Social factors associated with the affiliation or non-affiliation in the B’nai B’rith Hillel Foundation of selected college students

Citation preview

SOCIAL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE AFFILIATION OR NON-AFFILIATION IN THE B TNAI B fRITH HILLEL FOUNDATION*OF SELECTED COLLEGE STUDENTS

A Th'esis Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Sociology The University of Southern California

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts

By Ben V, Dwoskin June, 1950

UMI Number: EP65679

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI EP65679 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106- 1346

So

'j-o

0

T h is thesis, w r i t t e n by

BEN V, DWOSKIN u n d e r th e g u id a n c e o f Zi.iS... F a c u lt y C o m m itte e , and a p p ro ve d

by a l l its

m em bers, has been

prese n te d to a n d a cce p te d by the C o u n c i l on G ra d u a te S t u d y a n d R e search in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l ­ m e n t o f the re q u ire m e n ts f o r the degree o f

MASTER OP ARTS .....

Dean

n„„

May 1950________

Faculty Committee

Chairman

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHARTER I#

PAGE

THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OFTERMS USED . . .

1

The problem.................................. .2 Statement of the problem.................. . 2 Importance of the study.

........... 3

B*nai B frith Hillel Foundations... ............ Definitions of Terms used

8

............. .13

Social f ac t o r .............................. 13 Affiliation . .............................. 13 Identification.............................. 14, Positive.................................... 14, Culture

..........................14,

Marginal Jew.........................

.15

B ’nai B frith Hillel Foundation at the University of Southern California........ 16 Organization of the remainder ofthe thesis . II.

.17

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...................... 18 The Lennard S t u d y .......................... 19 The Greenberg S t u d y .................... .23 The Allport Study

........................ 28

III.- SOURCES OF DATA AND METHODS OFRESEARCH . . .

.30

The Questionnaire....................... ...30 Limitations of~the Study.................... 36

iii CHAPTER IV.

PAGE THE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES.................. 38 The meaning and significance ofchi-square.38 Likeness and differences non-statistically treated............................. . .40 Statistically treated data.

.... . .49

Hours worked on the j o b ................ 49 Number of organizations belonged to . . .53 Adherence to Jewish religiouspractices

.56

Ordinal position........................ 65 V.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...................... 67 Su mm a r y ...............

67

Conclusions

........................ 70

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

........................ 75

GLOSSARY.,............................ APPENDIXES..........................................85 A.

Tables XII through XXIV, presenting Non-statistically Treated Data.............. 86

B.

Questionnaire:'and/Letters .

.............-. 109

8

LIST OF TABLES TABLE I. 11. III.

PAGE Chi-square on Hours Worked on Job..........

Chi-square on Self-support...................... 52 Chi-Square on Economic Status of Subjects1 Families

IV.

• .51

.............

.54

Chi-square for Mumber of Organizations Belonged t o .....................................

V. VI.

Chi-square on Jewish Affiliations

.55

............ 58

Chi-square on Extent of Religious Observance by the Family...............

.59

VII.

Chi-square on Religious Attendance.............. 60

VIII.

Chi-square on Denominational Affiliation........ 62

IX.

Chi-square on Hebrew School Attendance.......... 63

X.

Chi-square on Residential Mobility. . •.*. . . .64

XI.

Chi-square on Ordinal Position. . ............... 66

XII.

Distribution of Subjects by Schools............. 87

XIII.

Distribution of Subjects According to Class . . .88

XIV.

Distribution of Subjects According to Martial S t a t u s .........................

*89

XV.

Distribution of Parental birthplace............ 90

XVIa.

Subjects1 Religious Preference.................. 91

4XVIb.

Religious Preferenace of Parents.........

XVIIa.

Father1s Organizational Activity. ........

.92

...93

V

TABLE

PAGE

XVIIb*

Mother1s Organizational Activity............ 94

XVIII.

Present Permanent Residence .

XlXa.

............ 95

Size or Present Permanent Residential Community.................................. 96

XlXb.

Size ol‘ General Community Where Subject Lived Most of his L i f e .................

XIXc. aXX.

.97

Size of Jewish Community in Home Town . ... .98 Parents1 Occupation

.......... 99

XXIa.

Language Spoken Most Often in the Home. . . ldO

XXIb.

Language Spoken Most Often to Parents . . . 101

XXIc.

Language Spoken Most Often by Parents to Subjects .

XXId.

............................. 102

Language in Which Parents Speak Most Often to Each Other...................

XXIIa.

103

Country in Which Father Received Major Part of Educiation............................. 104

XXIIb.

Country in ?Jhieh Mother Received Major Part of Education

..................... 105

-XXIII.

Humber of Previous Engagements............. 106

XXIVa.

Subject1s. Strength of Lesire for Children . 107

XXIVb.

Humber ofwChildren Leslred by Subject. . . .108

CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED On every college campus and, as a matter of fact, in all of society, an insistent question arises: ”why does a tendency exist among some persons to ;join certain groups, organization, or clubs while others, having apparently the same opportunity tend not to -Join?

This

—

query arises among trained professional as well as volun­ teer workers who devote much time and effort in attempting to stimulate increased interest, acceptance, membership and eventually participation in their particular groups* Obviously there is no simple answer*

It is import­

ant however, that sociologists delve into this problem in a scientific attempt to discover what social factors may have a significant relationship to membership or non­ membership in organized groups*

The results might prove

to be valuable tools for those persons interested in planning for organizations and groups. Charles J. Bushnell, in setting forth a definition of planning, says that, w.*.all planning is, the arranging of a cooperation of*, .members in a functional union*.. !fl

Henry Pratt Fairchild, Editor, Dictionary of Sociology. (New York: Philosophical Library, 1944)> P* 221

2

It becomes apparent then that if more effective work is to be accomplished by those dealing with groups, group leadership and activities, the sociologist may help dis­ cover those factors which might be important to intelli­ gent planning*

What social factors may influence

association and identification or withdrawal and anonymity of persons in relation to specific groups?

What motiva-

tions may stimulate joining, not joining or avoiding certain groups?

It is assumed that most college students

have the capacity, both physical and mental, to partici­ pate in group activity on at least a minimal level. Therefore, it is believed that their social activities may be examined with the purpose of revealing those social factors in the backgrounds of selected college students which may help to explain the degree of individual activity) in or away from organized groups. I.

I

THE PROBLEM

Statement of the problem.

The primary purpose of

e=““

this study was to compare certain social factors present in the backgrounds of selected Jewish college students, a group of whom were affiliated, and a group who were not affiliated, with the B»nai BJ rith Hillel Foundation on a ^ given college campus.

An attempt was made to determine

3 whether there were significant differences between these two groups, insofar as the social factors in their back­ grounds were concerned, and if so, to compare these differences.

Integrally related to the primary purpose of

this study was the question of whether there were any social factors involved which were responsible for motivat­ ing certain students to go beyond the initial step of identifying themselves as Jews through the completion of a religious preference card.

Why did some students take

this second step towards more positive and less anonymous identification by personally affiliating with the Hillel Foundation?

These questions naturally lead to another

question, namely, are these social factors in the back­ grounds of these students important as a motivating force in deciding the above action? A secondary purpose of this project was to deter­ mine to what extent this study might indicate the presence of Jewish marginality (to be explained belov/) in the college students studied. Importance of the study.

It is an accepted fact

that in order to plan intelligently, one must have signifi­ cant knowledge relating to those with whom he is working. Since the B*nai B frith Hillel Foundation is- primarily con­ cerned with effectively serving a substantial portion of

the Jewish student population onea given college campus, it necessarily follows that an attempt should be made to secure certain basic information.

