Educating Toward Excellence in Midot
in the Dati Leumi Girls’ High School System in Israel
By
Adina Luber

Project Mentor:
Mrs. Simi Peters

ATID Fellows
2000-1

Table of Contents

Project Description and Abstract……page 3
Introduction: Midot and Torah Personality……page 6
Foreword: A Transformative Journey:  The stages of this project’s development since the beginning of the ATID year….page 7 
Chapter 1: The Policy Makers……page 10
	       Conclusion: Policy and Midot education….page 27
Chapter 2: The Teachers: Interviews and Interpretation……page 29
	      Summary: Teachers and Midot education…..page 71
Recommendations: How to educate toward excellence in Midot in the 
Dati Leumi Girls High School system…….page 74
Conclusion: Midot, Policy Makers and Teachers…page 76
Afterword: Recommendations for further research….page 77
Bibliography……page 80

Dedication
This paper would not have been possible without the guidance, support and wisdom of my mentor and friend, Mrs. Simi Peters. Thank you. Special thanks to Rabbi Chaim Brovender, Rabbi Jeffrey Saks and the ATID faculty members who assisted me with this project. May Hashem bless you with abundant nachas from all of the ATID fellows and alumni. 

Educating Toward Excellence in Midot
in the Dati Leumi Girls’ High School System in Israel
By Adina Luber
Adina Luber is a scholar in Matan’s Advanced Talmud program. She is a graduate of the Law Faculty at Bar Ilan University and is a member of the Israeli Bar Association.

Project Description
This project attempts to understand how Dati Leumi high schools for girls in Israel educate their students toward excellence in Midot. Recognizing that Midot education occurs within the larger picture of the educational system as a whole, the project explores the various aspects of the Dati Leumi educational system, focusing on their relevance to Midot education.

Abstract
In this project, the author attempts to understand how Dati Leumi high schools for girls in Israel educate their students toward excellence in Midot. Recognizing that Midot education occurs within the larger picture of the educational system as a whole, she explores the various aspects of the Dati Leumi educational system, with a view to their relevance to Midot education.

 The author introduces the paper with an explanation of the concept of Midot education and its importance as a component of religious education. After describing the transformative educational process she experienced during the initial stages of her research, she goes on to analyze various figures in the Dati Leumi school system who are significant with regard to Midot education. 

In the first chapter of the paper, the author describes the views of the policy makers for the Dati Leumi school system, including policy makers on the government level and religious-educational leadership policy makers. She offers interpretations of their policies regarding religious education and its relationship with modernity. Comparing the different policies of the two types of policy makers, she finds that while government policy makers are concerned that their population is not exposed enough to Western culture, religious leadership is advocating rejection of secular influences. The author concludes that both government policy makers and religious-educational leaders are not completely aware of the challenges facing their population, and as a result, are setting policies which are difficult to implement. Finally, the author examines the ramifications of the policy situation with regard to Midot education in the Dati Leumi system. Her conclusions are that the confusion and lack of clarity which characterize the policies of this system are inhibiting the ability of the system to deal with its numerous religous educational problems. As a result of the necessity to deal with other crises, Midot are inevitably neglected and do not reach the policy makers’ agenda.

In the second chapter, the author explores an additional level of the educational system, the teachers in Dati Leumi girls’ high schools, while attempting to understanding their Midot educational goals.  She describes the interviews she conducted with ten mekhankhot and mekhankhim in various girls’ high schools regarding their educational philosophies and strategies, focusing on religious character education. Through interpreting the teachers’ statements, the author attempts to understand the challenges and problems the Dati Leumi school system is facing with regard to religious education and the connection of these challenges to Midot education in particular. Finding that this school system is experiencing a Midot crisis, she suggests several reasons for this problem, such as lack of time to focus on Midot due to prioritization of academic achievement, the dire need to deal with religious commitment problems, and the exposure of its students to popular culture, which contains negative Midot content. However, the author finds that the Midot crisis is being dealt with by the system’s educators, who are consciously using indirect methods of teaching Midot  and setting a personal example as outstanding role models. 

Given the findings of her research of teachers, the author presents several general recommendations which schools may consider implementing in order to further Midot development. These include cultivating the Midot awareness of teachers through training and discussion, and creating a positive atmosphere in the school.  

In the conclusion of the paper, the author compares the policy making level of the Dati Leumi educational system to the teachers’ view regarding openness and Midot education. She finds that while the teachers are aware of the necessity to increase Midot education and awareness, policy makers do not fully acknowledge the Midot problem, though it may be expected that the Midot issue will eventually reach their agendas.  Finally, the author offers recommendations for further research regarding Midot education, including the exploration of the roles of students, parents and the school principal with regard to Midot.
Introduction: Midot and Torah Personality
Torah educators today face the difficult challenge of inculcating in their students not only knowledge of Torah sources and a strong commitment to Halakha, but also a desire to strive toward self-improvement. Educating students to live their lives guided by ethical principles and ideals should be viewed as an important humanistic educational goal even in a secular system. However, Torah educators have an even greater responsibility to teach students how to develop their characters, since positive character traits or “good Midot” are one of the most vital components of the Jewish religious personality.
 
The term Midot is not easily defined, because it borders on many aspects of the religious personality. For instance, many Midot, such as Hessed, facilitate the performance of Mitzvot Bein Adam L’havero. However, when I refer to Midot, I do not mean the performance of Mitzvot per se. What I include in my definition of Midot is the commitment to introspection and improvement of personal character traits. This awareness should inevitably lead to healthy interpersonal relationships with others. 

The list of desirable Midot is endless. The Torah [Shmot 34:6-7] attributes thirteen Midot to G-d, including patience (Erekh Apayim), lovingkindness (Hessed), truth (Emet) and forgiveness (Noseh Avon). Pirkei Avot is devoted to the importance of Midot development. According to our sages, positive Midot include humility and respect for our fellow man (especially Torah scholars). Negative traits such as greed, stinginess and anger should be avoided. These are but a few examples of the Midot every Jew is expected to be aware of.

As an educator and future parent, I wanted to understand how these qualities might be developed in the postmodern world, where many alternative values compete with the Torah ideology we strive to transmit to our students. My interest in exploring the Midot issue also stemmed from my personal experience and frustrations as a product of the Dati Leumi school system in Israel. 

Foreword: A Transformative Journey:
 The stages of this project’s development since the beginning of the ATID year 
Stage One:
Beginning to understand the educational and social issues raised by my project proposal 
The original proposal for this project, which I wrote over a year ago, suggested that the model of the Midot curriculum in the Beit Yaakov (Haredi girls’) school system might be used as a best practices model and applied to Dati Leumi schools. In general, the Beit Yaakov school system’s method of teaching Midot is through direct instruction. The class curriculum includes Midot classes in which issues such as Tzniut, Hessed, Anavah and Kavod are discussed. School activities also revolve around this theme. However, indirect methods are also used. The reason that these schools had seemed like a best practices model was because of their high level of awareness regarding the importance of Midot education. The comparison was to be made by means of researching the Beit Yaakov Midot curriculum and conducting a practical survey among Dati Leumi educators about applying the Beit Yaakov model within the Dati Leumi system. Finally, I proposed suggesting an actual curriculum for teaching Midot.

This proposal, which had seemed fairly simple at first, proved to be more complex than I could have possibly imagined. As a lawyer, but a novice in professional educational matters, I lacked the proper analytical tools needed to tackle an educational issue. Furthermore, I realized that I was operating on the basis of a number of untested assumptions, including the assumption that Dati Leumi girls’ schools are not teaching Midot because they do not know how to do so, or do not care about the issue. This assumption was a result of my personal experience. An additional assumption was that Beit Yaakov is succeeding in Midot education. When I began to look at things from a professional educational perspective, I found that these assumptions were simplistic. Although from the outset it had been clear that the suggestion to use one school system as a best practices model and apply it to another was somewhat problematic, I hadn’t initially realized just how problematic it was. Finally, it became clear that the scope of the project was simply too vast for a one, or even two year ATID project.  

The complexity of the task I had set for myself was revealed when I began to explore the educational and social goals of the Haredi and Dati Leumi systems. This exploration included reading a varied bibliography on the Haredi and Dati Leumi social and educational systems for girls, as well as conversations with experts in the fields of education and sociology. I also discussed the issue with peers, colleagues, and students. Some insights were even provided by overhearing conversations at bus stops in religious neighborhoods. Eventually, I reached a realization that the educational strategies of both school systems reflect their different values and priorities.

Stage Two: Understanding the identity of the individual to be educated: 
The girl in the Dati Leumi school system and society
After reaching a broader recognition of the complexity of the task I had set for myself, I decided to focus on examining the Dati Leumi system, which I had been assuming to be lacking in the area of Midot education. This focus led to an insight which entirely changed the course of my research and contributed to my perspective as an educator. Instead of focusing on a theoretical and practical comparison of systems or researching a best practices model, I first needed to understand the Dati Leumi system from an educator’s perspective.  Only then, would I be able to determine whether or not applying Midot education as I had conceived it is relevant within that system.or not. I could not attempt to educate students before understanding them and the environment in which they function, as well as the challenges they face.  

This insight led me to formulate what I view as the critical question with regard to the education of Dati Leumi girls: What are the goals and priorities of Dati Leumi girls’ schools in general, especially with regard to cultivating the student’s Torah personality? I realized that this question would be the key to understanding Midot education in the Dati Leumi system.

Chapter 1-The Policy Makers
a. Introduction
The first issue I set out to examine was the larger social context of what is commonly described as the Dati Leumi system. For my purposes, social context includes: a) community and family structure.  b) the policies of educational and administrative leaders and c) the school system itself. Obviously, a thorough discussion of the sociology of Dati Leumi society is beyond the scope of this paper. I found, however, that examination of educational policy and the school system would be essential to my exploration. Chapter 1 of this paper will present my impressions with regard to educational policy in the Dati Leumi school system. Chapter 2 will analyze the school system from the teacher’s perspective.

Policy makers are significant educational agents because they are empowered with making sweeping educational decisions.  In order to understand the role of the policy makers, I realized that I needed to examine bibliography and speak to the policy setters. The main questions I set out to explore were: 
(1)	Does the Dati Leumi school system have official policy with regard to religious education? 
(2)	Is the policy an afterthought, or is it meant to be planned and then applied? 
(3)	Who sets the policy? How “in touch” are the policy makers with the society they are catering to? Do they recognize the difficulties and challenges it is facing, and if so, how do they deal with them?
My first important finding was that there are few policy statements relating directly to the religious educational policy of Dati Leumi High schools. However, I realized that policy statements have a subtext. I began to read the policy statements with a subtext oriented mindset, looking for underlying messages which could contribute to my understanding of the policy makers’ role in the system. This reading was revealing, and its results will be presented in this chapter. 

b. I. Policy Making at the Government Level
In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the government policy makers’ view, I spoke to three policy makers who perform different functions in the system: Dr. Reuven Mamo, who deals with general Mamlakhti Dati policy; Dr. Yair Barkai, a curriculum writer; and Rabbi Shimon Levi, who is among the policy makers for a department in Misrad Hakhinukh dealing exclusively with Torah education.

One of the experts regarding the policies of the Mamlakhti Dati school system is Dr. Reuven Mamo, who currently heads the Elementary Division of the Mamlakhti Dati schools. The highlights of my interview with him follow. 

I asked Dr. Mamo about the policy of the Mamlachti Dati department with regard to Midot education. He explained that Midot as an educational system developed from a historical reality which is unrelated to the ideology of the Dati Leumi school system. The Mussar and Hassidut movements instituted Midot study as a direct response to the permissiveness and wavering religious practice within the community. It became a means of socialization of women into the religious community, since due to their exclusion from the intellectual world of Judaism, an ideology had to be created in order to preserve their religiosity. This exclusion still exists to some extent in the Haredi community, which indeed, still advocates rigorous Midot training. This ideology developed in Europe but was never felt to be necessary in the Sephardic community. Dr. Mamo added that Midot should not be taught as a discipline in itself, since compartmentalizing detracts from educational effect. In his view, indirect education always has a more significant effect. One of the ways the Mamlakhti Dati system accomplishes this is through the institution of the “annual project” (“Mesima Shnatit”), which requires all schools to organize activities around a values theme, such as Kavod (respect).

