TY - CHAP
T1 - The Educational Institutions and Pedagogical Approaches
AU - Tadmor-Shimony, Talia
AU - Raichel, Nirit
N1 - Funding Information:
The development of kindergartens and schools in the moshavot was shaped by several factors: the conflict between the religious, educational frame - work of the heider and modern education in the moshavot, the identity of those funding the educational institutions, and the size of the moshava and the number of its students. These three factors were reflected in the char - acter and size of the educational buildings and their equipment. The moshavot may be classified into two categories. In the first category, educa - tion was funded by the philanthropic actor, Baron Rothschild, through his bureaucracy and the transnational Jewish network, JCA. The second group comprised those moshavot that did not receive regular funding from an external factor. These communities were forced to fund modern education through community taxes or parental tuition. In these moshavot, it took years to transfer the site of schooling from a public building, usually a synagogue, to a designated facility. In the moshava of Rehovot, for example, the school was relocated to a stone structure, partially financed by the wine company Carmel, after seven years in a wooden shack.21 In the moshava of Gedera it took thirteen years to transfer the studies from the synagogue to a designated two-room structure with a tiled roof.22
Funding Information:
Collaboration between the Hilfsverein network and Hebrew-speaking teachers led to the opening of a kindergarten in Jerusalem in 1903. This was the first kindergarten initiative in a city funded by the network. In the following years, the network financed additional kindergartens, and in fact, most Hebrew-speaking kindergartens were supported by the Hilfsverein network.
Funding Information:
A blind education house, unlike other educational institutions, was not supported by an educational network and it did not receive funding from philanthropists. The institution was unable to charge tuition from the children’s parents, who belonged to the weakest strata of society. The institution depended on fundraising through articles, various events, and appeals to affluent people. The School for the Blind was an internal educational institution with a religious-Zionist character built under the educational and auspices of institutions in Jerusalem at the end of the Ottoman period. The institution offered Jewish children between the ages of six and twenty vocational education and training to prevent their dependence on others and allow them to become effective adults who work for a living and contribute to society.
Funding Information:
A newly founded society that bore the name “The Hebrew Gymnasium Society in the Land of Israel” owned stocks, raised money, and was responsible for the institution’s administration. A supervisory committee headed the society, and it raised money for the Gymnasium from various networks in the Jewish world, such as Hovevei Zion and other Jewish donors. In other words, the Gymnasium’s status changed from that of a private institution to that of a public one, legally bound to be administered as an association. At this stage, the teaching staff increased greatly, to nine. In addition, a physician by name Sonia Belkind, who was among the first female physicians in Ottoman Palestine, worked for the school. The change in the school’s administration mode affected the economic aspect. The Gymnasium’s budget was balanced due to tuition, the support of the Hovevei Zion committee, interest from funds collected from various contributions, and payments from the shares of the association’s members.82 This fund financed the Gymnasium’s furnishings and construction. An additional fund available to it provided for the purchase of books and teaching aids. The Hilfsverein network financed the purchase of equip - ment for the study of natural science.83
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
PY - 2023/1/1
Y1 - 2023/1/1
N2 - This chapter discusses the processes of active reception, implementation, and indigenization in Ottoman Palestine’s modern Jewish and Hebrew education system. The modern educational institutions in Ottoman Palestine transitioned from a place of study to a place designated for education, similar to the process in other societies. This process first led to the transfer of various architectural models from Europe and their relocation to construct modern schools in Palestine. The actors and networks that built the first modern schools carried out the transfer of models. The growth of modern schools designed for children of different ages––promoted transfer processes and adaptation and assimilation processes that embodied the schools’ visions and goals. Five main types of modern schools developed, and their construction style was almost identical to that of the networks’ schools in areas outside Palestine. Modern schools’ curricula and teaching methods were transferred through three stages of lending and borrowing. The first was active reception, the second was implementation, and the third was indigenization. A fascinating case study of this process is the teaching of Hebrew using the natural method. One could argue that the indigenization stage was employed when the teaching instruction became known in Hebrew historiography as "Hebrew in Hebrew."
AB - This chapter discusses the processes of active reception, implementation, and indigenization in Ottoman Palestine’s modern Jewish and Hebrew education system. The modern educational institutions in Ottoman Palestine transitioned from a place of study to a place designated for education, similar to the process in other societies. This process first led to the transfer of various architectural models from Europe and their relocation to construct modern schools in Palestine. The actors and networks that built the first modern schools carried out the transfer of models. The growth of modern schools designed for children of different ages––promoted transfer processes and adaptation and assimilation processes that embodied the schools’ visions and goals. Five main types of modern schools developed, and their construction style was almost identical to that of the networks’ schools in areas outside Palestine. Modern schools’ curricula and teaching methods were transferred through three stages of lending and borrowing. The first was active reception, the second was implementation, and the third was indigenization. A fascinating case study of this process is the teaching of Hebrew using the natural method. One could argue that the indigenization stage was employed when the teaching instruction became known in Hebrew historiography as "Hebrew in Hebrew."
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85166670026&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-031-34926-3_3
DO - 10.1007/978-3-031-34926-3_3
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:85166670026
T3 - Global Histories of Education
SP - 43
EP - 105
BT - Global Histories of Education
PB - Palgrave Macmillan
ER -