This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 22 November 2014, At: 00:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Jewish EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujje20

The Synagogue and the Jewish Supplementary SchoolAlvin I. SchiffPublished online: 23 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Alvin I. Schiff (1978) The Synagogue and the Jewish Supplementary School, Journal of JewishEducation, 46:1, 13-21, DOI: 10.1080/0021642780460104

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0021642780460104

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ALVIN I. SCHIFF

The Synagogue and the Jewish Supplementary School

SUPPLEMENTARY JEWISH EDUCATION — Jewish schooling provided to Jewish chil¬ dren after public school (or private school) hours—is at a critical stage. The supplementary school—the normative form of Jewish education in the United States for three generations—is presently facing the most serious challenge in its history.

Since supplementary Jewish education is essentially congregation-based, the chal¬ lenge speaks to the viability, potential and future of the synagogue as well. Prior to analyzing the dimensions of the chal¬ lenge, a brief introduction will help place the relationship between the synagogue and Jewish schooling in historical per¬ spective.

Historical Background

Throughout the ages, the synagogue has played an important—albeit changing— role in Jewish education. From its incep¬ tion in Babylonian captivity, and later in Palestine, the synagogue served as a house of instruction for adults.

During the synagogue's formative stages, synagogue liturgy developed around the instruction of the Pentateuch and the Prophets. Indeed, "the scriptural readings supplied the content and form of the instruction" of the Jewish adult.1

An example of this is the early synagogue practice of weekly readings in which the Torah was first completed in seven years, and later still, in an annual cycle. And

DR. SCHIFF is Executive Vice President of the Board of Jewish Education of Greater New York.

[13]

ever since, the synagogue has, in a va¬ riety of ways, served as an institution for adult Jewish education—a kind of pop¬ ular university.

During its early years, the Jewish school for youth was a private establishment un¬ attached to the synagogue. The first schools—those organized by Simon ben Shetah for 16- and 17-year-olds in the first century B.C.E., and the elementary schools initiated by Joshua ben Gemala about 125 years later—were private in¬ stitutions set up by individual teachers. Beginning with the time of Bar Kochba, in the second century of the common era, Jewish schooling for the young became identified with the synagogue.

In addition to physically housing the Jewish school, the synagogue of the Bab¬ ylonian, pre-gaonic and gaonic periods had a direct relationship to the organi¬ zation and curriculum of the Jewish school. Indirectly, through the participa¬ tion of children in worship-related activ¬ ities, the synagogue also had significant impact upon their education. The chief aim of Jewish elementary schooling in the middle ages was to prepare young boys for participation in synagogue service. It is noteworthy that several gaonic responsa use the term "tinokot shel bet haknesset" interchangeably with "tinokot shel bet rabban."2

The pattern of school-synagogue rela¬ tionship that prevailed in Babylon was evident also in the west Mediterranean countries (Spain, Southern France and Italy) in the eighth and ninth centuries. In subsequent generations through the 1400's, the traditional liturgy and Torah

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

14 JEWISH EDUCATION

curriculum was enriched by the introduc¬ tion of Hebrew language and grammar and the study of the Prophets and Writ¬ ings. Advanced study included Mishnah, Talmud and such codifiers as Alfasi and Maimonides. In Spain, secular instruc¬ tion was added to the Judaic program.

In northern France and Germany, dur¬ ing the same period of time, the syna¬ gogue was the locus of formal Jewish schooling. Here, during the thirteenth century, the term heder came into use. In the Franco-German heder (a special room in the synagogue) the curriculum which included the scriptures and the Talmud was punctuated by tutelage for the strict observance of the Command¬ ments.

While the communities of Eastern Eu¬ rope—particularly Poland and Lithuania —were fashioned according to the Ger¬ man-Jewish life-style of the refugees who fled there, changes were made in the ed¬ ucational approaches in the schools of these communities. The synagogue con¬ tinued to be the central institution for the education of adults during the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth cen¬ turies in Eastern Europe. However, it was no longer the setting for elementary Jewish schooling. Beginning with the sixteenth century, Jewish education for the young was provided either in a private heder or in a community Talmud Torah, devel¬ oped and maintained especially for the children of the poor.