These data could prove

valuable in helping to determine the needs of the students, and consequently, the areas in which they need to be served, and also to indicate the extent of their acceptance of the services of the Hillel Foundation. While this study is limited to an investigation cf the social factors in the backgrounds of Jewish students at the University of Southern California, this approach could also apply to other university and college groups which are engaged in an overall program of religious, cul­ tural, social, social welfare, and counselling activities. According to Strang^ there have been only a few

^

studies made whose purpose was to discover why students doT or do not participate in certain groups.

She points out

that: the bulk of investigations relating to campus groups concerns description and classification of the princi­ pal types of social groups on the campus. Relatively few investigations are concerned with social processes...

2 Ruth Strang, Group Activities in Secondary Sehools and Colleges (New York: Harper and Brothers Pub­ lishers, 1*94-6), p . 61. u

J

5 Dr,. Maurice Karpf, in his book dealing with the organization of the Jewish Community in the United States said, ”not only is there no knowledge for determining ex­ isting needs and how to meet them, but what is even of greater importance, there is no knowledge which would help obviate the mistakes of the past.”-^ He pointed out the ”the rudimentary and basic facts needed* for sound community planning are not available.”

He suggested that

among studies which needed to be undertaken, adequate consideration be given to ” ... social groupings, their bases, their common elements, and their differences.” vT *

*

Thus information obtained from these investigations could supply ”the data necessary for establishing the needed norms” which provide the bases for determining whether or not certain practices are a d e q u a t e . 4 In a paper which was read before the sixteenth annual conference of the Yiddish Scientific Institute— YIVO, in New York, January 10, 194-2, Koenig said: The Jews of America, as a group, have not only re­ ceived attaa tion, have not only been written about

^ Maurice Karpf, Jewish Community Organization in the United States (New York: Bloch Publishing Company, 19387/ p. 152. 4 Ibid.. p. 156 .

6 and discussed, but have also been generalised upon, more than any other ethnic group.- The basis, however, for any sort of sound generalization is a body of con­ crete, reliable data, which in this case, is largely lacking•5 It therefore becomes obvious that if the structure, and trends of the Jewish life of students at a given college are to be understood, a body of facts must be gathered and validated.

In the first year of life, the person be­

gins forming a self, as a result of interaction with those in the primary group; there is established a definite social relationship.

The individual1s needs for food, comfort,

rest, response, and security form the basis for his earli­ est social desires.

As he progresses, the person’s earlier

biologically natural reactions are modified, and he subtly begins to conform to the social patterns created by the culture in which he finds himself.

Being required, usually,

to meet his parents’ interpretation of social codes, the youngster must accept and conform to their values and sentiments, their culture, their mores and folkways. Through this kind of "interaction of cdginal nature and group patterns,” and responding to the pressures exerted

Samuel Koenig, "Methods of Studying Jewish Life in America," Reprinted in the YIVO Annual of- -Jewish Social Science. Vol. II-III, 1948, p. 284-

7

by the society in which he lives, the individuals per­ sonality and social selves develop. Personality development and maturation occur in the ”social processes which function^ through social groups.”^

These groups permeate our entire lives; they

take on different forms and types of organization.

For

example, if a student were to enumerate specific activi­ ties which he carried on during a normal week, there would be revealed a number and variety of formal and informal groups in which he participated.

Such social

groups might readily include: (l) family group, (2) class groups (recitation and lecture), (3 ) social groups {informal friendship groups), (4 ) literary groups, ($) athletic, recrea­ tional, amusementgrpups (6 ) work groups (if the student is paying his own way in part or wholly), and (7) religious groups.^’ As was previously pointed out, such groups play an important role in *determining, among other things^ the values, attitudes and interests of an individual. Consequently, if an adequate approach to the student to participate in organized activity is to be effected, it must be accomplished through a combination of scientific

^ Emory S. Bogardus, Sociology (Uew York: The Mac­ Millan Company, 1949;?p,-3^ ^ Ibid., p. $.

8 investigation and wise planning. In an area, where, up to now, little sociological research has been undertaken, a logical place to begin a series of* investigations might be with basic factors. Certainly then, a sampling of the social factors in the backgrounds of a representative group of college students is a necessary beginning. II.

B'NAI B'RITH HILLEL FOUNDATIONS

In order that the^ function of the B fnai B* rith Hillel Foundations be clearly understood, it was deemed advisable to present a brief survey of its historical background, development, philosophy, and structure. The cr igin of Hillel dates back to 1921, when a young rabbinical student, Benjamin Frankel,^ began his bi-weekly congregational assignment in the immediate vicinity of the University of Illinois.

Here he ob­

served that students, the potential leadership of the Jewish Community, were almost totally lacking in their contact !!with the survival values of Jewish life."9

^ From the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. 9 National Brochure, B fnai B frith Hillel Founda­ tions at American Universities, 1945, p* 6 .

9 Dr. Edward C. Baldwin, a member of the Pilgrim Foundation and Professor of Biblical Literature at the University of Illinois, and Isaac Kuhn, a leading citizen of the Champaign community whose concern for the Jewish students was of long standing, played important roles in this generic stage.

They, together with other farsighted

individuals, urged Frankel to attempt to develop some method, some technique whereby the Jewish student at the University'would be brought closer to the central stratum of Jewish life, developing an appreciation of values, ideas and ideals, and traditions which are integrally related to Jewish life .10

In 1923, Frankel, ordained as

a Rabbi, accepted the responsibility of serving the Jewish students at the University of Illinois on a full-time basis. Today there are nearly two-hundred B fnai B rrith Hillel Foundations and Counsellor ship s.1'*'

10 hoc* cit. 11 Foundations are located on larger campi and have a full-time director who generally is a Rabbi. Counsellorships are located on the campi of colleges where there is a relatively small Jewish student population, and are served by a part-time counsellor. In the Los Angeles Area, Hillel Foundations are serving students at the Uni­ versity of California at Los Angeles, University of Southern California, and Los. Angeles City College. Coun­ sellor ships are located at East Los- Angeles Junior College, Woodbury College and Pasadena City College.

10 They are established at every major university in the United States, as well as at many colleges where there are relatively smaller Jewish student populations. C

Hillel units are also located on campus-e-s in Canada, Cuba and Mexico The philosophy of the Hillel Foundation, embodied in its objectives, is to make the religious and cultural values of Jewish life, vital and relevant for the college student of t o d a y . I t functions on the tenet that t!the patterns of Jewish life are important in the composite of western civilization and that the -university is enriched when it [Hillel] supplements the resources of the campus with the best in the Jewish tradition.fT13 Hillel is not a club, an organization, a special interest group, or a Jewish Center, but rather it is a student community in the same sense that ffa university is a community of scholars...f,i-4 Generally recognized by the University as the focal point of Jewish expression on

12

. cit.. p.

National Brochure, ojd

4

Ibid.. p. 8 ^ Jdhn Gunther, Inside U.S.A. Brothers, 194*7), p. 375.

(New York: Harper

11 Campus, Hillel has also become recognized as the "authorized spokesman for the Jewish tradition and is better able to interpret it than the individual students who have neither the background nor the maturity."15 It is also to be noted that the Hillel community necessarily promotes a varied and diversified program. A wide range of activities is sponsored in recognition of the necessity for attempting to satisfy student needs on all levels.

As Rabbi Finesilver so aptly put it, Hillel

"makes use of the psychological principle that education proceeds from the concrete to the abstract, from activities to attitudes."

1 z.

Ho attempt is made, however, at uniform­

ity of approach to the student, or programming technique, although the frame of reference is similar for all— "to guide the mind and spirit of the Jewish student through the complex contemporary intellectual and moral chal­ lenges."^^

^5 National Brochure, op,, pit., p. 8 16 Alexander Finesilver, "The Rabbi as Hillel Director", Hebrew Union College Quarterly. XXXVI (Third Quarter, 1949), p. 11. 17 National Brochure, pp. pit., p. 5

12 The Foundation, democratic in structure and function, operates its student program through a represen­ tative Jewish student government under the guidance of a rabbi and staff.

