New York City investigators began examining the city’s yeshivas in 2015 in response to complaints from graduates of the Yeshivas that they had not received an education that met state requirements. It is 2019 and there is still no report. Leonie Haimson writes about the growing suspicion that the de Blasio administration sat on the investigation in order to win key votes from Orthodox Jews and their allies in the Legislature on the renewal of mayoral control.
The report was finally released on December 19, four years after it was initiated.
Only two of the 28 ultra-orthodox yeshivas visited by the city Education Department over the past three years are providing an education that meets state legal standards, according to a long-awaited report released Thursday.
Schools examined by the city ran the gamut from teaching a full range of subjects in English, to offering no math or English courses, and providing students with no access to textbooks written in English. Of almost 140 elementary and middle school classes officials attended, about a third were taught exclusively in Yiddish, with the remainder taught in a mix of English and Yiddish.
The DOE classified 8 of the 28 schools as well on their way to meeting the state standard of providing an education “substantially equivalent” to the one offered in public schools. Another 12 met parts of the criteria, and five schools had almost no overlap with the requirements.
Naftuli Moster, the executive director of YAFFED, a group dedicated to reforming ultra-orthodox yeshiva education, said the report “reaffirms what we already know: That tens of thousands of children in New York City, including those in nearly 40 Yeshivas the city investigated and those which the city failed to monitor for decades, are being denied a basic education as required by law.”
Here is another report, this one in The Forward, a Jewish-oriented newspaper.
The mixture of religion and the state is always volatile.
The Yeshiva graduates who demanded the investigation said they had not learned secular subjects, they had learned most of the curriculum in Hebrew, and they were ill-equipped to function in contemporary society.
Why did it take four years to investigate 28 schools?
The NYC publication Gothamist reported:
|
|
|
Haimson writes:
It is hard to know which is more toxic – the system of autocratic mayoral control which I and others critiqued at Assembly hearings this week; or the damaging political deals the Mayor has made to keep it – which include not just a delay in issuing a report on the Yeshivas in 2017, but also that same year, his agreement to an increase in the number of NYC charter schools.
Before that, as part of the deal to extend mayoral control in 2014 , de Blasio agreed to either co-locate charter schools in public school buildings or help pay for rent in private buildings – a legal obligation which no other district in the state or the nation has been saddled with, and that the DOE is now spending more than $100M per year on.
A question which the DOE/SCI statement does not answer is why the DOE inquiry into the Yeshivas was still in its early stages in June 2017 – given that the initial complaint was made in the July 2015. See Yaffed’s timeline here.
Another question is what is now holding up the release of the DOE’s final report, given that that the DOE visits to Yeshivas concluded last spring and that “Although the DOE has now visited all 28 yeshivas [originally named in the complaint that are still open], more than four years after the initial complaints, the DOE’s Inquirycontinues.”
If the visits ended last spring, why does the DOE Inquiry continue and why has no report has yet been issued? No explanation is provided.
All this makes one suspect that the political influence of the ultra-Orthodox community with the Mayor and City Hall continues to hamper DOE’s actions and reporting on this issue.
If the United States Supreme Court rules against state prohibitions on vouchers for religious schools in the coming term, the public will fund many such schools, including those governed by all religious groups that will step forward to claim their share of the public purse.
If the Supreme Court decides that the state must pay for religious schools, will the state also have the power to regulate those schools and require that they teach subjects in English and meet the same academic standards as other publicly-funded schools?

It is NOT OKAY to RIP OFF public schools and use that money for Charters and Vouchers.
LikeLike
The Jews complaining that they didn’t receive an adequate education so that they can make it in society should not be blaming the “political machine”, they should be pointing fingers at the Rabbinical leaders of their community. Their leaders want total control of the Hasidic Jewish community and they want no one to leave or to know of a better life outside of the community. People better start placing the blame where it belongs even if it means compromising their religious beliefs and its leaders.
LikeLike
Politicians in New York have turned a blind eye to private Yeshivas for years. Jews, particularly conservative ones in New York, have considerable political clout, and they vote in a block. Democrats have tended to ignore a whole host of problems including the poor education in many Yeshivas as well as many building code violations in order to keep the peace with Jewish communities in exchange for their votes.
LikeLike
The problem is not “Jews,” as a group. The problem is Orthodox Jews. The swing vote in the State Senate is Simcha Felder. The politicians Court his one vote.
LikeLike
You are correct, I had an educated Orthodox Jewish student teacher that later worked in Kiryas Joel as an ESL teacher. Most of the young children spoke only Yiddish, not English. She was shocked by the low level of instruction in the schools. She was not allowed to have a classroom library as it was deemed “too secular.” Some Orthodox Jews value education. The two daughters of my student teacher were preparing for college. It is the ultra conservative Orthodox that live in a parallel world apart.
LikeLike
Felder is no longer a swing vote. As 2019 Democrats have a sizable majority in the state senate. The IDC senators except for Felder are gone,
40 Democrats to 22 Republicans .
Cuomo on several issues is at war with the Democratically controlled Senate . The larger Jewish community who always see any criticism of Jews or Israel asan attack is who deBlasio is afraid of agitating. Nobody voted for deBlasio but a far greater number did not vote for his opponent. In a race that had very low turn out.
