Stakeholders come last in KDVP closure

The closure of King David Victory Park, a 60-year-old school with an excellent reputation in South Africa, was confirmed as definite merely a week after being presented to stakeholders as “possible” and “under discussion”. This false impression inspired parents to present alternative plans for saving the school to the South African Board of Jewish Education, only to be told that it had been “finalised”. Overall, this closure has been badly handled by the Board.

It’s clear that in spite of being presented as a “possibility”, the school’s closure was already a foregone conclusion when the announcement of the “possible” closure was made. And it’s also clear that in spite of the fact that there appears to be sufficient funding to support the building of new facilities at King David Linksfield, there isn’t sufficient funding to support the continuation of King David Victory Park.

The reason given – that there aren’t enough Jewish children attending the school to be sustainable – is understandable, however the Board has gone about closing the school in the cold-hearted manner of an accounts department of a corporate ending an unprofitable subsidiary.

Let’s be clear: King David isn’t – and was never intended to be – a profitable entity, in spite of the fact that we pay high fees to go there. Fundamentally, it’s a communal organisation, and its “customers” are South African Jewish children and parents.

My reasons for criticising the manner in which it was handled are as follows: Why pretend the closure of the school was still being discussed, all while revealing the school’s imminent closure – in the next four months – in the media and to parents and staff? Surely, if the closure was “still being discussed” at the time, this fact wouldn’t have been made public, resulting as it does on a “run on” the school – parents rapidly finding alternatives for their children and teachers applying for new positions – making the school even less sustainable than it was before?

Why give parents and teachers no more than four months to find alternatives? Surely if a 60-year-old, eminent institution is to close, those affected should be given at least a year’s notice to make alternate arrangements. As I understand it, Grades 11 and 12 at the school are currently “sustainable” in numbers. These are crucial academic years, and possibly could be allowed to continue before the school’s closure.

As an aside, the point touted that “children and teachers will go to King David Linksfield” omits some facts. I know of teachers that are going to be retrenched. Similarly, many of the children at King David Victory Park actually chose to commute across Johannesburg quite simply because they didn’t want to go to King David Linksfield, which has a completely different culture to King David Victory Park. Inevitably, these children will be lost to a Jewish education as their parents look elsewhere.

And to those calling for communal “unity” in response to this issue, I would like to point out that the way this move has been handled has the effect of alienating many in Jewish education from the community.

If such last-minute notice was given in order to make sure that the teachers could move to King David Linksfield, how and why are there suddenly such a lot of vacancies at King David Linksfield? Is this because this was planned at the outset and for a long time – namely to expand King David Linksfield and close King David Victory Park? It points to a longstanding plan by the Board. And if that’s the case, then why did it wait until the last minute to tell everyone about it? Why are the parents, teachers, and students not being prioritised? It smacks of ruthless, top-down decision making.

I understand that the Board doesn’t see the possibility of continuing King David Victory Park as a Jewish school with the current numbers of Jewish pupils. But I have to ask, does this mean that it can’t continue as an education institution of excellence? King David Victory Park is known for its results and students who go on to excel at university and in life. Surely the school premises could be sold to another education institution to continue, possibly with a Jewish stream subsidised by the Board, as has been done successfully in many other schools around the country and the world?

What are we telling our children when they see their chosen school closing suddenly and without warning, giving their parents very little room to make alternative arrangements beyond travelling far, in traffic, every day to a school many have already chosen not to go to? We’re telling them we care more about social engineering and profit than we care about them. We’re telling them that we are unable to be transparent about our decisions.

It’s time for the Board to put the interests of Jewish parents and children first.

• Julie Leibowitz is a former King David Victory Park mom and the sub-editor at the SA Jewish Report.