Next, I asked Dr. Mamo about his policy regarding the relationship of religious and general Studies. He said that the Mamlakhti Dati system prides itself on its holistic attitude: there is no separation between Kodesh and Hol (religious and secular). Each one serves the other. The uniqueness of this system is the “Mamlakhti”-national aspect. It does not believe in living a life shut off from the world. He encourages his students and children to be critical when they watch TV: they should be both Western and Religious. He thinks that most parents want their children to be educated like they were, meaning Religious-Zionist. The Mamlakhti Dati system does not differentiate between Ashkenazic and Sephardic applicants, and accepts students from traditional homes though they aren’t fully observant. Dr. Mamo commented that “it is too bad that the Haredi schools don’t encourage openness, they are wasting a lot of professional potential. Unfortunately, they emphasize outward aspects, such as uniform dress which differentiates them from others”.

Dr. Yair Barkai of the Lifshitz Teachers’ College prepares curriculum for Mamlakhti Dati schools in conjunction with Misrad Hakhinukh. He said in response to my question about differences between the genders in the school system that “in the Mamlakhti Dati system, there is no such concept as “girls’ education” per se. Boys and girls are taught the same things, except for Talmud, and even that difference is shrinking. The reason for the equality is the Western policy of Mamlakhti Dati schools, as opposed to the Haredi system”. 

Rabbi Shimon Levi heads the Torah Sheba’al Peh department in Minhal Hakhinukh Hadati of Misrad Hakhinukh. He commented that teaching Talmud is becoming difficult because of society and its priorities. Unfortunately, the first value on parents’ agenda is academic achievement. They emphasize the importance of subjects that “can get you somewhere” such as math and English. This creates an uphill battle for teachers, who must work hard to make learning Torah exciting and relevant.
b. II. Interpretation and Conclusions 
It appears that the policy makers of the Mamlakhti Dati (hereinafter: Mamad) system want their system to be a holistic, integrative one. (“There is no separation between Kodesh and Hol. Each one serves the other…[students] should be both Western and Religious… Religious-Zionist. We do not differentiate between Ashkenazic and Sephardic applicants. We accept students from traditional homes [and fully observant ones]…”). According to the policy makers, the Mamad ideology strives toward an educational system devoid of duality and conflict: it believes wholeheartedly in the possibility of creating a wholesome synthesis between religious and irreligious values, assuming that even secular values are but an external reflection of religious ones. An additional aspect of this integration is the equality of girls and boys in this system, which is a result of its acceptance of Western values. 

As a natural result of this holistic view, the Dati Leumi schools’ policy is to encourage openness and exposure to the secular world, while supplying students with tools to deal with what it perceives as the dangers of this exposure. With respect to openness, the Mamad system sees itself as the direct opposite of the Haredi system.

Regarding character education, Mamad rejects the policy of teaching Midot as a subject. This is due to what the Mamad views as pedagogic considerations: it is assumed that students cannot internalize Midot if they are taught as a separate discipline. The result of this policy is that educators are left to their own devices to provide students with an indirect character education. A few programs are offered by Mamad, such as the “mesima shnatit”, an annual project focusing on an “Erekh” (value) such as Kavod (respect). Additionally, it should be noted that several textbooks on “Arakhim” have been recently introduced by Misrad Hahinukh. However, these programs and books are intended for elementary school, whereas (to the best of my knowledge) no such material exists for junior high school or high school. 

An important point to explain in this regard is the difference between the terms: Midot and “Arakhim”. While Midot is the traditional, Jewish term reserved almost exclusively to describe character traits and their development, Arakhim means values, a general term which covers just about everything from democracy and human rights to morality and ethics. In my opinion, Arakhim is a secular, social term rather than a religious one. This observation led me to wonder whether the difference between my terminology and that of the government policy makers reflects a difference in our understandings of character education.  I have made it clear that I view Midot as part and parcel of the religious personality. However, it is possible that by using the term Arakhim, the policy makers are expressing their view that Midot are general, humanistic values and as such, do not necessarily belong in the realm of religious education.

An additional point which came up in the conversations with some policy makers, was the statement that formal Midot instruction in the Dati Leumi system is irrelevant, since it is only a means of socialization of women into religious life and not an end in itself. Today, both girls and boys are socialized by means of intellectual Torah study. Because they think that religious training beyond textual study is unnecessary, policy makers seem to be satisfied with the religious level of the students in their system and think that textual Torah study is sufficient for reaching a high religious level. Judging by my personal experience and research, these policy makers do not seem to be fully aware of the fact that many educators are unhappy with what they see as deterioration in the religiosity of students. Teachers are struggling to find ways to strengthen students’ sense of connectedness and commitment to leading a religious life. The extensive discussion regarding the phenomenon of the “Kipot Zrukot” (“the discarded kipot”, a play on the phrase “kipa sruga”, was coined as a phrase referring to Dati-Leumi youth who leave the fold) and “Datlashiot” (the acronym for “datiot l’she’avar”, meaning girls who have stopped being religiously observant) in recent years highlights this problem.

Though it may seem from the view of some policy makers that the practice of the Mamad ideology enjoys full success, not everyone dismisses the system’s problems. Rabbi Levi’s reference to the recent “Gemara crisis” is a poignant illustration of that point. He attributes the crisis to the emphasis society puts on academic and financial achievement, a value that clashes with spiritual Torah study. However, Rabbi Levi doesn’t explicitly acknowledge that the exposure to these problematic social values may be a result of the Mamad’s policy of openness. Because of this lack of acknowledgement, he does not advocate modifying this policy. Rabbi Levi thinks that the solution to the crisis is increasing the relevance of Torah study. The alternative strategy of modifying the openness policy doesn’t appear to occur to him. This may be due to the assumption that the population he is educating wouldn’t accept such a modification, since Dati Leumi society places openness on the highest end of its scale of values.

As a result of my exploration, I concluded that the government educational policy makers see their policies with regard to Torah education as “lehatkhila” (ideal, from the outset) as opposed to “b’dieved” (an afterthought). Their policies are not a result of experience, but rather a result of preconceived social and educational philosophies. Because their policies are set in advance, it is extremely difficult for the policy makers to change their policies in the event of a crisis. Practical, local changes in the Torah studies curriculum are designed to solve problems as they arise, but the problems do not lead to the modification and reconsideration of ideology and policy. 

c. I. The Religious-Educational Establishment  
 “Ha’isha v’hinukha” (The Woman and her Education) is a well known collection of articles by senior educators in the Ulpanot and Rabbis of the Dati Leumi community, which was published in 1980. Though a publication of this nature which appeared 21 years ago may seem outdated, the policies and attitudes held by these circles today are to a great extent alike, due to the similar challenges the Dati Leumi school system is facing and the slow turnover of senior educators in the system. 

The book’s focus is the cultivation of the girl’s religious personality. It relates to what the educators view as the challenges the system is facing, which stem from the exposure of the Dati Leumi community to general society:
1)	Permissiveness (immodesty in particular, which diminishes the woman’s value), materialism, self gratification and other values which clash with Torah principles.  
2)	The rapid progress of women’s higher education and involvement in the spheres of intellect and career, which is viewed (to a certain degree) as a threat to Torah family values (the extent of the threat is the subject of controversy among the various authors).
3)	Lack of respect toward religious belief and practice. Religion is seen as outdated, irrelevant and “uncool” (the most important consideration for many teenagers).

Throughout the various articles, educational policies are stated in several areas: 
1) 	The necessity to educate girls toward evolving into active contributors to society and the State of Israel (such as Sherut Leumi and living in settlements), despite the risk of exposure to irreligious society.
2)	The acute need to provide girls with meaningful religious experiences in addition to relevant textual study. Emotional experience (such as singing tefilla) can potentially provide their need for fulfillment and spiritual elevation.  Additionally, girls need to absorb the recognition that their main place should be their homes and rather than career.
3)	The need to provide the girls with the basis for a strong faith and the ability to respond to challenges to their beliefs as a bulwark against “kilkul” (becoming ruined, i.e. irreligious) 

c. II. Interpretation and Conclusions
As opposed to the policy makers, the religious-educating policy makers seem to be in touch with some of the challenges their population is going through. For instance, they recognize that in order to connect to Judaism, students need a variety of religious experiences, and have changed their policies accordingly. 

However, no real solutions are offered with regard to women’s role concerning career and family. Their goal of educating towards centrality of the home is overly optimistic and out of touch with a lot of the Dati Leumi population (parents and students) who value career and academic achievement. Regarding Midot education, very little policy is offered. Even Hessed education is given its chief importance on a national level of contribution to the country, as opposed to personal development, and very little mention is made of the teacher’s importance as a role model. These weaknesses in the policies of religious leadership have significant ramifications regarding the development of students’ Torah personality.

An additional weakness in the religious leadership’s policy is their ambivalent attitude toward openness. It is treated as a “one way street”: it is good to be open “inside out” (contributing to Hiloni society) but not “outside in” (absorbing Western values). I am doubtful as to whether a complete rejection of “outside in” openness is realistic in the context of Dati Leumi society What is even more problematic is that although students are expected to avoid the values of secular society, they are expected to be involved in general society for the purpose of contributing Torah values. Yet, the religious leadership policy makers don’t offer realistic solutions to living with this duality. I concluded that the religious educational policy makers are also not fully in touch with their population.

 c. III. Comparison of Religious-educator policy makers vs. Government level
I found that each sector of policy-setting leadership responds differently to identical challenges. It would be reasonable to conclude that the policies of Dati Leumi religious educational leadership are a direct response to the dangers posed by the outside world, and not “mission statements” which were formulated in advance in order to be implemented in the schools. This view of the role of educational policy directly opposes the perspective of the government policy makers discussed above.

In comparison to government policy makers, who emphasize the pure ideology of openness as an opposition to Haredi ideology, the religious educational leaders discuss the contrast to Western cultural values. I believe that the difference stems from the positions each of these groups occupy in Dati-Leumi society. The educators are out in the battlefield dealing with the practical challenges, which stem chiefly from popular culture. In contrast, the government policy makers, who are somewhat detached from reality and are thinking in more abstract, philosophical terms, speak of the “Torah V’avoda” ideal in contrast to the Haredi world, and see the Haredi world as the central threat to Mamad ideology. 

d. Challenging the traditional Dati Leumi educational ideology: the proponents of Torani education
The founding of the Torani schools came as a critical response to the Mamlakhti Dati ideology and practice. These schools received official recognition in the late 1970’s.
The Torani schools were established by parents who, frustrated by the Dati Leumi system, sought “a genuine, original, deep and comprehensive Jewish education…(with) the highest possible content of faith and moral values”. The Torani schools thought that Mamad policy makers were “fervently, blindly cramming the schools with everything taught in the secular schools and using only the leftover time for religious studies”. They claimed that the people in charge of its Judaic Studies curriculum “are not Torah scholars, G-d fearing or devoted to Torah…The Mamad is a system of compromise, causing concerned parents to choose Haredi education…it is a system dependent on secular opinions”. The result is “the disintegration of the values in religious society, ideological emptiness…compromise on faith”. 

It seems that the founders of the Torani schools thought that the policy makers on the government level were responsible for what they viewed as “a failure to develop a society of conscientious, ideological, moral religious individuals”. The founders preferred the views of the religious-educational policy makers (Torah scholars) who they perceived as unaffected by secular values. This was due to their understanding that the government policy makers (negatively called “Askanei Hahinukh”) were not in touch with the reality of conflicts and difficulties their policies of integrating secular and religious ideas are creating. 

In the previous section, I concluded that religious policy makers are also not completely in touch with the reality of Dati Leumi society due their expectation that students be sheltered from openness to Western values. The Torani founders who chose the policies of the religious leadership were fully conscious of the distance between these policy makers and Dati Leumi society. However, the founders’ goal was to change Dati Leumi society to reflect their value of rejecting openness. This change could be effected by starting a school system that would be directed by the policies of its religious leadership.

