Educating Greek Americans: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Pathways [1st ed.] 9783030398262, 9783030398279

Citation preview

Educating Greek Americans Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Pathways Edited by

Fevronia K. Soumakis · Theodore G. Zervas

Educating Greek Americans

Fevronia K. Soumakis Theodore G. Zervas Editors

Educating Greek Americans Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Pathways

Editors Fevronia K. Soumakis Queens College The City University of New York Queens, NY, USA

Theodore G. Zervas North Park University Chicago, IL, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-39826-2    ISBN 978-3-030-39827-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Dedicated with love to our families.

Foreword

All immigrant groups face two educational challenges when settling in the United States. Will that group have equal access to educational institutions and can it retain some sense of its ethnic culture? Over the past one hundred years, Greek Americans have dealt with these challenges. The essays in this volume examine various strategies used at different times and places with concern about their possible usefulness in the present century. Ethnic culture is always evolving. What works or doesn’t work at any given time changes as the community changes. Education in Greek America has evolved within three broadly defined time periods. The first generation of mass immigration was concerned about how American it wanted to be or would be allowed to be. By the end of World War II, American-born Greeks were becoming the majority of the community. Their primary concern was how Greek they wanted to be and how Greek they would be allowed to be. In the twenty-first century, the majority of Greek Americans are of mixed ethnic heritage. These multi-ethnic Greek Americans ponder if they want to be Greek at all and if so, how being Greek is defined. The Great Migration of approximately half a million Greeks began slowly in the 1880s and ended in 1924.1 Most of the immigrants were young men with limited schooling. This was an era when more Greeks lived under the rule of a foreign power (the Ottomans, Italy, and Great Britain) than in the Greek state. Many had been sailors who served on international routes. Others had fished or had harvested sponges in North Africa. These combinations of experiences facilitated their ability to accept a place in a multi-ethnic America. vii

viii 

FOREWORD

That many Greeks had been raised in multi-lingual states also meant that Greek immigrants were not upset by the need to learn English or place their children in public schools. By the 1950s, Greeks were already among the best educated ethnic groups in America, a status they still enjoy. This achievement includes women. In fact, by the end of the twentieth century, more Greek American women than Greek American men were college graduates. Approximately half of the Greek immigrants had returned to Greece by the 1930s.2 Those who remained became the core of Greek America. They formed numerous organizations with educational dimensions. The most important of the new organizations was the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association (AHEPA), formed in 1922. Its organizational language was English. Its priorities were to orient immigrants to American law and culture and to respond to intense ethnic discrimination that included confronting the hostility of the Ku Klux Klan and other xenophobes. AHEPA also strove to establish that contemporary Greek immigrants were culturally linked to the ancient Greeks who had inspired many of America’s founders. A year after AHEPA was founded, it was challenged by the Greek American Progressive Association (GAPA) whose organizational language was Greek. GAPA’s major priority was to maintain the Greek language in America. These efforts brought it into an immediate alliance with the Greek Orthodox Church.3 The American Greek Orthodox Church, which is the largest Greek American institution, is under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul, not the Archbishop of Greece. For the first 30 years of the twentieth century, the Church was in organizational disarray. Its survival depended on the activism of local communities. The appointment of Athenagoras as Archbishop in 1930 brought decisive change. He quickly created a national structure to unite the various parishes. Although Athenagoras was a political liberal, the social agenda of the Greek Orthodox Church was socially very conservative well into the 1950s. Marriage to non-Greeks was anathema with the offending Greeks seen as lost sheep. American security agencies that surveyed all ethnic groups to establish their loyalty were disturbed that even in the mid-­1940s, Greek priests still referred to Greece as “our homeland.” Investigators also noted the Archdiocese library had no books in the English language.4 Where numbers made it feasible, the Church set up parochial schools to compete with public schools. Most often, however, the best a parish could

 FOREWORD 

ix

manage were classes held after American school hours or on Saturdays. Athenagoras also recognized that the Church in America could not be viable if it did not have English-speaking priests comfortable with American culture. Ideally, Greek America needed to produce priests from its own ranks. This view led to the establishment of Holy Cross Theological School whose first class of 13 priests graduated in 1937.5 Despite this effort, most priests and most Greek school teachers continued to come from abroad. The chapter by Fevronia K. Soumakis in this volume offers a wider view of the educational history of the Greek Orthodox Church while the chapter by Maria Kaliambou addresses the Greek-language texts developed for use in the Greek schools.  The chapters by  Theodore G.  Zervas and Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei consider innovative pedagogy and alternative curricula in Greek Orthodox parochial schools in Chicago. 

The American Born The Americanization of Great Migration immigrants was spurred by the policies of the New Deal. By the end of World War II, AHEPA had become the leading secular organization, a position it retains to this day, while GAPA was on the brink of extinction. Although the two major daily newspapers, Atlantis and Ethnikos Kyrix (the National Herald) survived, circulation was declining. The reality of post-war Greek America was the failure to pass on the Greek language to American-born Greeks, the emerging majority of the community. This new population cohort wondered how Greek it wanted to be and if it would be accepted as truly Greek by homeland Greeks and by immigrants who insisted Greek identity was rooted in the Greek language. The Greek Orthodox Church, anxious to keep the support of the American-born, reformed its educational policies. Under Archbishop Iakovos who reigned from 1959 to 1996, out-marriage to a non-Greek was considered gaining, not losing a member. Hellenization of non-Greek spouses became Church policy. Parish churches were Americanized with athletic facilities, social programs, and cultural clubs. An unanticipated turn in Greek America occurred in 1965–1980 when changes in America’s immigration laws opened the doors for a second wave of massive Greek immigrants (250,000).6 Atlantis and Ethnikos Kyrix experienced a temporary uptick in readership, but Atlantis would close in

x 

FOREWORD

1973. In 1977, a new daily, the socialist-oriented Proini, was launched and would continue to publish until the late 1990s. Church membership increased, but the Second Wave opposed using English in church services and events, a battle that became quite bitter in Chicago and some other cities. A revival of Greek towns occurred in cities such as Detroit, and the Astoria district in New  York became a Hellenic center. The new immigrants also inspired Archbishop Iakovos to establish Hellenic College in 1968 as a secular twin to Holy Cross Theological School. This Hellenic upsurge masked a deeper, harsher reality. A significant percentage of American-born Greeks were leaving the Church and abandoning community organizations. The children of the Second Wave would show a similar pattern. The number of Greek after-hours and parochial schools steadily declined. Teachers and texts still mainly came from Greece, partly funded by the Greek government. The Second Wave had temporarily catalyzed Hellenic culture in America, but did not alter its basic course. The inability of American-born Greeks to read Greek even though they identified as Hellenes led to the creation of Greek Accent, an excellent but short-lived monthly published by the National Herald in the 1980s. It was succeeded by the independent Odyssey which survived for two decades. More indicative of the era was the launching of the GreekAmerican by Proini in 1986. The fusion of Greek and American in the title was deliberate as was its intent to critique the existing social order. The Herald responded with its own English-language weekly in 1997. As of 2019, the weekly had a circulation of 30,000, a number similar to that of daily Greek-language newspapers in the 1930s. The concept of an English-­ language Hellenic journal that had been pioneered by Athene (1941–1967), a Chicago-based journal that dealt with the history of Greeks in America, covered major Hellenic issues and published poems and short fiction. A major secular educational initiative was the formation of the Modern Greek Studies Association (MGSA) in 1968. Among the MGSA’s achievements has been the peer-reviewed Journal of Modern Greek Studies. A second major new scholarly journal was the independent Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora (1977–2013) which had its roots in the anti-junta movement of 1967–1974. This journal would become the trend-setting resource for essays on Greek America. The initial goals AHEPA had set for itself were realized as Greek Americans became successful in all phases of American life and were linked in the public mind with ancient Greece. With its membership declining and graying, AHEPA increasingly became a generous supporter of

 FOREWORD 

xi

charities, especially those associated with care of the elderly. Self-­ congratulatory events have abounded, but serious rethinking of its top priorities has been limited.

Multi-Ethnic Greek America The number of multi-ethnic Greeks has always been higher than acknowledged, and in the twenty-first century, multi-ethnics make up the overwhelming majority of Greek Americans. A prime consideration for them is if they want any Greek identity and if so, what that identity entails. A person who is half-Chinese and half-Greek will have inherited cultures with enormous cultural capital. Such persons would realize mastering Chinese has immediate financial and job opportunities that mastering Greek does not. Further complicating ethnic identity is that many multi-­ ethnic Greeks have more than two cultures as their parents may also be multi-ethnics. Given that Greek America wants such multi-ethnics to identify as being Hellenes, it has to determine what educational strategies are appropriate to that end. An immediate hurdle to Greek American outreach to multi-ethnics is the disarray and corruption in the Greek Orthodox Church.7 Total Church membership has declined by 30% since the last century and a national study in 2017 revealed the Church leads all denominations in losing members born into its ranks. These realities have led to the closing of many churches and church-related schools. The chaos includes Hellenic College and Holy Cross School of Theology. Both are battered by financial scandals and both are facing decertification due to lack of students, inadequate curriculums, and financial irregularities.8 One result is a shortage of priests. Another is that there is no program for encouraging conversions, enhancing educational outreach, or directly promoting Hellenic culture. The fate of the Church will rest on decisions or lack of decisions to be made by the new Archbishop appointed by the Ecumenical Patriarch in 2019. A Greek America that is not connected to Greece is hard to imagine. Maintaining that contact for young people is a project many Greek American organizations have undertaken. They have been sponsoring travel to Greece by thousands of Greek Americans, roughly aged from 15 to 25. The nature of each program differs. Organizations like AHEPA and the National Hellenic Society provide relatively large numbers with an introduction to contemporary Greek culture laced with some education on the Byzantines and classical Greece. Regional societies focus on

xii 

FOREWORD

familiarizing students with the local history and culture of their forebearers. The American Hellenic Institute provides a relatively small group interested in public service with intense interactions with political figures and thinkers in Greece and Cyprus. This diversity of approaches offers considerable choice for young Greek Americans. The response to these programs is promising. Participants return feeling very enthusiastic about being Greek and wanting, in many cases, to learn more about Greek culture and to better navigate the Greek language. Organizations have yet to develop follow-up educational programs to the initial travel to Greece. Also under consideration is the possibility of a birth right program that would be open to all maturing Greek Americans.9 Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei and Gregory Katsas write about the Heritage Greece (HG) program in this volume. Although Greek America has done quite well in preserving traditional dancing, regional costumes, and music, it has been very weak in its support of most of the other arts. Without such support, the community’s artists and intellectuals go to where their efforts are better appreciated. A related educational need is to archive and publicize the achievements of Greek America. One existing model is the National Hellenic Museum in Chicago. It has regular book signings, music programs, culinary classes, school tours, alternating exhibits, and other activities designed to engage different elements of the community. Organizations in smaller cities cannot match the variety of activities in Chicago, but events on a more modest scale are possible. Modern Greek Studies programs have done quite well in offering instruction in Greek, but they rarely organize events of interest to non-­ Greek scholars, mass media, or the general public. This partly stems from an intense orientation on academic theorizing and identity issues, but financing is also a critical factor. More public seminars and more dynamic scholarship would emerge if there was greater community input. A constant complaint of MGSA scholars is that community funding often comes with intellectual non-starters such a community insisting on a preconceived conclusion or having a veto on who can and cannot speak. Greek educational programs, like all educational programs, are still grappling with how to use new communications technology effectively. The most obvious benefit is that geographical separation is far less disruptive than in the past. Greek Americans who do not live in Greek centers can easily remain up-to-date on all Hellenic current events. Greek films, radio programs, television, and newspapers are as readily available in the Greek Diaspora as in Greece and Cyprus.