While the curriculum in both the heder and Talmud Torah concentrated on the Pentateuch and liturgy, the organization, instruction and supervision of the Tal¬ mud Torah was infinitely better than the heder. An innovation in the East Euro¬ pean school was the use of Yiddish as the language of instruction. On the ad¬ vanced level, the yeshivot focused heavi¬ ly on the Talmud and its commentaries. The heder and the Talmud Torah also became the normative forms of Jewish schooling in the Jewish communities of Italy, North Africa, Turkey and the Bal¬

kans where sizable Jewish populations existed.

During the modern post-emancipation period in Europe, a wide variety of school types developed, generally not connected with the synagogue. These included the heder metukan, the Mizrachi school, the Yiddish-secular school, and the Beth Ja¬ cob girls' school.

The American Scene

In America, the first Jewish schools es¬ tablished in the eighteenth and early nine¬ teenth centuries by the Spanish and Ger¬ man immigrants were housed in and con¬ ducted by the various synagogues. The East European immigration in the 188O's, however, brought with it the heder and Talmud Torah, by and large, unrelated to the synagogue. These became the dominant forms of Jewish schooling in the latter part of the nineteenth cen¬ tury and beginning of the twentieth cen¬ tury. The poor, scanty instruction by ill-prepared, unqualified "lo-yutzlah" teach¬ ers in the private hadarim left a perma¬ nent scar on Jewish education in Amer¬ ica. In contrast, the community Talmud Torah, patterned after the heder metu¬ kan in Russia, engaged professional teach¬ ers and was professionally administered. Its curriculum included Hebrew language and literature, history, bible, customs and ceremonies, prayers, and occasionally, Jewish arts (music and arts and crafts).

Against this backdrop, the synagogue school developed gradually in modern American Jewish life. As synagogues were founded in the early 1900's many of them organized supplementary school programs. By 1940, about 80% of the total Jewish school enrollment was under synagogue auspices. The 1940's and 1950's saw the growth of large one-day-a-week and three-day-a-week congregational schools. Concomitant with this develop¬ ment was the almost total eclipse of the communal Talmud Torah which, with rare exception, ceased to exist by the mid-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE SYNAGOGUE AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHOOL 15

1960's. Demographic changes hastened the disintegration of the Talmud Torah as the suburban congregational school grew by leaps and bounds. : The main difference between the com¬ munal Talmud Torah and its synagogue counterpart was, in addition to its spon¬ sorship, the schedule of instruction. Whereas the students in the Talmud Torah studied five days a week, two hours each day, for forty-eight weeks per year, the synagogues conducted either three-day-a-week schools, one-and-a-half to two hours each day, for thirty-six weeks (Conservative and Orthodox), or one-day-a-week schools, two hours each session for thirty-two weeks (Reform).

The rapid growth of the synagogue school necessitated the hiring of large numbers of teaching and supervisory per¬ sonnel. This led to the establishment of the ideological associations of educators as counterparts to the respective rabbinic groups.

With the growth of the schools, the synagogues themselves grew, and the in¬ terdependence between school enrollment and synagogue membership became a reality. Their quantitative growth lulled many synagogues into a sense of com¬ placency. As the enrollments grew, so grew the building plants and the educa¬ tional budgets. And so, too, grew the desire of many synagogues to conduct their educational programs independent of other community resources. After all, they were large and growing even larger, and had sufficient means for developing and main¬ taining their own educational systems. Full-time principalships and even full-time teaching positions became the norm in the large synagogue schools.

By the end of the 1940's a significant number of relatively well-trained prac¬ titioners who had achieved both higher Jewish learning and general education were teaching and supervising congrega¬ tional schools. Even though the financial rewards of employment in synagogue schools were far from satisfactory, there

were more opportunities for full-time and part-time teaching and full-time principal-ships than ever existed before in this country.

