Yeshiva college students view themselves primarily as yeshiva students, not university students. They see college's purpose as allowing them to earn a livelihood to support continued religious study, not for personal growth. While able to discuss their university's perspective of developing well-rounded individuals, they do not personally believe this. They feel tension from cultural differences at university but overcome it by avoiding non-academic activities and socializing primarily with other Orthodox Jewish students. Their priority remains their religious studies at the yeshiva.

1. Yeshivot (plural for yeshiva) are rather peculiar institutions in 20th century America.
These important bastions of an era gone by are surprisingly vibrant, an accurate reflection of the
recent orthodox Jewish rejuvenation in this country and Israel. They are passionate about not
allowing the Holocaust to destroy what was once the spiritual and intellectual life source in the
shtetls of Europe. They are Orthodox Judaism as it is meant to be executed, with emphasis
placed on Jewish law and ancient tradition. Amazingly self contained, these places of higher
learning are far removed from the society in which they coexist. For those unaccustomed to the
ins and outs, a visit is a severe culture shock, leaving many wondering if in fact they can believe
what they had just witnessed.
These all male schools are rigorous, with grueling 15 hour a day schedules. It is most
interesting to observe how these young men spend their limited spare time. The students come
from all different backgrounds from all around the country and therefore, there are some distinct
pastimes. All, however, are approved hobbies, neither violating Jewish law, tradition or the
particular world view of the institution’s rabbis.
Although it would be almost imperceivable for an outsider, many yeshivot have different
philosophies regarding what is permitted and what is not. On a visit to one yeshiva one may find
talmidim (students at a religious school) reading books and popular magazines, while a visit to
another may leave one with the impression that such pursuit is not only a waste of time, but a
serious violation of Jewish law.
Attitudes towards universities follows a similar pattern. While one yeshiva may preach
that one should prefer death rather than attend a secular school, others may allow their students
to attend openly with full permission. However, it is important to understand that even

2. 2
according to most yeshivot that allow their students to attend university, it is considered a
necessary evil and is only allowed as a secondary pursuit, always remaining far behind their
religious studies in significance. Young men are encouraged to remain in yeshiva for as long as
they are in school, to help minimize the negative and dangerous affects their secular schooling
may have on themselves and their religious observance.
The objective of my study was to determine how the student subculture of yeshiva
college students, who come from an atmosphere which is at very best skeptical about the overall
benefits and ramifications of college attendance, view their college experience. Do yeshiva
college students consider themselves a part of the larger culture of college students?
As Astin claims (as quoted in Whitt 1996) "students peer groups are the single most
potent source on influence and growth and development during the undergraduate years." Are
yeshiva college students socialized by peer groups at their universities, or only by their peers at
yeshiva? What affect, if any, does college attendance have on them?
For the purposes of this study, student subculture is defined as
Smaller, distinctive groups within the dominant
student culture that are held together by a persistent
interaction and a common allegiance to certain values,
beliefs rituals and practices and codes of conduct.
Culture will be defined according to Tiereney (1988)
The collective, mutually shaping patterns of
norms, values, practices, beliefs and assumptions that
guide the behavior of individuals and groups (1988 pp.
12-13).
Socialization will be defined as

3. The process by which people begin to adopt the
perspectives of the group with which they wish to
affiliate. (Kuh, Hall 1992 p.11)
Data was gathered from personal interviews with ten yeshiva college students currently
enrolled in dual programs at three different yeshivot nationwide between the beginning of
October and the end of November, 1996. All three yeshivot had open policies allowing their
students to attend college part time while remaining fully enrolled in the yeshiva's religious
program. However, yeshiva college students remained a minority at each institution, as the
majority of yeshiva students focused on their religious studies exclusively. Permission was
received from Rabbi Peretz Zachai and Rabbi Jerold Eisenberg to conduct research at their
institutions in October of 1996. As per request, a copy of the complete study will be made
available to Rabbi Zachai.
The students themselves were all Caucasian, between the ages of 18 and 22. Their
college and yeshiva experience varied greatly. However, all students were in at least their
second year of yeshiva and first year of college.
Survey questions queried students’ feelings regarding their yeshiva and university's
perspective on a number of selected issues, as well as their own personal feelings. Results of the
study will be presented using direct quotations and examples from the different students
interviewed. As requested, pseudonyms will be used, and no direct link between any particular
student and his institution will be made.
One major theme was easily apparent throughout my research. Yeshiva college students
view themselves as yeshiva students who happen to be in college. The emphasis was unilaterally
placed on yeshiva, with college merely serving as a vehicle to an end, that end being becoming