The organizational structure is compar­

able to that of our United States 'government with its executive, legislative and judiciary branches.

The Hillel

student president and executive committee may be con­ sidered the executive department; the student executive board would be likened unto the legislative branch of our federal government; with the role of the judiciary branch being taken by the staff. Through cooperative effort the students and staff attempt to plan and implement a well-rounded program of cultural, religious, social and social welfare activities which are open to all students regardless of religion, color or conviction.

This program is designed, not as a

substitute for obher campus activity, but rather to supple­ ment and enrich college life. Another primary function of a Hillel Foundation and its professional staff is to offer appropriate per­

il? Rabbi Morton E. Kaufman, Annual Activities Report. 19A8-A9 (Hillel Council at the University of California at Los Angeles), p. 8 .

13 sonal services to the students.

At varying times, the

Hillel director must act as rabbi, friend, confidant, personal counsellor, or social worker.

He must recognize

his limitations in each of these areas of service and be prepared to make proper referrals when necessary. III.

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED

Concepts may vary according to the interpretation of the individual.

In order that there may be a uniform

understanding of the terms to be utilized in the following chapters, it is considered advisable to indicate how these terms will be used.

In each case, the term will be stated

first, followed by a working definition. Social factor.

This term was interpreted as beirg ^

applicable to any definite, identifiable item which was a component of a social situation, relationship, process or value, without necessarily referring to its causal significance.

A social factor, as here used, might be

a determinant, a cause, or possibly an essential condition of change or of an event. Affiliation.

As used in this study, affiliation

applied to a formal relationship voluntarily established between the individual-student and the B*nai B ’rith Hillel Foundation at the University of Southern California.

14 The process of affiliation involved the completion of a simple auto-biographical card, which was placed on file at the Hillel Foundation, and the payment of either one dollar and fifty cents dues for a single semester, or two dollars and fifty cents for annual dues. For the purposes of this study, affiliation was interpreted as representing_ a minimal level of participa­ tion in, and support of, the Hillel Foundation at the University of Southern California. Identification. This term was used in the sense of a process whereby an individual defined himself as be­ ing a part of the Jewish group. Positive.

The adjective, positive, was used in

conjunction with the term identification.

It was inter­

preted as applying to a voluntary acceptance and approval of Judaism, and an integration of this acceptance through participation in Jewish activity on at least a minimal level.

Insofar as this study was concerned, affiliation

with the Hillel Foundation was considered to be the minimal level of participation.

It is also to be noted

that positive identification was interpreted as being characterized by an affirmative attitude toward Jewish culture. Culture.

This is a collective term for all socially

acquired patterns of behavior which are transmitted from

15

generation to generation through utilization of symbols. Charles A. Ellwood says that the social traditions of the group form the essence of culture.

Culture involves, at

one and the same time, the knowledge, ideas, beliefs, values, standards and sentiments which prevail in the group.

It is integrated not only within the group1s

traditions and customs, but in the language, art and institutions of the group as well. -Marginal Jew. Bogardus indicates that the marginal person is the product of a bi- or multi-cultural social pattern of life.

^The marginal man is the person who

belongs to two or more cultures but is not fully accepted in any.”-*-9 This-definition applies to the term marginal Jew as used in the following chapters. Stonequist points out that the marginal Jews are 11those persons who have gone further in their identifi­

cation wi th, and assimilation of, Gentile society than have the main bddy of Jews and yet are not fully accepted by the ^entiles.”20

At the same time, it is to be noted

that the marginal Jew tends to look upon Judaism as being

^

Bogardus, op. cit.. p. 4-9.

20 E. V. Stonequist, 1fThe Marginal Character of the Jewst!. Jews In A Gentile World (New York: The MacMillan Company, 194-27/pp. 396-310.

16 detrimental to his welfare.

As Kaplan says, the marginal

Jews are known as Jews, "least by what they are or do, more by the company they keep and most by their antecedents."21 Generally speaking, the marginal ^ews tend to be almost totally ignorant of the concepts, values, tradi­ tions and heritage of their people.

Having no feelings of

loyalty towards the Jews, some of them strongly desire to leave the group.

They find, however, that they are forced

to remain within the group due to social prejudice.

Conse­

quently, they -frequently remain aloof from, or avoid association or identification with, anything Jewish.

Often,

in their desire to feel accepted by the majority group, they begin to accept the out-group views and stereotypes concerning the Jewish in-group.

The resultant concomitant

is a tendency to "give a low evaluation to- habits, atti­ tudes, *or customs that appear Jewish."^ B *nai B rrith Hillel Foundation at The University of

Southern California.

Sponsored by the Los Angeles Hillel

Council (an agency of the .Los Angeles Jewish,Community Coun­ cil) and B ’nai B 1rith, the Hillel Foundation at the University

21

Mordecai M. Kaplan, The Future of the American Jjew (Hew ¥ork: The Macmillan Company, 194&), p. 4 . 22 R.A. Schermerhorn. These Our.People.(Boston; D. C. Heath and Company, 1949), p. 436.

17 of Southern California is devoted to cultural, religious, social, social welfare and counseling services among Jewish students at the given university. The Hillel program, which is accomodated to the needs, desires and class schedules of the students, is open to all students regardless of religion or ethnic group affiliation and is carried on principally at the Hillel House, 1029 West 36th Street.

The facilities and

program are readily accessible to all students, being just a few minutes walk from the center of the University of Southern California campus. ORGANIZATION OF REMAINDER OF THESIS Chapter I has presented briefly the problem in­ vestigated, the importance of the study, and the defini­ tions of terms used.

Chapter II will be concerned with

the sources of data and methods utilized in research. The remaining chapters will be devoted to such items as a review of the literature, construction of the questionnaire, quantitative analysis and statistical significance of responses, a summary and conclusion, and finally a glossary to clarify terms used in the questionnaire.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In recent years much has been written aboutffe Jews, their religion, their culture, and attitudes towards a multitude of things, including themselves.

Many of

these studies indicate that the researchers have gone only so far as to record and categorize their raw data. Then, on the basis of casual observation, they attempted to indicate differences which they believe to exist between the„ groups being studied.

Obviously, guess-work

is not scientific research; statistical techniques should have been applied wherever possible in order that valid results might be obtained.

Studies concerning' the Jewish

college student are comparatively few in n u m b e r w h i l e

1 A commendable summarization of earlier studies* dating back to the 19301s was made by Nathan Goldberg, "Religious and Social Attitudes of Jewish Youth in the U. S. A -The Jewish Review. Vol. I, No. 2 (New York: December, 1943)• More recent studies include: Gordon W. Allport, James M. Gillespie and Jacqueline Young, 1!The Religion of the Post-War College StudentfT, Journal of Psychology. (January, 194$)$ 3-33; Leon A. Feldman, ftThe Jewish Students at McGill University. An inquiry into Their Religious Attitudes,” Guide Posts. Vol. II, No. 3, (Bfnai B 1rith Hillel Foundations, May, 194?), 21-36; Albert I. Gordon, "Frustration; and Aggression among Jewish University Students” . Jewish Social Studies. Vol. V, No. 1 (January, 1943).

19 scientific investigations of the social factors in the backgrounds of Jewish college students have been, until now, practically unknown.

An examination of the litera­

ture has yielded a few related studies, of which only the most pertinent will be reviewed. The hennard Study.

f!Jewish Youth Appraising Jews

and Jewishness" was the title of H. L. Lennard*s study dealing with attitudes.2

This study was primarily con­

cerned with attempting to answer four questions: 1.