Encouraged by increasing enrollments and growing professional resources, the congregational school looked forward to years of continued development and im¬ provement as it became the heir of the fast disappearing communal Talmud To¬ rah. Moreover, the synagogue school was motivated also by the new standards for intensive Jewish education being set by the rapidly growing Jewish day schools.

Needed were the upgrading and inten¬ sification of the two to four hour one-day-a-week school, and the four to six hour three-day-a-week congregational program. Toward this end, each ideological group¬ ing, buoyed up by the growth of its con¬ gregational schools, turned inward to dev¬ elop coordinated ideological programming among its respective schools. For almost three decades, beginning with World War II, there was a strong feeling of self-suf¬ ficiency among the synagogue groups re¬ garding their educational enterprises.

Despite the rapid growth of the con¬ gregational schools, the educational pro¬ grams of the synagogues frequently did not receive adequate lay attention, support or leadership. As one educator put it, the school has been the "stepchild of the synagogue."3 This is amply demonstrated by the relatively low status of the lay edu¬ cation committee members and the pro¬ fessional educators in the synagogue hier¬ archy. The results of this condition were often reflected in the operation and ef¬ fectiveness of the school program.

Where enrollments warranted full-time principals, rabbis gladly left the supervi¬ sion of the school in the hands of the principal. In the smaller, less affluent synagogue schools, many rabbis grudging¬ ly accepted the administrative respon¬ sibility for the conduct of the school, usually with the aid of a head teacher. With some notable exceptions, the attitude

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

16 JEWISH EDUCATION

of the rabbi to the school and its person¬ nel and his role in the educational program have been a source of irritation and frus¬ tration to synagogue educators.

Current Status ' - - •/

In 1963, supplementary school enroll¬ ment started declining rapidly. At its on¬ set, despite forecasts about the potential severity of the decline, the synagogue community demonstrated little anxiety. However, when the disaffection of Jewish youth from Judaism reached alarming proportions in the late sixties, much con¬ cern was voiced about the effectiveness of Jewish schools—a concern which eventual¬ ly led to a rash of community surveys of Jewish education and to serious introspec¬ tion regarding supplementary Jewish schooling.

Studies of the congregational school program demonstrate that this form of Jewish education leaves much to be de¬ sired. They challenge the present form, content and approaches of supplementary education. One study on the curriculum of the three-day-a-week school highlighted the low level of achievement in Hebrew reading, Hebrew conversation, Bible and Jewish history as it bemoaned the "cynical pretentiousness" of the one-day-a-week school."4

The awareness of the shortcomings of the school program has led each of the ideological movements to examine its school curricula and to develop serious projects for curriculum reform. Each of the movements is in the final stages of publishing new curriculum guidelines. Since there is no binding power regarding the curriculum practices of the autono¬ mous schools, the fate of these recom¬ mended programs of education remains to be seen. Moreover, it will take several years of experimentation and careful evaluation to assess the effectiveness and potential impact of the new curricula.

One fact emerged boldly and clearly from all the surveys and self-searching.

Without the support and partnership of the home as well as a supportive climate in the Jewish community, the synagogue school will never be truly effective. To this end, greater interest and activity has been evidenced in parent education and family education programs—so far, too little and too late to counter the vanishing Jewish generation, but, nevertheless a thrust in the right direction.

Despite the findings of the various stu¬ dies which point to the ineffectiveness of congregational education, a variety of worthwhile instructional activities have been taking place in many synagogue schools. The meaningful learning experi¬ ences in these institutions prompted one widely-quoted researcher to state "in many ways, it is unfortunate, however, that Jewish students spend so little time in Jewish schools because, unlike the schools that their parents attended, there are some exciting things being done in Jewish education today."5

To be sure, the relatively few hours of synagogue school attendance no matter how exciting—cannot sufficiently coun¬ teract or compensate for the influence of an unsupportive home and environment. Needed are additional hours for confluent education—the combination of formal learning and Jewish life experiences during the week, on weekends, and during ex¬ tended vacation periods.