4. self sufficient and self supportive.
After responding to questions regarding their yeshiva and their college's perspective on
college attendance, six of the ten interviewees responded to questions about their personal beliefs
by simply saying "the same" without reference to which of the two distinct institutional
perspectives they just described they agreed with. Upon further prodding each one clarified that
he meant "the same as my yeshiva." No further information was offered, as it appeared that
these students felt that whatever it was their yeshiva espoused was more than a sufficient answer
for them as well. What’s more, it appears that they felt it obvious that when they said "the
same" that they were referring to the yeshiva. When asked to clarify, several laughed, as if to
imply that the answer was obvious. Why would anyone think that they could be referring to
anything but their yeshiva?
There was quite a bit of agreement as to what role the students felt their yeshiva believed
college should play. All ten students responded that it was for a "parnassa (livelihood)" and
nothing more. Isaac said, "One should not take any courses he does not need", just the
minimum required to earn his degree and get the job he is looking for. Jacob, clearly the most
contemplative and thoughtful of all interviewees, added that college actually helps individuals in
their religious studies, as "people will have peace of mind by going to college to learn how to
make a living. Therefore they will be able to learn (Jewish studies) better. It can help
compliment rabbinics, so therefore in my mind going to college helps me serve G-d better." In
other words, college is a vehicle to an end (money), which when attained, allows one to better
serve G-d through his studies and practices without unnecessary interruptions. Furthermore, it
may provide an aspiring rabbi with important skills that allows him to function better in a

5. religious leadership role in a secular society. Jacob also mentioned that he had just been thinking
about the very same questions over the last few days, trying to sort out his beliefs, as well as
those of his yeshiva.
However, college attendance is not necessarily an appropriate first option. It should only
be pursued after a number of years in yeshiva (nine of the ten students had been in yeshiva for
several years more than they had been in college) and then, only as Simon put it, for "somebody
who is not necessarily going into chinuch (Jewish education and teaching)." If, however,
chinuch is an option, clearly most of the students, including Simon, believed that college
attendance was not recommended.
Even Abraham, who did say that he agreed with his university's perspective regarding
attendance (that everyone secular or religious should attend college), believed that the purpose of
college attendance, according to both his university and his yeshiva was, "to go to grad school."
When asked why that was important, he responded "You can earn more money that way"
Evidently, he believes that the perspective of his yeshiva regarding the purpose of a university
was the standard belief employed in the halls of his university as well.
Most students, however, were able to give more standard replies to questions about their
university's perspective. All ten responded that their university believed that "everyone...that can
meet the academic requirements" should at least have the opportunity to attend college. Most
felt that college attendance was an important thing within the non Jewish community and should
be encouraged whenever possible.
All the students, with the exception of Abraham, felt that their university had high, lofty
goals in mind in the furtherance of the education of their students. As Rueben said, college helps

6. them "gain an education, and provide(s) them with the tools for life." Or, as Simon said, “To
give people a broad perspective allowing them to explore different cultures." And, of course, the
standard reply was given by four students, "universities are there to produce well rounded
individuals."
Two other students also mentioned earning money and getting a job as important, but
placed that as a lower priority on the college's agenda.
It is very interesting that these students were able to produce such in depth and complete
answers to questions regarding their university's perspective, while only one of them would
admit to actually believing them to be true. Simon's response was most telling. After describing
a college's purpose as "teaching students how to think, and helping them grow up through the
college experience", he then remarked, "College is the biggest farce in America." He believed
that colleges can claim whatever they will, but they accomplish nothing productive besides
providing people with the education necessary to earn a degree, and then a job within a particular
field.
None of the interviewees had ever participated in an extra curricular activity. Several
were not even aware that such programs existed on their campuses. Simon remarked, "No (I
have never participated) thank G-d! They are a complete waste of time. They are completely
menuval (disgusting, appealing to base instincts) but are disguised with good intentions."
Becoming a well rounded individual does not justify "all the other garbage that comes with it" in
Simon's eyes. These activities have one goal in mind, and that is to allow students to do as they
please, act in an immoral manner with full university sanction. All the interviewees made it
abundantly clear that for them there was no distinction between regular university activities and

