Yeshivot (plural for yeshiva) are rather peculiar institutions in 20th century America. These important bastions of an era gone by are surprisingly vibrant, an accurate reflection of the recent orthodox Jewish rejuvenation in this country and Israel. They are passionate about not allowing the Holocaust to destroy what was once the spiritual and intellectual life source in the shtetls of Europe. They are Orthodox Judaism as it is meant to be executed, with emphasis placed on Jewish law and ancient tradition. Amazingly self contained, these places of higher learning are far removed from the society in which they coexist. For those unaccustomed to the ins and outs, a visit is a severe culture shock, leaving many wondering if in fact they can believe what they had just witnessed.
These all male schools are rigorous, with grueling 15 hour a day schedules. It is most interesting to observe how these young men spend their limited spare time. The students come from all different backgrounds from all around the country and therefore, there are some distinct pastimes. All, however, are approved hobbies, neither violating Jewish law, tradition or the particular world view of the institution s rabbis.
Although it would be almost imperceivable for an outsider, many yeshivot have different philosophies regarding what is permitted and what is not. On a visit to one yeshiva one may find talmidim (students at a religious school) reading books and popular magazines, while a visit to another may leave one with the impression that such pursuit is not only a waste of time, but a serious violation of Jewish law.
Attitudes towards universities follows a similar pattern. While one yeshiva may preach that one should prefer death rather than attend a secular school, others may allow their students to attend openly with full permission. However, it is important to understand that even according to most yeshivot that allow their students to attend university, it is considered a necessary evil and is only allowed as a secondary pursuit, always remaining far behind their religious studies in significance. Young men are encouraged to remain in yeshiva for as long as they are in school, to help minimize the negative and dangerous affects their secular schooling may have on themselves and their religious observance.
The objective of my study was to determine how the student subculture of yeshiva college students, who come from an atmosphere which is at very best skeptical about the overall benefits and ramifications of college attendance, view their college experience. Do yeshiva college students consider themselves a part of the larger culture of college students?
As Astin claims (as quoted in Whitt 1996) "students peer groups are the single most potent source on influence and growth and development during the undergraduate years." Are yeshiva college students socialized by peer groups at their universities, or only by their peers at yeshiva? What affect, if any, does college attendance have on them?
For the purposes of this study, student subculture is defined as
Smaller, distinctive groups within the dominant student culture that are held together by a persistent interaction and a common allegiance to certain values, beliefs rituals and practices and codes of conduct.
Culture will be defined according to Tiereney (1988)
The collective, mutually shaping patterns of norms, values, practices, beliefs and assumptions that guide the behavior of individuals and groups (1988 pp. 12-13).
Socialization will be defined as
The process by which people begin to adopt the perspectives of the group with which they wish to affiliate. (Kuh, Hall 1992 p.11)
Data was gathered from personal interviews with ten yeshiva college students currently enrolled in dual programs at three different yeshivot nationwide between the beginning of October and the end of November, 1996. All three yeshivot had open policies allowing their students to attend college part time while remaining fully enrolled in the yeshiva's religious program. However, yeshiva college students remained a minority at each institution, as the majority of yeshiva students focused on their religious studies exclusively. Permission was received from Rabbi Peretz Zachai and Rabbi Jerold Eisenberg to conduct research at their institutions in October of 1996. As per request, a copy of the complete study will be made available to Rabbi Zachai.
The students themselves were all Caucasian, between the ages of 18 and 22. Their college and yeshiva experience varied greatly. However, all students were in at least their second year of yeshiva and first year of college.
Survey questions queried students feelings regarding their yeshiva and university's perspective on a number of selected issues, as well as their own personal feelings. Results of the study will be presented using direct quotations and examples from the different students interviewed. As requested, pseudonyms will be used, and no direct link between any particular student and his institution will be made.
One major theme was easily apparent throughout my research. Yeshiva college students view themselves as yeshiva students who happen to be in college. The emphasis was unilaterally placed on yeshiva, with college merely serving as a vehicle to an end, that end being becoming self sufficient and self supportive.
After responding to questions regarding their yeshiva and their college's perspective on college attendance, six of the ten interviewees responded to questions about their personal beliefs by simply saying "the same" without reference to which of the two distinct institutional perspectives they just described they agreed with. Upon further prodding each one clarified that he meant "the same as my yeshiva." No further information was offered, as it appeared that these students felt that whatever it was their yeshiva espoused was more than a sufficient answer for them as well. What s more, it appears that they felt it obvious that when they said the same that they were referring to the yeshiva. When asked to clarify, several laughed, as if to imply that the answer was obvious. Why would anyone think that they could be referring to anything but their yeshiva?
