THE TRANSFORMATION OF JEWISH SOCIAL WORK_BERNARD REISMAN AND THE HORNSTEIN PROGRAM AT BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY

When the program became operational in 1966 and I joined the Brandeis faculty as its director, we announced that one of its pur­ poses was to provide education and training for a broa

T H E T R A N S F O R M A T I O N O F

J E W I S H S O C I A L W O R K

B e r n a r d R e i s m a n and the Hornstein P r o g r a m at

B r a n d e i s University

DR LEON A JICK

Helen & Irving Schneck Professor Emeritus of American Jewish Studies,

Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts

When the Hornstein program was launchd in 1969, its prospects for success were precarious The Jewish community was ambivalent about the centrality of its Jewish identity and unconvinced of the need for Jewishly knowledgeable professionals, and the response of the Brandeis University faculty ranged fi-om tepid to cold In this unreceptive environment, Bernard Reisman recognized the potential of the program and brought it to fruition

I n 1964 Brandeis University announced the

;stabhshment of the Phihp W Lown Gradu­

ate Center for Contemporary Jewish Studies

When the program became operational in

1966 and I joined the Brandeis faculty as its

director, we announced that one of its pur­

poses was to provide education and training

for a broad spectrum of Jewish communal

professionals, to create a "Jewish civil ser­

vice." That same year, aprogram for training

Jewish social workers was inaugurated at the

Los Angeles branch of the Hebrew Union

College-Jewish Institute of Religion in con­

junction with the School of Social Work of

the University of Southern California Both

programs represented independent initiatives

in a community still ambivalent about the

centrality of its Jewish identity and

unconvinced about the need for Jewishly

knowledgeable professionals

The field of Jewish social work—that is,

social work conducted in agencies supported

by Jewish philanthropic contributions—had

a history reaching back to the late nineteenth

century The National Conference of Jewish

Social Service had been organized in 1899

From the outset, the aim was to Americanize

immigrants and to facilitate the transition

from Old World particularism to fiill partici­

pation in contemporary society Judaization

was not on the agenda of the social agencies,

and Jewish educational agencies had to fight

for inclusion on the margins of the communal

agenda

A shortage of workers in the Jewish field led to the formation of a 'Training School for Jewish Social Work" in 1925 In 1932, its name was changed to the Graduate School for Jewish Social Work Its stated purpose was

"to provide facilities for the initial training for Jewish social workers and to provide further training for such workers as are al­ ready in the field of Jewish social work"

{AJYB, 1932-33,p 189) Some believed that

raising Jewish consciousness as well as pro­ fessional skills should be the mandate of the school In a 1936 article on 'Twenty Five Years of Jewish Education in the United States," Israel Chipkin, a Jewish educator, wrote

T h e J e w i s h social and c h a r i t a b l e a g e n c i e s

h a v e experienced the n e e d for workers w h o s e training included not o n l y general education

a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l t e c h n i q u e , but a l s o m o r e definite Jewish information, understanding and

b a c k g r o u n d T h e e x i s t e n c e o f a professional

s c h o o l for J e w i s h social w o r k e r s i s further

e v i d e n c e o f progress m a d e toward Jewish c o m ­

m u n i t y a w a r e n e s s and responsibihty for the quahty o f Jewish group hfe in the d e m o c r a c y

called the U n i t e d States o f A m e r i c a (AJYB,

1 9 3 6 - 3 7 )

In contrast to that view of a Jewish educator, Maurice Karpf, director of the school, chose

il5

to emphasize only that the school "has mate­

rially influenced social work education in the

United States" (AJYB 1936-38, p 117)

Whatever the assessment, the school did not

survive The Amencan Jewish Year Book of

1941-42 reports without explanation or com­

ment that the Graduate School for Jewish

Social Work suspended operadons after 1939

The School never succeeded in persuading

the Jewish community of the importance or

even the value of Jewish social work While

social work education was essential, Jewish

social work education, whatever that might

mean, was unnecessary in a community

fo-cusedonacculturationandintegradon "Sec­

tarianism," as Arnold Gurin (1966, p 38)

observed years later, remained "a persistent

value dilemma."

