Teaching Philosophy at Mandel

Teaching Philosophy at Mandel

Description

In my years of teaching I have had the privilege of working in a variety of institutions of higher education and addressing diverse audiences both in Israel and the USA. I have come to appreciate the deep impact such diversity has on the nature of the educational experience, and the ways the art of teaching and learning is structured in each very different context. Israeli students, for example, are less “professionalized”; you can't assume that all of them come fully prepared to class, that they have read the materials ahead of time, or that their writing assignments will be completed in the standard protocol of research papers. They are, on the other hand, mature and expressive; they tend to be independent, and they participate with intensity. Their American counterparts are much more professional in their attitude and habits. They are prepared for class and are well trained in writing and structured argument. Their mode of articulation and self-presentation radiates competence. The students in this respect mirror their respective general cultures; Israelis compensate for lack of professionalism with resilience, inventiveness and improvisation, sometimes at the cost of arrogance and shallowness, an attitude which Americans would not tolerate for their own good reasons. Professionalism insures a certain level of competence that doesn't rely particularly on great talent, though such talent might be abundant. A decent physician who follows the protocol will do well even if he or she is not particularly outstanding, though too much emphasis on professional protocol might harm the upper echelon of physicians. It is for reasons such as this that the gaps in Israeli classrooms, in general, could be quite wide, as is the case with everything that the country does. Such looseness of structure might be beneficial to the small upper level of the class, but lack of standards harms the middle level of the class a great deal. In an important way the different attitudes between the students are grounded in a deeper contrast of geopolitical standing and cultural traditions. The contrast is between a small country that is dependent on its wits and ingenuity to survive and excel, and whose population is not accustomed to civic traditions, and a vast great empire with a strong civic bond formed within a sense of constitutional order and freedom which aims at securing the promise to reward effort with success. One such experience of a uniquely striking educational context can be found in my years of working with a succession of cohorts of fellows in the Mandel School for Educational Leadership (MSEL), which are completely different from anything that I have ever encountered. I want to reflect on what the Mandel teaching experience has meant to me and what I have learned from this encounter as a teacher and as a philosopher. A good starting point to describe the uniqueness of the context is the extraordinary heterogeneity of the Mandel class. A typical Mandel class represents the best of the fractured Israeli society. It consists of Palestinian Israelis (both Muslims and Christians), Religious Zionists from the right—sometimes settlers, ultra-Orthodox men or women, Modern Orthodox Jews—usually from the Jerusalem area, and fellows that are drawn from Israel's full variety of traditional and secular streams—the kibbutz, Tel Aviv, or the progressive movements of Israel on the left. By way of contrast, in an ordinary class at the university, I rarely have Palestinian Israeli students or ultra-Orthodox students, and its make-up is far more predictable. It is important to distinguish the heterogeneity of the Mandel class from the way ethnic, racial and geographical diversity is expressed in the American classrooms I have encountered. The diverse ethnic student body in the US does indeed encompass different groups, but at least in the public sphere of the classroom they seem to share more or less the same ideological stance and value commitments. Students who happen not to share the liberal consensus of the class, such as Christian conservatives, usually tend to keep silent. In the case of the Mandel class, its heterogeneity consists of radically opposing ideological commitments which touch upon the most basic features of Israeli or Jewish identity. Differences are radical and stakes are high. The Mandel class is also a coherent working entity unlike classes elsewhere. I might teach a seminar at the university with the same size as the Mandel class, but students might find themselves together in a seminar once in three years. Mandel fellows share an intense study environment for two years, which insures that they cannot live together in their radical diversity by ignoring the differences amongst them. It is for this reason that each Mandel class has a personality of its own. This personality is shaped, among other factors, by the way the group has managed to live in diversity and to navigate the radical differences among them and the way these differences impact the most basic fabric of their human interactions. When I enter a Mandel class I know that it already has a past and will have a future; I join the life stream of a group at a certain moment of their ongoing engagement.

Source Publication

Empowering Leaders: The Mandel Foundation Vision in Action

Source Editors/Authors

Daniel Pekarsky

Publication Date

2021

Teaching Philosophy at Mandel

Find @ NYU

Share

COinS