LikeLike
“The larger Jewish community who always see any criticism of Jews or Israel as an attack is who deBlasio is afraid of agitating.”
Well apparently he isn’t afraid anymore since that report was released. I guess de Blasio has decided to retire from politics forever when his term is over.
The question I continue to ask is who has the power to do something about it. Can de Blasio simply say “okay, shutting you guys down now”?
Who were Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff afraid of when they dragged their feet when they should have been impeaching Trump right after the Mueller Report?
LikeLike
NYC public school parent
They dragged their feet because they put everything down on Mueller. How could he not deliver with what was obvious to all from January of 17. And all the never Trump Republicans and former Justice department officials pointed out how our institutions would hold up .
We were had. The guy who could not prove that the NFL saw Ray Rice slam his girlfriend like a rag doll on video was chosen by a co conspirator to” land the plane ”
Written within a few weeks of Mueller’s appointment
LikeLike
NYC public school parent
Would have helped if i posted the link
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/07/mueller-nfl-probe-rice-goodell-239216
LikeLike
Joel,
Thanks for the link! We definitely agree about Mueller. And that article you linked to was rather kind to Mueller. Still, buried in his report was clear evidence to impeach and Pelosi was attacked for not immediately calling for hearings. She was also attacked when she finally did call for hearings. And she would have been attacked even more for calling for hearings if that had resulted in sympathy for Trump instead of having a dozen brave souls stepping up to bear witness under oath.
Mueller reminds me of the FBI Inspector General who conducted a similar investigation of the origins of the Russia investigation. He kept it very narrow so that he could minimize (or ignore) myriad of evidence that FBI officials acted the same way they act with every investigation where little mistakes are commonly made. The IG did everything he could to minimize any context to the FBI’s actions, and maximize anything that could be used to justify the Republicans’ fact-free innuendo that it was an entirely biased investigation even though the facts stated otherwise. We know that the FBI officials investigating Clinton had political biases, and in that case there were serious breaches of policy, but that isn’t mentioned. The IG could not say that the investigation was biased or opened improperly because that would be a blatant lie and he’d be committing perjury. But he certainly wanted to imply what his Republican bosses wanted to emphasize and ignore evidence that hurt the Republicans’ attacks.
By the way, I felt exactly as you did when I read all the newspaper articles lauding William Barr’s handpicked investigator John Durham as the most upright and honest non-partisan investigator in history. It was a ridiculous mischaracterization based on assuming an Attorney General more corrupt than John Mitchell would appoint anyone who he wasn’t sure would do what he wanted. It’s like believing Trump would appoint Barr or Kavanaugh without knowing they were going to protect him. And Durham’s entirely inappropriate claim that the IG was wrong — without providing a shred of evidence but his own upright and honest self — proved that Durham was just as much Barr’s toady as I knew he’d be.
LikeLike
I’m glad this is getting coverage. There does need to be an investigation of what happened here. However, isn’t a bit more complicated than presented here? Back in 2014 NYC’s Controller was supposed to do an audit of Success Academy Charter School and that took many years and was just limited to finances and nothing else. And that was a charter school using public money. For private schools it is even worse. It’s not as if a Mayor can just order an investigation that gets free access to all of a yeshiva’s or private school’s records and have it immediately done. Private schools are going have even more rights to resist that than charters do, and apparently investigating charters is off the table for the DOE because the courts won’t allow it. Despite all the sexual abuse issues, has the DOE investigated any Catholic schools or private schools like Horace Mann? I wish it could, but I don’t think it is quite that easy.
“Before that, as part of the deal to extend mayoral control in 2014 , de Blasio agreed to either co-locate charter schools in public school buildings or help pay for rent in private buildings….”
Let’s be fair here. This was not simply a deal to extend Mayoral control. This was a deal to start UNIVERSAL PRE-K. There has now been 4 or 5 years of universal pre-k serving something like 60,000 students each year(!) — hundreds of thousands of the very poorest 4 year olds getting full day pre-k — so why leave that out? Also this leaves out the fact that the legislature was planning to force NYC to give free rent to charters regardless since in 2014, Albany was owned by pro-charter folks. Why ignore the fact that de Blasio got something HUGE for NYC — universal pre-k — that was a huge benefit for the most vulnerable kids in NYC? Would it have been better if NYC was ordered to pay rent for charters without getting something important out of it like universal pre-k? Because that was certainly on the table when de Blasio’s power was absolutely nil and Cuomo’s was at an all time high and he owned the legislature. (Remember de Blasio’s next step was fighting to replace those right wing Cuomo charter supporting legislatures with progressive ones and that is exactly what happened although it took longer than he hoped.)
