Old Order Amish tourists on a trip out west view the rock formations at Garden of the Gods in Colorado. Vacations for fun and sightseeing are on the rise among the Amish. Photograph courtesy of Matthew Dilyard.
The Shifting Bedrock of Kinship
Unlike kin ties in the wider society, which are relatively narrow in scope and sharply divorced from other institutions,77 the Amish kinship system is deeply intertwined with social life more generally. The values and behaviors promoted by parents still overlap quite extensively with those supported by the church, the school, and the workplace. Extended family members are not just seen once or twice a year at holidays, but may occupy important and multiple roles—employer, teacher, preacher—in the life of a given individual. In addition, the basic building blocks of strong kin ties among the Amish, such as three-generational households, clearly defined gender roles, the prohibition on divorce, and large families, have withstood the pressures of change.
Nevertheless, the shift from farming to market-oriented enterprises—and the subsequent influx of cash and free time—has left an indelible mark on Amish family life. New architectural designs for Amish houses, new household appliances, and new electronic “toys” for adults and children have joined with changes in leisure opportunities to create a spirited conversation within and between Amish families about whether the delicate balance between the individual and the community is being uprooted. To be sure, the watchful eyes and thoughtful admonitions of ordained leaders have reined in some potentially detrimental excesses, but many church districts have developed strong pressures against what is known as “nitpickin’.” “We don’t look for what our neighbor is doing wrong,” explained a young Old Order father. “You can’t run to the bishop every time you see someone not wearing their bonnet. My preacher says it is more wrong to nitpick and look for things than it is to be the guy who [breaks the rules].” Within this climate of relative tolerance, the contours of Amish family life are being incrementally redefined.
CHAPTER 5
The Changing Landscape of Learning
I have to question why so many of our people still send their children to public schools.
—A New Order father
For the Amish, no legal decision has had a greater influence on the educational and cultural prospects of their people than the landmark 1972 Supreme Court decision (State of Wisconsin v. Jonas Yoder et al.) exempting the Amish from compulsory schooling beyond the eighth grade.1 Although school conflict between the Amish and the state occurred in Ohio and elsewhere as early as 1914, it was the “final showdown” in Wisconsin that lead to Chief Justice Warren Berger’s decisive conclusion: “Almost 300 years of consistent practice, and strong evidence of a sustained faith pervading and regulating respondents’ entire mode of life support the claim that the enforcement of the State’s compulsory formal education after eighth grade would gravely endanger if not destroy the free exercise of respondents’ religious beliefs.”2 As Meyers points out, the legal precedents set in this case now inform the curricula of law schools across the country.3 The educational implications, however, were equally far-reaching. To outsiders, the one-room schoolhouse now stands alongside the horse and buggy and styles of dress as one of the most visible signs of the Amish rejection of English versions of “modernity.” For the Amish themselves, the decision literally opened the door for the proliferation of private schools, paving the way for cultural self-determination through control of education.4
Among ethnic and religious minorities, the Amish stand out for the tenacity with which they have fought for control of their children’s schooling, and yet the social and economic milieu has changed markedly over the past few decades. How has the shift away from farming and the growing socioeconomic differentiation in Amish communities affected Amish schooling? How does the considerable internal variation (both between and within affiliations) that exists among the Amish manifest itself in schooling? How has the one-room schoolhouse changed over the past four decades to keep in step with the changing economic requirements of Amish communities? In this chapter we explore these areas of educational continuity and change and ask how Amish parents are navigating a world of proliferating educational options.
We describe the various schooling choices available to Amish parents in the Holmes County Settlement (parochial school, public school, and home school), the reasons parents give for choosing among them, and the constellation of meanings associated with each; address the rationale for maintaining the eighth-grade limit on schooling and explore the small but growing numbers of Amish who pursue a GED or seek certification in a particular trade; discuss the educational options for parents with special-needs children; and consider the rationale and implications for the “silence” in church Ordnung on the matter of school choice.
Rising Shares: The Growth of Amish Private Schooling
According to our data, the majority of Amish parents in the Holmes County Settlement send their children to Amish-run private schools. Just over 80 percent of our respondents said that they preferred Amish private schools over public schools and homeschooling, and this preference stood regardless of the church affiliation or sex of the respondent. When asked about actual use, however, only 71 percent of parents of school-aged children said they actually sent their children to parochial schools at some point while they were growing up. As of 2009, there were approximately two hundred Amish-run private schools in the Holmes County Settlement, and at least 2–3 new schools were being built each year.5
To support the building and maintenance of schools, parents in a given neighborhood typically have purchased “shares” that remain with the owner of a parcel of land. When necessary, parents have raised additional money on their own to construct a new building. Concern about the ability of young families to cover the $60,000 cost of a new school led to a supplementary fund-raising strategy in 2005. Notices were sent out to all the bishops asking each member of their congregations to contribute approximately $30.6 “We figured if 60 percent of our membership would pay $6, it would be enough for one school,” noted a member of the three-person Amish Advisory Committee for all parochial schools in the settlement. The plan was to give $10,000 each to thirteen schools that had been built within the past three years, and then $40,000 to the new school. Since 2005, the annual collection from church members has ranged from $15 to $50. In addition to this “tax” levied on each family unit once a year, there is a collection later in the year that is tied to a family’s income.7 The result is a settlement-wide pool of money that can be used to augment funds raised locally for a new school building.
Amish parochial schools in Holmes County in 2008. Amish-run schools have proliferated since a 1972 Supreme Court decision granted the Amish an exemption from compulsory schooling after the eighth grade. Map by Erik Parker.
Parents we interviewed who sent their children to the private schools cited a wide variety of reasons for doing so, but the overwhelming majority felt that such schools allowed children to engage in activities more directly supportive of the lives they would lead as Amish adults. “We have the freedom of teaching the children what we want them to be taught,” noted one parent. Another added, “[In public schools] there is a lot of emphasis on things that really do not fit well with our way of life.” A third parent succinctly summed up the problem with public schools: “There’s too much we don’t need.” In our survey as well, parochial schools were evaluated as “effective” or “very effective” by a much higher percentage of respondents than were public schools or homeschooling.
More specifically, over three-quarters of the private school parents we interviewed explicitly mentioned the dangers of technology used in the public schools (computers, videos, and TV). Roughly half offered the opinion that public schools over the years had deteriorated in terms of discipline and that private school students showed more respect for one another. These themes are illustrated in the following responses to the question, Why did you choose private schools for your children?
Because there was too much peer pressure in the elementary school … and our kids were not satisfied any more with [the Amish] lifestyle. They were getting into a lot of the computer stuff that we didn’t approve of.
Another thing that comes to mind right now is that they don’t pick up all these TV characters that I don’t care for. Now I don’t care if they’ve heard about [Winnie the] Pooh, the comical ones, but I don’t care for the dinosaurs and all those weird-looking animals.
The reason … we took them out of public school is because of peer pressure, and we saw all this coming. They [public school students] are a lot more competitive, and I don’t believe that goes with the Christian nature. They were really aggressive.
Opportunities for Bible reading and prayer were also mentioned as attractive features of private schools. Several parents mentioned the religious quality of singing at the Amish schools as an important factor in their decision.
Our observations and interviews confirmed many of the distinctive features of Amish-run private schools that have been effectively described elsewhere.8 These include the small size of the schoolhouse itself (although in Holmes County there are usually two teachers and a retractable curtain between the lower and upper grades); the use of English at all times except for German instruction once a week; a streamlined and pragmatic curriculum focused on the three Rs; and pedagogical approaches that emphasize drilling, memorization of facts, and seatwork. The lack of emphasis on critical thinking was underscored in our survey, which showed that among a variety of desired qualities in a child, “being interested in how and why things happen” was considered among the least important. In fact, among fifteen qualities, this trait was listed as one of the three least important by almost half (49.2%) of the respondents. The qualities of honesty, obedience, and self-control were perceived as being the most important characteristics of a child.
The relative absence of religious instruction in the formal curriculum was a noteworthy feature of most schools as well. As Johnson-Weiner notes, “Perhaps in part because they must accommodate children from different church communities, the Holmes County area Old Order schools leave religious instruction for the church and the home.”9 We also encountered widespread rejection of the idea of homework. One New Order teacher commented that when the Amish see public school students coming home with stacks and stacks of books, “we think life must be really miserable for them nine months of the year.” In all of the classes we attended, there was a strong emphasis on the practical applications of schoolwork and on the importance of physical labor.10
Because of the focus on seatwork and drills in Amish schools, students eagerly anticipate recess. Cold or inclement weather rarely keeps students indoors. Photograph by Doyle Yoder.
Three other features of the parochial schools stood out in our minds. First, we were struck by the ways in which the formal structure and informal workings of Amish schools both “legitimize[d] and mitigate[d] patriarchal authority.”11 Structurally, the operation of Amish schools is heavily gendered. Each school is administered by an all-male school board (usually three or five fathers), which meets monthly. Teaching, by contrast, is a feminized and temporary occupation; Amish teachers are overwhelmingly young, unmarried women.12 Of the 330 teachers or teachers’ helpers listed in the 2005 Ohio Amish Directory, for example, only 6.7 percent (22) were men.
Parental involvement in the upkeep of the school and in special events (providing a hot meal once a month, organizing an end-of-the-year picnic, attending the Christmas play, etc.) also reveals a sharp division of labor. But seating is usually assigned by grade level, with boys and girls mixed together, and all students are expected to learn the same curriculum. Girls regularly joined in the softball games at recess. And every teacher we interviewed was adamant that the academic and extracurricular expectations were equal for both girls and boys.
Second, we noticed the care and intensity with which teachers attended to the socialization of children. Teachers had given much thought to disciplinary strategies and were preoccupied (to our eyes) with minor aspects of misbehavior that signaled nonparticipation in the group or lack of obedience to authority. “Lingering” after the bell had rung and “mocking” other students were viewed by teachers as serious infractions that had to be “nipped in the bud.” And although corporal punishment was rarely meted out, Amish teachers were not afraid to levy sanctions (such as writing sentences on the board or, in one case, the administration of cod liver oil) or remove privileges (such as playing softball during recess).
Third, one of the most intriguing features we discovered about Amishrun schools was that, strictly speaking, they are private, neighborhood-based schools run by a group of parents rather than by a particular church district. In the Holmes County Settlement, this means that children from several different church districts or affiliations, including ones not “in fellowship” with each other, may constitute the student body in any given school. Commenting on this arrangement, one father remembered a time when they had children from five different affiliations at the local parochial school. “It’s one of the most unexplainable situations you could imagine,” he confessed. “They all got along well, but they couldn’t take part in each other’s sermons!”
The rationale for this arrangement is both pragmatic and ideological. As mentioned earlier, Amish church districts are not residentially segregated but instead overlap to a considerable degree. As a result, it is not economical for each church district to build its own school. The arrangement also ensures that church districts do not become overly self-contained. An elderly bishop recalled: “When Amish schools were started, it was very clear that school problems were not supposed to come to the church.” In fact, in Holmes County, bishops rarely serve on the three- or five-person school board. Given that church affiliation has far-reaching implications for individual behavior in Amish communities, parochial schools can serve as an important vehicle for communication and friendships that cut across religious doctrine.13 Johnson-Weiner describes the private Amish schools as “the best opportunities for bridge building between the different church communities” because they reach a geographically defined population, not one defined by Ordnung.14 Reflecting on this fact, one Old Order man commented, “I went to school with all of them [the different affiliations]. They looked different and smelled different, but we all played softball together. We don’t think, ‘Oh, he’s Andy Weaver, I’m not going to sit next to him.’”
It is worth noting, however, that a handful of schools in the settlement do cater primarily to children from one church district. Several Swartzentruber districts operate schools specifically for the children of their church members. As mentioned in chapter 1, the most dramatic case involved two schools built to replace one school damaged by fire because Swartzentruber and Old Order parents could not agree on the size of the basement and whether there should be cubbies or hooks and shelves for the students. What looked to outsiders like a relatively minor issue became, for the Amish parents involved, a referendum on worldly “drift,” with the result that the two schools now stand only a stone’s throw from one another on County Road 77.15 At the other end of the spectrum, two of the most progressive schools in the settlement cater almost exclusively to the New Order Amish. The tendency for parochial schools to become “church schools” that serve only one district or affiliation is an ongoing concern for some Amish.
Variation among Parochial Schools
To outsiders, Amish schools look strikingly similar. Our school visits and interviews with teachers, however, revealed many differences, both subtle and explicit, in such categories as facilities, curricular emphasis, and disciplinary climate.16 Because Amish teachers attend regional meetings and regularly visit each other’s schools, they are not only aware of these differences but routinely discuss them among themselves.
The most obvious differences lay in the quality of facilities. By chance, the first two schools we visited turned out to have the most marked contr
asts in physical amenities of any we encountered. Beech Grove Parochial School contained one small classroom in a very old building with outdoor latrines. The basement was barely large enough to hold one ping-pong table, cubbyholes for the students’ gear, and a rusty hand pump for water. The softball field was small and inconveniently sloped downhill. Green Meadow School, by contrast, had four self-contained classrooms, centralized gas lighting, fire alarms, running water and drinking fountains, a merry-go-round, a slide, and two ball fields on an expansive playground, as well as a battery-powered typewriter for the upper grades to practice typing.
To be sure, most Amish schools are more like Beech Grove than Green Meadow, and new school constructions typically follow a standard plan. But schools vary quite a bit depending on the age of the facilities. In addition, schools are typically built on donated land. Depending on the topography of the area and the generosity of the donor, some schools have much larger and more functional sites than others. The extent to which parents are motivated to conduct fund-raisers or to contribute labor and materials to the upkeep of the school also plays a role. Parents and students at one school, for example, had a fund-raiser for a new addition to the building; they made two thousand pizzas and sent out teams to sell them. They brought in ten thousand dollars in one night!
Apart from the buildings themselves, an important factor that differentiates parochial schools is the particular interests, backgrounds, and personalities of the teachers. Given the small scale of Amish schools, it is not surprising that the taught curriculum can vary considerably depending on the teacher’s orientation. One male Amish teacher we spoke with commented that “schools are as different as teachers’ personalities”; a female teacher noted, “It’s kind of what you really love is what the pupils end up loving.”
An Amish Paradox Page 18