In conclusion, this analysis of the motives for establishing the Torani schools confirms the results of my comparison between the government policy makers and religious leadership in the Dati Leumi system. The government policy makers promote openness as a value, while religious leadership rejects openness as a central goal. The Torani founders were aware of the tension between the views of different policy makers of the Dati Leumi system. They rejected the Mamad’s policies and turned to the religious leadership as its sole source of policy.

e. I. Policy regarding the teacher’s role and training
In my view, the teacher is the interface between the policy makers and the students whom the policies are meant to affect, since he or she is meant to implement these policies. Because of the teacher’s pivotal role in the educational system, the policy makers are especially concerned with their training.

The meeting ground between the policy makers and teachers in the Dati Leumi system is reflected in Matityahu Dagan’s article “L’darka shel Hakhsharat Morim Ba hinukh Hadati”. Dagan served as the former head of the Minhal Hinukh Dati of Misrad Hakhinukh. The article discusses how teachers should be trained to implement the Mamad’s policies. Dagan’s description of teachers in Dati Leumi schools reveals a gap between the Mamad’s policy of modernity and openness, and the ideology of teachers in the system. 

Dagan expresses his satisfaction with regard to the massive entry into the Dati Leumi system, of teachers educated in the Ulpanot, Mikhlalot (religious teachers colleges for women) and Yeshivot Hesder (including the teacher training colleges attached to them). He welcomes the rise in intellectual and religious level which these teachers provide. Additionally, these teachers tend to be highly ideologically motivated since they chose the teaching profession over more lucrative options, and this idealism is a model for students. However, the policy maker is concerned by the poor skills young, Yeshiva-educated teachers possess for dealing with the needs of contemporary students. Their poor preparation is largely due to the fact that these teachers were raised in a system which did not put enough emphasis on the importance of general secular knowledge, science and  “wide horizons and familiarity with the positive intricacies of Western, modern culture”. The lack of openness among female staff is manifested not in deficient academic skills, but rather in their poor understanding of Limudei Kodesh, since they are not taught Torah Sheba’al Peh to a degree where they can become role models of “Talmidot Hakhamim”. 

It seems to Dagan that the academization of teachers’ training is an unsatisfactory solution to the openness problem, since academic studies alone cannot supply the teachers with “tools for strengthening of faith, and religious values and behavior as expected by the system”. Additionally, the behavioral sciences which are taught as part of teachers training programs “are not necessarily harmonious with Judaism…we have not yet developed methods and tools to deal with scientific schools of thought which clash with our worldview”.

Near the conclusion of his article, Dagan expresses his disappointment with the religious leadership (i.e. the Rabbis of the Dati Leumi community), which does not fully accept the Mamad’s ideology, leaving the government policy makers alone in the battlefield. He emphasizes the importance of providing teachers with information on the Mamad ideology within their formal training. 

e. II. Interpretation and Conclusions
Dagan’s article reveals a clash between the religious and secular goals of the Dati Leumi system, and the difficulty of implementing its policies. It appears that the Dati Leumi system is caught up in a state of perpetual confusion, finding itself combatting the goals it is striving to achieve: openness and exposure to modern society and culture.   

The system wants its teachers to be open, but they are not open enough, due to their deficient exposure to secular culture and knowledge. The system acknowledges that secular culture and knowledge clash with the teachers’ religious worldview. The exposure to this problematic clash requires the system to provide the teachers with “tools for strengthening of faith, and religious values and behavior”. In other words, the way to achieve the correct balance between openness and religion is to expose teachers to secular knowledge and then, as an antidote, provide them with religious training. 

Dagan’s view of secular and religious values as a clash directly opposes the ideology of the Mamad system as it was presented by its other policy makers at the beginning of this chapter. This alternative view presented the secular and religious values taught in the Dati Leumi school system as harmonious and integrated with one another. I was surprised to discover this stark contrast between these two views within the spectrum of government policy makers. It seems that there is confusion among the policy makers themselves regarding the relationship between the secular and religious values they are trying to inculcate. It is possible that the difficulty Dagan is experiencing regarding the training of his teachers, results from this basic confusion. Teachers can’t implement policies that are unclear to them. The policy maker admits that educators lack the tools to deal with openness (and if this is true with regard to adults, how much more is this true for students). 
  
Dagan suggests that the lack of openness among teachers can be cured by providing them with knowledge of Mamad’s ideology, as this knowledge can help them understand the correct balance between secular and religious values. I am doubtful as to the effectiveness of this solution, since the creators of Mamad policy are themselves not sure where they stand regarding the value of openness to the secular world. It is evident from the way many of the teachers themselves turned out (according to Dagan), that when faced with the choice of educating toward openness or closedness, the teachers prefer closedness. This choice is partially a result of the teachers’ difficulty in implementing the Mamad’s problematic, unclear openness policy. However, it is important to acknowledge that even a clear, well thought out theory of religious education incorporating secular values would not necessarily provide all the answers in today’s reality of conflicting values. 

Finally, it must be pointed out that Dagan’s comment about the Rabbis rejecting the policies of the government policy makers confirms my theory about the clash between the policies of the government agents and religious leadership.  

f. Conclusion: Policy and Midot Education
The exploration of policy was extremely fruitful for my reflections on Midot education.  I discovered that the educational framework within which I would have to think about Midot education includes a confusion of values. It appears that the policy makers for the Dati Leumi school system are unclear about their educational goals and priorities. This is due to the fact that this system is dealing with many problems simultaneously. On one hand, it is struggling with the deterioration of religious commitment among students. This problem is reflected in the “Gemara crisis” and the phenomena of the “Kipot Zrukot and Datlashiot.” On the other hand, the system is trying to maintain its place in the general, secular world by educating students to be open to irreligious influences. The Dati Leumi system is so concerned with the problems of religious commitment (which are in part a result of the conflicting secular and religious values), that Midot doesn’t make it to the policy makers’ agenda. When confronted with the Midot question, it is discussed as something there is little need for. Additionally, when Midot are discussed, they are referred to as Arakhim. As I pointed out above, the confusion of terminology may indicate that the policy makers aren’t sure whether Midot are supposed to be part of religious education at all.

Furthermore, the policy of exposure to secular society and its values, such as career advancement, may in itself clash with the goals of spiritual growth Midot education is meant to encourage. I found it ironic that Midot education is even overlooked by the policy makers as a possible solution to the problems of our generation. As mentioned above, Dr. Mamo said that the historical roots of Midot education were “a direct response to the permissiveness and wavering religious practice which pervaded the community… in order to preserve their religiosity”. 

Chapter 2-The Teachers: Interviews and Interpretation
The mode of research: Choosing teachers as subjects 
In order to understand Dati Leumi education at the level of the school system, I interviewed ten teachers and analyzed their statements. I chose to examine the teachers’ view due to their role as an interface between the larger system and the students. The teacher interacts with the school principal, who is the chief policy maker for the school and who maintains direct contact with the policy makers for Dati Leumi education as a whole. On the other hand, the teacher is also the main link to the students whom the policies are meant to affect. Due to the centrality of the teacher in the hierarchy of educational decision making and implementation of school policy, I thought that through speaking to teachers, I could gain valuable insights regarding the Dati Leumi school system as a whole.

This analysis led me to choose mekhankhot and mekhankhim as opposed to “regular” teachers. The role of the mehanekh (ill translated as a homeroom teacher)  as an interface in the Israeli system is more pronounced than the role of teachers who teach specific subjects, due to his/her position as a “mini-principal”, combining administrative and educational responsibility. She is responsible toward the school administration and the parents for every aspect of each student’s education. The mehanekhet, in addition to her role as a teacher of various subjects, serves as the class’ social coordinator, keeps track of the social dynamics in the class, helps to organize extra curricular activities, and keeps a particular eye on each student.  The mehanekh/et also teaches a course entitled “hinukh,” which often deals with values education, social issues, current events, and other topics which the mehanekh/et considers critical.  
.
Methodologically, I decided to adopt a suggestion given to me by Dr. Beverly Gribetz and conducted the survey in an anecdotal fashion, similar to sociological surveys. Though originally it had seemed to me that interviewing a small number of teachers was a compromise, I discovered that the ability to concentrate on quality afforded me a far more meaningful educational experience than a statistical evaluation would have. The extensive meetings with ten educators who offered different personalities and approaches to Hinukh, had a great impact on me and was also significant with regard to my conclusions. 

In order to include a variety of educational perspectives in my research, I chose teachers who work in schools from a wide range of Hashkafot, from “left” (liberal, “open”) to “right” (closer to Haredi). As two of the teachers hail from the same school, a total of nine schools were represented. The order in which I will present the interviews is according to the Hashkafot of the schools in which the interviewees teach, from left to right  However, t is important to note that I interviewed the teachers as individuals and not as representatives of their workplace’s official ideology. In an additional effort to achieve variety, I included teachers of different ages with varying degrees of experience in the research. 

How the interviews were conducted
Originally, I had planned to use a list of several specific questions (i.e. How do you teach Midot, etc.) for the interviews. However, I later recognized that this would defeat my purpose. As a lawyer by training, I realized that it was problematic to use “leading questions”. Authentic statements result from open questions, in which the witness states his or her own positive view (in comparison to leading questions which usually lead to the answers the investigator wants to hear). Furthermore, since one of my goals was gaining educational perspective from the teachers, I would have lost many precious insights and advice had I been limited to a list of uniform questions. I also realized that through listening to the interviewees talking about their work, most of the questions would be answered, whether explicitly or implicitly. The price I paid for the “free flowing” interview style was quite high, since this choice required far more effort in the organization of the research results. However, this choice was well worth the price, since it afforded fertile ground for a subtext reading. As discussed above with regard to policy statements, teachers’ descriptions of their work also have a subtext. The subtext consists of underlying messages about the population they are serving and the reasons teachers choose their educational strategies and methods. This subtext reading of the interviewees’ statements contributed to my understanding of the real situation of the Dati Leumi Girls’ high schools.

Nevertheless, although I had decided to use a less structured interview style overall, for the sake of minimal uniformity and for purposes of focus, I chose three essential questions which I asked in most of the interviews.  
1)	How do you prepare your students for becoming religious women in the modern world? 
I asked this question in order to gain an understanding of the teacher’s philosophy on the openness issue in the context of developing a Torah personality within students.
2)	What do you consider a success (an “educated student”) ?
The purpose of this question was to learn which elements of religious personality the teacher considers most essential and strives to develop, especially with regard to Midot.
3)	Please describe some of your most popular Hinukh classes.
 I chose this question because I wanted to hear whether Midot are included in the formal curriculum, albeit under a different title. 

Description of the Interviews
1) Michal
A sunny, easygoing woman of about 30, Michal is clearly enthusiastic about her 5 years experience as a Mehanekhet, and even thanked me for being interested in her work. A former psychology major at Hebrew University (where she was trained as a teacher), she taught problematic students and nursery school before returning to teach at her alma matter, which is a school that draws on an elite, upper middle class population. She likes teaching there since unlike “Ulpanisti” schools which hold a one dimensional religious outlook, her school has an open, liberal one. She teaches her 11th grade class Tanakh, History, and Hinukh. 

 Michal’s thoughts on Education
Her guiding principles regarding choice of Hinukh topics are: topics which authentically concern the girls and subjects which are new to them. One important subject is what is popularly called “Family Education” Since life after graduation is far more than just family education, the name was changed to “Eishet Hayil”. The class has addressed issues such as independence, values, relationships with parents, boyfriends, development of religious personality. Later, related Halakhic issues were discussed: Negiah, Taharat Hamishpakha. Michal presented the topics of difficulty in finding a partner, divorce and sexual harassment (especially in the army) in order to give her students the tools to relate to hardships in a mature way. “In today’s postmodern world, we tend to think that kids don’t need us. But they really need a lot of understanding, and don’t always know how to request it”. Michal decided to devote her Tanakh class this year to the idea of “Kedusha” which the girls connected to.

“An additional topic is forming their personalities. For me the most important is the religious personality. That is my mission here: they know they can trust me because I grew up in this school, but my message is commitment to Torah and Mitzvot, only someone from inside can say this. There is a phenomena of “I know all” (as opposed to the Ulpanot). Many of the teachers are working on strengthening the commitment: letting Halakha change you, as opposed to changing Halakha. We must be daring enough to set limits. The parents are also a problem in this regard. A pluralistic message causes confusion for the girls at this age. I would send a student who couldn’t deal with complexities to a Haredi environment where she would thrive. I insisted on teaching feminism, to make sure that it went together with Judaism. I don’t believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater”. 