 FOREWORD 

xiii

Today, Greek American organizations mainly use electronic media as a substitute for the journals, newsletters, reports, and pamphlets they formally printed. More significantly, Greek educators work regularly with colleagues throughout the nation and the world in virtual communities that can be as productive as face-to-face relationships. The work of numerous other professions and business enterprises has been similarly advantaged. Another new phenomenon is the use of the Internet to build social relations among young people. Despite these developments, educators have only begun to cope with the tremendous asset the new technology offers in promoting Hellenic identity. From its onset, the United States has prided itself on being effectively monolingual with a single national culture that was somewhat dismissive of other cultures and languages. The crudest expression of this orientation was the original melting pot theory that proposed immigrants would have their ethnic identity boiled away and come out of the melting pot spout as white bread Americans. The course of events has been otherwise. Rather than being melted down, each new immigrant group has redefined what it means to be an American. Although monolingualism and American cultural exceptionalism remain in vogue in some quarters, the new technology and the global economy it has generated require a basic change in American culture that is recognized by the nation’s military, and its diplomatic, educational, and responsible political leaders. This new embrace of multi-culturalism has led to changes in school curricula and is a factor in the emergence of charter schools. In communities with a significant Greek population, Greek-language classes can be taught in public schools as a second language class. That has occurred in several states, but has not been actively pursued by much of the community. Charter schools, on the other hand, have caught the imagination of Greek educators and parents. Several of the nation’s highest-rated charter schools are based on use of the Greek language. Charter schools, however, cannot address Greek America’s overall educational needs. One factor is that charter schools that are public generally have 10% or less Greek American enrollment. The charter schools are an excellent means for creating phil-Hellenes, but their greater value for Greek Americans is the successful curricula and methods such schools develop. Marina Mattheoudakis’ chapter offers a close examination of the achievements of the Odyssey Charter School in Delaware. Education is an ever-evolving process. A host of new political and technological changes remain under-utilized. Many methodologies and learning materials that had some success in the past have become irrelevant

xiv 

FOREWORD

while others may be more useful now than previously. The essays in Educating Greek America offer a historical and contemporary examination of education in Greek America that by its nature is relevant to all ethnic groups and educational organizations. New York City, NY, USA

Dan Georgakas

Notes 1. Peter C.  Moskos and Charles C.  Moskos, Greek Americans: Struggle and Success (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2014), 23. This is a revised third edition with an introduction by Michael Dukakis. The number of immigrants is a minimal number as many Greek immigrants arrived with passports issued by the Ottomans, Italy, Britain, and other nations ruling territories that were culturally Greek, many of which eventually became part of the Greek state. Only immigrants with Greek passports were counted as Greeks by the American government. Another unrecorded number involves the considerable total of undocumented immigrants. 2. The return numbers are hard to determine for the same reason as the total of immigrants stated in the previous endnote. The range, however, seems to be a minimum of 25% but more likely 50%. 3. A comprehensive view of the two organizations is found in Theodore Saloutos, The Greeks in the United States (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964), 246–247. 4. Abridged report by Constantine Yavis written for the Justice Department in 1944, “Propaganda in the Greek-American Community,” Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, V. XIV, No. 1&2, 1987, pp. 103–129. Full text available in the John Poulos Collection, Tamiment Library, New York University. 5. James Nestor, The Greek Church in America, a dissertation of 1940 reprinted in Paul G. Manolis, The History of the Greek Church of America (Berkeley, CA: Ambelos Press, 2003), Vol. III, pp. 2305–2367. 6. Charles C.  Moskos, Greek Americans: Struggle and Success (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Second edition of 1980), 54–61. 7. Dan Georgakas, “The Greek Church After Demetrious.” The National Herald, June 23, 2018. Editorial page. 8. Dan Georgakas, “Hellenic College/Holy Cross: Great Expectations Gone Awry,” The National Herald, October 27, 2018. 9. Jewish Americans have already achieved their goal of providing such trips to Israel. I do not know of any other ethnic group that shares that distinction.

Contents

1 Introduction  1 Fevronia K. Soumakis 2 Greek Orthodox Education: Challenges and Adaptations in New York City Schools  9 Fevronia K. Soumakis 3 The First Schoolbooks for Greek American Children 41 Maria Kaliambou 4 Considering the “Socratic Method” When Teaching the Odyssey and Iliad at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools 71 Theodore G. Zervas 5 Breaking the Traditional Greek School Mold: The Case of the Aristotle GSL Program101 Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei 6 An American and Greek Language Integrated Curriculum for a Dual Language Immersion Program: The Case of Odyssey Charter School129 Marina Mattheoudakis

xv

xvi 

CONTENTS

7 Promoting Heritage, Ethnicity, and Cultural Identity in Diasporic Communities: The Case of the Heritage Greece Program155 Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei and Gregory A. Katsas 8 Conclusion: When We Were Greek American175 Theodore G. Zervas Index185

Notes on Contributors

Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei  is a professor in the School of Education at North Park University, Chicago and coordinator of the ESL/Bilingual Teachers Endorsement and MALLC programs. In both Greece and the United States, she earned degrees in Greek Studies & Social Work; Greek pedagogy; Linguistics/ESL; and Comparative International Education & Policy Studies. Having received numerous grants, Balodimas-Bartolomei has conducted extensive studies on Greek and Italian Americans, Southern Italian Griki, Greek Romaniote Jews, and the endangered Colognoro dialect of Tuscany. She has also examined Holocaust education in Greece, anti-mafia education, Italian images in foreign language textbooks, and Italian American statue makers. Her latest work focuses on the upcoming series of Greek communities of the world. Dan Georgakas  is director of the Greek American Studies project at the Center for Byzantine & Modern Greek Studies at Queens College. He is a contributor to the National Herald, executive editor of the Journal of Modern Hellenism, and editorial consultant to Cineaste film quarterly. A Greek-language edition of his My Detroit: Growing up Greek and American in Motor City was published in 2016 and a second US edition in 2019. Maria  Kaliambou  is a senior lector at the Hellenic Studies Program at Yale University and teaches folklore and Modern Greek language. She earned her BA in History and Archaeology at the University of Thessaloniki, Greece, and her PhD in Folklore Studies at the University of Munich, Germany. She held post-doctoral positions at the University Charles-­de-­ xvii

xviii 

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Gaulle Lille 3 and in Princeton University. In 2006, her dissertation received the “Lutz Röhrich prize” in Germany as the best dissertation in oral literature, and in 2011, the European Commission elected her as “Erasmus Student Ambassador of Greece.” In 2006 she published her first book Home  – Faith  – Family: Transmission of Values in Greek Popular Booklets of Tales (1870–1970) (in German), and in 2015 The Routledge Modern Greek Reader: Greek Folktales for Learning Modern Greek, Routledge. She is working on her third book with the tentative title “The Book Culture of Greek Americans.” Her research focuses on the dialogue between folklore and book history, particularly in the diaspora. Also, she is interested in foreign language pedagogy, especially teaching Modern Greek. Gregory A. Katsas  received his BS degree from Drew University and his MS and PhD degrees from Fordham University. He teaches at Deree-The American College of Greece. He has also taught in the United States and the Hellenic School of Military Medicine. His academic interests include migration studies, social inequality, and issues related to teaching and learning. He is a participant in conferences in Greece and abroad, has published numerous articles, and organized an annual international Sociology conference with Athens Institute for Education and Research. His latest publications include a study on immigrant unemployment in Greece and an edited volume on migration and work. He has experience in quantitative research design, is listed in the Hellenic national register of academic reviewers, and is a member of sociological associations both in Greece and in the USA. Marina Mattheoudakis  is Professor in Applied Linguistics at the School of English, Faculty of Philosophy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She is a graduate of the School of English and holds an MA in Teaching English as a Second/Foreign Language (University of Birmingham, UK) and a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the School of English, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Her research interests lie in the areas of second language acquisition, bilingualism and bilingual education, language teaching methodology, and corpus linguistics. She has participated in various research projects (the most recent of them being the teaching of foreign languages to learners with dyslexia, DysTEFL2, which was awarded the ELTons Awards, 2014). She has presented her research in national and international conferences and she has published her papers in refereed journals, books, and conference pro-

  NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS 

xix

ceedings. In 2005 she founded, with the support of the School of English, A.U.Th, the 3rd Experimental School of Evosmos, which is the first primary school in Greece that is supervised by a university foreign language department. More recently she founded in the School of English the Lab of foreign language learning, teaching, and assessment in the school context. She has been the President of the supervisory committee of the 3rd Experimental Primary school of Evosmos since 2011, the President of the Greek Applied Linguistics Association since 2014, and more recently, she became the President of the School of Modern Greek, A.U.Th. and of the Centre for the Teaching of Foreign Languages, A.U.Th. Fevronia  K.  Soumakis  holds a PhD in History and Education from Teachers College, Columbia University and teaches at Queens College, The City University of New York. Her research interests include the history of education, immigration and ethnicity, and religion and education. She  has presented her work at numerous academic forums and has published on Eastern Orthodoxy and Greek American education. She is working on a monograph on the history of Greek American women, philanthropy, and education. She has served as a member of  the Transnational Studies  Committee of the Modern Greek Studies Association (MGSA)  and is the  2021 Program  Chair for Division F History and Historiography  of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). Theodore G. Zervas  is Professor of Education at North Park University in Chicago and coordinator of the MAT Program. He holds a BA and MA in History (DePaul University) MSED in Secondary Social Studies Education (Northwestern University) and PhD in History of Education (Loyola University Chicago). He has also taught at the American University in Cairo and TechnologicoSuperiores De Monterrey. Chihuahua, Mexico. Much of his research focuses on the history of education in both Greece and the United States. He has published academic articles on schooling and national identity in Greece, the uses of the Arvanitic Language in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Greece, and the teaching of history both in Greece and Europe. His first book The Making of a Modern Greek Identity: Education, Nationalism, and the Teaching of a Greek National Past (Greek Edition: Athens, Zacharopoulos Press. 2015), explores the ways in which the teaching of

xx 

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Greek history in Greek schools during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries helped shape a Greek national identity. His second book Formal and Informal Education During the Rise of Greek Nationalism: Learning to be Greek, was published in 2016 through Palgrave Macmillan.

List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 Fig. 3.2 Fig. 3.3 Fig. 3.4 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 6.1 Fig. 6.2

Venetia Vidali. New alphabet book for the Greek children of National Herald. Part A. New York: National Herald, 1930 49 G.  Konstantopoulou. The alphabet book of the Greek child in America. First volume. Second edition, expanded and improved. New York: D.C. Divry, 1942 [1935] 52 Mimes Demetriou. First Greek American children’s anthology for the Greek children in America. New York: D.C. Divry, 1935 56 Nikolaos Vavoudis. The palaces of my fatherland. Reader for the fourth or fifth grade of the Greek Schools in America. Third improved edition. New York: D.C. Divry, 1938 59 Thematic dimensions in teaching a text 82 The FLES program: the instructional split in grades K-4 132 The DLI program: the instructional split in grades K-3 139

xxi

List of Graphs

Graph 7.1 Index of cultural identity Graph 7.2 Index of sustainability Graph 7.3 Cultural identity and sustainability

167 169 170

xxiii

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Table 7.1 Table 7.2 Table 7.3

Greek Schools in New York City during the period 1941–1942 by Borough Greek Orthodox Parochial Schools in New York City under the auspices of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America Results of transcribed source Results of transcribed source World-readiness standards for learning language and the Greek language curriculum in kindergarten Classroom application The ‘can-do’ statements at the novice level Respondents by year Rating of cultural identity Rating of sustainability

14 20 87 93 143 147 147 165 167 169

xxv

CHAPTER 1

Introduction Fevronia K. Soumakis

In 1922, Vlassis Kantartzis fled the village of Dikili in Ottoman Turkey to settle in a small commercial town called Perama on the island of Lesvos across the Aegean Sea. For Vlassis and many Asia Minor refugee families, Perama became their final destination and permanent home. For others, such as his brother Euripedes, America beckoned and the long journey across the Atlantic to California separated the family until they would know each other no more. Vlassis eventually was elected mayor of this small town when a government minister by the name of Georgios Papandreou visited Lesvos in the post-World War II period. When Papandreou asked Vlassis what his town needed, the latter responded that they needed a new school because the children were being educated in a makeshift room in an olive press and soapmaking factory. Within a few years, a school was built just across from the Church of St. Panteleimon. The co-editors express their sincerest gratitude to the editors at Palgrave Macmillan for their support of this project. A special note of appreciation goes to Yiorgos Anagnostou, Alexander Kitroeff, John A. McGuckin, Alexa Rodriguez, and Eric Strome for providing valuable feedback at different stages. F. K. Soumakis (*) Queens College, The City University of New York, Queens, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_1

1

2 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Generations of children were educated in the school that my grandfather was instrumental in building. But Greece under a dictatorship (1967–1974) was an inhospitable place and thus, many of my father’s generation departed for America when immigration laws were revised to correct for the restrictive laws implemented just three decades earlier. My father Vassilis arrived to the epicenter of Greek America in 1970: Astoria, Queens, New York City. There, he became Bill, or on occasion, I noticed letters addressed to one William Kantartzis; my mother’s stately Konstantina was officially changed to Dina. Much like many Greek immigrants who emigrated during that time period, they wished to instill a Greek identity in their American born children by sending them to Greek school. They were able to do this because they found an infrastructure which was able to grow and thrive in a multicultural and multilingual city through community-led efforts, the local public schools, and the Greek Orthodox Church. This personal narrative centering on generations of Greek migration opens a window through which we can reconsider the efforts by Greek immigrants and Americans of Greek heritage to preserve and maintain a Greek cultural identity through schooling and learning in the United States. Educating Greek Americans: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Pathways seeks to revive a rich and long-overdue discussion of the impact of Greek American education. One of the last published volumes on this topic was written within the broader context and narrative of American educational reforms in the 1980s and with an acute awareness of the changes occurring within and across Greek American communities. Spyros D. Orfanos, Harry J. Psomiades and John Spiridakis’ 1987 volume on Greek American education drew attention to significant educational, social, and psychological questions.1 In the time since Orfanos and his colleagues published their book, there have been major developments in the Greek schools in the United States as well as the relationship between the Greek American community and Greece. A number of dissertations have been produced on the topic of Greek American education. Peer reviewed articles as well as newspaper articles have been published, and discussions on the future of Greek education in the United States have continued in the public sphere.2 Nonetheless, there are persistent gaps in our knowledge about Greek American institutions, organizations, or programs that are directly related to education or that include some component of education in their mission.3 An important gap exists in higher education with respect to the

1 INTRODUCTION 

3

nearly 60 Modern Greek Studies programs offered in colleges and universities in the United States and Canada.4 One of the oldest Greek American organizations awaits scholarly attention: The American Hellenic Education Progressive Association (AHEPA), founded in 1922 and which includes a women’s branch, the Daughters of Penelope, and their respective young adult branches, Maids of Athens and Sons of Pericles. The largest institution under which formal and informal schooling occurs, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOARCH), has yet to be analyzed critically with respect to the totality of its educational endeavors including its parochial schools, afternoon schools, Sunday schools, higher education, camping and scouting programs, and youth programs such as the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese Youth of America (GOYA). Using religion as an analytical lens might help scholars comprehend more fully the role the GOARCH has played in shaping the Greek American community over time. It can also illuminate the ways that Greek Americans have transformed their faith.5 To that end, what is needed is historical and contextual understanding of how religious institutions in the United States developed and the extent to which ethnic and religious communities innovated within a religiously and ethnically pluralist tradition. For example, the history of Catholic and Jewish educational efforts has long been documented by scholars. As such, the historiography has grown from sympathetic studies on predominantly male leaders and institutions to rich and nuanced explorations of ethnicity, gender, race, and geography by leading scholars.6 Understanding how Greeks in America approached schooling and learning is not just about adding another ethnic or religious group to the existing scholarship. If we define Greek American education in its broadest sense to encompass or to impart some degree of Greek language, religious, cultural, and/or political education, then we can say that this understudied effort taken up by a wide array of stakeholders has been the most persistent throughout the Greek American experience. This larger educational project as it has elaborated over time speaks not only to domestic ethnic interests but to international ones as well that have resulted in the steady creation and recreation of transnational networks of students, teachers, scholars, clergy, community members, and politicians. It is this dynamic interchange that the authors of this volume capture.