7. activities sponsored by on campus Jewish social organizations such as Hillel.
Although Simon was the only student to openly criticize extra curricular activities, it was
clear that none of the students considered them an appropriate way to spend their time. Their
roles as college students was to go to class, take notes and tests and go back to their yeshiva.
Academic activities followed a similar pattern. Most students did not know that such
programs existed. Jacob said that he "uses the computers. Does that count?" Dan, the only
student that replied that he had participated in some, said it was only with "with other Jewish
students who are frum (orthodox). He never participated in any programs with the "blacks and
other dregs of society" that he attends school with. Information regarding exactly who the other
"dregs of society" were was not offered.
None of the students made mention of what role they played in class with the exception
of Simon who said that he treated it much the same way he did his Talmud class, becoming
deeply involved, challenging the instructor on many small points, much to the dismay of many of
his classmates. Simon reported feeling perplexed at his classmates’ reaction.
Feeling perplexed or left out was a common theme among the students. Seven of the ten
students mentioned that they feel or have felt an abnormal amount of stress and tension being in
both yeshiva and college at the same time. Dan mentioned the problems with "time constraints."
The dual program can average 15 hour days, "making it extremely hard to find time to do college
homework", another poignant reference as to which program has priority.
Others mentioned coeducation. Coming from all male private education classrooms,
"it’s a different world", Hillel said. It can be rather perplexing and even disturbing to one who
is unaccustomed to such a setting.

8. Still others mentioned standing out. Dan said that wearing his kippa (skullcap worn by
orthodox Jewish males) "everyone looked at me differently, as if I was a smart rich Jew."
However, these differences were rather easy to overcome, as most claimed that their feelings of
tension wore off within a couple of weeks, some in the most interesting way. Benji said, “I just
learned that I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part of
them and they are not trying to be part of me." He admitted that such a relationship made him
somewhat of a loner but he did not care. "We just keep our distance." The belief was that they
were there for a decidedly different purpose, and they would have to live with that while their
classmates would have to learn to live with them. It was clear that this distinction bothered
Benji somewhat. However he got used to it and accepted it as a fact.
Simon reported major difficulties along the same lines.
I ask many questions in class. Sometimes I try and
gauge if the professor is being honest about my
questions. When I raise my hand and say I'll try to be
brief, I hear shifting in the classroom, I think it has to
do with my being Jewish I mean, some of the people in
my class are complete bozos. They don't get buggy
when someone else asks questions, only me. I have to
be careful so that I don't cause a chilul hashem
(desecration of G-d's name). They are all laughing
together at me. One time I asked a professor if his
course material would be clean and appropriate before
the semester. He told me it would, but he lied and
penalized me for not reading a disgusting story,
brushing aside my religious requirements.
Simon got straight to the heart of the matter and discovered some major differences in
classroom structure and content between his two realities. Apparently, he finds it difficult to
understand why his distinct style, mannerisms and sensitivities are hard to understand in an