“Our recent topic in Hinukh is relationships within the class. There are problems with cliques, egoism and serious students who don’t invest in social aspects. I encourage them to contribute to society. We all went to paint homes of elderly people. It was important for them to confront real poverty, and meet the idealistic people who are working with these senior citizens. Many girls didn’t show up. We discussed the problem of shouldering the responsibility together with classmates. As a result of this crisis, the girls decided to put together an agreement for “social responsibility”. I really believe giving the girls responsibility does wonders for their individual and group identity, and is worth more than 1000 Hinukh classes”. 

She teaches and discusses with the students ideas relating to religious personality:
1) Hassidut classes within History class (Piecesna, Carlebach) 2) Being a Modern Jew: the girls found Mendelssohn’s writings to be relevant to them. 3) How Judaism leaves space for individualism but also expects development, personal growth, Midot, Shmirat Halashon. “The girls don’t know about Shmirat Halashon: they need to realize that we shouldn’t accept society the way it is. I work on it mainly one on one, and show options of dealing with it”. 
This is accomplished through personal talks about self awareness and change (the idea of Teshuva). “They need to know this for their future as mothers, helping their children change. We did this through a guest speaker and the movie “As Good as it Gets”.

Michal defines a successful student as one who embodies religiosity, self awareness and giving to others. Or, as she phrased it: “Someone in my own image”. A capable student should become a leader.
“My bottom line is that if you bring yourself to the student, she will follow you every step of the way”.

 Interpretation:
Michal describes her school as pluralistic as opposed to the Ulpanot and the Haredi schools that have a closed, one sided view, but recognizes the difficulties in this approach with regard to halakhic commitment. It is apparent that she is working on strengthening her students’ commitment. Her students are given a lot of independence but Michal thinks they need more direction. They are overwhelmed by the complexity of the modern, religious world they are being exposed to. Though she didn’t use the term “openness” in this context, she thinks that the girls are sheltered and need to know how to deal with the outside world. Michal doesn’t view openness as an educational ideal, since her population has enough openness. 

Unlike most of the other teachers I interviewed, Michal uses the secular terminology for some Midot (social responsibility, contribution, self improvement) side by side with traditional terms like Midot, Shmirat Halashon, Kedusha. I think that this indicates that she relates to character education as a general, humanistic educational goal but also a religious one.

 She uses mainly indirect Midot education, but also some direct messages. Midot is clearly her number one priority. The range of Midot she offers is very wide, and Michal herself impressed me as an effective role model. Coming from a similar background as that of her students and being very much in touch with their challenges, she is able to reach them and help them “connect” to Torah, including the aspect of being a Ba’alat Midot. These goals are also reflected in her definition of an ideal student. I felt that the reason Michal is able to “get away with” teaching Midot extensively (as opposed to almost all of the other teachers I spoke to) is due to her unique personality and close relationship with the girls, in addition to the advantage of having been raised in their ranks.

2) Yehuda
A thoughtful young man in his late 20’s from a Hesder Yeshiva background, Yehuda has served as a Mehanekh in a girls’ High School for 3 years. His school, like Michal’s, draws upon an upper middle class, “left” population. In addition to Hinukh classes, Yehuda teaches his 12th grade class Talmud and Tanakh, but he wouldn’t cancel a Hinukh class even if he were pressed for time in other subjects due to the high importance of Hinukh. Additionally, he speaks to students on an individual basis and is accessible to them at all times.

Examples of topics he teaches are:
1)	Becoming acquainted with Israeli society: Haredim, Hilonim and people from development towns. This is accomplished by attending Gesher seminars and by visiting Bnei Brak for Shabbat. Yehuda thinks that the seminars are effective in triggering the girls’ thoughts about their religious identity and belief.
2)	Contribution to society as a preparation for army and Sherut Leumi.
3)	Knowing yourself and relationships with parents, love and marriage.
4)	Respect towards Torah scholars: This is done indirectly, by triggering discussions which will create an impression on the girls.
5)	Developing awareness of current events and ideas: post modernism in particular.

Yehuda’s thoughts on education
A successful student in Yehuda’s view is one who “feels a duty to find her way in life authentically: personally, religiously and nationally (“Israeli”), and leads an active life, as opposed to a passive existence. He doesn’t want students to imitate him, but to adopt the aspects of his personality they connect to. According to Yehuda, girls are experiencing difficulty in connecting to the religious world, and he wants them to clarify their personal relationship to Halakha. He is confident that most of them will lead a religious life. “Religiosity isn’t an end in itself. As long as the student is completely honest with herself it doesn’t even matter that she decides not to be religious. I educate them in a way that they will want to be religious”.

With regard to Hessed, the school runs a weekly “volunteering” program, which is mandatory for the 10th and 11th grades. In Yehuda’s opinion, it is a very successful program, since 12th graders usually choose to continue even though they aren’t obligated to do so. Yehuda doesn’t give formal classes relating to this, since he doesn’t want to preach. In any case, he says that the population of his school is very community oriented and self motivated toward giving.

Education toward Midot is of primary importance to Yehuda. It is mainly done by “going off on tangents” and indirect comments during classes and other indirect ways. He included within his definition of Midot education subjects such as self confidence and relationships with spouses.

Interpretation:
Yehuda impressed me as a serious, thorough educator who invests a great deal in his Hinukh. An intelligent, talented individual, he may be viewed as a model of idealism for his students, opting for Hinukh as opposed to more lucrative career opportunities. 

The girls he teaches come from strongly idealistic, Hessed oriented homes. However, like Michal’s students, Yehuda’s students are floundering with respect to their religiosity: belief and commitment to Torah. He believes that serving as an example of a religious person, and encouraging the girls to think about their Judaism will enable them to choose to be religious. Exposing them to secular Jews (like in the Gesher seminar) and to ideas such as post modernism, is meant to facilitate this process. Unlike Michal, Yehuda is optimistic with regard to his students’ ability to deal with choice and complexities in religious matters.

He is aware of the need to teach good Midot, which he defines widely to include not only Hessed and respect toward Torah scholars, but also self confidence and relationships. He strongly believes in teaching Midot indirectly so as not to seem like he is preaching, and purposely avoids the traditional terminology for Midot, Hessed etc. 

As I thought about Yehuda’s description of the difficulty of transmitting Midot directly, it occurred to me that this difficulty might be connected to the authority crisis which Dati Leumi society is currently experiencing. The fact that Yehuda is specifically concerned with the issue of respect toward Torah scholars reflects this crisis. The authority figures, toward whom there is a deterioration of respect, include not only rabbis but also teachers. Teachers cannot tackle the Midot issue directly because students view Midot as “preaching”, being told to accept values from their superiors.

3) Dafna
Dafna, a bright, pleasant woman in her late 20’s, is currently enjoying her first sabbatical after 7 years as a Mehanekhet, and is now busy studying for an MA and raising her 3 children. Her students hail from “left” to centrist Dati Leumi middle class homes. The school is characterized by its open approach to the arts. She studied at Midreshet Lindenbaum for a year after her Sherut Leumi, and continued to study Torah there throughout her academic education. She simultaneously majored in Jewish History at Hebrew University and received her teacher’s training at the Kerem institute, where she focused on art and literature (“not Tanakh and Torah Shebaal Peh, because of the irreligious, academic, critical approach”). 

Dafna’s thoughts on education
In Dafna’s experience, many of the girls are going through an Emunah crisis. They have very good, hard questions. They believe in G-d, but have difficulties with good and evil, Hashgakha and, especially, Mitzvah observance:“Why should I keep every minute detail, and minhagim which aren’t Talmudic?”. 

She believes that they can gain from her personality and life experience in order to reach their inner spirituality. “The girls feel that socially, they are part of the religious world but not fully “connected”. This is typical of girls this age. I share my own way of dealing with questions: living with questions. I don’t see myself as a model to be copied but rather as an option they can choose from: I am not perfect. My goal is to expose the girls to someone who reached a way of living in the modern world in a religious way”. 

Out of two approaches in Hinukh, Dafna prefers the first: 
1) Showing the students Judaism the way it is: “the authentic approach.”
2) Presenting issues in an aesthetically attractive way (“gimmicks”). This approach is very popular today: making Judaism fun, cute, something that speaks to them, user-friendly. For instance: showing how Judaism values individualism and self- actualization, an approach that is in synch with students’ views. This leaves the student stagnating. “I don’t believe in selling Judaism like that. Judaism doesn’t always fit in with modern life. You have to live with the contradictions and accept them because of “naaseh v’nishma”. The popular approach isn’t real preparation for Jewish life. I tell them that when they graduate, no one will care if they pray, study Torah before Holidays (as opposed to just passing the day, like they would a movie). Their parents only care that they keep the outer aspects of religion, so as not to ruin their reputation as good parents, not their inner spirituality”. 

“I think that the fact that I am a nice, empathetic person, who listens to them, and who is also an interesting teacher makes me a bridge to Judaism. I don’t believe in bringing Judaism to them. However, making things relevant to their lives is important. But the connection has to be authentic and not artificial”. 

Hessed: there is “Mihuyavut Ishit” in 9th grade, it’s mandatory for Misrad Hakhinukh. Girls serve as counselors in youth groups. They perform music for the elderly occasionally.

“We never call it Hessed. I think we should though. I don’t think that “Midot” is a bad word. It is too bad that in our circles, people are always trying to give it a more modern name. It bothers me that students will hear someone Haredi discussing Hessed, they will be turned off, it is not their world. I still think you shouldn’t start off by using those terms directly, but at some stage you should connect to the basic terminology. Why should we be afraid of using Jewish words? People think that using the secular terms (such as “giving” for Hessed) will bring students closer, but this is part of the artificial approach I can’t stand, and in the end it distances them from Judaism”. 

“Academic achievement isn’t as important to me”. 

Her 11th and 12th grade Hinukh classes include: 
1) 	Holidays: She focuses on the ideas of the holiday and not its Halakhic aspect: how the holidays help us build our personality.
2)	“Hot” topics on the public agenda or within the religious community, including topics “not related to Judaism”, such as violence. Post Modernism was an extremely popular topic, to Dafna’s surprise. 
3) 	Preparation for Sherut (Army or Leumi): the school’s policy is against the army, but 1/3 of the girls go anyway. Dafna encourages them to learn Torah for a year, since she strongly believes that this will have a significant effect on their religious lives. 
4)	Preparation for life as a religious woman: “Beino L’veina” (relationships between men and women) is taught in 12th grade as part of “Ishut U’mishpakha” (family education). She deals with relationships in general (accepting yourself, relating with family members, and spouse, being willing to change). “I don’t mean the Halakhic aspects like Negiah, I’m talking about what is really important”. Women’s role came up briefly, but the girls were not that concerned with the topic. “They grew up very privileged and are given whatever they want at home and in school. They haven’t been exposed to sexism yet”.

With regard to Midot education, Dafna says: “Next year, I want to teach about Goleman’s “Emotional Intelligence” which deals with self awareness. I really believe this is the most important thing we should be instilling. I give examples of people who fulfilled their potential in spiritual life and Midot. But I never phrase it as “Midot” because it sounds like preaching. I think knowing your place is the most important Mida: you can call it Anavah (humility). Today children are told they deserve everything, that they are whole people. We always ask them what their opinion is. They need to learn to say “I don’t know”.  They don’t understand that someone 20 years older has something worth listening to. We were raised differently, something has changed. There is no way to teach Anavah directly. I use stories, or a newspaper article. If the girls bring it up, we discuss it. I only bring things up directly during an annual summary talk. They will listen to a speech/preaching when it is on rare occasion. Yirat Shamayim, Kabalat Ol Malkhut Shamayim requires Anavah. You need to decide whether G-d is the center, or man. When I do say it, it is very strong, not soft. But my warm, loving, supportive relationship with them enables me to do it. I receive very positive feedback from students. The most important factor is whether they connect with the personality”. Her ideal student is one who possesses humility (Anavah) and self awareness: the ability to identify weak personality points and strive for self improvement. 