What is the image of the Jew that the Jewish youth of today has?

2.

To what extent has the Jewish youth internalized non-Jewish values and ideology?

3.

What is the attitude of the Jewish youth to the problem of Jewish survival?

4*

How does the Jewish youth react to Anti-Semitism and to what extent is it influenced hy it?*3. Lennard chose 105 subjects from among college

students attending New York University, College of the City of Hew York, Syracuse University of Chicago, Bernard

2 H. L. Lennard, "Jewish Youth Appraising Jews and Jewishness", Yi-vo Annual of Jewish Social-Science. Vol. II-III (Hew York: Yiddish Scientific Institute, 1947-48), 262-281 .

3 Ibid.. p. 262.

20

College, and Hunter College.

There was, however, no

statement indicating the type or methodology of the sampling. Some of the explicit limitations of this study ware: (l) there was no attempt made at obtaining a numer­ ically representative sample, (2) no attempt was made to control or match any factors other than that of being a Jewish college student.

Lennard reasoned that any other

controls were unnecessary in his study since he was TTnot primarily concerned w±th ascertaining the statistical distribution of views held by the Jewish college youth, but rather with obtaining a composite picture of all different types of views.

The main emphasis”, said

Lennard, ”is on variety of response.”4

Thus he aimed at

what Paul Lazarsfeld calls 1tcollective introspection.” In the construction of a questionnaire (which provided the date for his study) Lennard roughly grouped his items into three classes:

CD

questions dealing

with critical situations, (2) information-pro.lection ques­ tions, and (3) open questions.5

^ Ibid..- p. 26^ - Ibid.. p. 263

21

The results of the above study, insofar as the findings are accepted as valid, indicate that the college students studied have retained their loyalty to the Jewish group and exhibited considerable cohesion with the Jewish community.

Two-thirds of the subjects felt that

the survival of the Jews as a people was important, and most of them indicated a willingness to make sacrifices t1for the Jewish cause".

Although it was theoretically

felt that a wave of new Jewish immigration from Europe could possibly give rise to increased anti-Semitism, thus threatening the subject’s personal position, a vast majority of the students favored such immigration. Answering questions dealing with anti-Semitism, it is interesting to note Lennard’s comment, that some of the subjects revealed a conscious or unconscious internaliza.tion of ’’non-Jewish— and frequently hostile— values and ideologies.”

This acceptance

of out-group values, says

Lennard, ”as a rule...is in direct correlation to the currency of these views in the surroundings.”

He thus

concludes with the statement that "the more prevalent Gfe anti-Semitic charge is in the contiguous non-Jewish !

world, the deeper and wider is its penetration amidst our youth.”6

£

Ibid., p. 281

22

A general criticism which must be made concerning this study of attitudes of Jewish college students is that the researcher tended to derive unwarranted conclu­ sions from the data and to assume correlation even though no coefficients of correlation have been derived. Lennard was frequently inclined to make quantitative companions of distributions, when the significance of these distributions were not evaluated. One of the obvious major limitations cf Lennard!s study results from his failure to indicate the methodology involved in securing his sample, and in administering his questionnaires. Another point which should be made is that the sociological value of a study aimed at determining static i

"collective introspection" is rather vague and doubtful. However, presentation of the attitudes of the subjects studied by Lennard does indicate the need to relate atti­ tudes to actual behavior of the subjects.

This is being

attempted in the present study. A contribution of this project, in relation to ex­ tending the Lennard study, is to either substantiate his claim that there is a rise in the feelings of positive Jewishness among American Jewish youth, or else point out the trend toward increasing or decreasing cohesion with

23 the Jewish group, insofar as this may be revealed by the actual behavior of the students presently studied* The .Greenberg Studv. Another study directed to­ ward revealing the attitudes of Jewish students toward Judaism was made by Rabbi Greenberg, Hillel director at Yale University•^

Through a questionnaire, followed

by a number of personal interviews, an effort was made to analyze ”the general trends of Jewish attitude.” An attempt was also made to reveal the attitudinal differences that existed between Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jewish students, and 11to relate the attitudes to home environment, Jewish education, and religious observance.” The questionnaire was distributed to all the 94 Jewi&h undergraduate students registered at Yale during ”the latter part of 1944t!> with 74 copies (77 per cent) being returned.

Utilizing this method for gathering

his data, Rabbi Greenberg endeavored to obtain answers to the following questions: ■l 7

'

\

‘'

' Meyer Greenberg, ”The Jewish Student at Yale: His Attitude Toward Judaism1*," YIVQ Annual of Jewish Social Scienca. Vol. I (Hew York: Yiddish Scientific Institute, 1946) pp. 217-240. 8 Ibid.. p. 218.

(1)

How do our Jewish college youth look upon Judaism?

£2)

Do they consider it a source of inspiration or a handicap?

(3)

Do they consider the ties binding them to other Jews to be those ofireligion or of nationality?

(4)

Do they attend synagogue" and observe tradi­ tional practices?

(5)

Are they willing to accept traditional religious beliefs...?

9

His conclusions indicate that a close relationship exists between the degree of religious conservatism and the degree of positive-Jewis-h attitudes.

"The student who attends

synagogue often and practices religious ceremonials is far more likely to believe in the worthwhileness of Jewish life than a person who practices little or not at all."-^ Another important conclusion presented in this study of Jewish students at Yale is that the family environment of the students has a greater influence upon the formula­ tion of the students! views on Judaism than does formal

9 Ibid.. p. 217.

I® Ibid.} p . 239

25

Jewish education,

"If his family is observant, the child

is more likely to have positive attitudes than the child of unobservant parents, even though the latter may have received a better education. The results of the study also indicated that the offspring1s attitudes were definitely affected by the degree of "intensity of the Jewishness of their homes." In pointing out that the degree of religious conserva­ tism is positively associated with the extent of adherance to Jewish customs and religious practices, it was stated that "those from Reform and to some extent those from Conservative families do not conform to the standards of their groups as closely as do the children of the Orthodox, although the latter also have moved consider­ ably from traditional Jewish attitudes.”^ In terminating his study, Rabbi Greenberg empha­ sizes: There can be no question that a student who has no knowledge of Jewish practice either from home en­ vironment or from education will not merely have a mental attitude toward Judaism but in the great majority of cases will definitely tend toward negative attitudes, toward the disparagement of Jewrish values and dissociation from Jewish life....

IX

^

1

Loc. clt. I h l d ,, p. 240

26

those who have Jewish knowledge, and especially those who come from olbservant homes and are themselves ob­ servant Jews, are far more likely to believe in the worthwhileness of Jewish survival and of continued adherance to Jewish principles. The future of organ­ ized Jewish life will have to depend primarily upon the strengthening of observance, especially in the home, and secondly upon the improvement of the vehi­ cles of Jewish education,13 A critical evaluation of Greenberg1s Yale study re­ veals certain important limitations.

In setting forth

the purpose of his project, the researcher pointed out that the Jewish undergraduates at Yale were tfnot typical of all Jewish college students, either economically or socially [but]

they nevertheless have enough in common

with others to exemplify many of the trends in Jewish student thinking generally,”1^ contradictory statement.

This, obviously, is a

If the study is not represen­

tative, it cannot be considered to have enough similari­ ties (unless evidence of such similarities is cited) to make it applicable to the general Jewish college student population.