In the post-World War II period, signifi­

cant change in the character of the commu­

nity occurred at an accelerated pace In 1945,

the National Jewish Welfare Board engaged

Professor Oscar Janowsky of the City College

of New York to survey the program of the

National Jewish Welfare Board and its affili­

ates In his introduction to the report Profes­

sor Salo Baron wrote of "an underlying his­

toric evolution." As a result of the great

European tragedy, he observed,

[the American Jewish Community] has seen

the mantle of world Jewish leadership thrust

upon its shoulder American Jewry and its

leadership have become keenly aware of that

new responsibility There are incontestable

signs not only of a cultural awakening, but of

a certain eagemess of the Jewish pubhc to

pioneer in the unexplored realms of a modem

culture which would be both American and

Jewish (Janowsky, 1948, p xiii)

Once again, the response of the communal

leadership and especially of the Jewish social

work profession did not fulfill the expectation

of the historian educator

The Janowsky report recommended that

"the program of the Jewish Center should

devote primary attention to Jewish content"

(Janowsky, 1948, p 7) The report stated

further that "the Jewish purpose and the Jewish content of its program alone invest the Jewish Center with dignity and validity and justify its existence Only when this primary purpose has been established are neutral ac­ tivities for the full development of individu­ ality proper" (Janowsky, 1948, p 7) The survey was extremely controversial, and its recommendations were not accepted "After year-long study by local agencies and an appraisal by an outside committee, which disagreed with the findings of the original survey, a final statement of principles was adopted which was a compromise between differing views as to the importance of gen­ eral and specifically Jewish objectives of Jew­ ish agencies engaged in programs of leisure

time activities" (AJYB, 1948-49, p 132)

Professionals in the Jewish field resisted rec­ ommendations for "Jewish" programming And no one asked where professionals who were more knowledgeable and more commit­ ted to particularistic Jewish concerns might

be found should their services be desired In fact, some prominent professionals were sug­ gesting precisely the opposite strategy 1 n the late 1950s, Joseph Widen, executive vice president of the New York federation, pro­ posed a planned departure from "sectarian policies": "The implication [of his approach]

is that Jews should continue to contribute through Jewish channels but should not seek Jewish content in their philanthropic agen­ cies" (quoted in Urbont)

In the following years, the question of Jewish content was addressed in numerous articles and papers reflecting the ongoing ambivalence of the professional community

In a 1962 paper, Harold Silver, director of the Jewish Family and Children's Service of De­ troit, reviewed the perennial debates con­ cerning "What is Jewish about Jewish social work?" and presented the view that Jewish agencies were justified only where non-sec­ tarian agencies failed to meet community needs The idea that special qualifications and training were necessary for the Jewish communal workers was not widely accepted

in the field

Even Yeshiva University's Wurzweiler

School of Social Work, where Jewish identi­

fication was ineradicable, could not escape

this ambivalence The first issue of The

Jewish Social Work Forum puhlishQd in 1963

by the alumni association of the school was

devoted to a symposium on ' T h e Jewish

Social Workers' Primary Commitment: To

the Social Work Profession or to the Jewish

Community?" In a subsequent issue Carl

Urbont, director o f t h e 92nd Street YMHA,

noted that "a category of our colleagues in

Jewish agencies have commitments to social

work without prior commitment to Jewish

communal life." He describes the "fear of

imposing the worker's values upon the cli­

ent" and the frequent assumption that dedica­

tion to Jewish goals implies disloyalty to the

broader strivingfor unity of American society

or of humanity at large (Urbont, DATE?,

p 14)