Interpretation:
I was impressed by Dafna’s well thought out educational philosophy and accurate perception of her students’ reality. She has a clear philosophy with regard to teaching Judaism in general: a policy of absolute authenticity at the cost of conflict with modernity, while emphasizing relevance. 

It is apparent that her students are going through a crisis in Emunah and Mitzvah observance: commitment to Torah, and “connectedness” to Judaism. This is partially due to the unique nature of her student body (artistically talented, finding self), and the difficult age. She prefers not to deal excessively with Halakha due to this problem. She has harsh criticism for the parents, and thinks that they are not fulfilling their roles in developing religious personality. 

Unlike Yehuda, Dafna does not push openness as an ideal. It seems to me that she, like Michal, is aware of the reality that there is plenty of openness already and that her precious time is needed for development of the Torah personality. She acknowledges that there is a Midot crisis, and is concerned with self centered orientation of today’s privileged students. Dafna finds herself troubled by the generation gap (in the Midot sense) though she is not much older than the students. 

Dafna knows what she is doing with relation to Midot education. In her view, Midot must be taught and prioritized over academic knowledge. As a rule, she advocates an indirect approach which includes disguised terminology, examples from Tanakh and triggering discussions. She realizes that this approach is different than the Haredi one, and is troubled by the distance of her students from Jewish tradition in comparison to Haredim. She herself draws much of her Midot teaching from non Jewish sources. Though she is frustrated by the necessity to disguise traditional Midot terminology, she does use this strategy, due to her recognition that her population has a hard time connecting to tradition.

Dafna appears to be a strong, positive role model for her girls. She is completely in touch with their worlds, listens to them in a genuine way, yet doesn’t get carried away with what students want and like. She presents things authentically and will even give an occasional “Mussar shmuess”, which will be internalized because of her unique connection to the students.

4) Rav Eliahu
A dignified, imposing yet amiable figure in his 30’s, Rav Eliahu genuinely fits the part of School Rabbi. A graduate of a Yeshivat Hesder and Yeshivot Gevohot, he began his career as a successful Mehanekh in a girls’ high school before his current position, which includes some formal teaching as well. The majority of the students in the school come from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and many of the students’ families are relatively weak in their religious observance. From seeing his interaction with students, it became obvious to me that the girls really look up to him, and feel they can turn to him for advice and guidance in Halakhic and even personal matters. 

Rav Eliahu’s thoughts on education
Rav Eliahu sees his work as a high form of Hessed. “The Mehanekh represents Torah, a link in the chain of Torah Sheba’al Peh. He is also a role model whose every word and action is open to students’ interpretation. He is also a guiding hand for students. It is too bad that most teachers aren’t aware of this power. They are too busy with grades, procedures, status and punishments. These things are also important, but the real goal of education is to understand the student, by finding a point where you can grab the student. Never educate toward something that the student doesn’t have inside himself”. 

Rav Eliahu says that teachers need to be honest-not to pretend or judge but really care about the student. The goal should be to advance the student to a level higher than his starting point, not perfection. His population is very problematic in this regard: many girls come from weak socio-economic backgrounds, and this means that they are exposed to influences such as violence and drug abuse. He certainly doesn’t want them to be exposed to the army. Girls are excessively concerned with their physical appearance and have little self-confidence with regard to their real abilities. Teachers need to be sensitive to this, and treat the student as a whole. He thinks “the Dati youth has a lot of potential to receive educational messages, compared to Hilonim”. 

Interpretation
It would appear to me that Rav Eliahu has all the indicators of a Midot role model, radiating a genuine concern for his students and even the school janitor. Subtle but powerful messages are transmitted by his surroundings: his office is very simply decorated with a picture of the Hafetz Haim, and a note hanging on his bulletin board keeps track of the money he owes the school for personal photocopying.

His criticism of his contemporaries’ focus on grades, equating academic achievement with educational success, is reflective of the values of general society (which Rabbi Levi the policy maker confirmed), as is the excessive obsession with physical appearance. The price paid for the neglect of personality development is very dear. The reality he is describing with regard to Midot is a significant discovery for the purpose of this project: the lack of investment of teachers in Midot development stems from their alternative focus on the value of academic success.

5) Miriam
Miriam, a delicate, petite woman of about 60 years of age, sat in the busy teachers’ room of the High School (the same school where Rav Eliahu works). A veteran of 36 years, she serves as Mehanekhet for the 12th grade, Racezet (coordinator) of the 12th grade activities and also teaches History, Literature and Civics (Ezrahut). Miriam was educated in the Beit Yaakov system and taught there for a few years, but her Zionist orientation led her to the Dati Leumi system and eventually to BA studies at Hebrew University. Her entire career has been devoted to teaching students from “lower class” homes. Miriam is still enthusiastic about her career choice. She loves being a Mehanekhet because of the relationship with the girls, as opposed to the distance of being an exclusively specialized teacher. She tries to teach each class for at least 2 years in a row, so as to develop a connection with her students. 

Miriam’s thoughts on education
As a Mehanekhet, she has the opportunity to be a role model, to transmit values (Arakhim) and messages. She sees herself as a role model of a religious, educated woman with wide horizons and with values, who is also a mother, or as she put it: “good at everything”. In Miriam’s view, the educational messages come through in every subject: “the girls know when criticism is genuine as opposed to lip service. They are sensitive to the way you talk to them, whether you apologize for your mistakes. Your appearance and integrity also transmit messages”.  

On dealing with influence of general culture, Miriam says: “of course, things have changed. The street influences. The corrupt media has a great effect. Elite schools turn a blind eye to serious problems, such as drugs. We try to deal with them and discuss them”.

The themes for Hinukh classes are: in 10th grade: Mihuyavut Ishit (personal commitment i.e. volunteering). Miriam is impressed by how seriously the girls take their work. In 11th grade: Preparation for Sherut Leumi: Giving (Truma) to society. Her school doesn’t encourage the army, but gives the girls who choose the draft tools for dealing with it. She encourages them to join the Torani department, so as to avoid exposure to aspects of the army which are problematic for a religious woman.

The 12th grade is devoted to their future as women. Most teachers use a booklet about stereotypes and myths in gender identity, but Miriam says that personally, she is not a feminist. She believes in educating the girls toward self expression and actualization of their potential. “As opposed to elite schools, I know the students here really need me. I also feel very appreciated. Girls in elite schools don’t know how to be grateful. The girls here are warm, they are raised that way culturally. They will call me years later with positive feedback. In more established schools, maybe the students don’t need a relationship with the teacher, there is more alienation”. 

A successful student in Miriam’s view is one who achieves the following:
1) Success in Bagrut and Higher Education (because of their problematic background)
2) A good, Jewish religious home 

Interpretation:
Like Rav Eliahu, Miriam describes a situation of students exposed to the negative influences of general culture (“the street influences”). She didn’t use the phrase openness at all, and it is not one of her central values (“not a feminist”) but does advocate “wider horizons”. She pushes higher education because this is the key to self actualization in the modern world: her population is too plagued by other problems  in order to reach the level of concern with academic success. 

Miriam is aware of her status as a role model of a religious woman, and transmits values indirectly through her own behavior and comments, but does not seem to have a clear philosophy on Midot education like other teachers did. She used the secular terminology exclusively (Arakhim and Mihuyavut Ishit), with no mention of Midot (surprisingly, taking into consideration her Haredi background). I would suggest that her approach stems from the special needs of her students.  Miriam’s starting point is different because of the special  needs of her population. These girls are receiving a lot of Midot from home (the warmth, Hessed and appreciation she describes) but since the school is the exclusive source of academic, intellectual development for many of the girls, teachers need to focus on these aspects (including developing self confidence).

6) Einav
A soft spoken, dreamy woman in her twenties, Einav is close to completing her first year as Mehanekhet of the 9th grade. She studied Special Education at Orot Teacher’s college, and received her MA in Educational Counseling while taking Jewish Philosophy courses at Hebrew University. The only unmarried interviewee, she runs a tight schedule between her homeroom and several other classes she teaches and her part time volunteer work at a factory for mentally retarded adults. The students in her school come from a variety of socio-economic backgrounds due to its status as a district school. The school also has a dormitory. However, since it is an Ulpana, the main student body is comprised of girls from middle class homes with strong religious tendencies. 

Einav’s thoughts on education
On choosing Hinukh, Einav says: “my ultimate goal is to become a school counselor, but I knew it was necessary to experience education from the inside. I didn’t even tell our school counselor about my counseling degree. I felt this would enable me to learn more from her”. She described disappointment and disillusionment with her job. Einav has what I saw as a unique, creative view of  education, but the school and students didn’t meet her expectations. “The girls understand that I am investing in them, but they can’t contain it all. They can’t deal with complexity, with the esoteric, creative. They need simplistic, clear messages. They love talks and simple stories, formal, experiential activities”. 

Einav is struggling with the school’s policy of including many special experiential activities in the curriculum. This leaves little time to accomplish anything educationally. “Students tell me that they are frustrated with the situation that most of their teachers are “12:45 teachers”: they leave school the minute the bell rings, and are too busy rushing to the bus to deal with students”. There had also been talk about training for teachers, but there was never enough time. “On Purim, the girls got drunk. I was very angry at the teachers. They care only about grades, and are ignoring the fact that the girls are hanging out in “cat’s square” (near Ben Yehuda). They deal with problems by formulating formal rules, but aren’t dealing with the root of the problem”. 

The most popular Hinukh class topic is: “me and my self image: personality type and  development”. The class discussed identity-gender issues. Einav also give workshops for group communication and cooperation skills and tolerance. She ran a discussion about the book on girls who left religion. “My students are at the age where they are dealing with doubts in their faith. Unfortunately, they don’t like anything intellectual, things which involve general knowledge or books. There are some good girls who I try to encourage to pursue these things. They do love arguments and discussions: politics, religion, Zionism”. 

With respect to Midot, Einav says: ‘Tzniut always comes up. It is important to know how to react to problematic clothes. There is no set Hessed program, but girls have a lot of responsibility in their dormitory. The school will be running a “Hessed initiative” for 2-3 days. I am planning on discussing “giving”, especially from one student to another. We have talked about it, but it hasn’t been that successful. I might bring them to see the place where I volunteer. Maybe because I am single and have more time, they see me volunteering and creating things. Despite all of the frustration, I do see a change in the girls. Their behavior is more refined. I do think that the stress due to the security situation has affected a lot of what went on this year”. 
On openness, Einav comments: “I think it is important for the girls to be exposed to secular people, because of Akhdut and because Hilonim are more complex. Being only with religious people is not fertile ground for thought”. She was proud of one of her students who wanted to join a mixed school.

In response to my question about preparation for life as a religious woman, she says: “I am religious and G-d fearing. They can see that religion doesn’t suffocate you”. Her definition of a successful student is one with the following qualities: a good listener, sensitive to others, giving, doesn’t talk in slogans, and is committed to introspective personal growth.

Interpretation:
Einav entered the classroom with high expectations, only to face disillusionment with the system and its students. The self centered orientation of the students makes it difficult for her to transmit the values she thinks are important. She is also faced with a staff whom she perceives as grade oriented and ignorant of the behavioral and religious issues the students are confronting: difficulty accepting faith and Mitzvot, understanding Tsniut and Midot, exposure to problematic society and even substance abuse. Part of this critical attitude may stem from her status as a newcomer to the system, but even more experienced teachers I spoke to confirmed the existence of a crisis. Einav raised an additional point which affects Midot education: teachers are overwhelmed and busy with their personal lives and teaching material and can’t focus on character education. The school’s goal to enhance religious experience by providing extensive experiential activities contributes to the inability to effectively develop Midot, due to the time the activities consume and their interference with the regular Hinukh schedule.

Einav seems to have all of the indicators of a genuine role model for Anavah (disciple to the counselor), Hessed (her own volunteering) and Tsniut (in dress and behavior). Unfortunately, her unique style and strengths are wasted on 9th graders in the particular constellation she found herself in for her first teaching year. Though I don’t think Einav thought this out, it may be that the inability of the 9th graders to reach the complexity in thought process which Einav wants them to reach also extends to their ability to deal with openness to modernity. Einav encourages openness and exposure to secular society so as to develop complex thinking and personality. However, she realizes to her dismay that her high school aged students can’t contain complex ideas. In Einav’s view, they are confused by the mixed messages of religion, spirituality, and self awareness on one hand and the values of secular culture on the other. Teachers lack the time, energy and educational vision to successfully solve this dilemma.