I am glad that Leonie and others are staying on top of de Blasio’s yeshiva investigation. But there needs to be some context. It is like condemning Nancy Pelosi because she wasn’t calling for impeachment immediately after the Mueller Report and attributing some corrupt motives to that. It’s is like condemning Adam Schiff for not convening an investigation immediately after Mueller testified. Undermining Pelosi and Schiff as craven politicians for “not investigating” instead of understanding that their ultimate goal was to hold Trump to high standards and figuring out how to do that without allowing him to claim he was “victimized” and getting away with it. I have no doubt that de Blasio is on the right side of education — the progressive side. Just like Nancy Pelosi is on the right side of corruption. And I have no doubt that no matter they do, they will be attacked.
I just remember the non-stop criticism so-called progressives made when de Blasio standing up to charters backfired, and instead of doing good, it allowed charters to portray themselves as victims and THAT was when NYC was forced to pay their rent. Critics kept saying that it was all de Blasio’s fault for picking the wrong battle and he should have let that go and posed them at some other more politically convenient time. There is a lot of hypocrisy when it comes to attacking progressives and they can almost never win. If they act and fail, they are attacked for “moving too soon”. If they wait, they are attacked as secret supporters of the corruption.
Nancy Pelosi managed to withstand some of that brilliantly during impeachment, although certainly while she “waited” she got attacked and demeaned and mischaracterized as corrupt or cowardly and lots of other insulting thing. If impeachment hadn’t worked perfectly — if it resulted in Trump’s popularity increasing, Pelosi would have been attacked as “moving too soon.” Progressives will never take power when any results short of perfection are turned into “they are corrupt, secretly right wing, and would do anything to win an election so don’t trust them and don’t vote for them.”
Hold politicians to a high standard by all means. But don’t hold them to an IMPOSSIBLE standard. And see context instead of claiming that a politician made a trade for power when the trade just happened to include universal pre-k that benefitted hundreds of thousands of kids but not mentioning that makes the politician look a lot more corrupt. And don’t mention that the politician had no power at the time, so any program that the politician supposedly “traded away” would just have likely been enacted with the rest of us getting nothing.
I could easily interpret every single action by Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff with regards to impeachment in the most craven way. I could “prove” it by showing where they could have acted and didn’t. I know some progressives do just that.
LikeLike
^^Just as an example, half of the yeshivas simply refused to allow the DOE to enter the premises. Carranza even sent a letter to the state seeking guidance. Because the DOE can’t simply demand that a yeshiva let them in nor cooperate.
So what happens then? I don’t understand how people attack the Mayor and not the law that denies the Mayor the ability to properly investigate private schools.
It’s like saying that it’s Schiff’s fault because he didn’t get all the witness testimony from the Trump White House and that’s why he shouldn’t impeach. Which is EXACTLY what right wing pundits are saying regardless of how ridiculous it is since it is not Schiff’s fault that Trump is obstructing justice and he can’t stop that obstruction short of impeachment.
LikeLike
Leonie Haimson has rightly asked these big questions beyond the issues evident in NY.
“If the United States Supreme Court rules against state prohibitions on vouchers for religious schools in the coming term, the public will fund many such schools, including those governed by all religious groups that will step forward to claim their share of the public purse.”
“If the Supreme Court decides that the state must pay for religious schools, will the state also have the power to regulate those schools and require that they teach subjects in English and meet the same academic standards as other publicly-funded schools?”
As I recall, Bush opened the door to “faith-based initiatives” supported with federal funds.
I think that the Montana case on vouchers now in the Supreme Court, is likely to be won by those who support vouchers for religious schools. YesEvery Kid and Americans for Prosperity filed a brief on September 18, 2019 asking the US Supreme Court to address this question:
Does it violate the Religion Clauses or Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution to invalidate a generally available and religiously neutral student-aid program (tax credits in Montana) simply because the program affords students the choice of attending religious schools? https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1195/116183/20190918121723025_No.%2018-1195tsacAmericansForProsperityAndYesEveryKid.pdf
This case is from a legal practice “The Alliance for Defending Freedom” devoted to making Christian religious beliefs the law of the land. The Alliance for Defending Freedom has been the most successful in changing federal law, arguing and winning nine Supreme Court cases.
See also this effort to get public funds for religious schools and programs via tax credits. I reccomend that you read it and and see who is supporting it. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/634/text
LikeLike
Imagine defending this.
LikeLike
Say what? There was an investigation released this month. Who is defending the yeshivas that are not teaching kids? The investigation found some of yeshivas had huge problems. Who would defend this except people who run those yeshivas? I think even they are too ashamed to speak out.
Imagine if yeshivas find a lawyer who says that the DOE does not have full access to everything and anything from the yeshiva that they need to do a proper investigation, and that the DOE does not have any power to order them to change stat or be closed down stat. Imagine a lawyer defending such an outrageous abuse of children at yeshivas by saying that the DOE can’t tell them exactly what they have to provide their students. Who would ever defend such a corrupt lawyer who doesn’t tell the yeshiva that they hand over all documents requested by the DOE and provide them all the access they need?
I’m glad that even legal experts agree that yeshivas have to do what the DOE tells them to do and if they don’t, they are shut down. Anything else would be indefensible.
LikeLike