In 1966, Bernard Postal, director of public

information of the National Jewish Welfare

Board, conducted a survey of programs of­

fered by Jewish Centers and concluded, "If

one had to appraise the Jewishness of many

Centers only by the content and emphasis of

their published annual reports, membership

brochures, activity folders, and newspapers,

he would get the uncomfortable feeling that

the Center differs little from a non-sectarian

recreation agency" (p 283) Such was the

assessment nineteen years after the publica­

tion of the Janowsky report

The Jewishness of communal agencies

was directly addressed by Arnulf Pins, then

Associate Director of the Council on Social

Work Education, in a 1963 paper entitled,

"What Kind of Jewish Communal Worker Do

We Need?" Pins concluded, "Unless Jewish

agencies have aclear Jewishpurpose which is

reflected in their program, they really have no

reason or rationale for continuing to exist as

Jewish agencies and for being supported ex­

clusively by Jewish funds." Pins asserts that

"there is no longer the open challenge to the

need and validity for a Jewish communal

agenda serving Jewish needs as there was

formerly." However, he adds, "It would be a

mistake to assume that silence equals acqui­ escence or to confuse acquiescence with con­ viction." Pins summarized by saying

W e n e e d Jewish c o m m u n a l w o r k e r s w h o k n o w

a n d care about J e w i s h life and t h e J e w i s h

c o m m u n i t y and w h o p o s s e s s professional c o m ­

p e t e n c e to p r o v i d e h e l p a n d l e a d e r s h i p t o

American J e w s to preserve and e n h a n c e i t We

need individuals who are and see themselves

as Jewish communal workers with adequate Jewish and professional knowledge, attitude, and skills and not merely professional workers employed by and in a Jewish agency (itahcs in

o r i g i n a l ) I f w e really desire J e w i s h group survival, then w e m u s t begin to i m p r o v e our practice and d e v e l o p n e e d e d training and re­ cruitment programs

Pins had no concrete suggestions, but he did note positively the establishment of the Ye­ shiva University School of Social Work and the Lown Institute (sic) for Contemporary Jewish Studies at Brandeis

Despite Pins' strong advocacy, supportfor sectarianism in the field remained ambiva­ lent at best When 1 arrived at Brandeis in

1966 to inaugurate the Lown Graduate Cen­ ter for Contemporary Jewish Studies, I was greeted with virtually unanimous hostility The Center aspired to provide academic train­ ing for men and women who would enter the field of Jewish communal service T h e com­ mitment grew out of the conviction that the Jewish community was sorely in need of professional leadership who combined intel­ lectual insights with technical skills, who possessed not only an understanding of group dynamics and management technique but who also combined an awareness of the problems of contemporary Jewish life with a commitment to Jewish survival

In one regard, Brandeis University seemed

to be the ideal location for this venture Brandeis was a secular institution and there­ fore removed from the ideological and insti­ tutional factionalism of the Jewish commu­ nity The university, established and sus­ tained with the support of American Jewry,

could b e e x p e c t e d to undertake an endeavor

that w o u l d strengthen the c o m m u n i t y that

had created it H o w e v e r , Brandeis w a s a

liberal arts c o l l e g e , and therefore w i t h i n the

university there w a s widespread opposition

because of the professional character of the

program T h e Florence Heller S c h o o l , w h i c h

w a s limited to doctoral studies and to social

welfare, w a s not interested in participating in

training practidoners for the Jewish field

T h e faculty of the Judaic studies department

w a s hostile to a program seen as not suffi­

ciently scholarly W h e n 1 j o i n e d the faculty of

Brandeis in 1966 to direct the L o w n Center,

my reception from the university c o m m u n i t y

ranged from tepid to cold

At the s a m e time, professionals in the

social work field also w i t h h e l d their support

M o s t were unabashedly hostile T h e y feared

a w a t e r i n g d o w n of professional standards

and pointed out that Brandeis d i d not have a

school o f social work or education For them

the masters degree in social work remained

the essential requirement for practice in the

field, and the Jewish c o m p o n e n t remained a

l o w priority A n M S W w h o w a s Jewishly

illiterate w a s acceptable, but a Jewishly edu­

cated a n d sensifive worker w h o w a s v i e w e d as

deficient in professional skills w a s not

H o w c o u l d a program be established that

was professionally sound and acceptable to

all o f t h e relevant constituencies? There was

litde prospect of finding and recruiting a

faculty member with a c a d e m i c credentials

acceptable to the university c o m m u n i t y and

with social work experience acceptable to the

field of practice A n d if one found such a

paragon, w o u l d he or she be w i l l i n g to g i v e up

a secure position and risk a career on such an

untested, precarious, and controversial pro­

g r a m ?