There was quite a bit of agreement as to what role the students felt their yeshiva believed college should play. All ten students responded that it was for a "parnassa (livelihood)" and nothing more. Isaac said, "One should not take any courses he does not need", just the minimum required to earn his degree and get the job he is looking for. Jacob, clearly the most contemplative and thoughtful of all interviewees, added that college actually helps individuals in their religious studies, as "people will have peace of mind by going to college to learn how to make a living. Therefore they will be able to learn (Jewish studies) better. It can help compliment rabbinics, so therefore in my mind going to college helps me serve G-d better." In other words, college is a vehicle to an end (money), which when attained, allows one to better serve G-d through his studies and practices without unnecessary interruptions. Furthermore, it may provide an aspiring rabbi with important skills that allows him to function better in a religious leadership role in a secular society. Jacob also mentioned that he had just been thinking about the very same questions over the last few days, trying to sort out his beliefs, as well as those of his yeshiva.
However, college attendance is not necessarily an appropriate first option. It should only be pursued after a number of years in yeshiva (nine of the ten students had been in yeshiva for several years more than they had been in college) and then, only as Simon put it, for "somebody who is not necessarily going into chinuch (Jewish education and teaching)." If, however, chinuch is an option, clearly most of the students, including Simon, believed that college attendance was not recommended.
Even Abraham, who did say that he agreed with his university's perspective regarding attendance (that everyone secular or religious should attend college), believed that the purpose of college attendance, according to both his university and his yeshiva was, "to go to grad school." When asked why that was important, he responded "You can earn more money that way" Evidently, he believes that the perspective of his yeshiva regarding the purpose of a university was the standard belief employed in the halls of his university as well.
Most students, however, were able to give more standard replies to questions about their university's perspective. All ten responded that their university believed that "everyone...that can meet the academic requirements" should at least have the opportunity to attend college. Most felt that college attendance was an important thing within the non Jewish community and should be encouraged whenever possible.
All the students, with the exception of Abraham, felt that their university had high, lofty goals in mind in the furtherance of the education of their students. As Rueben said, college helps them "gain an education, and provide(s) them with the tools for life." Or, as Simon said, To give people a broad perspective allowing them to explore different cultures. And, of course, the standard reply was given by four students, universities are there to produce well rounded individuals.
Two other students also mentioned earning money and getting a job as important, but placed that as a lower priority on the college's agenda.
It is very interesting that these students were able to produce such in depth and complete answers to questions regarding their university's perspective, while only one of them would admit to actually believing them to be true. Simon's response was most telling. After describing a college's purpose as "teaching students how to think, and helping them grow up through the college experience", he then remarked, "College is the biggest farce in America." He believed that colleges can claim whatever they will, but they accomplish nothing productive besides providing people with the education necessary to earn a degree, and then a job within a particular field.
None of the interviewees had ever participated in an extra curricular activity. Several were not even aware that such programs existed on their campuses. Simon remarked, "No (I have never participated) thank G-d! They are a complete waste of time. They are completely menuval (disgusting, appealing to base instincts) but are disguised with good intentions." Becoming a well rounded individual does not justify "all the other garbage that comes with it" in Simon's eyes. These activities have one goal in mind, and that is to allow students to do as they please, act in an immoral manner with full university sanction. All the interviewees made it abundantly clear that for them there was no distinction between regular university activities and activities sponsored by on campus Jewish social organizations such as Hillel.
Although Simon was the only student to openly criticize extra curricular activities, it was clear that none of the students considered them an appropriate way to spend their time. Their roles as college students was to go to class, take notes and tests and go back to their yeshiva.
Academic activities followed a similar pattern. Most students did not know that such programs existed. Jacob said that he "uses the computers. Does that count?" Dan, the only student that replied that he had participated in some, said it was only with "with other Jewish students who are frum (orthodox). He never participated in any programs with the "blacks and other dregs of society" that he attends school with. Information regarding exactly who the other "dregs of society" were was not offered.
None of the students made mention of what role they played in class with the exception of Simon who said that he treated it much the same way he did his Talmud class, becoming deeply involved, challenging the instructor on many small points, much to the dismay of many of his classmates. Simon reported feeling perplexed at his classmates reaction.
Feeling perplexed or left out was a common theme among the students. Seven of the ten students mentioned that they feel or have felt an abnormal amount of stress and tension being in both yeshiva and college at the same time. Dan mentioned the problems with "time constraints." The dual program can average 15 hour days, "making it extremely hard to find time to do college homework", another poignant reference as to which program has priority.
Others mentioned coeducation. Coming from all male private education classrooms, "it s a different world , Hillel said. It can be rather perplexing and even disturbing to one who is unaccustomed to such a setting.
