Search results for: Philosophy of education

8. This article considers the role of the individual during crises in humanism and the ethical responsibility with which the individual is charged in such times of moral calamity. In a narrow sense, the article explores Emmanuel Lévinas's “Nameless” (“Sans nom”), an essay that appears in his book Proper Names, and proposes viewing it as his personal reading in honor of his unique, unaccounted-for teacher Monsieur Chouchani. From a broader philosophical perspective, the article attempts to consider the meaning of ethics and the assumption of responsibility in times when doing so appears to offer no benefit and hold no significance whatsoever. From an educational perspective, it endeavors to better understand the ethical role of the teacher in both tranquil and tempestuous times. And finally, it also offers another profound observation of what Lévinas's article refers to as the “Jewish condition,” not in a national historical sense but as a model of crisis-oriented ethical challenge.

This essay analyzes the place of Israel in American Jewish schooling from the beginning of the 20th century until the early years of the 21st century. It utilizes curricula, textbooks, and instructional units, as well as other primary and secondary sources to delineate four distinct periods of Israel education. The subject of Teaching Israel is contextualized in the larger frameworks of both general developments in education as well as the dynamics of Israel in contemporary American Jewish life. The article concludes by delineating emergent 21st century patterns of Israel education that represent new directions

Michael Rosenak uses the twin metaphors of “language” and “literature,” borrowed from Oakeshott and Peters, to argue that the goal of education is initiation into a language. This goal transcends the study of literature in that language. It includes, as well, the development of the capacity both to critique literature and to produce literature of one’s own. This article compares his use of the language-literature distinction to that of Oakeshott and Peters, revealing some inconsistencies that are driven by his desire to emphasize both autonomy and pluralism, on the one hand, and to maintain a residual essentialism on the other.

Writing this article presents me with an opportunity to look closely at the last speech that my father and mentor, Professor Michael (Mike) Rosenak z”l gave before his passing in 2013. I will write about this speech from a perspective that is based on my intimate familiarity with the questions that concerned him throughout his life. I will offer a close description of this speech after articulating several of the basic concepts which accompanied my father’s teaching throughout his career. It seems to me that toward the end of his life, a new motif appeared in my father’s educational philosophy that stemmed from this process. I wish to show how this motif was expressed very gently and subtly in the final speech.