Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

From Yeshiva to Academia: The Argumentative Writing Characteristics of Ultra-Orthodox Male Students

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study compares the argumentative writing characteristics of students from different sociocultural backgrounds. We focused on Jewish ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) students, educated in a segregated religious school for boys (yeshiva), who are now attempting to integrate in secular higher education in Israel. To better understand the unique characteristics of this population, we reviewed 92 essays written by Haredi students, and compared them with 76 essays by public education (PE) graduates. Our analysis was based on the cognitive and sociocultural perspectives of argumentation. Both bottom-up and top-down criteria were used to elicit the argumentative writing characteristics either emerging from the data or based on existing theories. Our primary findings indicate that Haredi students have distinct argumentative characteristics, including the use of more complex and dialectic arguments and unique persuasive tactics. These findings are discussed in light of previous research on yeshiva learning methods and recommendations are provided for adjusting the existing higher education curricula to suit both PE and Haredi students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Code Availability

Please contact the corresponding author.

References

  • Albertinti, John. 2008. Teaching of writing and diversity: Access, identity, and achievement. In Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text, ed. Charles Bazermann, 387–398. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Richard C., Kim Nguyen-Jahiel, Brian McNurlen, Anthi Archodidou, So.-young Kim, A. Alina Reznitskaya, Marina Tillmanns, and Laurie Gilbert. 2001. The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition and Instruction 19(1): 1–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asterhan, Christa C. S., and Baruch B. Schwarz. 2016. Argumentation for learning: Well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist 51(2): 164–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, Arnetha F. 2000. Empowering pedagogies that enhance the learning of multicultural students. The Teachers College Record 102(6): 1006–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bank of Israel. 2012. Annual report for 2012: Developments in the recent months. Jerusalem: Bank Israel Research Department (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Chaim, Reuven, Zvi Bekerman, and Baruch B. Schwarz. 2019. Making the written text oral by collaborating in argumentation: Towards detecting chavruta processes among ultra-Orthodox learners. In The oral and the textual in Jewish tradition and Jewish education, ed. Jonathan Cohen, Barry Holtz, and Matt Goldish, 242–283. Jerusalem: Magnes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Menahem Blondheim, and Gonen Dori-Hacohen. 2002. Traditions of dispute: From negotiations of Talmudic texts to the arena of political discourse in the media. Journal of Pragmatics 34(10): 1569–1594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, John D., Ann L. Brown, and Rodney R. Cocking. 1999. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Benjamin. 2017. The Haredim: A guide to their beliefs and sectors. Tel Aviv: Am Oved (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Center of Educational Technology. 2020. Mila tova meod: Understanding, written expression and language. Tel-Aviv: Author (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlap, Luba R. 2009. Rhetorical and stylistic characteristics of Talmudic exegesis literature: The case of the Soloveitchik School. Hebrew Union College Annual 80: 39–63 (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, Gloria, and Anne-Marie. Nuñez. 2014. Understanding the racial transfer gap: Modeling underrepresented minority and nonminority students’ pathways from two-to four-year institutions. The Review of Higher Education 37(3): 291–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demir, Yeliz, and Dale Hample. 2019. A cross-cultural study of argument orientations of Turkish and American college students: Is silence really golden and speech silver for Turkish students? Argumentation 33(4): 521–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, Andrea A. 2008. A note from the editor. Cognition and Instruction 26(4): 427–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong, Ting, Richard C. Anderson, Il-Hee. Kim, and Yuan Li. 2008. Collaborative reasoning in China and Korea. Reading Research Quarterly 43(4): 400–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, Nadav, Einat Heyd-Metzuyanim, and Uri Onn. 2015. Between mathematics and Talmud: The construction of a hybrid discourse in an ultra-Orthodox classroom. In Proceedings of 39th Psychology of Mathematics Education conference, Vol. 2, ed. Tracey Muir and Jill Wells, 257–265. Hobart: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, Sible, Shirley Simon, and Jonathan Osborne. 2004. TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education 88(6): 915–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, Sibel, and Maria Pilar Jiménez-Aleixandre. 2012. Argumentation in science education research: Perspectives from Europe. In Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrospective and prospective, ed. Doris Jorda and Justin Dillon, 253–289. Rotterdam: Brill Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, Sibel, Yasemin Ozdem, and Jee-Young Park. 2015. Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998–2014. International Journal of STEM Education 2 (1): 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, Linda, and John R. Hayes. 1981. A cognitive process: Theory of writing. College Composition and Communication 32(4): 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Menachem. 1991. The Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) society: Sources, trends and processes. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Israeli Ministry of Education. 2012. The Hebrew curriculum (reading comprehension, expression, and grammar) for 7–12th grades. Jerusalem: Author Hebrew. https://meyda.education.gov.il/files/Curriculum/hebrew-7-12.pdf