4 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

This book emerged from a fortuitous exchange between the co-editors at the Modern Greek Studies Association Symposium that took place in November 2017. As we embarked upon this project, we realized the potential for a long-term research agenda. This volume, however, is not a comparative study nor is it meant to be comprehensive in scope. Our hope is that it generates serious interest and new directions in thinking about the significance and long-term impact of Greek American education. The chapters within offer perspectives on historical experiences and contemporary developments. The historical section of this volume brings to light new material and archival sources that have not been readily accessible to scholars in the past. In Chap. 2, “Greek Orthodox Education: Challenges and Adaptations in New York City Schools,” Fevronia K. Soumakis examines how investing schools with the work of ethnic, religious, and linguistic survival, while not a new phenomenon among European immigrant groups of the early twentieth century, became a long-term undertaking for Greek Americans and the Greek Orthodox Church. Soumakis provides an overview of the history of Greek Orthodox educational initiatives as they unfolded under the administrative head of the Archdiocese located in New York City. The centrality of the Archdiocese and the priority ascribed to Greek language education and Greek history reveal a distinct educational mission. In Chap. 3, “The First Schoolbooks for Greek American Children,” Maria Kaliambou considers the earliest schoolbooks produced by Greek American publishers in the 1930s. Educators recognized that books imported from Greece did not meet the pedagogical needs of the first generation of students, and thus new textbooks, in the form of spelling books, readers, and anthologies for school festivals were created. In her close analysis of the schoolbooks, Kaliambou maintains that the authors repackaged the ideological trinity of homeland, religion, and family to Greek American student audiences in an effort to inspire a lifelong enthusiasm for Greek letters, traditions, and culture. Chaps. 4, 5, 6, and 7 bring us into the contemporary period and focus on schools or programs which reflect a high degree of innovation in curriculum, programming, and teaching methods. In Chap. 4, “Considering the ‘Socratic Method’ When Teaching the Odyssey and Iliad at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools,” Theodore G. Zervas takes us into the Greek Orthodox parochial school classrooms. He draws attention to the prominence of the Odyssey and Iliad in the Greek school curriculum

1 INTRODUCTION 

5

and the pedagogical method used to analyze these texts at an advanced level of Modern Greek. Zervas shows that in both the Socrates and Koraes Schools, teaching through questioning, as identified in many of the Socratic dialogues, has been successful in critically engaging students. Like Zervas, Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei focuses on innovative teaching practices in the Greek school classroom in Chap. 5, “Breaking the Traditional Greek School Mold: The Case of the Aristotle GSL Program.” Balodimas-Bartolomei discusses the creation of the experimental Greek school language program at the St. Haralambos Aristotle Greek School in Niles, Illinois. The school was one of several Greek American schools chosen by the Greek government in collaboration with the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America to pilot a new textbook series Mathaino Ellinika (I Learn Greek) published by the Pedagogical Institute of Greece. Inspired by the textbook initiative, the author helped to design the Greek as a Second Language (GSL) Program beginning in the 1989–1990 academic school year. In reconfiguring the Greek school curriculum, textbooks, and teaching materials for students learning Greek as a second language, the GSL Program continues to thrive into the present. Marina Mattheoudakis addresses recent developments in the Odyssey Charter School founded in 2006 in Wilmington, Delaware. In Chap. 6, “An American and Greek Language Integrated Curriculum for a Dual Language Immersion Program: The Case of Odyssey Charter School,” Mattheoudakis considers the increasing significance of bilingual programs and their growth in the United States since the 1990s. Odyssey Charter School, which has a racially and ethnically diverse student population, pioneered the first dual language immersion program in Greek and English in Delaware beginning in 2017. The emphasis on students’ oracy (listening and speaking skills) before the introduction of reading and writing skills is an innovative feature of the school’s immersion program. Mattheoudakis’ research and work with the Odyssey Charter School offers an alternative pathway for Greek language education, one that relies on the mutual benefit and layers of collaboration between the school, the state, and Greek and American universities. Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei and Gregory A. Katsas consider the growth of the Heritage Greece (HG) program during its nearly first decade of existence in Chap. 7, “Promoting Heritage, Ethnicity, and Cultural Identity in Diasporic Communities: The Case of The Heritage Greece Program.” Modeled after Birthright Israel, Heritage Greece was

6 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

founded and underwritten by the National Hellenic Society in collaboration with the American College of Greece in 2010. Its purpose is to connect Greek Americans with their heritage through an academic and cultural immersion experience in Greece. This work is the first study of the Heritage Greece initiative and its impact on students. The chapters in this volume offer scholars the opportunity to reflect more closely on the changing landscape of what constitutes Greek American education. Local contexts shape and influence educational agendas. We see this in the number of parochial schools located in New York City due to the large Greek American population. The growing popularity of charter schools is another option which is open to all students regardless of their ethnic background. Charter schools with innovative programs where Greek language is taught can be found in Florida, New York City, North Carolina, and Delaware. Transnational networks of people, books, and ideas are significant as well in that they invigorate and sustain the connections to Greece and Cyprus. They also foster innovation in the areas of curriculum, textbooks, pedagogy, and programming. Heritage Greece, not yet ten years old, captures the college-age student in a Greece immersion experience. Reading materials brought from Greece by the first Greek immigrants did not fulfill the needs of their American born children and so they created their own. By the end of the twentieth century, Greek American schools are piloting textbooks published in Greece but created specifically with their needs in mind. Greek Americans have always expressed a deep-seated interest and commitment to Greek education in the United States—the reports and assessments abound. These chapters continue the century-old dialogue.

Notes 1. Spyros D. Orfanos, Harry J. Psomiades, and John Spiridakis, Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects (New York: Pella Publishing, 1987). Of paramount importance as well is Andrew T. Kopan’s work on the Chicago Greek community and his comprehensive study, Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival (New York: Garland Publishers, 1990). 2. For example, see Steve Frangos’ five-part series on Chicago’s Apostolos Pavlos Greek School featured in the National Herald, 4 October 2007; 10, 16, 24 November 2007, and 1 December 2007; Eva Konstantellou, “Education as a Means of Empowerment for Minority Cultures: Strategies for the Greek American Community” Journal of Modern Hellenism 7 (1990): 125–139; Hans Vermeulen and Tijno Venema, “Peasantry and Trading Diaspora. Differential Social Mobility of Italians and Greeks in the United States” in Immigrants, Schooling, and Social Mobility: Does Culture

1 INTRODUCTION 

7

Make a Difference? edited by Hans Vermeulen and Joel Perlmann (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan, 2000), 124–149; John A. Rassias, The Future of the Greek Language and Culture in the United States: Survival in the Diaspora. A Report from the Archbishop’s Commission on Greek Language and Hellenic Culture (New York: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 1999); “The Vision for Greek Education in the United States,” Flushing, NY, Nov. 9, 2019, Conference sponsored by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. 3. For example, the Hellenic American Women’s Council (HAWC), Modern Greek Studies Association (MGSA), Hellenic Link, Inc. (HL), American Hellenic Institute (AHI), Hellenic American Leadership Council (HALC), and Hellenic Times Scholarship Fund, to name a few. 4. See the Special Section “The Status of Modern Greek Studies in Higher Education in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom,” Journal of Modern Greek Studies 24, no. 1 (2006): 137–209. 5. For more recent studies on the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America, see Athanasios P.  Grammenos, Orthodoxos Amerikanos: O Archiepiskopos Voriou kai Notiou Amerikis Iakovos stis Ellinoamerikanikes Schesis, (1959– 1996) [Orthodox American: Archbishop Iakovos of North and South America in Greek American relations (1959–1996)], (Thessaloniki, Greece: Epikentro, 2018); Alexander Kitroeff, The Greek Orthodox Church in America: A Modern History, NIU Series in Orthodox Christian Studies (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2020). 6. See F. Michael Perko, “Religious Schooling in America: An Historiographic Reflection,” History of Education Quarterly 40, no. 3 (Autumn 2000): 320– 338; John T.  McGreevy, “American Religion,” in American History Now ed. Eric Foner and Lisa McGirr (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2011), 242–260; Paula S. Fass, Outside in: Minorities and the Transformation of American Education (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989); Timothy Walch, American Catholic Parochial Education from Colonial Times to the Present (New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1996); Barry Chazan, Robert Chazan, and Benjamin M. Jacobs, Cultures and Contexts of Jewish Education (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017).

References Chazan, Barry, Robert Chazan, and Benjamin M.  Jacobs. 2017. Cultures and Contexts of Jewish Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Fass, Paula S. 1989. Outside in: Minorities and the Transformation of American Education. New York: Oxford University Press. Grammenos, Athanasios P. 2018. Orthodoxos Amerikanos: O Archiepiskopos Voriou kai Notiou Amerikis Iakovos stis Ellinoamerikanikes Schesis, (1959–1996)

8 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

[Orthodox American: Archbishop Iakovos of North and South America in Greek American Relations (1959–1996)]. Thessaloniki: Epikentro. Kitroeff, Alexander. 2020. The Greek Orthodox Church in America: A Modern History, NIU Series in Orthodox Christian Studies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. McGreevy, John T. 2011. American Religion. In American History Now, ed. Eric Foner and Lisa McGirr, 242–260. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Orfanos, Spyros D., Harry J.  Psomiades, and John Spiridakis. 1987. Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects. New York: Pella Publishing. Perko, F.  Michael. 2000. Religious Schooling in America: An Historiographic Reflection. History of Education Quarterly 40 (3): 320–338. Rassias, John A. 1999. The Future of the Greek Language and Culture in the United States: Survival in the Diaspora. A Report from the Archbishop’s Commission on Greek Language and Hellenic Culture. New York: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Special Section. 2006. The Status of Modern Greek Studies in Higher Education in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom.  Journal of Modern Greek Studies 24 (1): 137–209. The Vision for Greek Education in the United States. 2019. Conference Sponsored by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Flushing, New York. Walch, Timothy. 1996. American Catholic Parochial Education from Colonial Times to the Present. New York: Crossroad Publishing.

CHAPTER 2

Greek Orthodox Education: Challenges and Adaptations in New York City Schools Fevronia K. Soumakis

Introduction The Greek Orthodox Church1 in the United States has been instrumental in constructing and shaping the discourse and trajectory of the Greek American educational enterprise for over 100 years. Investing schools with the work of ethnic, religious, and linguistic survival, while not a new phenomenon among European immigrant groups of the early twentieth century, became a long-term undertaking for Greek Americans and the Greek Orthodox Church. Having developed a small number of parochial schools concentrated primarily in New York City and Chicago, along with a wide array of youth programs throughout the American parishes, Greek Americans alongside the Greek Orthodox Church contributed to

I wish to express my deep appreciation to Nikie Calles, the Director of Archives at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Her depth of knowledge and exceptional work in organizing the archival records greatly facilitated my understanding of the Archdiocesan educational system. F. K. Soumakis (*) Queens College, The City University of New York, Queens, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_2

9

10 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

linguistic survival and “Hellenic consciousness” well into the twenty-first century. This constellation of formal and informal educational programming operated to a large extent under the auspices of the Greek Orthodox Church. It is the evolution of this particular and inherently flexible educational architecture that has at its locus the Greek Orthodox Church and which has underpinned the Greek Orthodox communities in the United States. Today there are 326 weekday afternoon or Saturday Greek school language programs, 16 Greek Orthodox parochial schools for grades kindergarten to eight, one high school, and ten pre-school centers educating nearly 17,500 students.2 In this chapter, I provide an overview of the history of Greek Orthodox schools from the 1920s through the 1970s as they unfolded under the administrative head of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America (hereafter Archdiocese) located in New York City.3 I place the Archdiocese at the center by examining the purpose and mission of Greek American education and highlight the ways in which the Archdiocese and schools adapted to the challenges they faced.