9. American classroom, believing that his religion and possibly, anti- Semitism, are the root causes
of his classroom discomfort.
It is interesting to note, however, that Simon is not so concerned with how he is viewed
in his class. They don't like him. So? Let them laugh, they are "bozos" anyway. Why would
anyone object to a sincere attempt to understand and analyze the class material? His real concern
is of violating religious law, and he tries to be careful not to cause a chilul hashem. Non
association with other students does not bother him at all, as socializing is not an important
aspect of his college experience.
Jacob saw the tension in a different way. When asked about tensions he has experienced
at school he said,
Yes (I have experienced it). It’s wild! My very first
class was a few hours before kol nidra (the solemn
opening service for Yom Kippur, the Day of
Atonement) All around (the) yeshiva, it was a day of
introspection. I went to college and heard a girl talk
about her new king size bed and how it is so empty
(implying that she would like some company in filling
it up). That's the tip of the iceberg of the vast cultural
differences. There is much more emphasis of enjoying
life in college, the 'college scene.' In yeshiva, it boils
down to how hard you work. I see how much free time
everyone has. And then there is the girl thing. In
college a girl is just a girl. In yeshiva, talking to a girl
on the phone is a massive thing (a bad thing). In
college, they treat each other like people.
Jacob had discovered a completely new, and decidedly different, culture. It seemed
almost as if he was completely removing himself from his experience, analyzing his cultural
experience much the same way he would analyze a text book. It was a learning experience in as
much as he was observing a brand new culture, not socializing himself into a different one. It

10. was quite clear which culture he believed superior, and that he, under no circumstances, would
willingly allow the culture he was experiencing creep into his own personality.
The amount of respect in his voice when discussing his yeshiva vs the disdain he felt for
the lack of morals of the college scene was easily evident. He was glowing, openly enthusiastic
when describing the solemnness and holiness of the yeshiva. On the other hand, the open disdain
and distaste for his university culture easily shone through.. Even his comments about the
relationships with girls showed his perspective, as it was clear that comments such as "they treat
each other like people" was meant to illustrate his surprise at the difference, and should not be
taken as a rebuke of his yeshiva's policies.
It was very surprising that none of the students interviewed mentioned that they felt that
their secular studies were a hindrance to their religious studies. Although some mentioned that
they were greatly overworked, trying to adhere to all of the requirements of an exhaustive dual
program, the students seemed more concerned about the curious effects inter societal mingling
(or lack thereof) has on them, rather than the amount of time their chosen course of study was
taking away from their religious pursuits. This was something they felt they had to do, even
though it took time and almost Herculean effort to accomplish.
The most interesting, and diverse set of answers I received was regarding the benefits the
students interviewed felt they have gained from being enrolled at a university. Some responses
were predictable. Simon and Jacob both said that they "had more credits under their belts", and
were therefore closer to finishing off their degrees. The rest of the students were evenly split.
Those that had not been in university attendance for very long said that they felt they had gained
nothing as of yet. After saying that, two mentioned that they had picked up some interesting

11. information about psychology and anthropology, respectively. This, however, did not seem to be
the kind of information or influence that they had been seeking from their college experience,
possibly because these were general education courses and did not specifically help towards the
completion of their majors. They apparently have found it hard to understand how the
information they were processing was going to translate itself into making them more marketable
for future employment.
Interestingly, two students said that college made them more worldly. Abraham’s
attitude did not come as a surprise to me. He was the one student that believed in his college's
perspective over that of his yeshiva's. What makes his response all the more intriguing is the
fact that Abraham had not mentioned becoming well rounded or worldly when asked about the
purposes of university attendance. Instead, he felt that the university itself believed the
importance of college attendance was for professional training, i.e. the learning of a trade. How
or why the concept of worldliness entered his view now is hard to understand. Does he feel that
he had extended past the stated goal of his university? Does he believe that something
unintended has become the most important facet of his collegiate experience?
Two other students claimed that college attendance has greatly helped their Jewish
studies, improving their study habits, and forcing them to work harder at their religious studies.
However, this should be understood as a good thing because of the Jewish concept, according to
the effort is the reward.
It is very clear that these students have resisted socialization by their university peers at
all costs. They consider their universities to be potentially dangerous places that they must
protect themselves from. They have a narrow focus. Their training is strictly vocational. The