Fortunately for the future o f the program

and o f the A m e r i c a n Jewish c o m m u n i t y ,

Bernard R e i s m a n had arrived on the campus

of Brandeis University in 1967 to pursue

graduate study at the Florence Heller school

R e i s m a n had been director o f t w o Jewish

C o m m u n i t y Centers in the C h i c a g o area He

w a s a successful professional and the father of

four y o u n g children He w a s a l s o an ambi­ tious risk-taker w h o enjoyed the unstinting support of a capable partner-wife, Elaine At the age of forty, he left his secure and comfort­ able j o b , uprooted his family, and c a m e to study at the Heller School on a M e u h l s t e i n

F e l l o w s h i p awarded by the Jewish Welfare Board W h i l e the f e l l o w s h i p w a s g e n e r o u s by student standards, it i n v o l v e d a great hard­

s h i p for a family of six and stipulated that the recipient w o u l d return to work for a national Jewish agency

At the e n d o f the year 1 9 6 7 — t h e year of the S i x - D a y War in Israel that traumatized and e n e r g i z e d the A m e r i c a n Jewish c o m m u ­ nity and the b e g i n n i n g of the Jewish a w a k e n ­

i n g that Salo Baron had predicted in 1 9 4 7 —

R e i s m a n c a m e into my office to inquire about the L o w n program a n d to ask if h e could be of assistance I doubt that h e k n e w what a dangerous question that w a s and h o w the answer w o u l d c h a n g e his life 1 had brought Joe Lukinsky to the L o w n Center to inaugu­ rate the training program for Jewish educa­ tors Shortly afterward Marshal Sklare w a s recruited to oversee a program o f research in contemporary Jewish life Could this "gradu­ ate student" be a candidate to launch the program of training for Jewish c o m m u n a l workers? T h e answer w a s not l o n g in c o m ­ ing

Reisman went to work (initially in a part-time capacity) with a s t o n i s h i n g skill and enthusiasm Initiative w a s his p r e e m i n e n t characteristic He persuaded a variety of local

a g e n c i e s to provide fieldwork p l a c e m e n t s for our students—not an easy task since the program w a s u n k n o w n and untested He

o r g a n i z e d practical training in and out of the classroom to supplement the a c a d e m i c offer­

i n g s of the Center He b e g a n at o n c e to create

a c o m m u n i t y o f learning and experience in

w h i c h the interaction o f students and faculty

b e c a m e a model for their later professional work and personal growth An integrated curriculum w a s d e v e l o p e d in w h i c h all c o m ­ ponents were coordinated and professional skills were taught in the context o f the Jewish

c o m m u n a l experience A mandatory s e m i

-nar in Israel b e t w e e n the firstand s e c o n d year

w a s instituted in conjunction with the Center

for Jewish Education in the Diaspora at the

Hebrew University It represented our con­

viction that no Jewish c o m m u n a l worker w a s

adequately prepared for future responsibili­

ties if he or s h e did not p o s s e s s an intimate

acquaintance with Israeli society and an un­

derstanding of t h e d y n a m i c s and problems of

Israel-Diaspora relations

In 1 9 7 0 , R e i s m a n received h i s P h D from

the Heller School at Brandeis His disserta­

tion dealt with leadership styles and h o w the

leader determines the culture of an o r g a n i z a ­

tion H e e x a m i n e d the v a l u e s and character

of Jewish professionals and applied the i n ­

sights g a i n e d to his work in the L o w n Center

He w a s s h a p i n g a program in w h i c h students

learned by e x p e r i e n c e and e x a m p l e , as well as

by precept B e r n i e w a s ready to accept a

full-t i m e universifull-ty appoinfull-tmenfull-t a n d full-t o be re­

leased from the obligation of s e r v i n g a n a ­

tional Jewish agency At this point, R e i s m a n

and 1 d e c i d e d that it w a s time t o seek a

hechsher (seal o f approval) from the leaders

of the c o m m u n a l field W e arranged an

appointment with t h e " B i g Three": P h i l i p

Bernstein o f the Council o f Jewish Welfare

F u n d s a n d Federations, Sanford Solender o f

the N a t i o n a l J e w i s h Welfare B o a r d , a n d

Arnulf Pins o f the Council o n Social Work

Education O n a cold and dreary winter day

(the train w a s c a n c e l e d and w e w e r e forced to

drive in m y tiny, tinny Chevette), w e arrived

in N e w York to m a k e our plea T h e response

w a s as c o l d as t h e weather: n o M S W , n o

approval o f the program Even Pins appar­

ently a c q u i e s c e d in this conclusion O n e o f

the participants w a r n e d that w e w o u l d be

d o i n g a grave injustice to our students b e ­

cause w e w e r e "trapping t h e m " i n the Jewish

field a n d thus severely l i m i t i n g their profes­

sional opportunities

A s w e left the office, Reisman asked "What

n o w ? " T h e first part o f my answer is unprint­

able in a f a m i l y publication, but the c o n c l u ­

sion w a s that w e s h o u l d proceed with our

work W e w e r e discouraged but not deterred

In 1 9 6 9 , B e n j a m i n Hornstein, w h o had been

chairman of the Board o f Overseers of the

L o w n Graduate Center, b e c a m e the e n a b l i n g benefactor, and the B e n j a m i n Hornstein Pro­

g r a m i n J e w i s h C o m m u n a l S e r v i c e w a s named

For a brief t i m e , Leonard Fein served as director of what w a s n o w c a l l e d the Hornstein

Program, but h e soon left to f o u n d Moment

m a g a z i n e Bernard R e i s m a n , w h o had b e e n director in all but n a m e , a s s u m e d t h e post, and w e w e r e able to persuade the sponsors of

t h e f e l l o w s h i p that h a d b r o u g h t h i m t o Brandeis that this position w a s sufficiently important to fiilfill t h e requirement that he serve the national Jewish c o m m u n i t y

N e w s t a f f m e m b e r s w e r e recruited: Mildred Gubermen to supervise e x p a n d i n g field work

p l a c e m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d J o n a t h a n

W o o c h e r to teach in the area of contemporary Jewish life N e w d i m e n s i o n s w e r e added to the experience o f students R e i s m a n w a s always in search of n e w w a y s t o enrich the exposure of students to the varied d i m e n s i o n s

of Jewish life H e instituted an annual field trip that brouglit students to N e w York for an encounter with the panoply o f national Jew­ ish a g e n c i e s Students w e r e e n c o u r a g e d to attend m e e t i n g s o f the General A s s e m b l y o f the Council o f Jewish Federations a n d W e l ­ fare Funds to see and be seen T h e objective

w a s to socialize students to the culture of the Jewish c o m m u n i t y a n d t o d e e p e n not only their understanding but a l s o their c o m m i t ­ ment A w e e k l y s e m i n a r w a s instituted that brouglit lay and professional leaders o f di­ verse c o m m i t m e n t s a n d e x p e r i e n c e to the

c a m p u s

A s if h i s t e a c h i n g and his work at Hornstein

w e r e not e n o u g h , R e i s m a n a l s o served d u r i n g these years as secretary o f the n e w l y estab­

l i s h e d A s s o c i a t i o n of J e w i s h Studies and as a senior consultant to the Institute for Jewish Life where he supervised the d e v e l o p m e n t o f programs in the area o f fainily life It w a s his research and e n c o u r a g e m e n t in this capacity that h e l p e d stimulate the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the

havurah m o v e m e n t in the early 1 9 7 0 s

In 1975, with a grant from the f a m i l y of Sumner Milender, R e i s m a n inaugurated a

