wherever they are. Most children in the Conservative movement don’t go to day schools, but a huge portion of the Conservative movement’s education resources are in the Schechter schools. That’s why it should be a movement priority to keep day school educators as regular and active members of the larger community of Conservative Jewish educators.

    It’s not clear that the current institutions foster the engagement of Schechter Network professionals with non-day school educators. Schecter’s director, Elaine Cohen, clearly didn’t want to work with Hebrew charter schools9, writing in CJ magazine that “We concluded that it would be demoralizing, counterproductive, and against the best interests of the existing institutions to offer such programs in communities where there already is a Schechter or community school.” Perhaps this is the difference of priorities hinted at in Rabbi Wernick’s quote. I hope the Schechter Network would only leave USCJ for another Conservative institution, such as the Jewish Theological Seminary, where they’d be under the same umbrella as other education programs (including Ramah). If the Schechter Network decides to join RAVSAK, it might benefit from sharing resources with more day schools, but I want to see these educators find a way to remain part of the broader Conservative education community, whatever the institutional framework.

    References

    1. ^Dan Ab (jewschool.com) ( http://jewschool.com/author/danab/ )
    2. ^➚ (jewschool.com) ( http://jewschool.com/2012/07/26/29115/schools-want-to-drop-out-of-uscj/ )
    3. ^tried to defund (jewschool.com) ( http://jewschool.com/2012/06/04/28779/uscj-wants-to-drop-out-of-college/ )
    4. ^delayed this step (jewschool.com) ( http://jewschool.com/2012/06/20/28908/congratulations-koach-supporters-now-what/ )
    5. ^on a name change and tagline, (www.thejewishweek.com) ( http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new_york/schechter_rebranding_effort_takes_hurdles )
    6. ^The Forward reported that (forward.com) ( http://forward.com/articles/158920/will-schechter-schools-leave-conservatives/?p=all )
    7. ^the response (www.huffingtonpost.com) ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-julie-schonfeld/solomon-schechter-schools-will-always-be-part-of-conservative-judaism_b_1666328.html )
    8. ^USCJ strategic plan. (www.uscj.org) ( http://www.uscj.org/images/4tomorrow_veasu_li_mikdash.pdf )
    9. ^didn’t want to work with Hebrew charter schools (www.uscj.org) ( http://www.uscj.org/Aboutus/Publications/CJ_VoicesofConservative_MasortiJudaism/Archive/PastIssuesofCJ/Winter2010/HebrewCharterSchoolsAVeryRealConcern.aspx )

    Original URL:

    http://jewschool.com/2012/07/26/29115/schools-want-to-drop-out-of-uscj/