The pure opinion of a researcher does not

constitute valid scientific evidence. Another important criticism which must be made stems from the following statement:

13 U

Loc* cit. Ibid.. p. 218. i

This study, however, is not only an analysis of the general trends of Jewish attitude...; it is, in addition, an analysis of the differences that exist among Jews, especially as divided into three main religious groupings— Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform— and an attempt to relate the attitude to home environment, Jewish education, and religious observance.1* A serious limitation lies in the fact that an attempt was made to estimate differences between groups without utilizing specialized statistical techniques. arises:

The question

how can attitudes of behavior be correlated with­

out correlation coefficients? Greenberg also stated that his findings were based upon 74 returns, representing 77 per cent of the Jewish 1

undergraduates at Yale.

This, he claims, ?fis sufficiently

high to allow us to draw accurate conclusions...”16

per­

haps this might be true, but it lacks statistical substaniation.

Although 77 per cent represents a reasonable num­

ber of samples (N) for statistical purposes (provided the entire number of cases is used) when these are broken down into categories, the number may become so attenuated as to make statistical application unwarranted or impossible. Percentage comparisons, while interesting, are of no sociological significance, since there is no indication of

Loc. cit. 16 Ibid.. p. 221.

28 the possible occurrence of chance in these results, and especially since the smaller the number of cases used, the more likely it is that chance operates, and the less probable that significant differences may be found. Thus, even large percentage differences with as small a number as in this study, are misleading, tration is:

A brief illus­

a difference of 4 per cent in 1000 cases

may be more significant than a difference of 40 per cent in 10 cases. The questionnaire utilized by Greenberg was set up with the intention of revealing the attitudes of Jewish students.

However, he apparently failed to show

the basis upon which he has chosen his values for the subjects1 answers.

Furthermore, there is no evidence

that methods (such as outlined by Thurstons^ to con­ struct an attitude continuum were utilized.

He, there­

fore, cannot determine with any degree of reliability the attitudes of 'the subjects being studied, since he assigned values to responses without any cautious attempt to determine the basis upon which these numerical values should be attached to those responses. The Allport Study.

17

Gordon Allport, et. al., con-

L. L. Thurstone, ”Attitudes Can Be Measured.” American Journal of Sociology. 33: 529-554> 1928.

29 ducted an interesting investigation in 194i>, in an attempt to reveal the religious attitudes and practices of college s t u d e n t s . T h e researchers obtained their data through pre-tested questionnaires which were completed by 414 undergraduates at Harvard College and 86 under­ graduates at Radcliffe College. One of the problems raised by the above study was the extent to which religious conservatism was related to adherence to the Jewish group.

A hypothesis suggested,

but not proved, was that the more orthodox the Jewish upbringing, the greater the tendency of the individual to adhere to Jewish beliefs^customs and practices. sent study investigates this possibility.

-]0Allport, Loc. cit.

The pre­

CHAPTER III SOURCES OF DATA AND METHODS OF RESEARCH This study was designed to explore the following hypotheses:

(I)

The greater the number of clubs,

organizations or groups to which the subject belongs, the greater his tendency to affiliate with Hillel; (II)

The greater the adherence to Jewish religious

practices, the greater the tendency to join Hillel; (III)

Those students who are first born tend not to join

Hillel, while those of subsequent order in the family show a greater tendency to join;

(IV)

Students who work ten

hours or more per week”tend not to affiliate, while those who work fewer hours, or not at all, tend to join Hillel. The Questionnaire*

In order that this objective

might be facilitated a questionnaire was constructed so as to obtain responses which could be quantitatively measured, thus presenting a more scientific treatment of the problem.

The initial questions were formulated'on

the basis of empirical experience of the researcher as Hillel director and as an active worker in Jewish communities for the past twelve years.

Some of the works

31 of Kaplan, Steinberg, Graeber and Britt;1 and many others read over a period of years, provided inferential material which helped in the formulation of the original list of questions, .Following compilation, the questionnaire was sub­ mitted to four rabbis (who were Hillel directors at Uni­ versities in the Los Angeles Area) for their comments and suggestions.

These men were deemed qualified to judge the

relevance of the questionnaire on the basis of their prac­ tical experience in the field.

Some changes were made and

the questionnaires were then mimeographed and administered in a pre-test to 100 Jewish students at University of Sou­ thern California, who were selected at random. The questionnaire was pre-tested for the following »

reasons:

(1)

to determine the relevance of each ques­

tion to the hypotheses of this study;

(2)

to insure

brevity and conciseness so as to maintain the respondentsf interest, and (3) to avoid ambiguity in order *that'(a) the subject answering the questions will not be confused by the meaning of the questions, and (b) so that the investi-

^ Kaplan, op. cit.: Milton Steinberg^ Basic Judaism (New fork: Harcourt Brace & Company, 19J+l) ; Isacque Graeber and Steuart H. Britt,/Jews In JL Gentile World (New York: The MacMillan Company, 194^7^"

I

32 gator will clearly understand the respondents* answers. The results of the pre-test indicated the need for some additional clarification and refinement.

This

being accomplished, the questionnaire was then mailed out to fifteen leading Hillel directors in various parts of the country for further evaluation, criticism, and sugges­ tions.

Upon the basis of their responses, several addi­

tional changes were made.

The final questionnaire,^ as

used in this study, was -then constructed and prepared fcr distribution to the subjects during the spring of 1950. The first twelve questions were devoted to vital statistics.

These background factors, plus those in

questions 22 through 26 were included in an attempt to determine the degree of homogeneity of the sample popula­ tion.

Where the two groups (affiliated-or non-affiliated)

were found to differ markedly, those particular questions were made the basis for group comparison. Items 13 through 18, and 27 through 30 were included (a) to indicate the extent of adherence to Jewish religious practices; (b) to correlate the subjects* beliefs as to their own denominational category, and their actual relig­ ious behavior; (c) to determine the effect of family re-

2

See copy of questionnaire in Appendix B.

33 ligiouB practices upon the students* own religious be­ havior. The answers to questions 19 through 21 present a factual picture of the students* recent organizational activity which is being correlated with the subjects* propensity to join or not to join Hillel. If the two groups under investigation are funda­ mentally different, then there should be other issues related to, but not identical with the immediate ob­ jectives of the study, on which they differ.

Questions

31 and 32 were designed ,to present, such issues. The major purpose of this study is to determine the factors differentiating between who affiliate with Hillel and those wha do not affiliate with Hillel. Items 33 through 39 extend the scope of this investiga­ tion one step further; they attempt to reveal the reason for the non-affiliated groups not joining Hillel.

These

questions are of more practical significance since they afford a basis upon which Hillel may plan future program and group activity.

&s Chein points out, 11to be socially

useful, investigations must be carried out in such a way as to stimulate applications of their results in practical

34 *3

social situations.”-" The check system for question responses was used wherever possible so that the statistical method might be facilitated, to objectify and thus simplify the pro­ cedure, and to insure more cooperation from the subjects who might tend to avoid essay-type questions.

It was

Recognized that the check system might conceivably re­ strict expression in that only the suggested answers could be selected.

However, where it was felt that

possibilities existed of answers being given that differed from the suggested choices, additional space was made available for such responses (i. e. speak to yourrP&rents mostly in English ; Other _

Do you

; Yiddish

______ .)

Distribution of the questionnaire was accomplished through a non-uniform procedure.

The first method in­

volved the random selection of 100 Jewish students, to whom the questionnaire’was mailed.

A letter^* intmded

to indicate the importance of the subjects* responses was enclosed along ?jith a self-addressed, pre-paid return

o Isador Chein, ”Some Aspects of Research Method­ ology,” The Jewish Social Service Quarterly. XXV: 454, June* 1949. ^ For the actual letter, see Appendix B.

35

envelope.

The slow rate

of returns, however, indicated

that other methods of distribution were necessary, if a reasonable sample was to be obtained within the limited time available for the accomplishment of this study. Fortuitious distribution was then employed:

any Jewish

student who came into the Hillel House was asked by the investigator to complete a questionnaire. of fortuitous sampling was involved:

Another type

selected students

were asked to distribute questionnaires to any Jewish student on campus.