7) Rachel
Rachel is one of the most experienced teachers I researched, with  over 30 years as a teacher in the same school. Most of her students are from upper middle class homes with “centrist” religious orientation. She received her training at Mikhlalah. An outgoing, sociable woman, she also served as part of the administrative staff as a “racezet”-coordinator of special activities. Like the other Mekhankhot I spoke to, she considers the highlight of her profession to be the individual conversations with her class of 11th grade girls. 
Rachel’s thoughts on education
On the generation gap, she says that today’s students “need attention, have more fears, difficulties, feel that the world is alienating and unstable, that they are losing themselves. Even though people say our school doesn’t pay attention to the students’ needs, this is not true. My students talk with me about everything, even relationships with boys. I realize that they will only learn if they feel a connection of trust with me”.

“I am shocked by how ungrateful the girls can be. They don’t know how to thank me for going out of my way, and they demand more than the 100% teachers can give. Teachers feel they are “friers”. Possible reasons for this could be that at home they aren’t taught how, and that the generation thinks it deserves everything. I deal with it through small comments. I teach at another school where the girls have learning problems or come from difficult homes-they are very different and know how to appreciate what I do. The cream of society takes things for granted. I don’t teach about “Hakarat Hatov” (Mida of gratitude) but refer to it indirectly, whenever the opportunity comes up. The principal once tried organizing a Havruta program to study Midot (Anavah) but it didn’t catch on. You don’t become educated from talk, but rather from personal example and actions. The atmosphere educates. The problem is that in our school, girls don’t feel that there are any role models. The feeling is that in school-you are there to study for tests. Only when we have a special seminar outside of school do they really learn anything”.

With regard to Hessed, Rachel says that her students do “Mihuyavut” in 10th grade, after that most girls don’t do more than they have to, though some of them become Madrikhot in youth movements, and almost all do Sherut Leumi. 

On preparation for life as a religious woman, Rachel said: “We discuss this in 12th grade. Midrashot, career, emphasizing the home as the center. Too much emphasis on career affects the number of children (Rachel has 9) and the dynamic of the household. We bring in women speakers with and without careers. It really depends on the role models in their home. The girls have career ambitions which were unheard of even a few years ago. We sent them to the family education seminar in Ramot Shapira. The girls ask questions very openly today, they know everything, it is a very outward, bold culture”. 

Her ideal student maintains a high religious level: dresses modestly, is married to a religious husband, has a religious household, and a serious attitude towards religion.

Rachel doesn’t think that High School is an age where teachers can have a real impact molding and determining the girls’ religious personality. That can be accomplished later, in the Midrasha. An additional reason for this is the lack of time in High School: “there is too much material to learn, grades and achievement, a real race. The parents want it to be this way. There is no time for the educational process to occur. I am constantly arguing with the principal about this. I think that the solution is to return the duty of education to the parents. The teacher should be viewed as a partner and assistant. The parents have more influence on what the girls are doing: wardrobe, how free time is spent: TV, hanging out at the mall. The soul can’t contain such contradictions. I think the situation will deteriorate”. 

Interpretation:
As a teacher for 3 generations, Rachel communicates a message of despair and pessimism for the future. Note the powerful statement regarding religion and cultural exposure “The soul can’t contain such contradictions”. However, Rachel is aware of the fact that she is transmitting contradictory messages to her students. For example, with regard to preparation for life as a religious woman, the school is educating toward a contradiction: academic achievement is highly prioritized, but future careers are discouraged. As opposed to the other teachers I spoke to, Rachel herself doesn’t seem to have a well thought out philosophy with regard to educating toward modern religiosity. She doesn’t focus on dealing with the contradiction and trying to solve the problems it entails, but also doesn’t reject modernity. Rachel’s conclusion that the teenage years in general are not conducive to affecting change in students seems to be true in part, but it implies that she has surrendered her efforts to effect such a change. She relies on the post-high school Midrashot to fulfill this function.

The goals of Rachel’s school administration reflect the goals of the parents in terms of academic achievement. Academic accomplishment is prioritized by the school, and takes away from the ability to develop a religious personality due to lack of time and energy. The teacher who prioritizes religious development does not always receive the support of the system, and has to fight against it. 

Rachel points to the home as the major educational and religious influence. From her description it seems that homes are not doing enough, and she calls upon the parents to take more responsibility. In my opinion, it is true that the role of the home is critical for proper Midot development. However, this does not free the school and its teachers from the responsibility to teach Midot, since homes do not always fulfill this function. Furthermore, the aspects of Midot which can be learned in school are different than those which can be absorbed in the home. Even those students raised in homes where Midot growth is fostered need to see that Midot are prioritized in the school environment as well as the home.

Rachel describes the failure of the principal’s attempt to introduce direct Midot education into the curriculum. She believes in indirect Midot education as an ideal, but doesn’t think it is working well, especially with regard to the Mida of gratitude. The failure of direct and indirect Midot education may be attributed to the role model crisis Rachel describes. This crisis is characterized by a feeling of detachment between teachers and students who are “on different wavelengths”. Other teachers, such as Dafna, whose school isn’t experiencing a role model crisis, describe their efforts to indirectly educate toward Midot as successful.

Rachel only includes one Mida in her definition of a successful student (Tsniut), and that one Mida is defined superficially (clothing). She also affirmed Miriam’s statement about the gaps within the Dati Leumi system, between underprivileged and “cream” schools, with regard to Midot (especially hakarat hatov/gratitude). 

In conclusion, judging from Rachel’s experience, there is a Midot crisis in her population. The problem is partially a result of influence from secular culture which revolves around self gratification, but is reinforced by the lack of attention the staff is giving to Midot due to the emphasis on academic achievement.

8) Shalhevet
A busy young Kollel wife and mother of three small children, Shalhevet is currently in her 4th year as a Mehanekhet, taking on 7th grade for the first time. Her student body consists of girls from “centrist” religious homes. She was educated at Mikhlalah where she majored in Tanakh and Counseling. Although she initially enjoyed her job, Shalhevet has just decided to quit her position as Mehanekhet and instead specialize in teaching Tanakh. Due to the tremendous responsibility, time investment and emotional energy which this job entails, she feels that it is too stressful to balance it with managing a happy household.

Shalhevet’s thoughts on education
On Midot, Shalhevet says that in her school, it is customary to call the teachers by their first names. Shalhevet insists that her students refer to her as “teacher”, since there is not enough respect toward teachers or elders: “they have a lot of Hutzpah” The girls are very competitive with grades. They aren’t nice to each other. She works on this indirectly through group activities. There are also problems of religiosity: girls walk around dressed shockingly immodestly. The school emphasizes Tsniut in dress, but Shalhevet thinks the focus on this issue is exaggerated. She says that: “the girls are sick of hearing about Tsniut. I never use that term, instead I talk about honor, covering, respecting school rules. In general, the school is very strict, like Beit Yaakov”.  Hessed: the girls volunteer with children with difficulties. Girls who aren’t on a high enough religious or academic level can’t volunteer. 

To Shalhevet, a successful student is one who is respectful toward others, isn’t a “snob”, possesses ambition to develop good Midot (as opposed to stagnation) such as honesty, not to shame others etc. She should not be excessively focused on academic success (at the price of neglecting personal growth).

Interpretation:
There are several insights regarding the Midot situation which I learned from Shalhevet’s brief statement. 
1) Her decision to leave Hinukh confirms the complaint Einav’s students voiced with  regard to the lack of time teachers have for developing a personal relationship which can affect their religious personality. This is due to the fact that the majority of Mekhankhot are young mothers juggling two serious educational careers (their students and children).
2) Shalhevet describes a Midot crisis: Hutzpah, improper behavior towards others, lack of modesty in dress. 
3) She is teaching Midot directly but not using all of the traditional terminology so as not to turn off the girls. There is an especially acute sensitivity to Tsniut because of the association of this issue to “preachy, Beit Yaakov” styles of education. I interpret this to mean that the girls are repelled by the “Hitzoni” (outer, superficial) way in which Midot are presented to them, especially Tsniut, which is presented as a matter of dress code only. The students see it as a means of the school to discipline and control them. They don’t really understand the value of modesty, partially because they are not taught about its inherent meaning. 
4) Shalhevet is aware of the price of academic success but  instead of accepting the priorities of her students and their families and society, chooses to prioritize Midot and transmits this priority directly to the girls. 

9) Ruti
Ruti, a lovely, sophisticated woman in her mid 30’s, has an impressive record of 15 years as a teacher, 13 of them as a Mehanekhet. Educated at Mikhlalah, she is the busy mother of a large brood of youngsters in addition to holding a full time job and studying for an MA in school management. It is apparent that Ruti really likes what she does. Though she teaches sciences as a specialized teacher, her chief source of satisfaction is her work as a Mehanekhet of the 11th grade. The school leans toward the “right” in its religious outlook, and students come from lower to middle class homes.

Ruti’s thoughts on education
Ruti described her school as one which (unlike other schools) prioritizes the social aspect of school as opposed to emphasis on academic achievement. Teachers are encouraged to teach subjects of social interest and have the students work in groups. Joint activities between the higher and lower grades are held occasionally. The school has a special education class, whose students fully participate in all social school activities. A large proportion of the schedule consists of trips, guest lectures and other informal activities. Parents are aware of the social emphasis, and their support is vital to the success of its approach.

Emunah (religious belief) is taught mainly by sending the girls to seminars outside of school a few times a year. This has been proved to be more effective than just teaching texts, and is a method used by all of the Ulpanot. A recent popular topic was “Openness and its Price”. Similarly, 12th graders are farmed out to a seminar on the Jewish Home, as an informal setting can tone down the cynicism with which the students might approach such a “touchy” topic in a more formal, in-school setting.

“Arakhim are not discussed here as much as in Beit Yaakov. I don’t think their approach, teaching it as a subject is good, because it becomes just another subject, like math (Ruti used the word “Hitzoniut”). I teach it within Torah lessons (though the time element is problematic, I need to use most of the time for teaching the material), through monthly topics the school chooses, and other ways “through the back door”. I see that it is effective because when I see the girls working together, it is apparent that the girls respect each other (of course, there are exceptions). Relationships with parents are problematic, because they are teenagers. I don’t know how Haredi children skip adolescence! Teachers are always discussing the Midot problems-Tsniut,  Tefillah…Tsniut is emphasized on an Halakhic plane and as a matter of self respect for the girls”. In general she is satisfied with the Tsniut of graduates, but thinks this can really only be measured a few years after High School. This is due to the significant effect of the social exposure the girls experience during Sherut Leumi. 90% of a students’ Midot education comes from the home, unless it is a school with a dormitory. This is problematic today, since students spend most of their waking hours at home watching TV. Their entire vocabulary and world of associations, is from TV. I don’t have a TV. They don’t read books. They have a kind of screen in their brains, it is very difficult for me to penetrate it”. 

Hessed: Volunteering  is mandatory in 9th grade, and she would like girls to continue on their own initiative. Many of them become Madrikhot in youth movements. They do Sherut Leumi. 
 
Preparation for becoming a religious woman: “We discuss the balance between career, studies and home. Also-women’s role and readiness for marriage. Girls come from a variety of homes: Some will want to marry a Kollelnik, others will not sacrifice their careers and want to delay motherhood. I want them to hear all of the opinions, and to realize what the issues are: sacrifice, trying (hishtadlut)”. 

“We are currently in the midst of planning a meeting with secular students. We see it as part of the development of the girls’ personality, not only the religious-belief aspect but also accepting the other. That is our uniqueness in comparison to Haredi schools. Exposing the girls to different things is part of their education. Ultimately, most emerge from the school with their religious priorities straight”. She defines a successful student as a woman who embodies the following characteristics: “Has her priorities straight” regarding the following: religiosity, idealism, a desire to maximize potential, openness, connection (Hitkhabrut) to Torah, viewing it as a guide to life (Torat Haim). It is a failure if a girl goes to the army”. In Ruti’s experience, “most girls turn out fine”.