Significance The absence of Greek American educational initiatives from the scholarly literature can be explained by the attention and urgency given to public schools and the ideals they have yet to fulfill in terms of offering a common education to children of all classes, races, and beliefs. Scholars have challenged the notion of school choice as a “panacea” and demonstrate that religious schools have the potential to undermine the democratic purposes of a public education.4 Religious groups have advocated for public tax monies for education as far back as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, while an array of legal challenges over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries brought before state and supreme courts resulted in compromises between taxpayers and the religious groups operating their own schools. The tendency toward Americanization transformed what were once ethnic Catholic parochial schools into schools where all children could obtain a broad Catholic-centered education.5 It has been generally acknowledged that the Greek Orthodox Church “played a unifying role for Greek Americans” and that the “sense of ethnic self-identification” permeated “the Church and its educational institutions.”6 Yet, studies on the Greek Orthodox Church and education have characterized the Archdiocese’s relationship with the Greek schools as being symbolic or providing limited support. In doing so, they have emphasized

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

11

the individual parish and marginalized the influence and authority of the Archdiocese as well as the collaborative efforts between community stakeholders and the Archdiocese. Scholars have also examined Greek education by focusing on public and parochial school bilingual education programs, their instructional methods, and their general administration.7 For the Greek Orthodox community in the United States, the Archdiocese pursued two avenues, one public and the other private. In both cases, the Archdiocese succeeded in influencing public school officials to include Greek as a foreign language in a select number of public schools and equally important, secured support for parochial schools. The Church continued to promote the teaching of the Greek language while simultaneously advocating for an ecclesial model of unity and inclusivity. Greek Americans and the Archdiocese are part of a larger Greek diaspora that engages with Greece and Cyprus, Greek and Cypriot government agencies, and Greek and Cypriot political causes. The Greek government has invested its resources among its diaspora communities, especially the Greek Americans and the Archdiocese in the United States. Greek Americans and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America offer valuable insight into the workings of an influential diaspora community.

Greek Orthodox Education During the Early Immigration Period The arrival of Greek immigrants to the United States coincided with the period of industrialization and urbanization that marked the social, political, and economic expansion of the United States in the late nineteenth century and the political instability and declining agricultural economy that characterized Greece. As Greek immigrants settled in the United States, they formed church communities to attend to the community’s spiritual and cultural needs. Additionally, they bestowed upon the Greek Orthodox Church the task of maintaining, preserving, and perpetuating language, culture, tradition, and faith. Greek Orthodoxy was charged with upholding “ethnic consciousness and national identity.”8 However, it was the immigrants themselves who gave definition and shape to the initial growth of the Church in the United States. Up until World War I, historian Theodore Saloutos claims that the Church expressed an “uncompromising commitment” to preserving national identity in the United States, which was bolstered by the press, fraternal societies, and schools.9 However, due to the all-consuming nature

12 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

of partisan politics during this time, neither the Church of Greece nor the Patriarchate in Constantinople was able to commit substantially and successfully toward the administration of the immigrant communities or to the notion of national identity formation in the United States. Preserving Greek national identity was thus left to the immigrants, who established Greek language schools before the Church as an organized, overarching administrative entity called for them.10 Between 1908 and 1912, three parochial or community day schools were founded: Socrates Greek American School in Chicago, Hellenic-American School of Holy Trinity in Lowell, Massachusetts, and the Greek American Institute in the Bronx. It was not until 1921 that the process of organizing the independent Greek Orthodox parishes began. In that year, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America was formally incorporated in New York State. The Greek Orthodox Church in America would be governed by a conference held every two years in which the clergy and select laymen discussed, debated, and voted upon important issues affecting their parishes and the Church as a whole. These conferences are referred to as the Clergy-Laity Congresses. The Patriarch of Constantinople maintained jurisdictional authority over the North and South American Archdiocese. In the United States, four smaller administrative units known as dioceses were established in the cities of Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, and New York.11 Another important addition was the creation of a Supreme Educational Council (hereafter SEC) to systematize educational efforts in the Americas. The SEC was made up of a volunteer core of five clergymen and nine laymen whose responsibilities included not only regulating all schools, but overseeing their curriculum, establishing teachers’ qualifications and salaries, promoting Greek language learning and activities in the arts, publishing books and journals, and maintaining updated school statistics.12 The SEC also created a Department of Education with a paid staff to manage the daily administrative affairs of the Archdiocese’s educational system. Oversight on the part of the SEC and, thus, Archdiocese essentially meant a decentralized system of education where the local parish communities and, specifically, the elected members of the local Parish Councils would be directly responsible for governing and maintaining the schools as well as hiring the teachers. In effect, the responsibility for financing and maintaining the schools, whether afternoon language schools or parochial day schools, rested upon the local parish communities. Mapping out this system of financial decentralization of the afternoon and parochial schools enabled the Archdiocese to focus on the development of higher educational institutions. The SEC’s task during the organizational stage was to

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

13

provide a framework and guidance to local parish communities on how best to manage their schools, in creating a relatively uniform curriculum, procuring books, and hiring teachers. Basil T.  Zoustis, the SEC’s first secretary, compiled statistics on the schools and wrote about the status of education during these early years. The earliest language schools were usually held in the afternoons from 4 to 6  p.m. in church basements or other unsuitable spaces. Oftentimes, church communities would rent classroom space in American public schools because of their amenities, including “heating, cleanliness, and school supplies.”13 Priests and the more educated among the early immigrants served as teachers in these schools. The task before the SEC was to determine the number of schools, identify the teachers, and assess their qualifications. Their work was challenging in that they gathered information from the entire western hemisphere, since the Archdiocese was responsible for communities in all of North and South America. The earliest available statistics compiled by the SEC shed light on the scope and nature of the early schools. The number of afternoon schools more than doubled from 284 in 1932–1933 to 456 in 1937–1938, and the number of students doubled from 12,712 to 24,562  in those same years. Concomitantly, the number of teachers (clergy and lay) also increased significantly from 330  in 1932–1933 to 533  in 1937–1938. Afternoon language schools operated in nearly every American state as well as in Argentina, Uruguay, Mexico, and Canada.14 Though operating under the auspices of the Greek Orthodox Church, the SEC chose the owl associated with Athena, the ancient Greek goddess of wisdom, as their official seal or logo. The decision to adopt a classical symbol rather than a religious symbol to represent their office might seem incongruous, but it reflected the intense symbiotic relationship between Orthodoxy and Hellenism. Hellenic-centered ideals such as wisdom, knowledge, freedom, and democracy dominated the thinking of the SEC and the immigrant pioneers. They drew their inspiration from a classical, Byzantine, and Greek revolutionary historical past, upon which Orthodox Christianity had been inscribed. This notion is further illustrated in the names given to a number of afternoon schools that were established. For example, according to the statistics compiled for the year 1940–1941, 13 secular Greek language schools were known to have operated in the borough of Brooklyn in New  York.15 Several of these schools bearing the names of Athena, Leonidas, Homer, Adamantios Koraes, and Manuel Chrysoloras reflect the prominence of Hellenic-Christian ideals. See Table  2.1. The first

14 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Table 2.1  Greek Schools in New  York City during the period 1941–1942 by Borough Bronx/Yonkers  Greek American Institute (GAI) Day School (220)  Greek American Institute (GAI) Afternoon School (135)  Zoodohos Pege (47)  Renaissance School of Zoodohos Pege (49)  Yonkers School (30)  Pallikari-Vedova Boarding School of Port Chester (53) Manhattan  Holy Trinity Cathedral (100)  St. Spyridon (420)  St. Spyridon Night School (35)  St. Eleftherios (120)  St. Gerasimos (80)  The Annunciation (44)  St. Barbara (40)  St. George and St. Demetrios (79)  St. George (15)  St. John  St. Nicholas  Averoff School (87)  School of Pallas (15)  School of Athena (45)  Greek School of Demosthenes (40)  Parents’ School of Parnassus (43)  School of Plato (50)  School of Kleobulos (57)

Brooklyn  Saints Constantine and Helen (112)  Kimisis tis Theotokou Church (88)  Three Hierarchs (42)  School of Athena (62)  School of New Hope (50)  School of Leonidas  School of Adamantios Koraes (27)  School of Megale Hellas (28)  School of the Daughters of Sparta (30)  School of New Homer (35)  School of Manuel Chrysoloras (60)  School of Orpheus  School of Diogenes  School of Cadmus (22)  School of Homer (32)  School of Lykurgus Staten Island  Holy Trinity Church (32)  Bullshead (10)  Tompkinsville

Queens  St. Demetrios- Astoria (430)  St. Demetrios- Jamaica (98)  St. Nicholas- Flushing  Transfiguration- Corona (85)  Far Rockaway (25)  Rockaway Beach (29) The numbers of students that were reported are indicated in parentheses. Enrollment information was not provided for every school Statistikos pinax scholion, mathiton, kai didaskalon tou scholikou etous 1941–1942 [Statistical table of schools, students, and teachers for the school year 1941–1942], June 10, 1942, Box V11, Folder DF, GOARCH

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

15

three schools draw from a classical Greek past and heritage, while the last two are named after important historical figures who fostered Greek language and learning: Adamantios Koraes (1748–1833), a linguist and scholar during the Greek revolutionary period who promoted the more formal Greek known as katharevousa (a hybrid of demotic and ancient Greek) for the new Greek nation, and Manuel Chrysoloras (1350–1415), a Byzantine diplomat and scholar who helped to revive Greek learning in Renaissance Italy. The community day schools of Socrates, Koraes, and Plato in Chicago also drew from a classical past but were founded and supported alongside Greek Orthodox Churches.16 Moreover, the SEC made the Celebration of Greek Letters and Learning an annual parish and school-wide celebration. Held during the month of January, this program celebrated the Hellenic-based erudition of early Christian thinkers, whose feast days were celebrated in that same month.17 Students would perform in plays, recite poems, and read essays.18 The emphasis on Greek language as a significant historical vehicle would essentially anchor the worldview of the children of the new immigrants firmly in their Hellenic heritage. The SEC pursued additional avenues for promoting a Hellenic-centered education. It encouraged ties to the homeland by assisting young students in furthering their studies there. In this regard, a number of fraternal societies initiated similar projects. The SEC considered establishing a program with the elite teacher training academy in Athens known as the Arsakeion School to send young Greek American women to study there and return to teach in the Greek American schools.19 Like other ethnic groups, the SEC sought to introduce the Greek language in the American public high schools. This avenue met with success and the SEC continually encouraged parents and students to make their requests to school administrators. The SEC noted that Greek was being taught in schools in Chicago and Louisiana and efforts were underway to bring Greek into Ohio and Michigan public high schools. In New  York City in 1938, Greek students succesfully petitioned to have Modern Greek taught in the day and evening classes of Straubenmuller Textile High School. Schools in Queens and Brooklyn began offering Greek language instruction to their growing Greek student populations. In Massachusetts, legislation was passed permitting Greek to be taught in high schools where there were 25 or more Greek students enrolled.20

16 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Despite the lofty and well-meaning sentiments the SEC articulated about Greek language learning, they faced serious challenges that they would revisit over the next several decades. These challenges revolved around teachers and their methodology, the limitations of the Greek schools and their parishes, and the changing needs of the immigrant population. All three of these issues were highlighted in a letter sent to Archbishop Athenagoras by the officers of the Memphis, Tennessee American Hellenic Education Progressive Association (AHEPA fraternal chapter). In their five-page letter written in English, the members pointed to the reality that nearly half of all marriages in their community were mixed, a fact they believed made it more difficult for children to learn Greek. Of the 60 families in their community, only two enrolled their children in the Greek language school. The reason? Children could not comprehend “the all-Greek text and the teacher’s all-Greek discussion and explanations,” and thus, parents felt the school was ineffective. The officers had consulted with professors at Southwestern University, who advocated using English to teach a foreign language and subsequently petitioned the Archdiocese to adopt a similar method. “Therefore knowing the reason why so many Hellenic children fail to learn the ancient language of their fathers, we pray your Grace [the Archbishop] to move in the cause of bringing an end to the obstacle. We have set forth only an outline here because we believe your Grace fully knows of the situation which has filled with dismay the hearts of so many Hellenic parents.”21 The SEC and Archbishop were quite aware of the challenges the communities faced. Zoustis empathized with children who must have been “tired and resentful” of attending Greek school after a full day of American public school instruction.22 The SEC was preoccupied with Greek teachers and their qualifications, especially during the period of the Great Depression when a number of unqualified individuals sought employment as teachers in the schools. Consequently, the SEC accepted a wide array of credentials for individuals who wished to teach in the afternoon or community day schools, from a certificate of completion from a Greek high school to a university or theology degree.23 However, teachers complained about their salaries, which varied from a low of $45 to a high of $140 per month, and they sometimes worked without getting paid for 12 months. The lowest paid teachers supplemented their income by teaching choir, serving as chanters, or working as church secretaries. Books were problematic in that they were not written for teaching Greek language to second-­generation students. Part of the problem was that both linguistic

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

17

variations, demotic and katharevousa, were being used. The SEC held contests for new textbooks, mandating that demotic would be used for the second, third, and fourth grades, but maintaining katharevousa for the upper grades. Even Sunday Schools became part of the debate. When the Archbishop mandated Sunday Schools in every parish in 1931, Greek was the language of instruction because he believed that “Hellenism would save both Orthodoxy and national consciousness.” While efforts to publish Sunday school books modeled on Protestant religious materials and methods did not materialize, the initial popularity of Sunday Schools waned due to poor materials and an unfulfilling experience by the children. The reality of this experience prompted the Clergy-Laity Congress to approve the use of English in the Sunday school curriculum beginning in 1950.24 Despite the challenges the Archdiocese and the SEC faced during the 1930s and 1940s, the Church was deeply committed to promoting and furthering Greek language education and consistently encouraged the establishment of Greek afternoon schools. By 1946, the Clergy-Laity Congress envisioned expanding the system of education to include: Nursery schools, kindergartens, and afternoon schools in every parish, elementary day schools in financially sound parishes, high schools for boys in large city centers, and extracurricular activities that complemented the programs of all of these institutions.25 The SEC placed its hopes upon the day schools, using the nursery schools and kindergartens as vehicles to promote expansion into the elementary level grades. In subsequent reports and essays, Zoustis and the SEC stressed the importance of the day school over the afternoon school. They considered the day schools to be the foundation for the survival of the Greek language. Equally important, they recognized that more day schools needed to be built to accommodate all Greek American children and lamented that more time, energy, and financial resources had not been invested toward building these schools. He observed that students graduating from the day schools were academically successful in American high schools. The Archbishop took the argument a step further, discerning that students in the day school environment became more steeped in linguistic and religious traditions than those in the afternoon schools. While the Archdiocese encouraged day schools, they also focused their energies on building two institutions of higher education that fell under its jurisdiction: St. Basil’s Academy and Holy Cross Theological School. The persistent lack of qualified teachers prompted the establishment of a