Students were chosen to implement

the distribution who indicated an interest in this study and a desire to be -of assistance.

They were briefed as

to'the nature and importance of the study, and were in­ structed to give the subjects the same explanation of the project as was sent along with the mailed question­ naire. A total of 400 questionnaires were distributed with 151 students responding.

This represents a 38% return.

As the unsigned responses were returned, they were deposited in a sealed box which contained a slot large enough to receive the completed forms. of the respondent was fully guaranteed.

Thus the anonymity On the day upon

which the tabulation of the questionnaire was to commence,

36

the questionnaires were taken from the box, separated into two groups (those affiliated with Hillel, and those who were not) and each numbered,

A corresponding number was

placed upon a small card for each subject, placed in a cylinder, and then thoroughly shuffled.

Of the 151

questionnaires obtained, 50 were drawn from each group at random in the above manner and included in the sample. Limitations of the study.

Subjects included in

the sample were random selections representing various schools and departments of the given university.

The

subjects exhibited other variables which included sex, age, campus group affiliations, birth place and resi­ dence.

It is recognized that these variables might be

as important as the factors controlled.

However, match­

ing is not feasible in this study due to the limited number- of cases available for analysis. Another limitation is involved in the matter of population selection.

Questionnaires were distributed

to all the Jewish fraternities and sororities at the given university.

Thus the sample might tend to be selec­

tive in the sense that fraternities and sororities, .are not wholly representative of the general college popula­ tion. It is also to be noted that perhaps the non-

37 uniform method of distribution might have induced a fac­ tor of unsuspected selection, although there is no proof of this in this study.

CHAPTER IV T H E 'QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES The responses to each of the thirty-two items con­ tained in this questionnaire were tabulated and recorded on individual cards for the members and non-members, re­ spectively.

Those answers which centered directly upon

the hypotheses'of this study were further quantified, sub­ jected to statistical analysis, and then compared to de­ termine what significant differences, if any, existed between the two groups. Due to practical limitations, all the items were not treated statistically.

They were, however, recorded

on separate tables and, for those interested in examining the raw data, may be referred to in Appendix A. The meaning and significance of chi-scmare»

The

chi-square method was utilized in statistical analysis of those factors directly related to the hypotheses ad­ vanced in this study.

This technique is of value in de­

termining'the significance or meaningfulness of the dis­ tribution of figures in two groups which are being com­ pared.

Thus> the chi-square is aimed at testing "the

Hypotheses that the differences between a set of observed

39 and expected frequencies may be due solely to chance”!* and, in this study to determine also whether the differ­ ence in deviations between two groups is due to chance or to significant factors. In order that this may be further clarified, it is desirable to point out that generalizations based merely on raw data are not scientifically dependable. They require unequivocal knowledge as to the significance of the data upon which they- are based; the chi-square affords such a test of significance and permits varied^ generalizations to be made. For example, a study might have been made in which the distribution of figures for two groups was fairly similar, insofar as the percentages of the responses were concerned.

On the basis of this apparent similarity,

the investigators might assume that the two groups did not differ in their reaction to the question. bility of this guess, however, is suspect.

The relia­

There might

be a significant difference between the two groups, yet it is not uncovered because of the failure of the inves­ tigations to apply methods which would recognize such

! Thomas C. McCormick, Elementary Social Statistics (Hewr York; McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1948) > p. 148.

40 •

hidden differences.

Another element which might enter

is that of too small a sample.

Statistics, in part, over­

comes the handicap of small numbers induced because diff­ erences or similarities based on a small number of cases may be due to the atypical nature of those cases. Statistics, by determining the likelihood that the ob­ served results would have occurred through chance, provides a method of evaluating these results. The cM-square^ is a method which is so' designed as to indicate the exact number of times out of one-hundred that a total distribution of figures might be obtained due to chance.

If a given result could occur five times in

100 cases, the result is considered to be probably signif­ icant; if it could occur only once-in 100 times by chance, the results are considered to be unquestionably significant. Likenesses and^differences-non-statistically treated. The composition of the two groups of students studied is quite interesting in regard to their homogeneity.

In con-

A

The formula used in determining the chi-square (&2) is: where fo = observed frequency of the cases in each category, and fe =- the number of expected cases in each category. The number of degrees of freedom is deter­ mined (for method, see J. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1936, p. 356), and the significance of the found by referring to the chi-square table under the given number of degrees of freedom.

41 sidering the departments and schools in which they were enrolled at the university, twenty-three of the fifty Hillel members studied were in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences while twenty out of the fifty non­ member subjects studied were also in Liberal Arts and Sciences.

Among the members, ten were attending the

College of Commerce, with eight of the non-members .also enrolled "in-this same school.

Other similarities are

shown in Table XII.^ An examination of the distribution of the sub­ jects according to class (see Table XIII) indicates that perhaps the sample obtained is "not representative of the general college population.

A comparison of percentage

distribution of the two groups according to school class reveals that they are not completely homogeneous in this respect. It is also to~ be noted that there are at least twice as many non-members as there are Hillel members in the Freshman and graduate categories.

A possible expla­

nation for these differences might be that many students falling in either of these categories are registered at the University of Southern California for the first time,

3 All tables showing non-statistically treated data are found in Appendix A.

42 and have not as yet, been made aware of the scope, aims, and programs offered by the Hillel Foundation* The homogeneity of the two groups studied is further emphasized in connection with the age factor. ber three revealed that

Item num­

members ranged in age from

seventeen years to twenty-nine years, while the non­ members1 range was slightly greater, extending from seven­ teen to thirty-five years of age.

The model age for mem­

bers was twenty-two; for non-members, twenty-one.

The

mean age for members was 22.0 years, while for non-members, the mean age was 23.6. In relation to place of birth (item number two) both categories are quite similar.

Among the members studied,

forty-seven were native born and three foreign-born.

There

were forty-six native born and four foreigh-born non-member subjects. Insofar as the subjects marital status and number of dependents were concerned, it was found that the vast major­ ity of both groups were single (see Table XIV) and indicated no dependents; hence, for all practical purposes, these fac­ tors were of no significance to this study except to indi­ cate further how clearly akin the two groups studied are. This also applied to Item number seven. It is interesting to note that there were exactly

43 the same number of veterans for both groups:

twenty-seven

members, and twenty-seven non-members were formerly in the s

armed forces, while twenty-three in each group were not veterans. The subjects continue to reveal their homogeneity in responding to the question of parental birthplace. Table XV shows the numerical distribution of dblie -parents* place of birth according to three categories:

native born,

foreign born, or mixed. Item number ten, dealing with type and place of

\

living quarters could not be evaluated due to the fact that too many students failed to answer. In response to the question on religious preference (item number thirteen) it was found that among both groups the great proportion of the subjects identified themselves with the Jewish group.

They also tended to identify their

parents in a similar manner. The subjects indicated further similarity by their replies to the question, tTDid you attend Sunday School?” (Item number fifteen.) The members were divided evenly in their response, with twenty-five answering Yes and the same number, No.

The non-members were somewhat similarly

divided in their replies:

twenty-five answered affirma­

tively, twenty-two said TTNo” and three failed to answer at all.

hfhr

A hypothesis that has frequently.been made is that the degree of organizational activity of the parents will tend to influence in the same direction the organizational activity of the children.

This does not seem to be borne

out (insofar as joining Hillel is concerned) by the sub­ jects1 response to the request (item number nineteen), "Give the number of clubs or groups your parents belong to, or attend regularly:

Father

^

Mother

j .Tt The

following results would seem to warrant statistical ana­ lysis in another study.