Still others mentioned standing out. Dan said that wearing his kippa (skullcap worn by orthodox Jewish males) everyone looked at me differently, as if I was a smart rich Jew. However, these differences were rather easy to overcome, as most claimed that their feelings of tension wore off within a couple of weeks, some in the most interesting way. Benji said, I just learned that I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part of them and they are not trying to be part of me." He admitted that such a relationship made him somewhat of a loner but he did not care. "We just keep our distance." The belief was that they were there for a decidedly different purpose, and they would have to live with that while their classmates would have to learn to live with them. It was clear that this distinction bothered Benji somewhat. However he got used to it and accepted it as a fact.
Simon reported major difficulties along the same lines.
I ask many questions in class. Sometimes I try and gauge if the professor is being honest about my questions. When I raise my hand and say I'll try to be brief, I hear shifting in the classroom, I think it has to do with my being Jewish I mean, some of the people in my class are complete bozos. They don't get buggy when someone else asks questions, only me. I have to be careful so that I don't cause a chilul hashem (desecration of G-d's name). They are all laughing together at me. One time I asked a professor if his course material would be clean and appropriate before the semester. He told me it would, but he lied and penalized me for not reading a disgusting story, brushing aside my religious requirements.
Simon got straight to the heart of the matter and discovered some major differences in classroom structure and content between his two realities. Apparently, he finds it difficult to understand why his distinct style, mannerisms and sensitivities are hard to understand in an American classroom, believing that his religion and possibly, anti- Semitism, are the root causes of his classroom discomfort.
It is interesting to note, however, that Simon is not so concerned with how he is viewed in his class. They don't like him. So? Let them laugh, they are "bozos" anyway. Why would anyone object to a sincere attempt to understand and analyze the class material? His real concern is of violating religious law, and he tries to be careful not to cause a chilul hashem. Non association with other students does not bother him at all, as socializing is not an important aspect of his college experience.
Jacob saw the tension in a different way. When asked about tensions he has experienced at school he said,
Yes (I have experienced it). It s wild My very first class was a few hours before kol nidra (the solemn opening service for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement) All around (the) yeshiva, it was a day of introspection. I went to college and heard a girl talk about her new king size bed and how it is so empty (implying that she would like some company in filling it up). That's the tip of the iceberg of the vast cultural differences. There is much more emphasis of enjoying life in college, the 'college scene.' In yeshiva, it boils down to how hard you work. I see how much free time everyone has. And then there is the girl thing. In college a girl is just a girl. In yeshiva, talking to a girl on the phone is a massive thing (a bad thing). In college, they treat each other like people.
Jacob had discovered a completely new, and decidedly different, culture. It seemed almost as if he was completely removing himself from his experience, analyzing his cultural experience much the same way he would analyze a text book. It was a learning experience in as much as he was observing a brand new culture, not socializing himself into a different one. It was quite clear which culture he believed superior, and that he, under no circumstances, would willingly allow the culture he was experiencing creep into his own personality.
The amount of respect in his voice when discussing his yeshiva vs the disdain he felt for the lack of morals of the college scene was easily evident. He was glowing, openly enthusiastic when describing the solemnness and holiness of the yeshiva. On the other hand, the open disdain and distaste for his university culture easily shone through..... Even his comments about the relationships with girls showed his perspective, as it was clear that comments such as "they treat each other like people" was meant to illustrate his surprise at the difference, and should not be taken as a rebuke of his yeshiva's policies.
It was very surprising that none of the students interviewed mentioned that they felt that their secular studies were a hindrance to their religious studies. Although some mentioned that they were greatly overworked, trying to adhere to all of the requirements of an exhaustive dual program, the students seemed more concerned about the curious effects inter societal mingling (or lack thereof) has on them, rather than the amount of time their chosen course of study was taking away from their religious pursuits. This was something they felt they had to do, even though it took time and almost Herculean effort to accomplish.
The most interesting, and diverse set of answers I received was regarding the benefits the students interviewed felt they have gained from being enrolled at a university. Some responses were predictable. Simon and Jacob both said that they "had more credits under their belts", and were therefore closer to finishing off their degrees. The rest of the students were evenly split. Those that had not been in university attendance for very long said that they felt they had gained nothing as of yet. After saying that, two mentioned that they had picked up some interesting information about psychology and anthropology, respectively. This, however, did not seem to be the kind of information or influence that they had been seeking from their college experience, possibly because these were general education courses and did not specifically help towards the completion of their majors. They apparently have found it hard to understand how the information they were processing was going to translate itself into making them more marketable for future employment.
Interestingly, two students said that college made them more worldly. Abraham s attitude did not come as a surprise to me. He was the one student that believed in his college's perspective over that of his yeshiva's. What makes his response all the more intriguing is the fact that Abraham had not mentioned becoming well rounded or worldly when asked about the purposes of university attendance. Instead, he felt that the university itself believed the importance of college attendance was for professional training, i.e. the learning of a trade. How or why the concept of worldliness entered his view now is hard to understand. Does he feel that he had extended past the stated goal of his university? Does he believe that something unintended has become the most important facet of his collegiate experience?
Two other students claimed that college attendance has greatly helped their Jewish studies, improving their study habits, and forcing them to work harder at their religious studies. However, this should be understood as a good thing because of the Jewish concept, according to the effort is the reward.
It is very clear that these students have resisted socialization by their university peers at all costs. They consider their universities to be potentially dangerous places that they must protect themselves from. They have a narrow focus. Their training is strictly vocational. The idea of becoming well rounded is at best a waste of time, better spent in religious pursuits. The "college scene" is a place with loose morals, a simple excuse for justifying any behavior. It was different from what they were accustomed to at yeshiva, and they found it unusual. They have chosen not to interact with their fellow students, whom they find inexplicably different as well as hard to comprehend. They have no desire to adapt or become part of this foreign environment as they are positive that the culture at their yeshiva suits them better.
They believe that college attendance can be positive if it, in some way, aids their religiosity by giving them peace of mind or teaching them important leadership skills. It is something that has to be done, and can be done safely as long as the student remains firmly entrenched within his yeshiva while pursuing it.
Upon the conclusion of his interview, Jacob remarked, "What an interesting series of questions to ask yeshiva guys." He felt that these were important questions that the students themselves should contemplate from time to time. However, he added, "You're not going to show this to your teacher, are you? I'm afraid that the goyishe velt (non Jewish world) won't understand."
He is absolutely correct. No matter how well presented or how thorough an introduction, it is extremely hard for outsiders to understand how yeshivot operate. Can anyone hope to understand a 2,000 year old institution cultivated in a ghetto society in a mere 15 pages? Certainly not. However, it is important to understand that the perspective these students espouse is the product of a carefully engineered program designed with one goal in mind, the furtherance and protection of traditional fundamentalist Judaism as it was meant to be practiced.
Assimilation is the largest single threat to orthodox Judaism in America. Many estimates claim that more Jews will simply disappear from sight then were killed in the Holocaust! Intermarriage is at its highest level in recorded Jewish history. Upon questioning, fewer and fewer Jews respond that if given a choice they would want to be born Jewish. The pride that has kept Judaism so vibrant for so many thousands of years is quickly withering away.
To many Jews, these facts are irrelevant, treated with indifference. However, to an institutions whose goal it is to promote fundamentalist traditional Judaism, it spells disaster. Isolation and intense programs are considered the strongest and most effective means of keeping young men Jewish. Rabbis at these institution are well aware of the effects collegiate peer interactions can have on their students, and they are vigilant against them. They fully understand that the more a student is exposed to the outside world with all of its enticements, the more likely he is to be affected and socialized by it, changing him forever. If we are honest, we would realize that this change is for the worse considering where these students have come from and the direction they have indicated they want to lead their lives.
Universities are not necessarily the root cause of the problems. However, they are symptomatic of it. Universities are accurate reflections of the community at large, and to many young yeshiva students, represent their first real interaction with the outside world. And, it is an extremely difficult thing. Many students, like Simon, don't understand that college is a different reality with a different culture. Things are done differently and what is an acceptable and encouraged practice at his yeshiva is looked at with scorn and ridicule at his university.
Overall, however, the system works well, keeping yeshiva students insulated, virtually unaffected by their peers, and completely orthodox, while affording them the opportunity to pursue careers. What s more, the rabbis at these institutions know that eventually their students will themselves some day go out into the secular world. The hope then is that this controlled environment in which their first experience took place will serve as a model for appropriate interactions throughout the rest of their lives.
There are dangers involved in such a set up as well. Some students, such as Dan, may misinterpret their orders to remain segregated as a justification for feeling superior and aloof. Calling college students the "dregs of society" is a perfect example of over applying the rabbis intentions. Most, however, never come to such radical conclusions. Benji's response was most representative, I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part of them and they are not trying to be part of me. Perfection! He has understood exactly what his rabbis had intended. Do your own thing and remain who you are. You'll see many different people and things at school, don't let them get to you or affect you. You are a yeshiva student. Remember that and remain who you are and college can be a productive time in your life.
In conclusion, members of the university community must constantly keep in mind that their students differ in many ways. Every university has a mission. Many believe it important to socialize all students into their university's culture. And although there are always people who resist such socialization for unhealthy reasons, we must keep in mind that some are doing it for very well thought out and positive reasons. Our goal is to produce better and more productive citizens, but America is a country in which religious freedom and pluralism is an integral part. We must allow those who resist our mission for the sake of the strength and continuance of their religion, the space and comfort in which to do so.
These all male schools are rigorous, with grueling 15 hour a day schedules. It is most interesting to observe how these young men spend their limited spare time. The students come from all different backgrounds from all around the country and therefore, there are some distinct pastimes. All, however, are approved hobbies, neither violating Jewish law, tradition or the particular world view of the institution s rabbis.
Although it would be almost imperceivable for an outsider, many yeshivot have different philosophies regarding what is permitted and what is not. On a visit to one yeshiva one may find talmidim (students at a religious school) reading books and popular magazines, while a visit to another may leave one with the impression that such pursuit is not only a waste of time, but a serious violation of Jewish law.
Attitudes towards universities follows a similar pattern. While one yeshiva may preach that one should prefer death rather than attend a secular school, others may allow their students to attend openly with full permission. However, it is important to understand that even according to most yeshivot that allow their students to attend university, it is considered a necessary evil and is only allowed as a secondary pursuit, always remaining far behind their religious studies in significance. Young men are encouraged to remain in yeshiva for as long as they are in school, to help minimize the negative and dangerous affects their secular schooling may have on themselves and their religious observance.
The objective of my study was to determine how the student subculture of yeshiva college students, who come from an atmosphere which is at very best skeptical about the overall benefits and ramifications of college attendance, view their college experience. Do yeshiva college students consider themselves a part of the larger culture of college students?
As Astin claims (as quoted in Whitt 1996) "students peer groups are the single most potent source on influence and growth and development during the undergraduate years." Are yeshiva college students socialized by peer groups at their universities, or only by their peers at yeshiva? What affect, if any, does college attendance have on them?
For the purposes of this study, student subculture is defined as
Smaller, distinctive groups within the dominant student culture that are held together by a persistent interaction and a common allegiance to certain values, beliefs rituals and practices and codes of conduct.
Culture will be defined according to Tiereney (1988)
The collective, mutually shaping patterns of norms, values, practices, beliefs and assumptions that guide the behavior of individuals and groups (1988 pp. 12-13).
Socialization will be defined as
The process by which people begin to adopt the perspectives of the group with which they wish to affiliate. (Kuh, Hall 1992 p.11)
Data was gathered from personal interviews with ten yeshiva college students currently enrolled in dual programs at three different yeshivot nationwide between the beginning of October and the end of November, 1996. All three yeshivot had open policies allowing their students to attend college part time while remaining fully enrolled in the yeshiva's religious program. However, yeshiva college students remained a minority at each institution, as the majority of yeshiva students focused on their religious studies exclusively. Permission was received from Rabbi Peretz Zachai and Rabbi Jerold Eisenberg to conduct research at their institutions in October of 1996. As per request, a copy of the complete study will be made available to Rabbi Zachai.
The students themselves were all Caucasian, between the ages of 18 and 22. Their college and yeshiva experience varied greatly. However, all students were in at least their second year of yeshiva and first year of college.
Survey questions queried students feelings regarding their yeshiva and university's perspective on a number of selected issues, as well as their own personal feelings. Results of the study will be presented using direct quotations and examples from the different students interviewed. As requested, pseudonyms will be used, and no direct link between any particular student and his institution will be made.
One major theme was easily apparent throughout my research. Yeshiva college students view themselves as yeshiva students who happen to be in college. The emphasis was unilaterally placed on yeshiva, with college merely serving as a vehicle to an end, that end being becoming self sufficient and self supportive.
After responding to questions regarding their yeshiva and their college's perspective on college attendance, six of the ten interviewees responded to questions about their personal beliefs by simply saying "the same" without reference to which of the two distinct institutional perspectives they just described they agreed with. Upon further prodding each one clarified that he meant "the same as my yeshiva." No further information was offered, as it appeared that these students felt that whatever it was their yeshiva espoused was more than a sufficient answer for them as well. What s more, it appears that they felt it obvious that when they said the same that they were referring to the yeshiva. When asked to clarify, several laughed, as if to imply that the answer was obvious. Why would anyone think that they could be referring to anything but their yeshiva?
There was quite a bit of agreement as to what role the students felt their yeshiva believed college should play. All ten students responded that it was for a "parnassa (livelihood)" and nothing more. Isaac said, "One should not take any courses he does not need", just the minimum required to earn his degree and get the job he is looking for. Jacob, clearly the most contemplative and thoughtful of all interviewees, added that college actually helps individuals in their religious studies, as "people will have peace of mind by going to college to learn how to make a living. Therefore they will be able to learn (Jewish studies) better. It can help compliment rabbinics, so therefore in my mind going to college helps me serve G-d better." In other words, college is a vehicle to an end (money), which when attained, allows one to better serve G-d through his studies and practices without unnecessary interruptions. Furthermore, it may provide an aspiring rabbi with important skills that allows him to function better in a religious leadership role in a secular society. Jacob also mentioned that he had just been thinking about the very same questions over the last few days, trying to sort out his beliefs, as well as those of his yeshiva.