seminar tliat would bring leading Jewish

communal professionals to the campus to

share insiglits and experiences with students

The first leader tobe invited was an erstwhile

skeptic, Sanford Solender, whose participa­

tion signaled the growing acceptance and

maturation of the program Thereafter all of

the most prominent leaders of the coinmunity

were honored as Milender Fellows It is safe

to say that they not only tauglit our students

but they also learned from them

The program was continually refined and

intensified in response to the changing needs

of the Jewish community Recognition of the

importance of their Jewish background and

commitment among communal leaders

sdmu-lated acceptance of the Hornstein graduates

Hornstein students without exception found

placements in a wide variety of settings—

from federations to Hillel Foundations to

Jewish Coinmunity Centers, even to family

service agencies—and made their mark on

the Jewish community

Soon the program was attracting students

from around the world Reisman's diligent

efforts to establish contacts and his outreach

to Jewish communities around the world

brought students from Europe, Israel, South

America, South Africa, and Australia to the

Brandeis campus The integration of Jewish

knowledge and professional skill in one pro­

gram—which is unique to the Hornstein pro­

gram—and the broad scope of Jewish con­

cern gave the program a global reach and

nourished a sense of the diversity of contem­

porary Jewish life

New dimensions were condnually devel­

oped as Reisman sought to serve the needs of

the community, as well as to enrich the expe­

rience of students: continuing education

seminars for professionals in the field, an

annual "distinguished leaders" seminar for

lay leaders from around the country, and an

annual institute examining key issues on the

communal agenda In 1989, the Nathan

Perlmutter Institute for Jewish Advocacy

was established More recently the Max

Fisher-Irving Bernstein Institute for Leader­

ship Development in Jewish Philanthropy

was inaugurated An active alumni associa­

tion maintains a sense of fellowship with the program and provides an ongoing forum for engaging issues in the community

In addition, the Education program, which had been a coniponerit of the original Lown Graduate Center, was revived and expanded The Hornstein program remains flexible and responsive to the needs of its students and of the larger community

At the turn of the millennium, a trans­ formed Jewish community faces a radically new set of problems and challenges Jewish continuity has replaced overseas relief and rescue and domestic defense and integration

as the primary concern More than 450 graduates of the Hornstein Program and its faculty, and the scores of participants in its seminars and institutes are amongthe leaders

in fashioning responses to the ongoing dilem­ mas and opportunities

When I came to Brandeis in 1966 to direct

a modest program to train a Jewish "civil service," which had been fiinded by Philip W Lown, the prospects for success were precari­ ous Many individuals over the ensuing decades contributed to the devel opment of the program But the single key individual re­ sponsible for its scope and success has been Bernard Reisman, who recognized its poten­ tial and brouglit it to fmifion The full harvest

of his work will be reaped in the years ahead

in the work ofhis students and disciples, in the ongoing contribution of the institute he shaped, and in the model he provided for the field of Jewish communal service

Without his leadership, the Hornstein Pro­ gram might not have succeeded at all It certainly would not have achieved the degree

of success that it has As he reaches the age

of retirement (from his job not from his calling), the work ofhis hands, his mind, and his spirit brings honor to hiin and benefit to

us all

R E F E R E N C E S

American Jewish Year Book, Vols, 34, 38, 29, 49,

( 1 9 3 2 - 3 3 , 1 9 3 6 - 3 7 , 1937-38

1947-48, 1948-49) New York: Amencan Jewish Committee

Gurin, A m o l d ( 1 9 6 6 , Fall) Sectarianism; A

persistent value dilemma Journal of Jewish

Communal Service, 42(\), 3 8

Janowsky, Oscar ( 1 9 4 8 ) The Jewish Welfare

Board Survey N e w York: Dial Press

P i n s , Amulf ( 1 9 8 5 , Fall) What kind o f Jewish

social worker do w e n e e d ? Journal of Jewi.sh

Communal Service, 42{\()), 6 0

Postal, B e m a r d ( 1 9 6 6 , Spring) H o w effectively

are Jewish Centers interpreting their Jewish

programs? Journal of Jewish Communal

Service, 42(3), 2 8 3

Silver, Harold ( 1 9 6 2 , Fall) Jewish c o m m u n a l

service: Historical perspectives Journal of

Jewish Communal Service, 39(1), 7 - 1 9

Urbont, Cari ( 1 9 6 0 ) T h e J e w i s h and social

w o r k c o m m i t m e n t s o f t h e w o r k e r s in Jewish

c o n m i u n a l a g e n c i e s