Enrollment

At its 1962 peak, national synagogue school enrollment was approximately 520,000. By 1977 it dropped to 280,000, a 46% decrease in fifteen years. To un¬ derscore the impact of the decline, various dimensions of the enrollment drop in New York are discussed below. In Greater New York, congregational school enroll¬ ment peaked in 1965 at 96,000 pupils— 36,000 in Conservative congregational schools, 33,000 in Reform religious schools, and 27,000 in Orthodox after¬ noon schools. By 1977 there were 53,000

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE SYNAGOGUE AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHOOL 17

pupils in supplementary schools—a de¬ cline of 45%, somewhat less than the national decrease. Of this number, 23,700 were enrolled in Conservative congrega¬ tional schools (a drop of 32%); 23,400 were in Reform religious schools (a de¬ crease of 27%); and 5,900 studied in Orthodox afternoon schools (a decline of 75%).

A portion of the decline in Orthodox synagogue schools and a small percentage of the decrease in Conservative congrega¬ tional schools is compensated for by the increase in enrollment in yeshivot and day schools between 1965 and 1976.

The reasons for the decrease are five¬ fold:

(1) The sharply lower birthrate among middle class Jews following World War II is the major cause for the decline. Many American Jewish leaders have tried in vain to alarm the Jewish community about the zero and minus-zero rate of Jewish population growth. Yet this phenomenon still persists in the mid-seventies.

2) The aging Jewish communities and the changes in Jewish demography are significant factors in pupil loss. As com¬ munities grow older and young children mature and move to other areas, many of the older couples remain or are not re¬ placed by younger Jewish families with children.

(3) The fallout from the increasing rates of intermarriage and mixed marriage is still another cause for lowered enroll¬ ments. More children are lost than gained through this phenomenon, which results in a serious net loss in Jewish pupil popu¬ lation.

(4) The increasing number of young Jewish families unaffiliated with the syna¬ gogue is another factor in the decline. This is partly due to prohibitiveness of mem¬ bership requirements and membership fees.

(5) The apathy of many young families to Jewish life is yet another reason. Many young Jewish couples have opted not to conduct their lives as their parents did

with respect to Jewishness. Whereas, by and large, the homes in which they were reared were generally devoid of Jewish content, their parents, nevertheless, sent them to synagogue schools. Many younger folk, on the other hand, do not wish to engage in this kind of "hypocrisy." They neither join synagogues themselves, nor enroll their progeny in congregational schools.6

Overall, the decline severely affected synagogue schools in the urban communi¬ ties and impacted suburban institutions as well. In Greater New York, for exam¬ ple, congregational school enrollment in the boroughs decreased by 63%—from 48,000 in 1965 to 17,500 in 1977. Pupil population in Westchester and Long Is¬ land declined by 19%—from 48,000 in 1965 to 38,500 in 1977—a pattern similar to the rate of decrease in public school enrollments in these areas.

Problems Resulting from the Decline

One of the most critical problems result¬ ing from the decline is the number of small unviable schools. In 1977, 74% of the congregational schools in Greater New York—279 out of a total of 376 schools—had enrollments of less than 100 pupils. Most of these schools (166) enrolled less than 50 students!

The severity of the "small school" dilemma is reflected in the various dis¬ advantages caused by its size. It is not possible, given the current conditions in American synagogues, to operate a quality educational program without sufficient enrollment for proper staffing, scheduling, pupil classification and the provision of a suitable educational climate and en¬ richment activities. The rapid decline has made virtually impossible the achieve¬ ment of these essential elements of a viable school.

Moreover, smaller school enrollments mean smaller membership and less income from membership fees. Synagogues are now saddled with the need to finance

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

18 JEWISH EDUCATION

large education deficits—a responsibility they did not have to face during the years of growing enrollments. For the first time, many congregations have had to dip into their treasuries, raise extra funds from their members, or look outside their mem¬ bership for monetary support. This con¬ dition has focused attention on the role of Federation and the central agency for Jewish education in financing supplemen¬ tary Jewish education.