Interpretation
Regarding openness, Ruti clearly places a priority on openness and exposure to positive aspects of secular culture and people (for instance, by doing Sherut Leumi), perhaps because her population tends toward closedness (as opposed to Michal and Dafna’s students on the other side of the spectrum of Hashkafot). On the other hand, she bemoans her students’ exposure to the media and people whose observance is lax. She is also disturbed by the distance between teacher and students due to the generation gap affected by the media culture. What needs to be examined is whether the students can reach the correct balance within the paradox of this openness policy. The seminar “Openness and its price” which she sent the girls to is a poignant example of this existential dilemma. Ruti refers to Haredi schools as a contrast to her ideology and practice: openness, interaction with Israeli society, and indirect Midot education. 

The situation she describes reflects a Midot problem, but not a crisis: the girls interact well with each other, but lack Tsniut (interestingly, her definition of Midot includes Tefilla as well). 

The school’s social emphasis can be viewed as an unusual example of indirect Midot education. However, though having good Midot can contribute to one’s social skills, there is much more to Midot education than their social aspect (such as the internal development of humility and modesty). Ruti points out that the social emphasis is made possible due to the priorities of students’ parents. Parents are willing to sacrifice academic achievement (to an extent), so that their daughters’ social personalities can be developed. The price which Ruti’s students’ parents choose to pay shows that they are different from parents in the other schools in this survey who prioritize academic achievement. 

Ruti’s term for Midot is the general one: Arakhim. However, she clearly believes Midot are an essential part of religious education. This led me to realize the inaccuracy of equating Arakhim with values education as a secular endeavor. It seems as though the word Midot has been replaced by modern terminology. The term Arakhim is being used for reference to Midot because it is a word which has more meaning to the contemporary Israeli (teachers and students alike). However, as mentioned above, several other teachers think that the shift of terms is deliberate. They think that the fact that teachers are refraining from using traditional terminology, shows that they are uncomfortable with transmitting traditional values to students.   

Ruti’s method of indirect Midot education is an outgrowth of her general belief that informal education is always the most effective (and Midot are too important an issue to sacrifice this efficiency). Ruti also brings up the problem of compartmentalization (which we met with briefly in the chapter on government policy makers) of Midot as its own discipline, while it is really meant to affect the whole person. 

Like Rachel, she thinks that role models of religious women in the home are extremely important. In my opinion, Ruti herself appears to be a very positive role model for the girls, in terms of Midot and otherwise.

10) Leah
 I met Leah in her modest Jerusalem home. The serene mother of several grown children, Leah looks much younger than a veteran of 32 years of teaching experience. She was one of the first Mikhlalah graduates, choosing Judaic studies and Hinukh as an ideal. Leah has been teaching at her current Haredi-Leumi school for 7 years, following an extensive career in Dati-Leumi High schools for girls with learning disabilities, and still loves her work. Her current students come from a variety of schools: Mamad and Beit Yaakov. 

Leah’s thoughts on education
“There is a great generation gap. 15 years ago, students were idealistic, wanted to be part of the community. Today, each youth lives for himself. TV is a plague. TV creates a situation where people aren’t socially oriented. They are self centered (“me”). TV is also a partial cause of the development of violence in schools and deterioration of values. Every year, I feel there is a change in the girls”. 

“Schools are very into changing the learning atmosphere into “experiential”. This is very problematic. There is a very extensive range of extracurricular activities. It is all meant to make the girls like school, to “relieve the stress”. 

We take the girls twice a year to meet a Gadol and we send girls to him if they have a shaila. We are against Sherut Leumi. This is part of our Haredi Torani Hashkafa. But if a girl decides to go, we give her advice and guidance. We make sure the girls know that the Rabbis (Steipler, Rav Meltzer, Sonnenfeld, even Rav Eliahu) are against Sherut Leumi.

Preparation for life as a religious woman: In Tanakh classes, I try to show the relevance to their lives. It is very difficult for them to internalize this today. The Holocaust is also very difficult for them to understand, I think this is because they have everything and can’t fathom a reality where the basics of life are lacking. I couldn’t believe girls didn’t know anything about the Six day war. I decided not to take them to Yad Vashem anymore because I saw it did nothing for them-they did not feel it. They are overstimulated and aren’t impressed by it. Similarly, they don’t know how to treat the elderly: they have no patience for them”. 

“Because of the openness: there is no “distance”, everyone is equal (for instance, “Mr.” or “Mrs.” is virtually unheard of among youth today). I teach them that Judaism is a hierarchy, not a democracy: it is based on respect, honor toward superiors. I think this message is slowly but surely absorbed by my students. Another price of openness is the loss of a common denominator with Hilonim, since the idealistic goals which our societies shared (such as aliyah absorption) hardly exist anymore. The lack of morals creates a gap between us. The openness difficulty extends to our own girls too. For instance, it is hard to educate toward Tsniut in dress. I want the girls to have an intuitive sense of it. They don’t understand that you can be dressed in black from head to toe, but it is still very immodest”.

Hinukh classes topics: 1) Holidays, such as activities relating to Western culture (Hellenization) on Hanukah  2) Tsniut (how to dress) Girls need to know that they must respect the rules of the institution, it is important for the future. 
Role of the Jewish woman: “The woman’s obligation is in her home: raising children, making sure she invests enough time at home. We send the girls to a course in Ramat Shapira, to listen to married women, professionals in the field of family education. 
I also give them individual advice on what to do in the future. I think girls should maximize their academic potential, especially because of the job market today.

Midot: We talk about them, not always formally. For instance: society doesn’t view it favorably when girls don’t get up on the bus for the elderly. In Torah Sheba’al Peh, they learn about Midot.
Hessed: We send them to “mihuyavut ishit” in 9th and 10th grade (for Misrad Hakhinukh). Some girls volunteer on their own. During Pessah vacation we send them to help needy families for a day. They also help the secular students in the neighboring school with their homework.

My main goal is to make sure the girls connect with Torah. I try to instill in them a sense of pride to be Mitzvah observant. They shouldn’t feel they are less than others, rather the elite, the role model, and do not need to apologize for who they are. A successful student is one who is motivated toward educating self in Torah, is part of wider Haredi society (Merkaz Ha Rav and further), married to a Ben Torah, runs a  purely Torani household, intelligent, maximizing potential by pursuing Higher Education in a religious environment.

 Interpretation:
Though a lot of her frustration with the younger generation stems from her previous work with less religious students, the problems Leah addresses are prevalent among her more Haredi oriented students as well. She is dealing with students who are heavily affected by the general individualistic, outward culture. Like Ruti and Dafna, Leah connects the exposure to popular culture to the Midot problem (respect to the elderly, relationships with friends, etc.) However, as opposed to Ruti, Dafna and many of the other teachers who viewed openness as a goal, Leah as views it as an enemy. Since openness to secular society has negative influences, Leah’s Haredi Hashkafa values closedness over openness. She rejects the possibility of using the complex values model of mainstream Dati Leumi education. 

Regarding preparation for the future as a modern religious woman: The “modern” part of the equation is only related to in religious or practical contexts, not as an end in itself: relating to contemporary halakhic topics, dealing with the reality of the necessity of higher education in the job market. Modernity must be fought (TV, immodesty, apathy), and not accepted as a goal.

Leah seems to perceive Tsniut on an outward level (clothing) and other Midot are related to similarly. (not getting up on bus makes bad impression). This reminded me of Shalhevet’s statement associating “preachy” Midot education with the Haredi schools. Interestingly, though the school is Haredi oriented, Midot are not related to in a completely direct way. Her terminology is secular: Arakhim, Mihuyavut, etc. This may be due to Leah’s previous teaching experience in the “left” Dati spectrum, but it may mean that even Haredi schools are beginning to shift toward indirect Midot  training. Though Leah is frustrated by the Midot situation among her students, and seems to think that even indirect education will not be effective, especially with regard to sacrifice (Hasameah B’helko) and patience, the school strongly emphasizes the Midot of respect toward Torah scholars and Hessed.

Summary: Teachers and Midot education 
The subtext of the mekhankhim’s words suggests that there is a Midot crisis in the Dati Leumi girls’ High School system. Teachers describe a student population which is increasingly self-centered, lacks respect and appreciation for teachers, and whose values are weakening. Educators are struggling with the challenge of dealing with Midot in this environment.

A variety of possible reasons for the Midot problem or crisis surfaced from the research. It is essential to emphasize that although the majority of my research dealt with schools, the school system is not to be viewed as solely responsible for the Midot problem. As mentioned above, the issues which schools are dealing with in the Midot context are a product of society (including family dynamics), policy and contemporary reality in general.
1) 	Schools are so busy resolving issues of Halakhic commitment and religious belief, that there is no time or energy to emphasize Midot. These problems are a result of contemporary trends such as extreme individualism and rejection of authority.
2)	Schools are so busy with promoting academic success, that there is no time to focus on Midot. This is either because of social priorities, as in the elite schools, or because of necessity, as in the schools with difficult populations. 
3)	In many Dati-Leumi circles, Midot are associated with appearances, superficiality and control or discipline of the schools. As such, they are associated with Haredi education, which Dati Leumi students do not “connect” to.
4)	Students of Dati Leumi schools are exposed to popular culture, including values that directly oppose Midot goals: respect, modesty, integrity, etc. In the opinion of teachers, students are absorbing negative values as a result of this exposure. For example, educators feel that a deterioration has occurred regarding respect toward them. This creates a vicious circle where the teachers can’t begin to teach Midot since they feel that students don’t respect them enough. Additionally, because the students are overstimulated by the fast pace of modernity, teachers must struggle to teach Torah and values in an exciting, relevant way. The extreme need to focus on relevance may detract from the students’ authentic view of Torah, which includes many aspects that may not seem exciting or interesting. It also makes it harder for teachers to come up with innovative, “catchy” ways to teach Midot. 
5)	One teacher expressed the opinion that that high school aged students may not yet be mature enough to understand the importance of Midot as part of their Torah personality. I disagree with this assumption. Students can be taught at their level of maturity, and teachers should not abdicate their responsibility to educate towards Midot development.

Teachers have various methods of dealing with the Midot problem. Some are not aware that there is a problem, or do not have a difficulty with the particular population they are dealing with. Others have given up on educating towards Midot due to their frustration and despair, hoping that as girls mature they will be more open to development. However, I was pleased to find that most teachers are not only aware of the Midot problem but are consciously dealing with it. The most prevalent way of dealing with the problem is educating toward Midot indirectly. All of these teachers are basing the majority of their Midot education on indirect methods: comments, individual conversations, disguised terminology, triggering discussions, sending girls out to volunteer, etc. For most of the teachers, the choice of indirect teaching is fully conscious, and is employed as a systematic method. By choosing indirect approaches, teachers are able to bypass some of the stumbling blocks previously identified, such as students’ aversion to traditional Midot terminology, and the lack of time to invest in intensive, concentrated Midot study due to the Dati Leumi system’s other priorities.

A significant finding was that the Mekhankhim appear to be outstanding role models of Torah personalities and Ba’alei Midot. They are fully conscious of the influence this has on their students. Several of them mentioned that they felt that their example had a real and direct effect on the behavior of their students. 

An additional finding which surprised me was that the amount of concern with Midot was (more or less) unrelated to the location of the school on the spectrum of religious outlooks. I had assumed that teachers in schools on the “right”, being closer to Haredi views, would be more conscious of the importance of Midot development. However, I discovered that teachers in “left” schools are just as aware of Midot as the teachers on the “right”.  On the contrary: some of the “left” teachers appear to be more conscious of Midot than “right” ones, and are constantly striving to inculcate this in their students. Apparently, regarding Midot consciousness, the personality of the Mehanekhet appears to be a far more significant  factor than the Hashkafa of the school in which she teaches.

In sum, I found that within the reality of Dati Leumi girls High schools, the most significant method of teaching Midot is through the model of a teacher who is a Ba’alat Midot and who consciously transmits Midot messages to her students 

Recommendations: How to educate toward excellence in Midot in the Dati Leumi Girls High School system
Given the results I found, I would recommend that educators take the following steps in order to further students’ Midot development.

Teachers need to be more conscious of their roles as Midot models. Otherwise, they may be missing the precious opportunity of making a real impact on their students.  They must be confident that students can potentially learn from their example. An optimistic attitude regarding the capacity of students to learn can be a positive force in the encouragement of Midot development. 