18 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

teaching academy in the United States.26 In 1944, the teacher preparatory school was founded alongside a home for orphans and children in need. The dual-purpose institution, known more generally as St. Basil’s Academy, was located approximately 50 miles north of Manhattan on the banks of the Hudson River in Garrison, New York. The teacher training school at St. Basil’s was patterned on the three-year teaching academies in Greece that educated women for careers in teaching. Additionally, while much of the financial support for St. Basil’s Academy came from a variety of sources—fraternal societies, private donations, and parishes—it was the women’s philanthropic organization, the Ladies Philoptochos Society, which undertook regular and systematic financial support for St. Basil’s Academy. The founding in 1937 of the Holy Cross Theological School reflected the promise and hope placed upon the Church leadership in shaping the future of the Greek immigrant and religious community in the United States. It was the clergy who were expected to take leading roles as spiritual guides and centers of authority for promoting Hellenism and Orthodoxy. The school was prompted by a dearth of qualified priests during the early immigration years as well as the need to supply an American-­ trained clergy to the growing parish communities throughout the country.27

Greek Orthodox Parochial Schools in New York City Under Archbishop Iakovos The Archbishop that bridged the influx of the new immigrants of the 1960s with the first wave of the early nineteenth century was Iakovos, born Demetrios Coucouzis in 1911 on the Ottoman-controlled island of Imvros. Educated in the Ecumenical Patriarchal Theological School at Halki in Istanbul, his world outlook was shaped by his formative experiences. According to the Orthodox Observer, “he had great success in drawing many adults and children to Church, but ran afoul of the Turkish authorities … he was told never again to teach religion in the church on the grounds that he was teaching the Greek people to be disloyal to Turkey.”28 These experiences prompted Iakovos, the name he adopted upon being ordained into the priesthood, to engage with civil rights and human rights issues when he arrived to serve in American parishes. Almost ten years after earning a graduate degree at Harvard’s School of Theology,

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

19

he was appointed Archbishop in 1959. The important positions he held over the years included the presidency of the World Council of Churches (1959–1968) and vice-presidency of the National Council of Churches. He represented the Greek Orthodox on the National Conference of Christians and Jews and on the Commission on Religion and Race. In the 1960s, the steady stream of new immigrants from Greece settling in New York City coincided with the tenure of Archbishop Iakovos, whose leadership skills and erudition altered the tenor of Greek Orthodoxy in America. In his first address to the 1960 Clergy-Laity Congress held in Buffalo, New  York, he asserted that education was a “subject of primary urgency and must be maintained always as the first subject of concern of our Archdiocese. For without education analogous with the history and importance of Orthodoxy, our Greek Orthodox Church cannot long remain.”29 He provided examples of diaspora communities such as “Russia, Hungary, Romania, Austria, Germany, and Italy” where Greeks assimilated and experienced loss of language and faith while proclaiming Orthodoxy as being “Greek in spirit, in thought, in character, and in sentiment.”30 Education would be part of the “resurrection of a Greek Orthodox consciousness,”31 and to that end he boldly urged parish communities to invest three-fifths of their operating budgets for education and culture. In his address to the 1962 Clergy-Laity Congress, he affirmed the importance of the parochial schools, “a definite assurance of the future of our Church,” expressing the wish that more communities would embark upon building them instead of fellowship halls; by 1964, he challenged church communities to mortgage their properties and support day schools to “prevent … dissolution or assimilation.”32 “It is the school, in its daily contact with the child, that will make him Greek Orthodox … the school should be a day school wherever this is possible.”33 In order to understand the extent to which the Archdiocese’s policies shaped the parochial schools in New York City, it is necessary to broadly sketch out their development. The settlement of Greek immigrants and their families prompted the establishment of afternoon schools in growing church communities, which in turn also led to the establishment or expansion of 13 co-educational parochial schools in New  York City. See Table 2.2. The oldest parochial school in New York City, and the second oldest in the United States, is the Greek American Institute in the Bronx, which was established as a home for children in need and as a day school in 1912 by

20 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Table 2.2  Greek Orthodox Parochial Schools in New York City under the auspices of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America Name of school

Date Est.

Parish community and location

Greek American Institute (K-8)

1912

Zoodohos Peghe Church (1920s) Bronx

St. Basil’s Academy  Home and school for children in need 1944  Teacher Training Institute 1944–1973

St. Basil Chapel (1944) Garrison, NY

The Cathedral School (K-8)

1949

Holy Trinity Cathedral (1891) Upper East Side, Manhattan

St. Andrew’s Academy (K-12)

1953–1980

Independent school not affiliated with parish Beechhurst, Queens

Chelsea School of St. Eleftherios (K-8)

1955–1973

St. Eleftherios Church (1918) Chelsea, Manhattan

St. Demetrios Parochial School (K-8) St. Demetrios High School (9–12)

1957 1975

St. Demetrios Church (1927) Astoria, Queens

The Theodore P. Tsolainos-Constantine Goulandris Parochial School (K-8)

1959–2016

St. Spyridon Church (1931) Washington Heights, Manhattan

A. Fantis Parochial School (K-8)

1963

SS. Constantine and Helen Cathedral (1913) Brooklyn Heights, Brooklyn

Soterios Ellenas Parochial School (K-8) Hellenic Classical Charter School

1966–2005 2005

Kimisis tis Theotokou Church (1931) Park Slope, Brooklyn

St. Demetrios Day School (K-8) 1967–2013 Archbishop Iakovos High School (9–12) 1980–2001

St. Demetrios Church (1927) Jamaica, Queens

Transfiguration School (K-8)

1967–2011

Transfiguration of Christ Church (1926) Corona, Queens

Three Hierarchs Parochial School (K-8) Aristotle Academy of Math & Sciences of the Three Hierarchs

1975–2010 2010–2011

Three Hierarchs Church (1922) South Brooklyn

William Spyropoulos Parochial School of St. Nicholas (K-8)

1977

St. Nicholas Shrine Church (1955) Flushing, Queens

Dimitrios and Georgia Kaloidis Parochial School (K-8)

1980

Holy Cross Church (1956) Bay Ridge, Brooklyn

Information was drawn from church and school community websites, and the yearbooks of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America located in boxes E52 and E53, GOARCH. Information regarding school closures and the establishment of new schools was found in the reports of the Direct Archdiocesan District Office of Education’s website at http://www.goarch.org/archdiocese/departments/education/reports. I have chosen to include St. Basil’s Academy as part of this list due to its historical significance as a teacher training school, and home and school for children in need, but exclude it from the total parochial school count of New York City schools

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

21

the combined efforts of the Atlantis newspaper, the Retail Florist’s Association, and the Confectioners’ Society. In the 1930s, the home became a separate institution, and the school, due to financial issues, changed several locations over the course of the years. The school was transferred under the auspices of the Archdiocese in this time period. Many students from the Bronx, Queens, and Manhattan attended GAI until parochial schools were built in their communities. Up until the late 1950s, the curriculum was divided into two, with half a day spent on the American curriculum and the other half on the Greek curriculum. During the decades spanning the 1960s through the late 1970s, the school’s enrollment hovered between approximately 200 and 320 students.34 Of the 11 Greek Orthodox churches that were founded during the 1890s–1930s throughout Manhattan, three communities succeeded in building parochial schools. While most of the Manhattan parishes operated afternoon schools and a number of secular afternoon schools existed, the most significant afternoon school enrollments were reflected in those church communities that established parochial schools. The oldest parish in New York City, the Archdiocesan Cathedral of the Holy Trinity (1891), located on the upper east side of Manhattan, established the Cathedral School in 1949. Archbishop Iakovos decided to assume administrative control of this church, in effect making it the church of the Archdiocese. This fact is relevant because, with the growth of the parochial school, the Archbishop had placed his hopes in establishing the first high school there, although this never materialized. Another of the early church communities, St. Eleftherios (1918), established the Parochial School of St. Eleftherios in the Chelsea district in Manhattan in 1955. A fire destroyed the church and school building in 1973, and the community did not rebuild the school. In contrast to the other schools, St. Eleftherios’ parochial school enrollment was unusually low, almost always under 100 students. At the other end of the spectrum, the church community of St. Spyridon (1931) in Washington Heights succeeded in garnering the financial support of shipping magnates Theodore P.  Tsolainos and Constantine P. Goulandris to establish the eponymous parochial school at St. Spyridon in 1959. The parochial school enrollments were the highest of the Manhattan schools, ranging between approximately 200 and 300 students from the 1960s to the late 1970s, in contrast to approximately 100 to slightly over 200 students at the Cathedral School during the same time.35

22 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

The early church communities in Brooklyn broadly mirrored Greek settlement patterns in this New York borough. The community of Saints Constantine and Helen Cathedral (1913), located in the Brooklyn Heights section, built A. Fantis Parochial School in 1963 with the endowment of Argyrios Fantis, a business leader in the import/export food trade. Nearly 20 years later and moving two miles south, the incorporated “Greek Orthodox Community of Bay Ridge” established the Kimisis tis Theotokou Church (1931) on the south side of the Park Slope section of Brooklyn. Following on the heels of A. Fantis Parochial School, this community built a parochial school three years later in 1966 underwritten by restaurateur Soterios Ellenas, whose name was given to the school. In south Brooklyn, the Greek community founded Three Hierarchs Church in 1922 and Three Hierarchs Parochial School in 1975. Up until they built their parochial schools, records show that all three parish communities had thriving afternoon schools during their early growth phases, with enrollments reaching well over 200 students in Kimisis tis Theotokou parish’s afternoon school.36 Holy Cross Church, the newest church community in Brooklyn, was founded in 1956 in Bay Ridge, located in the southwest section of Brooklyn, where a high concentration of Greeks had settled and continued to settle after 1965. Like the other three Brooklyn parishes, Holy Cross community’s growing afternoon school prompted the founding of a parochial school in 1980 named after their benefactors, Dimitrios and Georgia Kaloidis. During the 1960s–1970s, enrollment figures for A. Fantis and S. Ellenas were similar, ranging from 100 to over 300 students, while Three Hierarchs enrollment figures approximated 200 students during the early 1980s. The borough of Queens saw the establishment of five parochial schools and three high schools by Greek immigrants who settled in and around the northern sections of Whitestone, Corona, Astoria, and Flushing, and farther southeast in Jamaica. In the mid-late 1920s, three communities established churches and afternoon schools simultaneously: Transfiguration of Christ Church (1926) in Corona, St. Demetrios Church (1927) in Astoria, and St. Demetrios Church (1927) in Jamaica. The community of St. Demetrios in Astoria opened their parochial school in 1957, where rapidly increasing enrollment figures necessitated the building of another church and school, the St. Catherine-St. George Church and School Annex in 1971, and high school grades in 1975. Total enrollment figures reached nearly 1500 students by the early 1980s. St. Demetrios Jamaica Day School, which opened its doors in 1967, also saw steady growth

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

23

during the 1970s, reaching well over 400 students by the time their high school was opened in 1980. Transfiguration Parochial School in Corona opened in 1967, and while their enrollment figures did not match those of the St. Demetrios schools, they were more in line with the schools in the other boroughs, reaching nearly 300 in 1980. One possible reason for this might be that Corona is located four miles east of Astoria and six miles north of Jamaica, so that students had the option of attending the parochial schools in either one of those communities. Another notable option students had was an independent school located six miles northeast of Corona called St. Andrew’s Academy-on-­ the-Sound in the Beechhurst section of Queens. Koula Tassopoulou, a graduate of Teachers College, Columbia University, founded it as a private Greek elementary and high school in 1953 independent of the Archdiocese’s jurisdiction, as the school was not affiliated with a particular church community. Enrollments reached nearly 600 students in the mid-­1970s and then rapidly declined until the school shut down due to nonpayment of payroll taxes.37 The school is unique in that the principal, Koula Tassopoulou, maintained a healthy relationship with Archbishop Iakovos and the Archdiocese’s Department of Education. She was one of the few women appointed to serve on the Archdiocese’s Supreme Educational Council and attended meetings for principals of all the Greek parochial schools. In turn, the Archdiocese considered it a boon to have another parochial school on record and always included St. Andrew’s Academy in its statistical information and official reports. Just as St. Andrew’s Academy’s tax issues were coming to the fore and affecting the school, four miles south in Flushing, the community of St. Nicholas Church (1955) opened their parochial school in 1977 to serve the needs of their growing community.

