Rabbi Abe Katz, the Founding Director of the Beurei Hatefila Institute make many wonderful points in his observations about tefilla, but I want to focus on two of them, not because I doubt that they are correct, but in order to make a plea for some data to show that they are correct.
He states as follows:
<<
Having laid out that background, I can answer why Day Schools do not teach Tefila. To properly understand Tefila, you have to study it using academic methods of study. That means revealing that what is found in the Siddur today is not exactly what can be found in Siddurim over the last two thousand years. Apparently, that is a truth that many in the Orthodox Jewish community are fearful to reveal.
>>
After endorsing a more academic methods approach to tefilla and that much of Orthodoxy is afraid of this, he tells us that:
<<
Rabbi Soloveitchik, Rabbi Cohn and Rabbi Wohlghemuth came together to create the Beurei Hatefila course at Maimonides demonstrates that they did not share that fear. That many alumni of Maimonides still remember much of what they learned in the Beurei Hatefila course (and they are still Orthodox) is a testament that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance (FDR First Inaugural Speech).
>>
Let me summarize his claim to you, emphasizing the words I placed in bold. Rabbi Katz is claiming that teaching an academic beurei hatefilla approach produces better learning of tefilla and that better learning produces a higher number of "still Orthodox" students than schools that have some other curricula. Rabbi Katz is implicitly claiming causation and not just correlation -- learning a certain style of tefilla keeps our students Orthodox. More specifically, Rabbi Katz is claiming that "We [Orthodox] have nothing to be afraid of from the academic study of tefilla, because at Maimonides we use it and it produces better results that other methods, since the students retain more and are still Orthodox."
To me, his post highlights a data problem. To the best of my knowledge, I doubt anyone can show if this claim is true or false. I do not doubt that it might be true and I ponder that it might be incorrect, but I would be deeply interested in any data about whether certain curriculum produces a higher retention rate within Orthodoxy than other curriculum.
Controlling for religious level of the parents and observance at entry -- which is very important -- is it true that teaching X in Y style with Z curricula increases the retention rate within the Orthodox community? Is there any data, or is this claim merely a puff claim unsupported by any data at all.
And if it is true for Beurei Hatefillah, what else is it true for?
MJB
Michael J. Broyde
Professor of Law
Emory University School of Law
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/06/2016 05:59AM by mlb.
