Towards Mutual Understanding (TMU): Religious and ...

ISSN 2239-978X

Journal of Educational and Social Research

Vol. 3 (1) January 2013

Towards Mutual Understanding (TMU): Religious and Secular Students In Higher Education Meirav Hen, PhD Department of Education Tel-Hai Academic College E-Mail- .

Irit Sasson, PhD Department of Education, Tel-Hai Academic College E-Mail- Doi:10.5901/jesr.2012.v3n1p151 Abstract ! " # $ % & '"() " * % " " enhance self- " + -religious, highereducation college, a A / 01 - " + / 2 3 Key Words4 3 5 6 ! ! 6 Dialogue.

1. Introduction One of the main problems facing multi-cultural theory stems from the fact that different communities make opposing claims and have diverse aspirations and goals which need to be addressed within a common political, administrative, budgetary, educational and judicial framework (Nachtomy, 2003). Israeli society presents a particularly interesting case of multicultural existence. It comprises many different communities and identities, with very different purposes and hopes for the future, and diverse forms of social organization and modes of living. The homogenizing agenda of mainstream Zionism - its attempt to blend the variety of Diaspora Jewish communities into a single Israeli identity has been seriously challenged in the last two decades. Israeli society is being perceived as disintegrating into heterogeneous groups which are not only very different, but also challenge the ideal of a uniform Israeli identity by their conscious struggle to maintain their own (Israeli) identity and gain recognition (Liebman & Yadgar, 2004; Sagi, 2003). The state of Israel portended the birth of 'the new Jew' who does not have any need for a community. This 'new Jew' has a State that governs the economic system, carries out socialization by means of an educational system, culture and even religious schools (Ben-Yosef, 2001; Tabory, 2003). 151

ISSN 2239-978X



However, in spite of these frameworks the need for belonging and 'communal' intimacy is a significant element in the Israeli ethos (Calderon, 2000). Communal existence in Israel where both religious and non-religious Jews of varying ethnic backgrounds, as well as various non-Jewish groups, claim recognition and insist on respect and space, demands that a meaningful, rational dialogue take place that will enhance multicultural awareness and practice (Sorek & Ceobanu, 2009; Sasson, Tabory & Selinger - Abutbul, 2008). Caspi (1998) argued that Israeli Judaism can exist only if the builders of the new Israeli Judaism will manage the friction or unstable compromise produced by secular Jews who wish to separate church and State opposite Jews who prefer that religion dominate all aspects of life. Stern (2006) claims that Jewish life in Israel is deeply affected by Western-liberal thought interacting with traditional Jewish concepts. Different Jewish communities endorse different strategies to cope with the cultural religious-secular duality: the religious choose compartmentalization (avoidance); the ultra-Orthodox alienation (withdrawal); and the secularists, abdication (oblivion). All three strategies are equally ineffective, and none offers an inclusive model that integrates both cultures. Both parties consider their theoretical and practical scope as all-inclusive, and both claim exclusivity in the regulation of reality. In order to stabilize Jewish society in Israel, however, both groups must come to terms with Israeli cultural duality. Goodman and Yonna (2004) agree that the Jewish identity led by the Orthodox approach perceives the secular milieu as lacking spirituality, rituals, faith, and holiness. The Israeli religious identity was formed opposing secular Zionism and emphasizing the differences between groups. Goodman (2006) notes that as long as Israeli society is locked in a ‘degenerating’ dichotomy between secular and religious groups, its ability to carry out a meaningful rational dialogue and to form a Jewish identity that values and respects all groups is in jeopardy. A rationale for 'tying the strands' together in the face of friction among various groups can be found in Charles Taylor's (1994) work on the ‘Politics of Recognition’. Taylor insists that the core of a multi-cultural discourse involves the question of identity and its formation, the notion of the value and respect we ascribe to the uniqueness and to the variety of different cultures, the idea of society's recognition of the demand to realize a unique lifestyle and its continuation, and its ability to carry out a meaningful and rational dialogue. He argued that this discourse is a founding element of personal and collective identity, and enables a similar conceptual platform within and between groups. Taylor believes that it is impossible to disconnect an individual's values from his identity, and a person's individual's identity from his communal identity. He claims that an individual's identity is woven into the group's identity since it is formed and likely to be realized solely in the course of contact and dialogue between the individual and his group members. Taylor advocates the recognition of different cultures and their rights, and their essential role in the formation of the identity of their members. He believes that it is possible and even necessary to hold a rational dialogue between different cultures, and presents an alternative to those who claim it impossible to hold a rational dialogue concerning matters of values because of a conceptual gap that prevents a meaningful dialogue. Taylor does not deny the existence of power struggles, but stresses that recognition and identity occur when there is a role not only to relations of oppression and domination, but also to moral yearnings for identity. Identity, according to Taylor, is shaped from a discourse and the very definition of a unique identity assumes the existence of a hidden or overt dialogue between it and other identities. A unique identity cannot be realized without a place for common discourse. Each identity becomes different and unique as it is shaped and realized in the course of negotiation with other identities. Since the discourse is a founding element of personal and collective identity, lack of discourse will finally lead to depriving different cultures of their values. A society must be encouraged to recognize the values of other cultures. The discourse among identities is not inevitable but necessary and constitutes the basis for negotiation and recognition. The negotiation serves to expand the norms and values of each group, and to introduce it to the characteristics of a different culture. An identity is formed in a place in which moral aspirations play a founding role and a question such as: "who am I" is associated with questions such as: "what is it proper for me to be" and "what do I have to do". In Taylor's opinion, identity is not a definite concept devoid of history; it is formed in the course of negotiation for recognition in an actual