“Resurrection of a Greek Orthodox Consciousness” In the early 1980s, Demetrios Constantelos, a Greek American scholar of Byzantine history made the following observation: “When a people, a community, or a nation neglect, forget, or even worse betray their heritage, they lose their memory and disappear from history.”38 Constantelos’ outlook was part of a larger essay, where he eloquently and vigorously argued for the promotion of Greek language and Greek Orthodoxy in the United States as a unified whole and not as two separate or distinct pursuits. For Greek Americans, Constantelos’ reference to “people,

24 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

community, and nation” was intricately bound up with history. Archbishop Iakovos captured the minds and hearts of the first wave of immigrants and their offspring in 1959 when he called for a “resurrection of a Greek Orthodox consciousness”39 in education; a resurrection, which would impart upon students knowledge of the Greek language as well as the historical, cultural, and religious legacy of the Greek Orthodox nation. His perspective and thus, the Archdiocese’s, were shaped by important political events unfolding in Greece, Cyprus, and Turkey during the 1960s and 1970s. A “resurrection of a Greek Orthodox consciousness” signified a deeper engagement with the world as well as the internal workings of America. The Archbishop’s outlook for a renewal or “resurrection” of Greek Orthodoxy in America underpinned his educational outlook. But what precisely did Greek Orthodox education mean? And how did it manifest itself within the school curriculum? The Archdiocese sought to instill the notion of historical and cultural continuity embedded in Hellenic-­ Christian ideals. The union of Hellenism and Christianity was fashioned out of the ideological prerogatives of the newly independent Greek kingdom of the 1830s when the Church also assumed the cultivation of Greek identity as one of its functions. Faith, nationalism, Hellenism, and education became intertwined with liberation and resurrection. A modern Greek national identity was molded by the cultivation of a new history that unified and bridged the classical, Byzantine, and modern eras. This narrative, which was complemented by the emphasis of the classics, alongside celebrations of national and religious holidays, formed the basis of the Greek Kingdom’s education system. This narrative of historical cultural continuity was brought forward into the twentieth century. This notion of historical cultural continuity was realized in a myriad of ways. In conjunction with the school building projects in the New York City communities, the Archdiocese sought to complement the students’ education through books, magazines, national and religious celebrations, and curriculum. They supported the publication of a monthly bilingual children’s magazine, The Greek American Magazine for Children (Ellino-­ Amerikanopoulo), which reached Greek American students throughout the United States and Canada during the 1960s.40 The first issue of the 50-page magazine, which was circulated in January 1962, featured a brightly colored illustration of a familiar American scene—Santa Claus with his reindeer and a large sack overflowing with copies of the magazine. The editor carefully constructed the contents to capture several important

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

25

interrelated themes: The prominence of the Greek Orthodox Church and its role in education, an emphasis on the church hierarchy as a center of authority for Greek Americans and as guardians of their faith and traditions, the immigrant experience, and citizenship. There were a number of pieces that focused on the educational activities of the Archdiocese and the New  York communities. For example, there was an article that discussed the establishment of the newly constructed parochial school in Washington Heights, poems and drawings by the children of St. Andrew’s Academy, the Greek American Institute, and Chelsea- St. Eleftherios, an article describing the first summer pilgrimage to Greece for boys and girls sponsored by the Archdiocese, and a sketch of a weekend Religious Retreat by the Boy Scouts of four New York communities. There was also a piece highlighting the work at St. Basil’s Academy and Holy Cross School of Theology, those “bright jewels of Greek Orthodoxy.” In addition, an essay explaining the Archdiocese’s membership in the World Council of Churches in Geneva and Archbishop Iakovos’ important position as one of the five co-presidents was included.41 A special insert on the Ecumenical Patriarch accompanied the first issue. The purpose was to highlight the Patriarchate’s preeminent status within Orthodoxy as the “mother church” but also to orient Greek American children to their historical legacy. The Patriarchal message to Greek American children came from the “historic city of Constantinople,” where Greek Orthodox children were being “raised and nurtured …. The children of Romans, who for centuries continue the tradition of their Fathers, the tradition of their grandfathers.”42 In this message, the Patriarchate was likened to a lighthouse that radiated its light upon all his children scattered throughout the world. Photos of the Patriarch with children surrounding him drove the point home. The seat of Orthodoxy, children were reminded, is in Constantinople, where the Church is in need of protection. Bringing to life this imagery in another part of the magazine was an illustrated series featuring the battles of the fourth century Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine, who became the first Christian emperor, transferred the capital to Byzantium, which he renamed after himself. Immigration, citizenship, and maintaining a Greek identity were also themes the writers addressed in the inaugural issue. One writer wrote about the history of the Greek sponge divers in Tarpon Springs, Florida. Another wrote a short fictional story about a pioneer immigrant who recounted his early experiences in the United States to his grandson and

26 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

advised a newly arrived Greek immigrant to love and respect his new country but never to forget Greece. Advice on how to reconcile their Greek and American identities was found in many stories. Children were instructed to be good citizens, to respect great American heroes such as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, but also to be proud in their understanding that ancient Greek civilization formed the basis for American civilization. They were advised to offer that which they had “inherited” from Greece to the United States. Rounding out the first issue was a short story on the life of Abraham Lincoln, humorous poems, prayers, a crossword puzzle, vocabulary words, and recipes. It was fitting that the inaugural issue would appear in January, the month dedicated to the celebration of Greek Letters and Learning in honor of the Three Hierarchs. The celebration of the Three Hierarchs on January 30th became a state holiday in Greece beginning in 1842.43 As early as 1936, the Archdiocese mandated every parish to celebrate Greek Letters.44 The celebration of this important holiday, along with others, served to inculcate students with their religious and national identity by continually stressing the prominence of the Church in sustaining Greek education and safeguarding the nation. In New York City, the Archdiocese promoted this holiday by sponsoring community-wide programs held in local universities and colleges, which included special religious services, speeches, or lectures by distinguished scholars and artists, and musical and dance performances. The Week of Greek Letters45 was “dedicated to promoting the spiritual, educational and cultural programs of the Greek Archdiocese, to extending the cultural pursuits of Americans of Greek descent, and to stressing the values of Hellenic civilization, in its many aspects, from ancient times to the present.”46 For Archbishop Iakovos, the celebration of Greek Letters meant conveying a sense of the “nobility of Hellenic thought … the beauty of Hellenic arts … the transformative power of Hellenic civilization.”47 The programs often included dramatic performances of ancient Greek plays and lectures highlighting significant cultural, artistic, and historical contributions of Greeks throughout history, including those of the diaspora. In 1965, in honor of the celebration of Greek Letters, the Greek Press and Radio, and the Fine Arts, the Archdiocesan Department of Education issued the following statement: For the Happiness of All Greek Orthodox Families Mothers!

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

27

1. Send your children to the Greek Orthodox Kindergartens and the Greek Orthodox Schools. 2. Only in the Greek School can your child from a young age make close friendships with other Greek Orthodox children. 3. Only in the Greek School will your children be protected from bad company that may lead to juvenile delinquency. 4. Only the Greek School can keep our children within the frame of Greek Orthodoxy, and lead them from the school desk to the Church Choir, to the Greek Orthodox Youth and to the Community or the Ladies Philoptochos Society. 5. The Greek Language should be considered as a sacred cause. The Hellenic consciousness, the Greek Language, and the Greek Orthodox Faith comprise an indivisible triad. Only the Greek School can give all three together to our children. 6. Large communities were dissolved, when they stopped teaching the Greek language to their children. 7. Thousands of American School children are taught a foreign language in thousands of American Public Schools. Why should not our children be taught Greek? 8. Only the Greek School can develop in our children love and admiration for Greece, which is loved and admired and respected generally by all Americans and all mankind. 9. Only the Greek language reminds your children that they belong to the Greek Orthodox Church. Take care not to bring unjust harm upon the children.48

Part directive part entreaty, “For the Happiness of All Greek Orthodox Families,” was aimed specifically at Greek mothers but also broadly at the Greek American community; it encapsulates precisely two significant ideas, namely, the centrality of the Greek school in all its forms in sustaining Greek American ethnicity and secondly, the centrality of the Archdiocese in constructing and shaping Greek American education. The Greek school, a foundational compass for life, amplified the trinity of Hellenic-centered learning, language, and faith. However, in a significant report to the 1962 Clergy-Laity Congress, the head of the Education Department, Philippos Emmanuel, comprehended more acutely the reasons behind the prescriptive and urgent advice. The purpose and future of parochial school education were being compromised by the competing views of overlapping generations of Greek Americans. Emmanuel discerned that the pioneering generation, which

28 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

was deeply invested in promoting the schools, was unable to grasp their interdependent relationship to American society. American-born Greeks, on the other hand, neither fully understood the purpose and role of Greek education nor the current trends in American educational practices. Others, he noted, believed in keeping Greek education entirely separate from the church.49 The concern expressed over the diminishing interest in religious and cultural heritage overshadowed not only Emmanuel’s report but also the Education Committee’s report to the 1962 Clergy-Laity Congress. Both reports stressed the complementarity of Greek education and American education. “The preservation and perpetuation of our own particular customs and ethnic traits, of our religion and of our Greek language, should be viewed as part of the American way of life in its most generic aspects of national growth and forward progress.”50 Thus, by upholding their Hellenic identity through the parochial schools, Greek Americans contributed positively to American society. Emmanuel’s concerns rested on the fact that the parochial schools had not kept pace with progressive American educational practices. Again, he pointed to the clashing of generational needs, in which the pioneering generation of immigrants desired an absolute Greek curriculum and the Americans of Greek descent desired more emphasis on the American curriculum and less on the Greek program.51 For these reasons, parochial schools had not developed a comprehensive program of study that integrated the ethos of the school and extracurricular activities, as well as the overall mission of the Greek program. Referencing the Cathedral School, St. Demetrios of Astoria, St. Spyridon, and St. Eleftherios, the Education Committee observed, after visiting these schools, “a complete lack of uniformity in their methods of teaching, the subjects being taught, the schedules of tuition and fees and the scales of faculty salaries …. There is little cooperation or even consultation in charting the course of instruction and the difficult mode of operation.”52 There were two exceptions: GAI in the Bronx and St. Andrew’s Academy in Beechhurst, Queens, both of which were noted to “have established a very enviable record in Greek Orthodox education” and were accredited by the Greek Ministry of Education. St. Andrew’s Academy offered French and ancient Greek in addition to music and the arts. Tuition and salaries were higher on the average than in the other schools.53 GAI’s schedule up until the late 1950s was divided into two

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

29

parts: One half of the day was devoted to the Greek program, which included reading, spelling, grammar, history, religion, geography, and ancient Greek. The American curriculum made up the other half of the day and included English, social studies, science, math, and penmanship.54 GAI also boasted an arts and music program. GAI’s principal at the time, Nicholas Hatzidimitriou (DeMetro) (1938–1959), firmly believed, like Philippos Emmanuel, in incorporating American pedagogical practices to realize the Greek component of the curriculum.55 The time devoted to the Greek program varied from school to school and ranged from one hour per school day to two and a half hours a day.56 In order to assist the parochial schools in shaping a uniform program, the Department of Education developed a general curriculum guide for the Greek program and a handbook of school policies. School-wide celebrations continued to reinforce the specifically Greek and Orthodox identity of Greek American students. Every October, students would prepare poems, essays, and songs for the October 28th commemoration of the Greek government’s rejection of Mussolini’s ultimatum for Greece to surrender to Axis forces. This day, known as OXI Day (pronounced Ohi, Day of ‘No’), highlighted the heroism of Greeks during World War II, an event that was commemorated by Greeks worldwide, including the students of Greek American schools. Students celebrated another equally important event, Greek Independence Day, which coincided with an important religious holiday, the Feast Day of the Annunciation on March 25th. The significance of this dual celebration cannot be overstated. Students wore traditional folk costumes, recited poetry, sang famous songs, prepared skits, and performed dances to celebrate Greeks’ liberation from what was considered to be “four hundred years of slavery” under Ottoman rule. The slavery narrative was impressed upon students at an early age. It was during this celebration that the Greek Orthodox Church’s role came to the fore as a defender of freedom, of the Greek language, and of Christianity. In addition to the formal curriculum and school-wide celebrations, the Archdiocese provided supplementary materials to complement the books the schools used from Greece and which were donated by the Greek Ministry of Education, or from the publishing companies based in the United States. These materials included titles such as Moral Stories, Great Men of Greece, and The Greeks Have the Word.57

30 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

History books with the titles The Minoans, The Mycenaeans, and the Golden Age of Athens continued to underscore the important historical connection to ancient Greece.58 The Education Department also made theatrical plays available to schools and which were an integral part of the school celebrations. Teachers and students invested great effort and time into producing short skits and dramatic plays because  with their reenactment, they further bound the notion of church, education, and nation within the minds of students. Plays such as “Matomena Rasa” (Bloodied Robes) underscored the pivotal role of heroic clergymen in the Greek Revolution of 1821, while “To Kryfo Scholeio” (The Secret School) dramatized the education that was thought to have been secretly conducted by the Church during the Ottoman period. While the curriculum instilled a patriotic sense of Greek identity, it was reinforced by the physical ordering of the school space itself in order to “reflect the cultural character of the school”: Byzantine-style icons, maps and illustrations of Greece, displays of Greek vases, art, traditional folk costumes, photographs, and paintings of the Archbishop and Greek Revolutionary heroes, among other items adorned classrooms, bulletin boards, and hallways. Schools stocked their libraries with books on Greek culture and civilization.59 Finally, the Archdiocese continued to advocate for its students by promoting Greek language education through the New  York State Department of Education and the Regents Exam in Modern Greek. This exam gave academic foreign language credit to high school students and promoted Modern Greek language instruction at an advanced level in high schools. In 1970, Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, the Director of the Archdiocese’s Education Department, amassed thousands of signatures for the petition toward this end.60 The Archdiocese’s request was successful, and the first Modern Greeks Regents Exam was administered to nearly 200 students in New  York City in June 1972.61 The Archdiocese succeeded in introducing Modern Greek language courses in six NYC high schools—William Cullen Bryant, George Washington, Long Island City, William H. Taft, North Lehman, and Flushing.62 It also developed a three-year Modern Greek Language syllabus for high schools.63

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

31

Conclusion The brief overview in this chapter has shown that what makes Greek Orthodox education distinct is its prioritization of Greek language and culture. The curriculum, school celebrations, school space, as well as proximity to a Greek Orthodox Church created a world unto itself for Greek American students. The Archdiocese played a central role in shaping the ideological orientation of Greek American afternoon and parochial schools in New York City during their growth phases between the 1920s through the late 1970s. The purpose and mission of Greek American education under the Archdiocese emphasized the centrality of the Church, and a profoundly and deeply entrenched sense of historical cultural continuity. Its decentralized educational organization allowed parish communities to steer the course of their schools in relationship to the needs and wants of their respective communities. The ideology has remained much in place, however, as each generation continues to be reminded of the historical, cultural, and religious legacy of the Greek Orthodox nation.