However, college attendance is not necessarily an appropriate first option. It should only be pursued after a number of years in yeshiva (nine of the ten students had been in yeshiva for several years more than they had been in college) and then, only as Simon put it, for "somebody who is not necessarily going into chinuch (Jewish education and teaching)." If, however, chinuch is an option, clearly most of the students, including Simon, believed that college attendance was not recommended.
Even Abraham, who did say that he agreed with his university's perspective regarding attendance (that everyone secular or religious should attend college), believed that the purpose of college attendance, according to both his university and his yeshiva was, "to go to grad school." When asked why that was important, he responded "You can earn more money that way" Evidently, he believes that the perspective of his yeshiva regarding the purpose of a university was the standard belief employed in the halls of his university as well.
Most students, however, were able to give more standard replies to questions about their university's perspective. All ten responded that their university believed that "everyone...that can meet the academic requirements" should at least have the opportunity to attend college. Most felt that college attendance was an important thing within the non Jewish community and should be encouraged whenever possible.
All the students, with the exception of Abraham, felt that their university had high, lofty goals in mind in the furtherance of the education of their students. As Rueben said, college helps them "gain an education, and provide(s) them with the tools for life." Or, as Simon said, To give people a broad perspective allowing them to explore different cultures. And, of course, the standard reply was given by four students, universities are there to produce well rounded individuals.
Two other students also mentioned earning money and getting a job as important, but placed that as a lower priority on the college's agenda.
It is very interesting that these students were able to produce such in depth and complete answers to questions regarding their university's perspective, while only one of them would admit to actually believing them to be true. Simon's response was most telling. After describing a college's purpose as "teaching students how to think, and helping them grow up through the college experience", he then remarked, "College is the biggest farce in America." He believed that colleges can claim whatever they will, but they accomplish nothing productive besides providing people with the education necessary to earn a degree, and then a job within a particular field.
None of the interviewees had ever participated in an extra curricular activity. Several were not even aware that such programs existed on their campuses. Simon remarked, "No (I have never participated) thank G-d! They are a complete waste of time. They are completely menuval (disgusting, appealing to base instincts) but are disguised with good intentions." Becoming a well rounded individual does not justify "all the other garbage that comes with it" in Simon's eyes. These activities have one goal in mind, and that is to allow students to do as they please, act in an immoral manner with full university sanction. All the interviewees made it abundantly clear that for them there was no distinction between regular university activities and activities sponsored by on campus Jewish social organizations such as Hillel.
Although Simon was the only student to openly criticize extra curricular activities, it was clear that none of the students considered them an appropriate way to spend their time. Their roles as college students was to go to class, take notes and tests and go back to their yeshiva.
Academic activities followed a similar pattern. Most students did not know that such programs existed. Jacob said that he "uses the computers. Does that count?" Dan, the only student that replied that he had participated in some, said it was only with "with other Jewish students who are frum (orthodox). He never participated in any programs with the "blacks and other dregs of society" that he attends school with. Information regarding exactly who the other "dregs of society" were was not offered.
None of the students made mention of what role they played in class with the exception of Simon who said that he treated it much the same way he did his Talmud class, becoming deeply involved, challenging the instructor on many small points, much to the dismay of many of his classmates. Simon reported feeling perplexed at his classmates reaction.
Feeling perplexed or left out was a common theme among the students. Seven of the ten students mentioned that they feel or have felt an abnormal amount of stress and tension being in both yeshiva and college at the same time. Dan mentioned the problems with "time constraints." The dual program can average 15 hour days, "making it extremely hard to find time to do college homework", another poignant reference as to which program has priority.
Others mentioned coeducation. Coming from all male private education classrooms, "it s a different world , Hillel said. It can be rather perplexing and even disturbing to one who is unaccustomed to such a setting.
Still others mentioned standing out. Dan said that wearing his kippa (skullcap worn by orthodox Jewish males) everyone looked at me differently, as if I was a smart rich Jew. However, these differences were rather easy to overcome, as most claimed that their feelings of tension wore off within a couple of weeks, some in the most interesting way. Benji said, I just learned that I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part of them and they are not trying to be part of me." He admitted that such a relationship made him somewhat of a loner but he did not care. "We just keep our distance." The belief was that they were there for a decidedly different purpose, and they would have to live with that while their classmates would have to learn to live with them. It was clear that this distinction bothered Benji somewhat. However he got used to it and accepted it as a fact.
Simon reported major difficulties along the same lines.
I ask many questions in class. Sometimes I try and gauge if the professor is being honest about my questions. When I raise my hand and say I'll try to be brief, I hear shifting in the classroom, I think it has to do with my being Jewish I mean, some of the people in my class are complete bozos. They don't get buggy when someone else asks questions, only me. I have to be careful so that I don't cause a chilul hashem (desecration of G-d's name). They are all laughing together at me. One time I asked a professor if his course material would be clean and appropriate before the semester. He told me it would, but he lied and penalized me for not reading a disgusting story, brushing aside my religious requirements.