Among the members1 parents,

nineteen fathers belonged to ..from one to four groups, three belonged to five or more, thirteen belonged to no clubs, while the organizational activity of the rest of the fathers was unknown to the students.

The mothers of

the members seemed to be somewhat greater 11joiners!1 accord­ ing to the following raw data:

twenty-seven belonged to

from one to four groups; three belonged to five or more organizations; eight belonged to no groups, and the re­ maining mothers1 activity was unknown by the subjects. Insofar as the non-members were concerned, twentythree mothers and the same number of fatherrs were credited by their children with belonging to from one to four groups; two mothers and two fathers belonged to five or more organizations; twelve of each were considered as not

45 affiliated with any organizations; and the remaining num­ ber of parents* organizational life was unknown to the respondents. Table XVIII presents the responses to question 22: TtWhat is your present permanent place of residence?”

The

results again point to the likeness of the two groups and emphasize the fact that 89 per cent of all the students studiedw.ere residing in California.

The number who live

in the City of Los Angeles is unknown. Both members and non-members again seemed to corres­ pond in regard to the factor of the size of the communities where they lived.

(See Table XIX a, b, and c.)

The pre­

ponderance of students replied that they lived in cities with a population of over 500,000, and a Jewish community which exceeded 10,000. The two groups were fairly similar insofar as numer­ ical distribution of occupation of parents was concerned. (See Table XXI.)

The greatest number clustered around the

”business category” for members and non-members* fathers. The mothers of both groups were engaged in an occupation in relatively few cases; most utl of them were identified as ”housewTif e”. Some leaders in the Jewish community hold that the ”Yiddish language creates a Jewish cultural milieu and

46 exerts under certain conditions a decisive influence in shaping self acceptance.rt4* It has been stated that nthe speaking of Yiddish in the home can...be assumed to create a favorable climate for a later positive orientation toward one*s Jewish­ ness.1^

jf this statement were to be accepted as true,

one could also assume that the use of Yiddish in the home, acting so as to induce a greater cohesion with the Jewish group, might tend to be a factor influencing the ■joining or not joining. of.Hillel.

In other words, a

hypothesis to be tested in a future study could well be concerned with a more stringent testing of this factor. Insofar-a-s the findings of this study deal with the problem, there is no conclusive proof herein which would tend to verify or disprove the above commonly held interpretation.

Table XXII, a, b, c, and d, presenting

the distribution of cases relative to language spoken in the home, indicates that 22'per cent of the parents of the fifty members Studied spoke mostly Yiddish to each other, while 88 per cent spoke English primarily.

Only 4 per

cent of the subjects in this group said that Yiddish was

^ Lennard, op. cit.. p. 270. 5 Ibid.. p. 271.

47 the language spoken most often in the home.

Members

reported that 96per cent of their families spoke English most often in the home; the same percentage spoke English most often to their parents; and* 90 per cent noted that the language their parents spoke most often-to them was English. The picture as presented, by the fifty non-members studied indicates a great similarity to that of the mem­ bers.

It is interesting to note, however, that whereas

no other language was indicated for the members, nonmembers reported that 20 per cent of their parents spoke to each other mostly in languages other than English or Yiddish.

English was recorded as the predominantly

spoken language in 70 per cent of the parents1 cases, while Yiddish was the primary language between 10 per cent of the subjects1 parents.

The non-members stated,

in regard to the language spoken most often in the home, * that 86 per c&it of that group spoke English most often, 10 per cent used mostly Yiddish in the home, and 4 per cent spoke some language other than English or Yiddish. Table XXIII a, and b, gives the distribution of the countries in which the parents were educated.

According

to the numerical response, there is close agreement be­ tween the members1 and non-members1 parents insofar, as

43 the place in which parents received the major part of their education is concerned. Item number thirty was concerned with the sub­ jects’ response to the question:

”Are you now engaged

(or have an informal understanding that ydu are going to be married?”)

Among the members, five indicated that

they were engaged, while only three of them responded to the question of whether or not the prospective mate was Jewish.

All three were engaged to college students,

none of whom are Hillel members.

The non-member group

has eight subjects who related that they are now en­ gaged.

Seven said their future mates are Jewish, one

stated that the future mate is non-Jewish.

The responses

thus indicate that of the eight, one is a Hillel member, while the other seven are not.

Four out of the eight

future mates of non-members are attending college. In response to the question asking about the num­ ber of previous engagements (Item #31) the members sig­ nified that thirty-seven of them have had no previous engagements,, eleven have previously had one engagement; one subject had been engaged twice before. members replied in the following manner:

The non— ■ no previous

engagements— twenty seven; one previous engagement— eight*

One subject -reported being engaged twice pre­

viously, and three other non-members indicated that they

49 had been engaged three or more times.

Among the members,

only one subject failed to answer, whereas among the non­

members eleven did not respond (see Table XXIV),

The

above indicates, as might be expected from their age dis­ tribution, that most of them are under twenty-two years of age. The subjects1 strength of desire for children is presented in Table XXV, a, and b.

Once again similarity

between the two groups is indicated.

Forty-one out of

fifty members indicated that they 11very much” desired to have children; the remaining nine indicated they ”mildly desired” them.

The non-members replied:

thirty-five

wanted children T,very much”;, nine-had a mild desire; three indicated that they ”very much object” to having children; and three failed entirely to reply to the question. -Stati stic ally Treated-Data.

The results of the

statistical analysis as related to the hypotheses of this study are as follows: I.

Hours worked on the job.

Twelve members worked

ten or more hours per week as against thirty-four who did not.

Among the non-members, £wenty-five~ worked ten or

more hours per week, and -ah eqiual number worked-fewer hours. The Chi-Square (X^) for this distribution was 5.7 for 1 'degree of freedom (n).

The table of chi-squares indicates

that such a result would occur about three times in.two

50 hundred, thus this result may be accepted as unquestionaly significant (see 'fable I).

Hence hypothesis IV (students

who work ten hours per week tend not to affiliate, while those who work fewer hours, or not at all, tend to join .(Hillel) is born# out. A curious result related to this, however, is* that there is no significant difference between members and non-members in terms of degree of self-support (see Table 110

. A possible explanation of this is that the- amount

of time taken from leisure by work activities, rather than the amount of money earned by employment, is the determin­ ing factor in affiliation or non-affiliation with Hillel. These findings may be related to the :fact that a - decidedly signif icant difference appears in the greater tendency to join Hillel on the part of those whose families had an income of more than $5,000 per year, as compared with those whose families earned less than that amount, (Table III)•

This fact probably means that the students

whose families earn more than $5,000 per year do not have to work, and thus have the time for extra-currieular acti­ vity.

On the other hand this situation could also mean

that the subjects with a lower family income may feej. that even though the dues are low ($2.50 per year) certain acti-

TABLE I

CHI-SQUARE OK HOURS WORKED OH JOB.*

(ITEM #12)

Categories or Response

Non*? Members i Both

Members

c^'l/u ‘^ Personal

L

I ! I

_ j

N

■

Ten hours or more-

12

Less than ten hours

34

4&

; Totals

37

38.5

25

59

61.5

50

96

100

&

equals 5*7, n equals 1, on between the two and one percent level. This difference could occur 1.5 chances out of 100, ergo this finding is statistically considered to be undoubtedly significant.

52

TABLE II

CHI-SQUARE ON SELF-SUPPORT#

(ITEM #11)

Categories of Response

' Members

Completely and more than half

24

Less than half and not at all

Totals

NonMembers * --------.... -

Both

Percent

31

55

55.6

25

19

44

44 *4

49

■ 50

99

100

equals 1.8, n equals 1. There are twenty chances out of 100 that difference is due to chance, ergo, the finding is not considered statistically significang.