Notes 1. The Eastern Orthodox Church is a branch of Christianity whose trajectory, by the ninth century, had been shaped by the gradual divergence of what was considered the Greek-speaking eastern and Latin-speaking western parts of the Roman Empire due to theological, political, and cultural differences. In the fifteenth century, the Eastern Roman Empire was subsumed by the Ottomans for the next four hundred years. With the concomitant weakening of the Ottoman Empire and the increase in nationalism and ethnic consciousness among its subjects during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the Orthodox Church’s role in safeguarding Greek identity was written into history and amplified thereafter. The Greek Orthodox Church has been mythologized as the protector of Hellenic Orthodox education during Ottoman Turkish rule. The Orthodox Church is divided into territories administered by Archbishops and Bishops, appointed by the leader of the Orthodox Church, the Ecumenical Patriarch located in Istanbul, Turkey. Due to historical and symbolic reasons, the Ecumenical Patriarch is ­considered primus inter pares (Latin for first among equals) which defines his historical relationship with other Orthodox Patriarchates. See John A.  McGuckin, ed., The Concise Encyclopedia of Orthodox Christianity (Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell,

32 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

2011); Fotios K. Litsas, A Companion to the Greek Orthodox Church (NY: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, 1988); Victor Roudometof, Globalization and Orthodox Christianity: The Transformations of a Religious Tradition (New York: Routledge, 2014), 18–37. 2. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America 2019 Yearbook (New York: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 2019), 112–114. The St. Demetrios Greek American Day School in Astoria operates the only high school. 3. The terms Archdiocese and Greek Orthodox Church will be used throughout this paper interchangeably to refer to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, which is the title given to the ecclesiastical administrative territory representing all Greek Orthodox Christians in the western hemisphere. It was administered by a head bishop or Archbishop who was appointed by the leader of the Orthodox Church, the Ecumenical Patriarchate located in Istanbul, Turkey. 4. Benjamin Justice and Colin Macleod, Have a Little Faith: Religion, Democracy, and the American Public School (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2016), 136–146. 5. James Fraser, Between Church and State: Religion and Public Education in a Multicultural America, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999. 6. Demetrios J. Constantelos, “The Greek Orthodox Church and the Future of the Greek Identity in America,” in Greeks in English Speaking Countries: Culture, Identity, Politics, ed. Christos P. Ioannides, Hellenism, Ancient, Medieval, Modern, vol. 24 (New Rochelle, NY: Caratzas, 1997), 57. 7. Spyros D.  Orfanos and Sam Tsemberis, “A Needs Assessment of Greek American Schools in New York City,” in Reading Greek America: Studies in the Experience of Greeks in the United States, ed. Spyros D.  Orfanos (New York, Pella Publishing, 2002); Eva Konstantellou, “Greek-American Day Schools in the Context of U.S. Educational Multiculturalism: History, Present State, and Future Prospects,” in Rightly Teaching the Word of Your Truth: Studies in Faith and Culture, Church and Scriptures, Fathers and Worship, Hellenism, and the Contemporary Scene, ed. N.M.  Vaporis (Brookline, Mass: Holy Cross Press, 1995), 382; John Spiridakis, “Greek Bilingual Education: Policies and Possibilities,” in Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects, ed. Spyros Orfanos, Harry J. Psomiades, and John Spiridakis (New York, Pella Publishing, 1987). 8. Demetrios J. Constantelos, “The Greek Orthodox Church and the Future of the Greek Identity in America,” in Greeks in English Speaking Countries: Culture, Identity, Politics, ed. Christos P. Ioannides, Hellenism: Ancient, Medieval, Modern, vol. 24 (New Rochelle, NY: Aristide D.  Caratzas, 1997), 56. 9. Theodore Saloutos, “The Greek Orthodox Church in the United States and Assimilation,” International Migration Review 7 (Winter 1973): 395.

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

33

10. Saloutos, The Greeks in the United States, 134; George Papaioannou, The Odyssey of Hellenism in America (Thessaloniki, Greece: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies, 1985), 235. 11. Papaioannou, The Odyssey of Hellenism in America, 238–242, 277–280. The process of centralization was cemented in a revised charter in 1931, which gave the Archdiocese ultimate control over the appointment of priests. 12. Kanonismos Anotatou Ekpaideutikou Symbouliou scholion kai didaskalon tis Ellinikis Archiepiskopis Amerikis Voriou kai Notiou [Regulations of the Supreme Educational Council of schools and teachers of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America], 1936, Box V12, Folder AA, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOARCH). 13. Basil T. Zoustis, Ekthesis dia to scholikon etos 1935–1936 [Report for the academic year 1935–1936], Box V11, Folder AA, GOARCH. 14. Basil T. Zoustis, Ekthesis ton pepragmenon ypo tou tmimatos ekpaideuseos dia to scholikon etos 1937–1938 [Progress report of the education department for the school year 1937–1938], Box V11, Folder AS, GOARCH. 15. Statistics reveal that most of the independent schools in New York became defunct after short periods of operation with a noticeable rise in enrollment figures of the church afternoon schools. Statistikos pinax scholion, mathiton, kai didaskalon tou scholikou etous, 1941–1942 [Statistical table of schools, students, and teachers for the school year 1941–1942], June 10, 1942, Box V11, Folder DF, GOARCH.  See Table  2.1 for a list of schools in New York City in 1942. 16. Eva Konstantellou also remarks on this usage in her research on the Greek American day schools in the 1990s. She notes that classical ideals are not incompatible with the Greek Orthodox faith. Early Christian thinkers, in fact, were educated in classical thought and philosophy and used their knowledge to shape early Christian theology. Equally salient, as Theodore G.  Zervas shows, the construction of a modern Greek identity through schools and education began after Greek Independence in 1821 when early historians, such as Konstantine Paparrigopoulos, sought to connect modern Greeks with the ancients. Eva Konstantellou, “Greek American Day School in the Context of U.S. Educational Multiculturalism: History, Present State, and Future Prospects,” in Rightly Teaching the Word of Your Truth, ed. Nomikos Michael Vaporis (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1995), 379–388; Theodore G. Zervas, The Making of a Modern Greek Identity: Education, Nationalism, and the Teaching of a Greek National Past (New York: Columbia University Press, 2012). 17. The Three Hierarchs are fourth century Christian bishops who shaped the teachings of the early Christian church. They are: Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, and Basil of Caesarea. All three are commemorated together on January 30th.

34 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

18. Kanonismos Anotatou Ekpaideutikou Symbouliou scholion kai didaskalon tis Ellinikis Archiepiskopis Amerikes Voriou kai Notiou [Regulations of the Supreme Educational Council of schools and teachers of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America], 1936, Box V12, Folder AA, GOARCH. 19. Basil T. Zoustis, Ekthesis dia to scholikon etos 1935–1936 [Report for the academic year 1935–1936], Box V11, Folder AA, GOARCH. 20. Basil T.  Zoustis, Ekthesis ton pepragmenon ypo tou tmimatos ekpaideuseos dia to scholikon etos 1937–1938 [Progress report of the education department for the school year 1937–1938], Box V11, Folder AS; Greek Students to Dr. William H.  Dooley, Principal of Straubenmuller Textile High School, October 1938, Box V11, Folder AS; Flyer “Learn to Speak Greek 1938/1940,” Box V11, Folder AS; Archbishop Athenagoras to William Dooley, April 26, 1940, Box V11, Folder AS; Basil T. “Zoustis, Ekthesis ton pepragmenon ypo tou tmimatos ekpaideuseos kata to scholikon etos 1941–1942 [Progress report of the education department for the school year 1941–1942” Box V11, Folder AF; Basil T. Zoustis, Ekthesis ton scholion, mathiton kai didaskalon tes Ellinikis Archiepiskopis Amerikis Voriou kai Notiou 1938–1939 [Report on the schools, students and teachers of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, 1938–1939], Box V11, Folder AD, GOARCH. 21. Order of AHEPA to Archbishop Athenagoras, October 6, 1939, Box V11, Folder AD, GOARCH. 22. Basil T.  Zoustis, “Ekthesis ton pepragmenon ypo tou tmimatos ekpaideuseos kata to scholikon etos 1941–1942 [Progress report of the education department for the school year 1941–1942” Box V11, Folder AF, GOARCH. 23. Basil T. Zoustis, Ekthesis dia to scholikon etos 1935–1936 [Report for the academic year 1935–1936], Box V11, Folder AA; Kanonismos Anotatou Ekpaideutikou Symbouliou scholion kai didaskalon tis Ellinikis Archiepiskopis Amerikis Voriou kai Notiou [Regulations of the Supreme Educational Council of schools and teachers of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America], 1936, Box V12, Folder AA, GOARCH. 24. Papaioannou, The Odyssey of Hellenism in America, 380–386. 25. To paidion, apo genisin eos tin apoperatosin ton spoudon autou [The child: From birth to the completion of his education], 1946, Box L7, Folder DS, GOARCH. 26. Papaioannou, The Odyssey of Hellenism in America, 391. 27. Ibid., 407. 28. “Iakovos of America,” special edition to The Orthodox Observer, May 2005, vol. 70, issue 1216.

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

35

29. Archbishop Iakovos, “Our Declared Directions and Ways,” in The Complete Works: Visions and Expectations for a Living Church, Addresses to ClergyLaity Congresses, 1960–1996, ed. Demetrios J. Constantelos, vol. 1 (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1988), 13. 30. Ibid. 31. Ibid., 14. 32. Ibid., Archbishop Iakovos, “This is What We Are: An Assessment” 54–55; Ibid., Archbishop Iakovos, “The Demands of Our Times,” 68. 33. Ibid., Archbishop Iakovos, “Reestablishing Ourselves Morally and Spiritually,” 109. 34. Contopoulos, Michael, The Greek Community of New  York City: Early Years to 1910, Series on Hellenism: Ancient, Medieval, Modern, vol. 11 (New Rochelle, N.Y: A.D. Caratzas, 1992), 115; Thomas Burgess, Greeks in America: An Account of Their Coming, Progress, Customs, Living, and Aspirations: With an Historical Introduction and the Stories of Some Famous American-Greeks (Boston, MA: Sherman, French & Co., 1913), 76; Thomas C.  Moulketis, “Greek Orthodox Education and the Greek-­ American Institute, 1912–1999” (PhD diss., Fordham University, 2000), 74–105; Zoodohos Peghe Greek Orthodox Church website, accessed August 1, 2019, http://www.zoodohospeghe.org 35. Undated informational pamphlet of the Archdiocesan Cathedral of the Holy Trinity, Holy Trinity Cathedral, NY; Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral website, accessed August 1, 2019, http://www.thecathedralnyc.org; Fifty-Year Anniversary Journal of St. Spyridon, 1980, Archives of St. Spyridon Greek Orthodox Church, NY; St. Spyridon Greek Orthodox Church website, accessed August 1, 2019 http://www.saintspyridon.net; St. Eleftherios Greek Orthodox Church website, accessed August 1, 2019 http://www.steleftherios.ny.goarch.org 36. Statistikos pinax scholion, mathiton, kai didaskalon tou scholikou etous, 1941–1942 [Statistical table of schools, students, and teachers for the school year 1941–1942], June 10, 1942, Box V11, Folder DF, GOARCH. 37. Max H. Seigel, “Queens Greek School Gets a Week to Pay $150,000 on U.S. Tax Bill,” New York Times, September 13, 1977. 38. Demetrios Constantelos, Ph.D., “Greek and Religious Education” March 1–2, 1985, Box V13, Folder AK, GOARCH. 39. Archbishop Iakovos, “Our Declared Directions and Ways” in The Complete Works of His Eminence Archbishop Iakovos, Primate of North and South America: Volume 1, Visions and Expectations for a Living Church: Addresses to Clergy-Laity Congresses, 1960–1996, ed. Demetrios Constantelos (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1998), 14; Ibid., 54–55, 68.