  • Kolstø, Stein D. 2006. Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education 28(14): 1689–1716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Deanna. 1991. The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Deanna, Yahan Wang, and Huamei Li. 2010. Why argue? Developing understanding of the purposes and values of argumentative discourse. Discourse Processes 48(1): 26–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Deanna, and Wendy Moore. 2015. Argumentation as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice 1(1): 66–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malach, Gilad, Lee Cahaner, and Eitan Regev. 2016. The five-year program of the Council for Higher Education for the Haredi population for 2012–2016. Jerusalem: Council for Higher Education (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, George E., Richard Beach, Jamie Smith, and Jennifer Van Der Heide. 2011. Teaching and learning argumentative reading and writing: A review of research. Reading Research Quarterly 46(3): 273–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, Michael, and Gregory Schraw. 2007. Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students’ writing. The Journal of Experimental Education 76(1): 59–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, Michael, Ian J. Dove, Nathan Slife, CarolAnne M. Kardash, Refika Turgut, and David Vallett. 2018. Using critical questions to evaluate written and oral arguments in an undergraduate general education seminar: A quasi-experimental study. Reading and Writing 32: 1531–1552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, Jonathan, Sibel Erduran, and Shirley Simon. 2004. Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41(10): 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peri Hazan, Lotam. 2013. The ultra-Orthodox education in Israel: Law, culture, and politics. Jerusalem: Institute for Legislative Research and Comparative Law (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Polo, C., C. Plantin, K. Lund, and G. Niccolai 2013, September. Cohering Without Converging: Students’ Use of Doxa, Norms and Values while Debating about SSI (Mexico, USA, France). In Conférence de l’Association Européenne d’Education Scientifique (ESERA).‏

  • Proctor, Katarzyna, and I-Wen. Lily. 2011. The 1st person plural in political discourse: American politicians in interviews and in a debate. Journal of Pragmatics 43(13): 3251–3266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regev, Eitan (ed.). 2016. The challenges of integrating Haredim into academic studies: State of the nation report. Jerusalem: Weiss A. Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, Troy D. 2004. Informal reasoning regarding socio-scientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41(5): 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, Baruch B. 2011. “Hevruta” learning in Lithuanian Yeshivas: Recurrent learning of Talmudic issues. In Education and religion: Authority and autonomy, ed. Immanuel Etkes, Tamar El’or, Michael Heyd, and Baruch B. Schwrtz, 279–308. Jerusalem: Magnes (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, Baruch B. 2014. Authoritative or authoritarian voices in traditional dyadic learning in Jewish institutions. In Activities of Thinking in Social Spaces, ed. Tania Zittoun and Antonio Iannaccone, 129–146. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, Baruch B. 2015. Discussing argumentative texts as a traditional Jewish learning practice. In Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue, ed. Lauren B. Resnick, Christa CS. Asterhan, and S. Clarke, 153–162. Washington, D.C.: AREA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, Baruch B., and Michael J. Baker. 2016. Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.