Simon got straight to the heart of the matter and discovered some major differences in classroom structure and content between his two realities. Apparently, he finds it difficult to understand why his distinct style, mannerisms and sensitivities are hard to understand in an American classroom, believing that his religion and possibly, anti- Semitism, are the root causes of his classroom discomfort.
It is interesting to note, however, that Simon is not so concerned with how he is viewed in his class. They don't like him. So? Let them laugh, they are "bozos" anyway. Why would anyone object to a sincere attempt to understand and analyze the class material? His real concern is of violating religious law, and he tries to be careful not to cause a chilul hashem. Non association with other students does not bother him at all, as socializing is not an important aspect of his college experience.
Jacob saw the tension in a different way. When asked about tensions he has experienced at school he said,
Yes (I have experienced it). It s wild My very first class was a few hours before kol nidra (the solemn opening service for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement) All around (the) yeshiva, it was a day of introspection. I went to college and heard a girl talk about her new king size bed and how it is so empty (implying that she would like some company in filling it up). That's the tip of the iceberg of the vast cultural differences. There is much more emphasis of enjoying life in college, the 'college scene.' In yeshiva, it boils down to how hard you work. I see how much free time everyone has. And then there is the girl thing. In college a girl is just a girl. In yeshiva, talking to a girl on the phone is a massive thing (a bad thing). In college, they treat each other like people.
Jacob had discovered a completely new, and decidedly different, culture. It seemed almost as if he was completely removing himself from his experience, analyzing his cultural experience much the same way he would analyze a text book. It was a learning experience in as much as he was observing a brand new culture, not socializing himself into a different one. It was quite clear which culture he believed superior, and that he, under no circumstances, would willingly allow the culture he was experiencing creep into his own personality.
The amount of respect in his voice when discussing his yeshiva vs the disdain he felt for the lack of morals of the college scene was easily evident. He was glowing, openly enthusiastic when describing the solemnness and holiness of the yeshiva. On the other hand, the open disdain and distaste for his university culture easily shone through..... Even his comments about the relationships with girls showed his perspective, as it was clear that comments such as "they treat each other like people" was meant to illustrate his surprise at the difference, and should not be taken as a rebuke of his yeshiva's policies.
It was very surprising that none of the students interviewed mentioned that they felt that their secular studies were a hindrance to their religious studies. Although some mentioned that they were greatly overworked, trying to adhere to all of the requirements of an exhaustive dual program, the students seemed more concerned about the curious effects inter societal mingling (or lack thereof) has on them, rather than the amount of time their chosen course of study was taking away from their religious pursuits. This was something they felt they had to do, even though it took time and almost Herculean effort to accomplish.
The most interesting, and diverse set of answers I received was regarding the benefits the students interviewed felt they have gained from being enrolled at a university. Some responses were predictable. Simon and Jacob both said that they "had more credits under their belts", and were therefore closer to finishing off their degrees. The rest of the students were evenly split. Those that had not been in university attendance for very long said that they felt they had gained nothing as of yet. After saying that, two mentioned that they had picked up some interesting information about psychology and anthropology, respectively. This, however, did not seem to be the kind of information or influence that they had been seeking from their college experience, possibly because these were general education courses and did not specifically help towards the completion of their majors. They apparently have found it hard to understand how the information they were processing was going to translate itself into making them more marketable for future employment.
Interestingly, two students said that college made them more worldly. Abraham s attitude did not come as a surprise to me. He was the one student that believed in his college's perspective over that of his yeshiva's. What makes his response all the more intriguing is the fact that Abraham had not mentioned becoming well rounded or worldly when asked about the purposes of university attendance. Instead, he felt that the university itself believed the importance of college attendance was for professional training, i.e. the learning of a trade. How or why the concept of worldliness entered his view now is hard to understand. Does he feel that he had extended past the stated goal of his university? Does he believe that something unintended has become the most important facet of his collegiate experience?
Two other students claimed that college attendance has greatly helped their Jewish studies, improving their study habits, and forcing them to work harder at their religious studies. However, this should be understood as a good thing because of the Jewish concept, according to the effort is the reward.
It is very clear that these students have resisted socialization by their university peers at all costs. They consider their universities to be potentially dangerous places that they must protect themselves from. They have a narrow focus. Their training is strictly vocational. The idea of becoming well rounded is at best a waste of time, better spent in religious pursuits. The "college scene" is a place with loose morals, a simple excuse for justifying any behavior. It was different from what they were accustomed to at yeshiva, and they found it unusual. They have chosen not to interact with their fellow students, whom they find inexplicably different as well as hard to comprehend. They have no desire to adapt or become part of this foreign environment as they are positive that the culture at their yeshiva suits them better.
They believe that college attendance can be positive if it, in some way, aids their religiosity by giving them peace of mind or teaching them important leadership skills. It is something that has to be done, and can be done safely as long as the student remains firmly entrenched within his yeshiva while pursuing it.
Upon the conclusion of his interview, Jacob remarked, "What an interesting series of questions to ask yeshiva guys." He felt that these were important questions that the students themselves should contemplate from time to time. However, he added, "You're not going to show this to your teacher, are you? I'm afraid that the goyishe velt (non Jewish world) won't understand."
He is absolutely correct. No matter how well presented or how thorough an introduction, it is extremely hard for outsiders to understand how yeshivot operate. Can anyone hope to understand a 2,000 year old institution cultivated in a ghetto society in a mere 15 pages? Certainly not. However, it is important to understand that the perspective these students espouse is the product of a carefully engineered program designed with one goal in mind, the furtherance and protection of traditional fundamentalist Judaism as it was meant to be practiced.
Assimilation is the largest single threat to orthodox Judaism in America. Many estimates claim that more Jews will simply disappear from sight then were killed in the Holocaust! Intermarriage is at its highest level in recorded Jewish history. Upon questioning, fewer and fewer Jews respond that if given a choice they would want to be born Jewish. The pride that has kept Judaism so vibrant for so many thousands of years is quickly withering away.
To many Jews, these facts are irrelevant, treated with indifference. However, to an institutions whose goal it is to promote fundamentalist traditional Judaism, it spells disaster. Isolation and intense programs are considered the strongest and most effective means of keeping young men Jewish. Rabbis at these institution are well aware of the effects collegiate peer interactions can have on their students, and they are vigilant against them. They fully understand that the more a student is exposed to the outside world with all of its enticements, the more likely he is to be affected and socialized by it, changing him forever. If we are honest, we would realize that this change is for the worse considering where these students have come from and the direction they have indicated they want to lead their lives.
Universities are not necessarily the root cause of the problems. However, they are symptomatic of it. Universities are accurate reflections of the community at large, and to many young yeshiva students, represent their first real interaction with the outside world. And, it is an extremely difficult thing. Many students, like Simon, don't understand that college is a different reality with a different culture. Things are done differently and what is an acceptable and encouraged practice at his yeshiva is looked at with scorn and ridicule at his university.
Overall, however, the system works well, keeping yeshiva students insulated, virtually unaffected by their peers, and completely orthodox, while affording them the opportunity to pursue careers. What s more, the rabbis at these institutions know that eventually their students will themselves some day go out into the secular world. The hope then is that this controlled environment in which their first experience took place will serve as a model for appropriate interactions throughout the rest of their lives.
There are dangers involved in such a set up as well. Some students, such as Dan, may misinterpret their orders to remain segregated as a justification for feeling superior and aloof. Calling college students the "dregs of society" is a perfect example of over applying the rabbis intentions. Most, however, never come to such radical conclusions. Benji's response was most representative, I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part of them and they are not trying to be part of me. Perfection! He has understood exactly what his rabbis had intended. Do your own thing and remain who you are. You'll see many different people and things at school, don't let them get to you or affect you. You are a yeshiva student. Remember that and remain who you are and college can be a productive time in your life.
In conclusion, members of the university community must constantly keep in mind that their students differ in many ways. Every university has a mission. Many believe it important to socialize all students into their university's culture. And although there are always people who resist such socialization for unhealthy reasons, we must keep in mind that some are doing it for very well thought out and positive reasons. Our goal is to produce better and more productive citizens, but America is a country in which religious freedom and pluralism is an integral part. We must allow those who resist our mission for the sake of the strength and continuance of their religion, the space and comfort in which to do so.
1 comment:
Why would a University need or have a 'culture', it is a place to get something and return from, go forward from. If it needs to provide a culture, it must think there is none in those who are coming to it.
And who is responsible for defining this 'culture'. Is it not really a random and really changing thing, even the profs/faculty change with it, go along, they do not guide it, unless they do so by agreement with the direction.
I thank whoever for this study, and my being able to read it, I gained a lot from the content.
I really think too, that the opinions/perspectives of all the kids are correct, substantiatable and if one thinks otherwise, they are just making excuses or covering up reality with fantasy. I think the kids are more 'real' than opinionated.
Having been many years in a university setting, I know that even devout christians have problems stemming from their church orientations and committments. I know that the colleges do not respect them any more than a Jew. Unless of course it is a 'christian' college.
The extracuricular activities does attempt to dominate and will if the student isn't stronger. Even if the student (non-religious) isn't acceptable to the majority culture, he is affected and he embraces it at a distance. Only the devout do not, they are rejected and repulsed, both ways.
thanks for the reading.
Post a Comment