152

ISSN 2239-978X



historical context. For this reason it feeds on meetings with other identities and may also be modified and expanded. Concerning the current debate, Taylor's word-view inevitably calls for the inclusion of both cultural spheres, secular and religious, in the formation of any valid and recognized communal Jewish identity. Goldman (2008) calls for a ‘Jewish community renewal’: He argues that the essential foundation of democracy – at both state and community levels – is not the formal practices but the delicate integration between individual autonomy and the sharing of thought and action among individuals. Ben-Yosef (2001) proposes three core elements upon which the new Jewish Community in Israel is to be founded: the creative learning of Israeli heritage; the active participation in events that call for emotional experience; and the realization of social accountability. The study of the 'Torah' may be based on didactic activity and spread over all ages. At the heart of this approach are to be found the religious colleges, Batei Midrash. Goodman (2006) argues that both groups need Batei-Midrash as an opportunity to study Torah without subordinating oneself to the uncompromising discipline of the 'Halacha' (the Jewish law). Such a framework respects and allows religious people to satisfy their appetite for religion as well as the non-religious individuals' desire to realize one’s loyalty to the nation. The mutual learning experience of both groups in a context imbued with respect and appreciation may be perceived as a way to bridge the gap and through a constant dialogue both parties may experience self growth. It seems that for the Batei-Midrash-model to work, one has to cope with the following dilemmas: 1. maintaining a unique identity in an open and pluralistic society; 2. Retaining a place for joint responsibility and identity accompanied by a recognition of separate identities. 3. Respecting and acknowledging dual identities. (Ben-Yosef, 2001) The recent years have marked a movement and development in Israeli society that implies a search for a new kind of Jewish identity and communality. The claim for community renewal has exceeded the sphere of philosophy to include the sphere of action. Several research projects have been conducted to study the characteristics of Jewish organizations dealing with the renewal of Judaism in the secular sphere, (Azulai & Tabory, 2008; Ben Sasson Furstenberg & Cariati, 2007; Hevlin, 2006; Sagiv &Wolomaski-Feder, 2007; Wolf & Baaher, 2003 Yair, Sagiv, Shimborsky, Akrai, & Lichtman, 2006; Yoffe, 2000), programs for Jewish Leadership (Kopelowitz & Sakal, 2009), and Judaism as an educational matter in schools and higher education (Sales & Saxe, 2006). Overall findings suggest that in the last two decades many Jewish colleges (Batei- Midrash and Midrashot) were established with the main goal of bringing religious and secular Jews together to cope with the question of 'Jewish identity in Israeli society’ as their key focus. Other goals included influencing the Jewish character of Israeli state and society, deepening Jewish knowledge among Israeli elites and the general population, building or strengthening community through the use of Jewish learning, culture and ritual, and strengthening ties between Israeli Jews of different religious and ideological backgrounds. The main and significant finding concerns the desire of the learners to study and immerse themselves in the Jewish sources. While secular people are searching for a way of realizing themselves as “new Israeli Jews”, religious people experience this search as a threat to what they perceive to be the “real Judaism”. The participants remain with their own cultural group; they are not really motivated to develop a dialogue or a significant social change (Yair et. al, 2006). Goodman (2006) proposed a new model of academic Beit- Midrash, collapsing and combining the religious and academic training that the yeshiva and university traditionally impart, respectively. He created a model in higher education where religious students study in order to expand their spiritual world and strengthen their personality.. The academic Beit-Midrash strives to shape a new scholarly agenda, one that fits the spiritual needs of the Israeli society, in order to be able to produce scholars who will know how to cope with basic Israeli dilemmas. By establishing a broad perspective for the learner, one can conduct a dialogue with both Torah and secular knowledge as a means for developing a new Jewish identity that includes both secular and religious groups.

153

ISSN 2239-978X



2. Purpose of the Present Study This study aims to explore a unique academic intervention that was developed to meet the Israeli society’s struggle to ‘mend the rift’ between religious and secular communities. The main goal of this program - which mixes the secular academic and the religious world in a meaningful, cultural way was to create an opportunity for religious young people to enhance their self-growth with the goal of ‘developing an authentic self identity’ that would help launch a rational dialogue between religious and secular students. The program interweaves Torah studies and creativity- drama for men and dance for women - as a means to enhance personal and group Jewish identity among religious students. In order to assess and evaluate the contributions of this academic intervention as a practical framework for developing self-growth and dialogue between groups, the research question was : How, based on Taylor’s theoretical framework, did the academic intervention of interweaving Torah studies and creativity, contribute to religious students’ self and group identities, and to a rational dialogue with secular students. 3. Research Methods The research method combined quantitative and qualitative measures that aim to deepen and expand the understanding of the program's effect. Measurements included four questionnaires: I. Demographic details: gender, age, religious identity, and marital status for both secular and religious students. II. Attitudes items focused on the academic curriculum's contributions: Secular and religious students graded their degree of agreement regarding 24 statements based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 for full agreement). Items were divided into three main categories presented in Table no. 1 III. Open-ended questions, with a focus on religious students' perceptions regarding the intervention program. IV. Initial expectations from the program and program contributions to the student. Table 1: Categories and examples-Attitudes Questionnaire

Category

Attitude towards the curriculum

Attitudes Change towards religious/secular Contributions personal growth

for

Item Examples The academic workshops contribute to my learning processes The free-choice academic courses are important for my academic development The introductory courses are important for my academic development My attitude towards secular people were changed positively The Program expanded my educational & psychological knowledge The Program expanded my personal introspection skills

0.537

0.561

0.894

Questionnaires were analyzed statistically, while content analysis was conducted with the open-ended questions in order to identify specific themes. 4. Participants The participants were 79 third-year students at Tel-Hai Academic College, 44 religious students (out of 50 who participated in the TMU intervention program) and 35 secular students. All students 154

ISSN 2239-978X



completed the demographic, attitude and relationship questionnaires; in addition, religious students were asked to reflect on the intervention by means of expectations and contributions. Participants’ Characteristics - Students Table 2 presents religious and secular students' characteristics. Table 2: Religious and secular students' characteristics N Religious

44

Secular

35

Gender Male

39%

Female

61%

Male

9%

Female

91%

Age 20-25 26-30 30-35 20-25 26-30 30-35

80% 20% 0% 54% 43% 3%

Family status Single Married Married* + Single Married* Married +

41% 20% 39% 77% 12% 11%

Region North Center South North Center South

68% 32% 0% 94% 6% 0%

* One divorced

As shown in Table 2, most participants were females, age 20-30. The majority of the secular students were single while most of the religious students were married or married with children. Most participants lived in the northern region of Israel. Table 3 presents students' religious identity as they identified themselves in the questionnaires. Table 3: Students' religious N Religious Secular

44 35

Ultraorthodox 4% 0%

Religious

Traditional

Jew

Repents

Secular

Atheist

73% 11%

14% 23%

5% 0%

2% 0%

2% 63%

0% 3%

Students were asked about their parental religious identity and we found a high degree of correspondence between students' present religious identity and the religious tendency in their parents' home. Intervention Program The "( program was established as a fixed program for religious students in the college-level Education Department. The intervention represented 40 academic credits (one third of the academic bachelor degree) that were called Beit-Midrash ( Jewish academy) and focused on Torah and creative (Movement, Drama, and Music) studies, taught in experiential learning methods and studied in " Hevruta" (a unique " learning together" mode, typical of Jewish Beit-Midrash). The curriculum focused on deepening and widening the Jewish religious identity in creative and expressive ways, and created a spiritual place where they could examine themselves in relation to their faith and their personal inner world. 5. Results Results will be displayed as follows: first we shall describe the attitudes questionnaire outcomes indicating differences between secular and religious groups. Further qualitative results will focus on

155

ISSN 2239-978X



religious students' expectations, perceptions of contributions, and cultural identity in relation to the intervention program. Finally, differences regarding relationships between groups will be presented. Outcomes - Students' responses to the attitudes questionnaire In order to complete the investigation of students' attitude towards the TMU intervention program we examined 24 statements relating to three core categories as presented in Table 1. Table 4 presents comparison results.

Table 4: Religious and secular students' attitude regarding the program (N=79)

Attitudes Categories

Attitude towards the curriculum Attitudes Change towards religious/secular Contributions for personal growth

Average Agreement (S.D.) '( ; Positive Positive ---> Negative Positive with no change Negative with no change No answer

Religious Students' Attitude ! ! N=44 45% 14% 30% 11% 0%

Secular Students' Attitude 6 ! @;F= 17% 20% 37% 6% 20%

Table 7 shows that 45% of the religious students claimed they changed their attitude towards secular students in a positive manner as a result of the intervention. In contrast, to the religious students, only 17% of the secular students reported an improvement in their attitude towards religious students. The comparison between groups showed a significant correlation between the group to which one belongs (i.e. religious or secular) and the change in the individual's relationship with the other group that occurred following the program( F=4, p