  • Schwarz, Baruch, and B., Zvi Bekerman, and Reuven Ben-Haim. 2019. Diving into Yeshiva's talk practices: Chavruta argumentation between individual and community towards crystallizing methods. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 22: 100315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sofer, Gilad, Sefi Pompian, and Naomi Gafni. 2013. Development of writing assignment in the verbal area of the psychometric test. Jerusalem: National Institution for Testing and Evaluation (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stampfer, Shaul. 1995. The Lithuanian Yeshiva in its emergence. Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • State Comptroller of Israel. 2019. Annual Report (69b). Jerusalem: Author (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Teshner, Naama. 2014. Data on the employment of Haredim in the high-tech sector. Jerusalem: Knesset Information and Research Center (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, Stephen E. 1958. The philosophy of science, vol. 14. Chicago: Genesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsemach, Ehud, Anat Zohar, and Elite Olshtein. 2020. The writing charecteristics of Haredi students. Dapim 72: 199–227 (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Uccelli, Paola, Christina L. Dobbs, and Jessica Scott. 2013. Mastering academic language: Organization and stance in the persuasive writing of high school students. Written Communication 30(1): 36–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas. 1996. Argument structure: A pragmatic theory. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Ying-Tien., and Chin-Chung. Tsai. 2007. High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education 29(9): 1163–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeh, Stuart S.. 1998. Empowering education: Teaching argumentative writing to cultural minority middle-school students. Research in the Teaching of English 33(1): 49–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, Dana L., Benjamin C. Herman, Mitch Ruzek, Anna Linder, and Shu-Sheng. Lin. 2013. Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socio-scientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 50(3): 251–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, Dana L., Benjamin C. Herman, and Troy D. Sadler. 2019. New directions in socio-scientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research 1(1): 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, Anat, and F. Flora Nemet. 2002. Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39(1): 35–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

    Ehud Tsemach & Anat Zohar

Authors
  1. Ehud Tsemach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anat Zohar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Ehud Tsemach and Anat Zohar. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Ehud Tsemach and Anat Zohar commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ehud Tsemach.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by ethical committee of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (November 15th 2017).

Consent to Participate

Written informed consent was obtained from the parents.

Consent to Publish

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Persuasive Writing Assignment

Appendix 1: Persuasive Writing Assignment

Write a persuasive essay that discusses the following topic. An excellent persuasive essay includes:

  1. A.

    Presenting various reasons supporting the position, encompassing different aspects of the topic.

  2. B.

    Relating to counter-arguments and possible criticism on the position that was taken.

It does not matter which position you will take as long it is founded and presented clearly. You should avoid writing in a personal tone or giving personal examples and stories. Your voice is embedded in the position you will present and the way you will support it your position.

In addition, the text structure should reflect the argument structure: the different elements should be connected reasonably, and the connection between the different reasons should be clear. Please pay attention to precise and explicit language.

You have 45 min for writing, the expected length is usually 30–40 lines in average handwriting (a full page length).[Each student received one of the two following writing prompts]

[Each student received one of the two following writing prompts]

[Topic 1]

1.1 The Topic: Robots for Caretaking Jobs

In recent decades there is a major development in the field of robotics and technology. Today, robots can do many jobs according to the instructions given by their operator. Different companies try to develop robots for caretaking of the elderly and people that need help with everyday activities. In the coming years, these companies intend to market robots that will help or even replace human caretakers of elderly people.

Do you think that robots should be used for caregiving jobs?

[Topic 2]

The topic: Raising Cigarettes’ Prices

In recent years, the prices of cigarettes were raised significantly, aiming to reduce smoking and the damages caused by it. Consequently, many smokers were hurt financially. Recently, the government has considered another tax raise. Do you think the prices of cigarettes should be raised again?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tsemach, E., Zohar, A. From Yeshiva to Academia: The Argumentative Writing Characteristics of Ultra-Orthodox Male Students. Argumentation 35, 457–481 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-020-09541-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-020-09541-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation