The Living Jerusalem course is an
incredibly unique and hands-on way of learning about the various facets of the
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Jerusalem. We covered such a huge variety of topics,
covering both political and economic issues, as well as gender and identity
related issues. I appreciate that this course was not set up like any other
history course at Indiana University: there were no lectures from Professor
Horowitz, but rather the majority of the class revolves around
student-to-student interaction through various media forms. We also had the
incredible opportunity to interact with well-known and distinguished scholars,
politicians, and activists relating to study within Jerusalem and/or the
Arab-Israeli conflict. Over all, I had a very positive experience with this
course and would recommend it to anyone interested in Middle Eastern politics
and/or culture; however to comment in more detail, I am going to break down the
course into the following subjects: the readings, guest speakers, setup of the
class, final project assignments, and recommendations for the future.
During
the first few months of the semester, we quickly made our way through Karen
Armstrong’s Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths. Armstrong is a religious
scholar, so it was important to keep this in mind while reading the novel since
this is the main aspect of Jerusalem upon which she focuses. The novel was
extremely detailed in terms of names, dates, and events, arguably even to a
fault. The further I got into the novel, the more confused I became with the
growing and ever-changing list of political leaders, battles and wars, and
dates of importance, since they continually piled up. As an academic source,
Armstrong’s book was very well written, but for someone with no prior knowledge
of Jerusalem’s three thousand year history, it was a bit too much to take in
and digest all of the information she presented.
Complicating
the matter further was the speed through which we were required to read the
entire book. During the first few weeks of school, I was able to keep up well
with the extensive readings since there wasn’t yet a lot of schoolwork being
assigned; however, after the first month or so, I had a very difficult time
staying on top of the reading. I used the weekends to my advantage in catching
up on multiple chapters, yet during the week I became completely lost. In my
opinion, having the reading responses due every Monday and Wednesday at 5:00 p.m.
(shortly after many students are finished with classes for the day) was
extremely difficult to keep up with. Because of my academic and work schedule,
there was no way for me to complete the hundred or so pages of assigned reading
and write a creative and well-written reading response in only 48 hours.
Therefore, I was not able to read Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths as
extensively as I would have liked; instead, I was only reading a section of one
chapter and choosing important quotations upon which to comment in my blog
posts.
Conversely,
I very much enjoyed the assigned readings during the second half of the
semester: partly because they were much lighter readings and partly because I
found the content material to be much more interesting. It was easier to stay on
top of these readings since we were no longer required to digest a hundred
pages of material in the span of two days, but rather we were reading a variety
of relatively short academic articles or looking around at websites of related
organizations. I enjoyed this because I was interested about learning about
present-day Jerusalem, its issues, and the ways in which people are responding.
But, as discussed in class, it is necessary to examine and analyze Jerusalem’s
past in order to have any hope of understanding its present. So for this
reason, I understand why the semester was divided in this ways according to the
reading material; however, I felt the first half was too intense while the
second half was perhaps too light.
I
feel very privileged to have listened to the work and experiences of so many
renowned scholars and activists in this field, and I think I enjoyed this
aspect of the class the most. I learned a great deal from each of the speakers
because even though all of their studies and areas of interest relate to
Jerusalem, they were still quite unique and covered a wide range of topics.
Being assigned readings relating to each of the speakers before the
video-conferences was a great way to become prepared so that we would have the
opportunity to ask more in-depth questions as they arose.
I
also really appreciated the variety of sources that were used: it was obvious
that the course attempted to provide intellectuals’ opinions from numerous
sides of the conflict so that we would be exposed first-hand to the various
faces of Jerusalem and the Arab-Israeli conflict. This is what had the greatest
impact on me. Learning about the opposite side’s feelings, opinions, and even
justifications of the conflict from a neutral individual (a teacher, for example)
is so very different than hearing these things from the individuals involved
themselves. Personally, Sahar Vardi was this “face of the other,” so to speak,
that truly opened my eyes to the Israeli viewpoint of the conflict to which I
had no experience whatsoever before this class. After this video-conference, I
realized that there are people on all sides of the conflict, but especially
Israelis, who support the Palestinian people and hope for peace while
simultaneously supporting the nation of Israel. Before this, I was naively
thinking only in extremes and in very “black and white” terms.
As
stated before, I really enjoyed the setup of this class, especially the unique
use of media. Even though at times we had issues connecting with Ohio State
University or with the speakers, it was a very cool experience to not simply be
a single, isolated classroom, but rather connected with students learning about
similar material hundreds of miles away. Likewise, the experience of
videoconferencing with the guest speakers was so much more interesting and
inspiring because we were able to see and connect with them one-on-one. It is
nearly impossible to get this same kind of personal connection with someone
through merely reading their materials or a biography of him/her. Therefore,
regardless of the minor technical difficulties, the videoconferences are an
essential component of this course because they allow students to see the
“faces” of Israel and Jerusalem that would otherwise not be possible.
Additionally,
the blogs were another unique and potentially effective way (depending on the
individual) for the students to communicate with each other. I have had courses
in the past that have been centered on blogging, yet it has always been through
OnCourse which is obviously not the most organized or efficient way to
communicate. Therefore, I really enjoyed the professional blog setup because it
was so easy to navigate around the students’ blogs and the other sections. It
was also really neat to be able to come up with the design and layout as a
class. I think as a whole the blog was very successful both for the class and
for me personally. I prefer to communicate with students via written media
because I feel I can more accurately express my opinions, whereas I sometimes
get nervous or do not express myself clearly in face-to-face, group
discussions. For these reasons the blog was very effective for me: I was able
to easily access others’ writings, opinions, and reactions, and I could also
communicate quite easily and casually with my colleagues.
I
have never been an extremely active in-class participator, simply because I
feel uncomfortable speaking up about topics of which I am not very
knowledgeable. Also, this class was so large that having class discussions was
a bit intimidating because many of the people seemed to be so opinionated and
well-informed about the issues at hand. Furthermore, I simply enjoy listening
to students’ arguments and experiences because I learned a great deal from
them. I think discussion is a very significant part of any course, especially
one as “personal” as the Arab-Israeli conflict; however since this class was so
large, it was rather difficult for everyone to share their thoughts. The small
group discussions were a great way of responding to this issue since they
generally allow people to feel much more comfortable.
I
had heard in the past that students completed their final projects individually
or with one other person, so I was surprised to learn that we would be doing
group presentations. Yet, again, because of the class size, this was an
appropriate way of adjusting. I was very happy with how my group’s presentation
turned out and with all the logistics. I enjoyed being able to choose groups
based on similar topic interests, because oftentimes professors assign groups
completely randomly, which is does not always cause the group to feel like one,
cohesive unit. Over all, I am very happy with the final projects and have no
complaints concerning them.
I
have very few recommendations for how this course could be changed in the
future. In terms of the readings, I think Karen Armstrong’s book is appropriate
for the course, but the chapter assignments should not be as heavy since they
were nearly impossible to keep up with. Perhaps more could be assigned for
Monday because of the weekend, while less could be assigned for Wednesday.
Also, I think more rigorous teaching or discussion of the historical events
would be helpful in class (the small groups often got off topic with this).
Regarding the guest speakers; perhaps the class before there is to be a
videoconference, we could prepare very generally in class and go over main
topics and concepts to be aware of in the readings. I feel like this would be
the most effective way to prepare for these speakers in case individuals did
not have time to complete all of the readings. Also, I found the use of media
to be very effective in encouraging creative ways of communication, and it kept
the class interesting. Furthermore, I think both small-group and entire-class
discussions are important for emphasizing and discussing/debating key concepts.
Over all, I loved the course and learned so much from it, but I would have
enjoyed listening to lectures by Professor Horowitz a bit more since she has so
much experience in the field. It is true that as students we can learn so much
from interacting with one another, but a mix between informal communication and
formal “lecturing” perhaps would have been most effective in learning the
historical, geographic, and political information surrounding the Arab-Israeli
conflict.