Schools should do all they can to foster the commitment of their teachers to to the goal of Midot education. Awareness of the need to pay attention to Midot should be emphasized in teachers’ training. 

Principals should take into account the Torah personality, especially the Midot, of candidates for teaching positions. The priority of the Midot criteria should be applied not only to Mekhankhot and teachers of Limudei Kodesh, but to teachers of secular subjects as well. Additionally, Midot issues should be a regular part of the agenda at teachers’ meetings. At parent-teacher meetings, teachers should discuss the student’s Midot progress in addition to reporting her academic achievements.

In general, the creation of an environment conducive to the development of students’ religious personality and Midot should be a priority on the school’s agenda. Though many additonal factors affect students’ Midot, I sincerely feel that schools can do a lot to improve the situation by keeping these guidelines in mind.

Conclusion: Midot, Policy Makers and Teachers
In this paper, I examined two major components of the educational system: the policy makers and the teachers. 

In my conclusions regarding the policy makers, I had guessed that teachers would have difficulty implementing the complex openness policies of the Dati Leumi system on the government policy makers’ level. My conversations with the teachers confirmed this hypothesis. 

Another interesting finding relates to Dagan’s opinion that teachers in the Dati Leumi system are tending toward closedness and do not have the ability to understand the needs of contemporary youth. This was not the impression I received from most of the teachers I spoke to. They were (for the most part) models of open, modern individuals. An additional gap between the government policy makers and the teachers exists with regard to the acknowledgement of the Midot crisis. Whereas teachers acknowledge the existence of a Midot deterioration in recent years, government policy makers do not seem to share this awareness and therefore, are doing little to find solutions to the problem on either a practical or policy level. My hope is that as teachers become increasingly aware of the problem, they will eventually call the attention of these policy makers to shift their focus to the vital issue of Midot education. 

Afterword: Suggestions for further research
As I have pointed out throughout this paper, many essential aspects of Midot education remain to be explored. 

1)	Students: A significant addition to this research would be to ask students how they perceive the way Midot education transpires in their schools. Graduates of girls’ High schools can be asked what elements of their education affected their Midot personalities. Obviously, the individual personality (or psychology) of the student is a significant factor in determining how much Midot instruction can be accomplished. Some girls have a strong natural tendency to be introspective while others don’t. 

2)	Parents: It is globally acknowledged that the way parents educate their children is a far greater factor regarding Midot than the role of schools. The environment in which students are raised at a younger age serves as a background for their personal development as teenagers, as does the family environment within which they spend a lot of their time.  An important extension of this research would be to include conversations with parents regarding their childrens’ Midot development at school. An assessment could be made regarding parents perception of their responsibility for Midot education, compared to what they perceive as the school’s role.

3)	Principals: As mentioned above, the place of the school principal within the “educational pyramid” is below the policy makers and above the teachers. The principal is meant to implement the system’s policies and provide for the training of teachers. The principal’s role in Midot education is pivotal, as she is responsible for creating a Midot-friendly atmosphere in school, which includes making curriculum decisions and choosing her staff with awareness of this issue. I would be interested in exploring the role of the principal of the Dati Leumi girls’ High School in greater detail, in order to gain a deeper perspective of the significance of her role. 
 
4)	Other school systems in Israel: Dati Leumi boys’ High schools, Dati Leumi elementary schools, Beit Yaakov and Haredi boys’ schools can be examined and compared to this research. Researching general character education (Arakhim) in secular schools would also be a significant source of comparison. 

5)	The Diaspora: The findings of this paper are very “Israel-centric”, due to the particular way the Dati Leumi schools in Israel are organized (and additional factors). Therefore, the results may not be applicable to schools in Hutz La’aretz with parallel Hashkafot. However, a lot of the information included in this paper and some of its results may also be relevant in the Diaspora as well. This relevance is demonstrated in Rabbi Jack Bieler’s article regarding Midot education in Modern Orthodox schools in the United States According to Rabbi Bieler’s article, it appears that schools in the U.S.A. are experiencing similar challenges to those of the Israeli system: lack of time to focus on Midot due to academic time constraints; the dire need to deal with religious commitment problems; lack of attention to Midot within teachers’ training and staff selection, and the shifting of responsibility from the school to the home and future education (i.e. Israel experience or Midrasha). 

Regarding a solution to the problem, Rabbi Bieler reaches a similar conclusion to mine. The school system must choose teachers who have the potential to become genuine Midot role models, and provide whatever training possible in order to achieve this goal. “The text that students should be studying is the living texts of their instructors”. The ultimate solution on the school level would be an overall approach, striving to alter the atmosphere of the school into one that will encourage menschlikhkeit. 

My hope is that as a result of this study, educators in Hutz La’aretz as well as in Israel will take the time for a Heshbon Nefesh with regard to their Derekh in Midot education.

Bibliography

Foreword: A Transformative Journey

Haredi Women’s Education

1) מנחם פרידמן, כל כבודה בת מלך חוצה-האישה החרדית, מאמר בספר ברוך שעשני אשה? האישה ביהדות מהתנ"ך ועד ימינו (ידיעות אחרונות-ספרי חמד) יהדות כאן ועכשיו (התנועה ליהדות מתקדמת) עמוד 189

2) מנחם פרידמן, האישה החרדית, מאמר בספר "אשנב לחייהן של נשים בחברות יהודיות: קובץ מחקרים בינתחומי, בעריכת יעל עצמון (מרכז שז"ר לתולדות ישראל, ירושלים תשנ"ה) עמוד 273

3) תמר אלאור, משכילות ובורות: מעולמן של נשים חרדיות (ספרית זהות, הוצאת עם עובד 1992)

Best Practices
4) The Best Practices Project in Jewish Education, CIJE (Council for Initiatives in Jewish Education), Editor: Barry Holtz. These booklets describe models of successful Jewish formal and informal education in the U.S.A. 

Dati Leumi Women’s Education
1)	תמר אלאור, בפסח הבא: נשים ואוריינות בציונות הדתית דתית 
(ספרית זהות, הוצאת עם עובד1998)
2)	החינוך הדתי בגבורותיו, 80 שנה לחינוך הדתי לאומי בא"י (המרכז לחינוך הדתי בישראל תשמ"ז)(קטעים נבחרים)
 
3) אתגרים בחינוך הבת הדתית בעידן המודרני, סדרת דיונים מסמינר באונ' בר אילן בפברואר 2000, המכון לחקר האישה ביהדות ע"ש פניה גוטספלד-הלר והמכון לחקר החינוך הדתי ולקידומו ע"ש שטרן

4) כתנות אור, בירור אמוני בסוגית הצניעות (מכון "מופת"-מרכז הדרכה פדגוגי תורני)(קטעים נבחרים)

5) אורה כהן, צניעות האשה בעידן המודרני, (שילה ברכץ -בית אל)
General background sources
Carol K. Ingall, Transmission and Transformation: A Jewish Perspective on Moral Education (The Melton Research Center for Jewish Education, JTS, 1999). The book was helpful in understanding how Jewish educators in the U.S. are grappling with the moral education crisis. Additionally, the book contains several original curriculum ideas for teaching Midot to young children.

Conversations with senior educators
Dr. Daniel Marom, Mandel School-Jerusalem Fellows
Prof Oded Schremer, Dept. of Education, Hebrew University 
Dr. Deborah Weissman, Kerem Teachers Institute
Prof. Menachem Friedman, Dept. of Sociology, Bar Ilan University
Mrs. Bilha Admanit, Herzog Teachers Institute
Dr. Beverly Gribetz, ATID
Rabbi Chaim Brovender, ATID

Chapter 1- The Policy Makers

1)	שרגא פישרמן, נוער הכיפות הזרוקות, מכללת אורות ישראל, אלקנה, תשנ"ט-1998
2)	שרגא פישרמן, על מה אבדה, מכללת אורות ישראל, אלקנה, תש"ס- 2000
 3)  האישה וחינוכה: אסופת מאמרים בהלכה ובמחשבה ערך: בן ציון רוזנפלד (אולפנת אמנה תש"ם- 1980
מאמרים חשובים:
–לדרך חינוכן של בנות האולפנות (מתוך שיחה בחוג מחנכים) הרב משה צבי נריה
-חינוך הבת- הרב יהודה רוזנברג, ראש אולפנת אמנה (ומאמרים נוספים)
 The book relates to the ideology and policy of Ulpanot (girls’ Religious-Zionist high schools) and approaches to women’s education and role in general, as seen by Rabbinical educators and leaders.

4) החינוך הדתי בחברה הישראלית-מקראה בעריכת ד"ר מרדכי בר-לב תשמ"ו-תשמ"ז 1987
מאמרים חשובים:
--עקרונות מטרות והישגים בחינוך שלנו (בקיבוץ הדתי) יוסף אחיטוב
-דרכי חינוך בבי"ס תיכון חרדי לבנות "בית יעקב" רמת גן הרב ש. לוסטיג
I read both of these articles to get a feel for the two "reference groups" on the two 
extreme sides of Dati-Leumi girls' education: The liberal ideology of the Kibbutz Dati
vs. a modern-open Beit Yaakov, somewhat identified with the Haredi-Leumi camp.
-מחינוך דתי לחינוך תורני- הרב יעקב פילבר (פורסם ב"מורשה" תשל"ג)
The article shows the problems in the State-religious school system in the eyes of the  students’ parents, which led to the founding of the Torani school system. 
-הקונפליקט הבין-תרבותי של נוער בישיבות התיכוניות ובאולפנות-ד"ר מרדכי בר לב
- גדרי ישיבה תיכונית-הרב יהושע יגל (פורסם ב"ניב המדרשיה" תשל"א)

5) החינוך פשט את הרגל- אור וערכים (1997) 
A Haredi "propaganda” booklet criticizing secular and Dati-Leumi education, aimed at encouraging parents to send their children to Haredi schools.

6) תלפיות-כתב עת של מכללת תלפיות להכשרת מורות בחינוך הדתי ת"א תשנ"ח- 1998
מאמרים חשובים:
-עת כנוס-ד"ר שמחה פישר
-לדרכה של הכשרת מורים בחינוך הדתי-מתתיהו דגן, לשעבר מנהל מינהל החינוך הדתי במשרד החינוך (עמוד 167)
-עקרונות יסוד בחינוך- פרופ' משה אדד
-דיוקנו של בית ספר בעל חזון "אני מאמין"- דינה שקולניק
  The last two articles provided interesting ideas about educational narrative.

7) שמעתין-בטאון המורים למקצועות הקודש מינהל החינוך הדתי במשרד החינוך-שבט-ניסן תש"ס- דרכי חיבובה של התורה על תלמידינו
This special edition relates to the “Gemara crisis". 

8)	Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein’s recent article on the “Gemara crisis”:
הוראת הגמרא בישיבות התיכוניות, שנה בשנה, היכל שלמה תשס"א
The article is available at the Daat website:
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/toshba/tochniut/lichtin.htm

Textbooks on Values (Arakhim), published by the Mamlakhti Dati department of Misrad Hakhinukh (partial list)
1) "להתנהג זה ענין שלם": תכנית בחינוך החברתי, זכויות וחובות בבית הספר, זכויות וחובות האדם
תשנ"ח- 1998 
2) הולכים על ערכים-דמוקרטיה ודו קיום (תשנ"ז- 1997)
3) זכות קדימה לדרך ארץ: חינוך בתמונות, "למידה חברתית" (תשנ"ו- 1996)
4) חישוקי כבוד (תשנ"ו)
5) "כן, איכפת לנו"(חוברת עבודה לכתות ד-ו (מודן הוצאה לאור, דליה קרח-שגב, שוויון, עזרה לזולת, תש"ס- 2000)

Chapter 2-The Teachers
מצוקת הסמכות ההלכתית בימינו, הרב דניאל טרופר, (טרם פורסם) הוצג בפורום לחינוך דתי של ישיבה אוניברסיטה  בפברואר 2000.

Afterword
Rabbi Jack Bieler, “Sensitizing Day School Teachers to Issues in Values Education”, Ten Da’at Vol. VI, No. 1, Spring 1992 (Nisan 5752)