In a number of synagogues the financial crisis is particularly aggravating because the school enrollments, small as they may be, are often entirely comprised of chil¬ dren of non-members who are either un¬ able or unwilling to share the burdens of carrying on the educational program. This is especially true in several Orthodox syna¬ gogues in Queens and Brooklyn where members' children attend day schools. The rabbis of these congregations feel strongly that the responsibility for educating the pupils in their congregational schools be¬ longs to the larger Jewish community— i.e. Federation.

In light of the crucial issue of Jewish survival and the financial problems facing the synagogues, there is serious question¬ ing in synagogue circles about Federa¬ tion's support of individual Y's and Jew¬ ish Centers. "If Federation provides a significant percentage of the annual budget of the Y's which have relatively little or no Jewish content in their programs," asks an influential synagogue leader, "why doesn't it support congregational schools whose sole objective is guaranteeing the survival of the Jewish community?"

In New York the challenge of funding synagogue schools is compounded by the fact that, as yet, the level of communal support to yeshivot and day schools, which is presently considered a priority, is far from adequate. The combined need for educational services and financial aid to congregational schools and day schools underscores the grave necessity for Federa¬ tion to dramatically increase its support to Jewish education—even if this means

drastic reprioritization of allocations in the event new sources of funding are not available for Jewish schooling.

The financial problems of congregations have affected the respective ideological groups which have had to delimit their local and national educational operations —a modification which ultimately will benefit the cause of Jewish communal education as it increases the dependence of the ideological groups upon communal assistance.

The rapidly changing school demo¬ graphy has led to the diminishing status of the synagogue educator. In the first instance, there has been a breakdown of communally developed standards regard¬ ing the hiring, firing, licensing and cer¬ tification of educational personnel. As a result of decreasing enrollments and es¬ calating costs many congregations have terminated their full-time principals and many veteran teachers. A significant num¬ ber of instructional and supervisory posi¬ tions are being filled by part-time non-career Jewish educators whose salary base is dictated primarily by financial concerns of the synagogues.

In addition to causing unprecedented demoralization among educational profes¬ sionals, this turn of events has also made a large number of rabbis unhappy. Many spiritual leaders were charged with the ad¬ ministration and supervision of their re¬ spective synagogue schools, a responsibili¬ ty they reluctantly assumed and for which they generally have had no specific train¬ ing, little expertise and even less desire to fulfill. On the other hand, there are some cases where, in order to ensure the economic viability of their own positions, rabbis are forced to help liquidate prin-cipalships in their synagogue schools.

The problem of the quality of instruc¬ tion and supervision cannot be over¬ emphasized. The most serious obstacles confronting the Board of Jewish Educa¬ tion's pedagogic specialists as they en¬ deavor to help schools improve their pro¬ grams are essentially personnel-related

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE SYNAGOGUE AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHOOL 19

problems: lack of professional supervi¬ sion, untrained teachers, rapid turnover of teachers and principals, and low staff morale.

The challenge here is six-fold: 1) to find ways to deal equitably with excessed personnel; 2) to make every effort to retain effective practitioners; 3) to make a major thrust in retraining potentially good teachers; 4) to recruit new talented personnel; 5) to train and/or retrain rab¬ bis for educational supervision and in¬ struction; and 6) to upgrade substantially the economic and social status of syna¬ gogue school personnel.

School Consolidation

The small schools challenge the social planning ability of the organized Jewish community to consolidate them into larger, more viable units. The advantages of merging small schools into more substan¬ tial neighborhood schools are obvious. Consolidation can help maximize educa¬ tional standards, provide enriched pro¬ gramming, encourage intra-congregational activity, increase community stability, in¬ sure appropriate supervision, and elimi¬ nate unnecessary duplication of expendi¬ tures.

To be effective, mergers require a high degree of cooperation and trust, a sense of community and the ability to sublimate one's institutional objectives in favor of the larger communal good. Consolidation requires decisions regarding the choice of a name for the new school unit, its location, the composition of the new school board, the education program, staffing, supervision, salaries, role of rab¬ binic leadership, and bussing.

Moreover, questions regarding tuition fees, sharing the costs of maintenance and clerical assistance, new parents' synagogue affiliation, junior congregation activities, and Bar and Bat Mitzvah preparation must all be resolved prior to achieving consolidation. This formidable list of challenges demonstrates why mergers are not easy to accomplish. The most difficult

problems, however, are persuading parents to allow their children to be transported longer distances, and convincing syna¬ gogues that their membership potential will not be adversely affected by merger.

Ideology plays a crucial role in school consolidation. Where possible, mergers should naturally be intra-ideological. How¬ ever, bi-d'let b'reirah, the severity of the "small school" problem has motivated many synagogues to consider seriously the establishment of inter-ideological com¬ munity schools. In these institutions, pro¬ gram and scheduling arrangements can assure religious instruction and Bar and Bat Mitzvah preparation for the respective students of the merging schools while the bulk of the pupils' education is provided in a consolidated community school setting.

During 1974 and 1975, with the help of a modest allocation from Federation's Program Development Fund for Jewish Education, BJE awarded grants to help consolidate some 22 synagogue schools into 6 larger units. Since that time, con¬ solidation efforts have waned, particularly due to opposition from parents, to the un¬ willingness of synagogues to give up their school autonomy, and to their fear of losing membership.

For all its advantages, school consolida¬ tion remains a most significant challenge to the Jewish community. However, it will not be possible to consolidate all small schools. For these institutions, edu¬ cational upgrading will depend upon how effectively they can personalize their edu¬ cational programs, individualize instruc¬ tion, and create a vibrant Jewish life climate—all of which will require signi¬ ficant financial investment for appropriate staff and realia.

Secondary Education It is an axiomatic that adolescence is

the most crucial period for Jewish educa¬ tion. Although there has been a significant increase in the proportion of elementary school graduates continuing in high

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

20 JEWISH EDUCATION

school classes, the challenge of secondary Jewish education under synagogue au¬ spices is far from being met.

Here is where intercongregational ef¬ forts are an absolute necessity. Consolida¬ tion on the high school level is certainly much easier than elementary school mergers. In this case, secondary education provides an opportunity for coordinated activity with local Y's and Jewish Centers. The two inter-synagogue supplementary high schools (established with the guidance of JBE in Canarsie and Pelham Parkway in 1973 and 1976), which meet in the "neutral" facilities of a community center might serve as models for this kind of cooperative effort.

To bring about increased continuation, nothing short of a massive promotion campaign is needed. As important as recruitment is the development of new, exciting curricula with less emphasis on structure and more attention to learning projects, informal activities, weekend shab-batonim, summer camp programs and Israel-based seminars, and the engaging of specialized staffing with expertise in both formal and informal educational methodology.

Children With Special Needs

Synagogue schools in the last quarter of the twentieth century are faced with unique problems resulting largely from the critical changes in the patterns of Jewish family life. The rapid increase in intermarriage and mixed marriage7 has serious implications for the Jewish school. A recent survey by this writer of the ef¬ fects of intermarriage on Jewish schooling revealed that while only 3.2% of the pupils in the sample studied were progeny of mixed marriage and intermarried couples, 23% of the enrollment sample in Queens, 26% of the pupils in Man¬ hattan schools, and 12% of children in Westchester were products of intermar¬ riage. The consensus of the responding principals is that these parents are gen¬

erally well-intentioned regarding Jewish education for their offspring. However, the respondents claimed that many chil¬ dren are confused about their religious identity. The effect of this identity dilem¬ ma upon their attitude to Jewish studies and their behavior in school should not be hard to comprehend.

The impact of this growing phenomenon on the school itself is poignantly sum¬ marized by one of the responding prin¬ cipals. "The problems created by the lack of support and lack of Jewishness in the homes where both parents are born Jewish are hard enough to manage. Now, on top of this, the congregational school has to cope with the social and psychological problems of children of in¬ termarried parents. Needless to say, we are unprepared for this responsibility."

Added to the problem of intermarriage is the increasing incidence of Jewish chil¬ dren from broken homes. In some schools, as many as one-fourth of the pupils are from single-parent families. To be re¬ levant, synagogue schools must be pre¬ pared to respond effectively to the needs of these children and their parents.

Another group of pupils with unique needs are those with learning disabilities. It is estimated that about 10% of all children in the general population are learning disabled. (And there is no reason to believe that the enrollment in syna¬ gogue schools is an exception to this con¬ dition.) Special instructional approaches are required for these pupils whether they are mainstreamed or taught in special classes.

Some efforts have been made in special education by the respective ideological commissions on education. In New York, via support from Federation's Program Development Fund for Jewish Education, the Board of Jewish Education has pro¬ vided small program grants and modest guidance to the 25 special education classes sponsored by synagogue schools in the New York area. However, much

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE SYNAGOGUE AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHOOL 21

more must be done to respond adequately to the special Jewish education needs of the slow, retarded and learning disabled youngsters in congregational schools.

Adult Education The aging of the Jewish community and

the increasing number of older Jewish adults is a growing reality for which many synagogues are beginning to realize the need to retool their current educational programs. Traditionally, the synagogue played a significant role in the lives of adults with leisure time. This role must be recaptured in the last quarter of the twentieth century and beyond.

Moreover, the open society and the disaffection of many Jewish families re¬ quire the synagogue to rethink its ap¬ proach to the scores of unaffiliated Jewish families in its environs. Part of the new approach must include formal and in¬ formal educational opportunities and Jew¬ ish-life experiences outside the regular

synagogue operation for family groups and adults. .

The synagogues located in areas where Israeli yordim and Russian Jewish im¬ migrants reside have a unique opportunity to provide Jewish educational programs for these families who, by and large, are either uninvolved in or are on the peri¬ phery of Jewish life in America. Meeting their Jewish cultural, communal and re¬ ligious needs also requires new innovative outreach strategies.

In Sum The educational problems of the mod¬

ern American synagogue are numerous and complicated. At this critical stage in its history, the synagogue has the op¬ portunity to turn problem into promise, and promise into reality. The key to the materialization of these challenges is an openness to confront the problems and the flexibility and willingness to respond to them unselfishly, realistically, and creatively.

REFERENCES

1. Morris, Nathan, The Jewish School, New York, The Jewish Education Committee Press 1964, p. 85.

2. Asaf, Simhah, Mekorot Letoldot Hahinuch, Tel Aviv, Dvir Volume 1, p. 4.

3. As early as 1929 Dr. Alexander M. Dush-kin noted that the synagogue did not fully integrate the school into the synagogue structure. "Congregation and Community in Jewish Education" Jewish Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1929.

4. Ackerman, Walter, "An Analysis of Se¬ lected Courses of Study of Conservative Congregational Schools," Jewish Educa¬ tion, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1970.

5. Himmelfarb, Harold, "The Impact of Re¬ ligious Schooling Upon Adult Religious Involvement," Unpublished Ph.D. Disser¬ tation, University of Chicago, 1974.

6. It is precisely this latter reason that moti¬ vated the Board of Jewish Education in 1974 to embark upon a media enrollment campaign, popularly known as the "Survi¬ val Through Education Drive." An infor¬ mal survey conducted in Greater New York in the 1973-74 school year revealed

that about 25% of all Jewish children of school age will not have been exposed to some formal Jewish educational experi¬ ence by the time they reach adulthood. During the three years that the campaign was conducted (in the month of Septem¬ ber—1974, 1975, 1976) over 3,000 Jewish children were enrolled in Jewish schools —children who would otherwise not have found their way into a Jewish classroom.

It is interesting to note that the Survival Drive helped reverse the enrollment decline in Greater New York. In 1975, for the first time in ten years, BJE's annual statis¬ tical report revealed a slight increase in the pupil population. The increment was due to two factors—the continued growth of the day school, and the slowing down of the supplementary school decline. Fifty-four percent, or 1,600, of all new enroll¬ ments that resulted from the Survival Drive were reported in the supplementary schools.

7. According to the National Jewish Popula¬ tion Study 31.7% of Jewish persons mar¬ rying between 1966 and 1972. chose a non-Jewish spouse. "Intermarriage," CJF National Population Study, n.d.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

34 2

2 N

ovem

ber

2014