12. idea of becoming well rounded is at best a waste of time, better spent in religious pursuits. The
"college scene" is a place with loose morals, a simple excuse for justifying any behavior. It was
different from what they were accustomed to at yeshiva, and they found it unusual. They have
chosen not to interact with their fellow students, whom they find inexplicably different as well as
hard to comprehend. They have no desire to adapt or become part of this foreign environment as
they are positive that the culture at their yeshiva suits them better.
They believe that college attendance can be positive if it, in some way, aids their
religiosity by giving them peace of mind or teaching them important leadership skills. It is
something that has to be done, and can be done safely as long as the student remains firmly
entrenched within his yeshiva while pursuing it.
Upon the conclusion of his interview, Jacob remarked, "What an interesting series of
questions to ask yeshiva guys." He felt that these were important questions that the students
themselves should contemplate from time to time. However, he added, "You're not going to
show this to your teacher, are you? I'm afraid that the goyishe velt (non Jewish world) won't
understand."
He is absolutely correct. No matter how well presented or how thorough an introduction,
it is extremely hard for outsiders to understand how yeshivot operate. Can anyone hope to
understand a 2,000 year old institution cultivated in a ghetto society in a mere 15 pages?
Certainly not. However, it is important to understand that the perspective these students espouse
is the product of a carefully engineered program designed with one goal in mind, the furtherance
and protection of traditional fundamentalist Judaism as it was meant to be practiced.
Assimilation is the largest single threat to orthodox Judaism in America. Many estimates

13. claim that more Jews will simply disappear from sight then were killed in the Holocaust!
Intermarriage is at its highest level in recorded Jewish history. Upon questioning, fewer and
fewer Jews respond that if given a choice they would want to be born Jewish. The pride that has
kept Judaism so vibrant for so many thousands of years is quickly withering away.
To many Jews, these facts are irrelevant, treated with indifference. However, to an
institutions whose goal it is to promote fundamentalist traditional Judaism, it spells disaster.
Isolation and intense programs are considered the strongest and most effective means of keeping
young men Jewish. Rabbis at these institution are well aware of the effects collegiate peer
interactions can have on their students, and they are vigilant against them. They fully understand
that the more a student is exposed to the outside world with all of its enticements, the more likely
he is to be affected and socialized by it, changing him forever. If we are honest, we would
realize that this change is for the worse considering where these students have come from and the
direction they have indicated they want to lead their lives.
Universities are not necessarily the root cause of the problems. However, they are
symptomatic of it. Universities are accurate reflections of the community at large, and to many
young yeshiva students, represent their first real interaction with the outside world. And, it is an
extremely difficult thing. Many students, like Simon, don't understand that college is a different
reality with a different culture. Things are done differently and what is an acceptable and
encouraged practice at his yeshiva is looked at with scorn and ridicule at his university.
Overall, however, the system works well, keeping yeshiva students insulated, virtually
unaffected by their peers, and completely orthodox, while affording them the opportunity to
pursue careers. What's more, the rabbis at these institutions know that eventually their students

14. will themselves some day go out into the secular world. The hope then is that this controlled
environment in which their first experience took place will serve as a model for appropriate
interactions throughout the rest of their lives.
There are dangers involved in such a set up as well. Some students, such as Dan, may
misinterpret their orders to remain segregated as a justification for feeling superior and aloof.
Calling college students the "dregs of society" is a perfect example of over applying the rabbis’
intentions. Most, however, never come to such radical conclusions. Benji's response was most
representative, "I'm different from them and they are different from me. I'm not trying to be part
of them and they are not trying to be part of me." Perfection! He has understood exactly what
his rabbis had intended. Do your own thing and remain who you are. You'll see many different
people and things at school, don't let them get to you or affect you. You are a yeshiva student.
Remember that and remain who you are and college can be a productive time in your life.
In conclusion, members of the university community must constantly keep in mind that
their students differ in many ways. Every university has a mission. Many believe it important to
socialize all students into their university's culture. And although there are always people who
resist such socialization for unhealthy reasons, we must keep in mind that some are doing it for
very well thought out and positive reasons. Our goal is to produce better and more productive
citizens, but America is a country in which religious freedom and pluralism is an integral part.
We must allow those who resist our mission for the sake of the strength and continuance of their
religion, the space and comfort in which to do so.