53 vities will inevitably require the expenditure of money and an inability to participate in such activities would embarrass the student, causing him to feel a loss of status.

Which of the explanations is more correct needs

to be determined by additional investigation, possibly through interviews with the students. II.

Number of organizations belonged to.

In this

category we find that only eleven members had no other campus group affiliations, whereas twenty-four non-members had no such contacts.

Thirty members had one or two campus

affiliations as against only twenty non-members.

This re­

sult is highly significant, occurring by chance only once in 100 times (Table IV). The above finding bears out the first hypothesis (The greater the number of clubs, organizations or groups to which the subject belongs, the greater his tendency to affiliate with Hillel) . ?/e may interpret this as meaning that if a person will join one group, he will tend to join other groups; joining the first group seems to be the

proof

hardest step to take. The same finding seems to be substantiated by the fact that more members than non-members belong to Jewish organizations. see Table V).

(For actual distribution of the responses The chi-square for this result was 4*2 for

n equal 1, which means that such a result could have

®

54

TABLE III

CHI-SQUARE OH ECONOMIC STATUS o f sub'j e c t s ' FAMILIES* (ITEM #26c) Categories or Response

$5 >000 per je ar or more

Under #5,000 per year

Totals

N onMembers

31

Both

Percent

21

27

92

100

2 equals 6.2, n equals 1. This difference could occur 1.5 chances' out of 100, ergo it is considered statistically to he unquestionably significant.

55 TABLE IV CHI-SQUARE FOR NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS BELONGED TO* (ITEM #20 c; CATEGORIES; 0, AND 1-2)

No Affiliations

11

24

35

4 1 .2.

1-2 Affilia­ tions

30

20

50

58.8

Totals

41

44

85

100 ! .

equals 6.7, n equals 1 on the one percent level. This difference could occur one chance out of one hundred, ergo this finding is considered as undoubtedly signifi­ cant.

56 occurred by chance four times -in 100.

This is probably,

but not unquestionably significant, and possibly might require a greater number of cases' for an unequivocally significant result. III.

Adherence to Jewish religious practices.

The extent of religious observance by the family seems to be immaterial in determining the propensities of the students to join Hillel.

The difference between the

families of members and non-members, in the extent to which they observed Sukkot, Hanukkah, Purim and Yom Kippur, was thoroughly insignificant.

The chi-square of .8 with

an n equal to 3, means that the observed differences could have been due to chance eighty times in 100 —

the least

significant finding In*this study (see Table VI).

Thus

hypothesis II (The greater the adherende to Jewish relig­ ious practices, the greater the tendency to join Hillel) is not borne out. The criterion of religious attendance, however, differentiates the two groups of subjects in this study markedly.

Whereas twenty members attend services regular­

ly or occasionally, only five non-members do so.

The non­

members attend rarely, never or only on High Holydays. This is true of forty-five of the non-members as compared to twenty-eight of the members.

The above difference

57 could occur by chance only once in 100 times (Table VII) . As~ might be expected, the latter finding is dup­ licated for the denominational affiliations of the two groups.

Twenty-five members, as against nine non-members,

consider themselves as Orthodox or Conservative.

Forty-

one non-members, in contrast to twenty three members de­ clare themselves to be either Reform or to have no affil­ iation at all.

Again, in this case the result could have

occurred less than once in 100 times, by chance (Table VIII). Attendance in Hebrew school is a much less signif­ icant factor in differentiating the two groups.

The dis­

tribution is such (see Table IX) that the difference be­ tween the two groups could have occurred by chance* fifteen times in 100. tical significance.

Such a result 'has little statis­ All the above results in this action

seem to indicate first, that religious behavior of the family is not defintely associated with the tendency of the subject, to join Hillel and that perhaps the student1s tendency to join Hillel can be associated with his own religious indications and present denominational affilia­ tion.

Early Jewish education seems not to be influential

in determining the subjects1 later group preferances.

In

fact more non-members attended Hebrew school in their early youth than did members.

The reason for this might

58

TABLE V CHI-SQUARE ON JEWISH 'AFFILIATIONS* (ITEM #16,Id)

Categories of Response

Members

Non Members 1

Both

Percent

B elong

26

16

4-2

4-2

Do Not Belong

2A

3A

58

58

Totals

50

50

100

100

;

equals 4*2, n equals l,on between, the five percent and two percent levels. This difference could occur four chances out of one hundred, ergo, this- finding is considered slightly more than probably (but -not unquestionably) signif­ icant.

59 TABLE VI GHI-SQUARE ON EXTENT OF RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE BY THE FAMILY* (ITEM #29 a-k) Categories

Families

Families of

Sukkot

20

10

30

15.3

Light Candles on Hanukkah

32

22

54

27.6

Purim

25

17

42

21.4

Fast on' Yom Kippur

#0

30

70

35.7

117

79

196

Totals

100

^ equals .S, n equals 3• This difference could occur eighty chances out of 100, ergo this finding is not con­ sidered statistically significant.

60

TABLE VII

CHI-SQUARE ON RELIGIOUS ATTENDANCE* (ITEM #18a & b) Categories of Response

Members

NonMembers

Both

. Percent

Attend Regularly & Occasionally

20

5

25

25.5

High Holydays Only and Rarely Attend

23

31

54

55.1

5

14

19

19.4

48

50

98

100

Never Attend

Totals r 9

equals 17.0, n equals 2. This difference could occur less than one chance ih-one hundred, ergo this finding is considered to be undoubtedly significan, from the point of view of statistical observation.

61

be that Hebrew School was made unattractive to the sub­ ject, thus causing him to carry away negative memories which perhaps consciously or unconsciously affected his attitude with respect to other Jewish institutions.

The

student*s own contemporary behavior as evidenced by such things as religious attendance, is a much more re­ liable index of his tendencies to join o r n o t to join Hillel than criteria such as his earlier behavior or the behavior of his family.

The same conclusion holds

with respect to the students*' own- denominational affili­ ation.

In other words, it is the studeni*s ovrn actual

present behavior, (not the behavior of other persons, or his own behavior at an earlier time) which has import­ ant predictive value.

The methodological significance

of this statement should be tested further in subsequent^ studies. Factors which affect both the student and his family may be of significance, as is indicated by the .;t facj: that those who tended not to join Hillel exhibited much greater residential mobility than those who joined (for actual distribution of response, see Table X). The chi-square, however, was not, conclusive as in the instances discussed above.

The difference in mobility

could have occurred just slightly more than five times

62

TABLE VIII CHI-SQUARE ON DENOMINATIONAL AFFILIATION* (TEM #17b)

Categories Members

NonMembers --!"■'---

Both

Percent

Conservative and Orthodox

25

t .9

34

34.V

Reform and no Affiliation

23

iH

64

65.3

50

9B

100

Totals

...

■

.................

*X2 equals 12.1, n equals 1. This difference could occur less than one chance in one hundred, ergo this finding is considered to be undoubtedly statistically significant.

63

TABLE IX CHI-SQUARE OH HEBREW SCHOOL ATTENDANCE* (ITEM #14)

Categories of Response

' Members

NonMembers j Both

Percent

Attend Hebrew School

31

38

69

69

Do Not Attend Hebrew School

19

12

31

31

Totals

50

50

100

100

*X2 equals 2.4, n equals 1. This difference could occur fifteen chances in one hundred, ergo it is considered sta­ tistically insignificant.

64-

TABLE X CHI-SQUARE ON RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY* (ITEM #24)

Categories of Response

Members

NonMembers ' Both

Percent

1-2 moves

26

21

47

67.1

3-4 moves

7

16

23

32.9

33

37

70

100

Totals

*X