36 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

40. Ellino-Amerikanopoulo [The Greek American Magazine for Children], January 1962, Box V28, Folder FF, GOARCH. As of this writing, it is not clear how many issues of this magazine were published. 41. Ibid. 42. Ibid. 43. Trine Stauning Willert, New Voices in Greek Orthodox Thought: Untying the Bond between Nation and Religion (Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing, 2014), 43. 44. Kanonismos Anotatou Ekpaideutikou Symbouliou scholion kai didaskalon tis ellinikis Archiepiskopis Amerikis Voriou kai Notiou [Regulations of the Supreme Educational Council of schools and teachers of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America], 1936, Box V12, Folder AA, GOARCH. 45. The Week of Greek Letters was also referred to as the Week of Greek Letters, the Press, and the Fine Arts or the Week of Greek Letters, the Greek Press and Radio, and the Arts. 46. “Greek Letters Week, January 22–30, 1961,” Office of Information, Box V43, Folder AF, GOARCH. 47. Archbishop Iakovos, Encyclical No. 7, January 15, 1971, Box V43, Folder AK, GOARCH. 48. Celebration of Greek Letters, the Greek Press, and the Arts, 1964–1966, Box V43, Folder AH, GOARCH. The last sentence was included in the Greek version but not in the English translation. See also, 1964 Yearbook, Box E52, Folder 1963, GOARCH. Another variation of this statement can be found in Ekthesis, statistiki scholion-mathiton-didaskalon kai allon pliroforion scholikon etos 1963–1964 [Reports, statistics on schoolsstudents-­teachers and other information for the school year 1963–1964], Archives of the St. Demetrios Jamaica Parochial School, Jamaica, Queens, NY. 49. Philippos D. Emmanuel, “The Greek-American Day Schools Within the Frame of the Broader Educational Program of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America, 16th Clergy-Laity Convention June 23–29, 1962,” Box V16, Folder AD, GOARCH. 50. Kimon A. Doukas as rapporteur for the Education Committee, “Sixteenth Biennial Ecclesiastical Congress: Greek Orthodox Elementary Education,” June 14, 1962, Box L14, Folder RP, GOARCH. 51. Philippos D. Emmanuel, “The Greek-American Day Schools Within the Frame of the Broader Educational Program of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America, 16th Clergy-Laity Convention June 23–29, 1962,” Box V16, Folder AD, GOARCH.

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

37

52. Kimon A. Doukas as rapporteur for the Education Committee, “Sixteenth Biennial Ecclesiastical Congress: Greek Orthodox Elementary Education,” June 14, 1962, Box L14, Folder RP, GOARCH. 53. Kimon A. Doukas as rapporteur for the Education Committee, “Sixteenth Biennial Ecclesiastical Congress: Greek Orthodox Elementary Education,” June 14, 1962, Box L14, Folder RP, GOARCH. 54. Moulketis, “Greek-American Institute,” 89. 55. Ibid., 90. 56. Ekthesis epitropis epi tou omoiomorfou programmatos hemerision scholion [Report of the committee for the uniform program of the day schools], n.d., pp. 4–6, Box V36, Folder HA, GOARCH. 57. Elliniki paideia en Ameriki 1966 [Greek education in America 1966], Box V12, Folder DH, GOARCH. 58. I Minoes [The Minoans], I Mikinaioi [The Mycenaeans], Ta Chrysa Chronia tis Athinas [The golden age of Athens], Box V27, Folders AH, AJ, AK, GOARCH. 59. Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, “A Curriculum of Greek Studies for the Schools of the System of Education of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America,” 1982, Box V12, Folder SH, GOARCH. 60. Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel to Principals of Parochial Schools, 1970, Box V17, Folder HJ, GOACRH. 61. Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, “Progress Report,” May 16-Oct 1, 1972, Box V15, Folder FS, GOARCH. 62. Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, Report to the Clergy-Laity Congress, July 1972, Box V20, Folder AA, GOARCH; Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, “The Greek Archdiocesan System of Education,” June 25, 1975, Box V15, Folder GA, GOARCH. 63. Decisions of the 21st Clergy-Laity Congress of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, 1972, Box L24, Folder DC, GOARCH.

References Anagnostou, Yiorgos. 2009. Contours of White Ethnicity: Popular Ethnography and the Making of Usable Pasts in Greek America. Athens: Ohio University Press. Bodnar, John. 1985. The Transplanted: A History of Immigrants in Urban America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Burgess, Thomas. 1913. Greeks in America: An Account of Their Coming, Progress, Customs, Living, and Aspirations: With an Historical Introduction and the Stories of Some Famous American-Greeks. Boston: Sherman, French & Co. Canoutas, Seraphim G. 1910. Ellino-Amerikanikos Odigos [Greek-American Guide]. New York, Helmi Bros.

38 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Carnes, Tony, and Anna Karpathakis, eds. 2001. New York Glory: Religions in the City. Race, Religion, and Ethnicity. New York: New York University Press. Clogg, Richard. 1992. A Concise History of Greece, Cambridge Concise Histories. New York: Cambridge University Press. ———. 1999. The Greek Diaspora in the Twentieth Century, St. Antony’s Series. New York: St. Antony’s Press. Constantelos, Demetrios J., ed. 1976. Encyclicals and Documents of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America: Relating to Its Thought and Activity of the First Fifty Years (1922–1972). Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies. ———., ed. 1981. Orthodox Theology and Diakonia: Trends and Prospects. Brookline: Hellenic College Press. ———. 1998. The Complete Works of His Eminence Archbishop Iakovos Primate of North and South America, 1959–1996, Visions and Expectations for a Living Church: Addresses to Clergy-Laity Congresses, 1960–1996. Vol. 1. Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press. ———. 1999. The Complete Works of His Eminence Archbishop Iakovos Primate of North and South America, 1959–1996, The Torchbearer Part 1, 1959–1977. Vol. 2. Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press. ———. 2001. The Complete Works of His Eminence Archbishop Iakovos Primate of North and South America, 1959–1996, The Torchbearer Part 2, 1978–1996. Vol. 3. Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press. ———. 2002. The Complete Works of His Eminence Archbishop Iakovos Primate of North and South America, 1959–1996, Paideia: Addresses to Young People. Vol. 4. Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press. ———. 2005. Understanding the Greek Orthodox Church: Its Faith, History, and Life. 4th ed. Brookline: Hellenic College Press. Contopoulos, Michael. 1992. The Greek Community of New York City: Early Years to 1910, Series on Hellenism: Ancient, Medieval, Modern. Vol. 11. New Rochelle: A.D. Caratzas. Fairchild, Henry Pratt. 1911. Greek Immigration to the United States. New Haven: Yale University Press. Fass, Paula S. 1989. Outside in: Minorities and the Transformation of American Education. New York: Oxford University Press. Foner, Nancy. 2000. From Ellis Island to JFK: New  York’s Two Great Waves of Immigration. New Haven: Yale University Press. ———. 2005. In a New Land: A Comparative View of Immigration. New York: New York University Press. Fraser, James. 1999. Between Church and State: Religion and Public Education in a Multicultural America. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Gallant, Thomas. 2001. Modern Greece. New York: Oxford University Press.

2  GREEK ORTHODOX EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ADAPTATIONS… 

39

Georgakas, Dan, and Charles C.  Moskos, eds. 1991. New Directions in Greek-­ American Studies. New York: Pella Publishing Co. Ioannides, Christos P., ed. 1997. Greeks in English-Speaking Countries: Culture, Identity, Politics, Series on Hellenism: Ancient, Medieval, Modern. Vol. 24. New Rochelle: Aristide D. Caratzas. Justice, Benjamin and Colin Macleod. 2016. Have a Little Faith: Religion, Democracy, and the American Public School. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Konstantellou, Eva. 1990. Education as a Means of Empowerment for Minority Cultures: Strategies for the Greek American Community.  Journal of Modern Hellenism 7: 125–139. ———. 1995. Greek-American Day Schools in the Context of U.S. Educational Multiculturalism: History, Present State, and Future Prospects. In Rightly Teaching the Word of Your Truth: Studies in Faith and Culture, Church and Scriptures, Fathers and Worship, Hellenism, and the Contemporary Scene, ed. N.M. Vaporis, 379–388. Brookline: Holy Cross Press. Kopan, Andrew T. 1990. Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival. European Immigrants and American Society. New York: Garland Publishing Co. McGuckin, John Anthony. 2010. The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to Its History, Doctrine, and Spiritual Culture. 1st ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. ———. 2014. The Concise Encyclopedia of Orthodox Christianity. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Moskos, Peter C., and C. Charles. 2014. Greek Americans: Struggle and Success. 3rd ed. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Orfanos, Spyros D., ed. 2002. Reading Greek America: Studies in the Experience of Greeks in the United States. New York: Pella Publishing Co. Orfanos, Spyros D., Harry J.  Psomiades, and John Spiridakis. 1987. Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects. New York: Pella Publishing. Papaioannou, George. 1985. The Odyssey of Hellenism in America. Thessaloniki, Greece: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies. Psomiades, Harry J., Alice Scourby, and John G.  Zenelis, eds. 1982. The Greek American Community in Transition, Modern Greek Research Series 4. New York: Pella Publishing. Roudometof, Victor. 2014. Globalization and Orthodox Christianity: The Transformations of a Religious Tradition. New York: Routledge. Saloutos, Theodore. 1964. The Greeks in the United States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Thernstrom, Stephan, ed. 1980. Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups. Cambridge: Belknap Press. Vermeulen, Hans, and Joel Perlmann, eds. 2000. Immigrants, Schooling and Social Mobility: Does Culture Make a Difference? Basingstoke: Macmillan.

40 

F. K. SOUMAKIS

Willert, Trine Stauning. 2014. New Voices in Greek Orthodox Thought: Untying the Bond Between Nation and Religion. Burlington: Ashgate. Xenides, J.P. 1922. The Greeks in America. New York: G.H. Doran Co. Zervas, Theodore G. 2012. The Making of a Modern Greek Identity: Education, Nationalism, and the Teaching of a Greek National Past. East European Monographs. New York: Columbia University Press. Zotos, Stephanos. 1976. Hellenic Presence in America. Wheaton: Pilgrimage. Zoustis, Basil T. 1954. O en Ameriki Ellinismos kai i drasis autou: I istoria tis ellinikis archiepiskopis amerikis voriou kai notiou [Greek Americans and Their Activities; The History of the Greek Orthodox Church of North and South America]. New York: Divry.

CHAPTER 3

The First Schoolbooks for Greek American Children Maria Kaliambou

Introduction When Greeks started immigrating to America toward the end of the nineteenth century, they immediately realized the need for a sound education for their children. Thus, they undertook several educational initiatives either within the community or around their local churches in order to promote Greek language and culture. The majority of the Greek educational books that circulated in America were imported from Greece. However, by the 1930s, when Greek publishing companies were well established in America, Greek immigrants started producing their own books for use in Greek schools. The aim of this chapter is to present and critically analyze the first four schoolbooks written and published by Greek immigrants in America. The books published in America were a reaction to peer books imported from Greece. Contrary to those imported books, Greek American educational books conveyed ideological messages, which better suited the circumstances of the first generation of immigrants. After close reading and sociohistorical contextualization of the material, I demonstrate that these

M. Kaliambou (*) Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_3

41

42 

M. KALIAMBOU

books printed in America reflect  a socially  conservative  outlook, which aimed to fulfill the wishes of the older generation toward the formation of a Greek American ethnic identity. Greek America has been the focus of historians, ethnologists, anthropologists, and literary scholars, who have researched the historic roots and the formation of the identity of Greek immigrants as manifested in their literature and culture.1 In addressing the education of Greek immigrants, scholars have discussed some general pedagogical problems in immigrant communities by focusing on the issue of assimilation in the American environment and education as a means of integration.2 However, there is an astonishing gap in the literature about the schoolbooks used at the newly established Greek American schools. One of the biggest challenges in teaching language and its culture is the use of appropriate pedagogical material. What material did Greek teachers use and why? This chapter fills the gap in our knowledge about the educational solutions created by Greek immigrants during the first half of the twentieth century. Moreover, through the history of those books we can better understand the complicated relationship between diaspora Greece and homeland Greece. Greek America has a filial relationship with Greece: “[Greece], you are the Big Mother of the World! And I am your oldest daughter, America!”3 says America to Greece in a brief theatrical dialog in one of those schoolbooks. This metaphor of the “mother–daughter” relationship unveils the inextricable affinity which Greek immigrants have with their homeland. Initially, “the daughter,” the Greek diaspora in America, is in a state of infancy and thus, dependent upon “the Big Mother.” Slowly “the daughter” grows up, self-reflects, and realizes the need to be autonomous. The first Greek American autochthonous schoolbooks are testimonies of the first attempts of the “daughter Greek America” to become independent and also active in publishing. Significantly, the diaspora-daughter has more material and financial resources than Mother Greece. Therefore, these schoolbooks, as material and cultural objects produced in the diaspora are important for scholars in Greek American studies in order to understand the formation of ethnic identity. They are equally important for book historians who wish to trace the complicated “communication circuit” of agents4 leading to their production and distribution. This  chapter  acknowledges those schoolbooks as a significant aspect of the  Greek American publishing  industry. Although the book history of the diaspora is a relatively recent academic endeavor, this chapter contributes to the broader discussion of ethnic book histories, particularly of European groups in America.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

43

Books for Children: “Printed Out of Love for Progress” “The First Need Is to Learn English” During the first decades of the twentieth century there was a significant number of publications produced to fulfill the reading needs of immigrants. Despite the common and widely spread stereotype that the first immigrants had a poor education, these books showcase that the first generation was thirsty for reading and writing.5 Books with a literary character (poetry collections, novels, short stories), publications with functional purposes (guide books for the new country), and a variety of newspapers and journals appeared on American soil. One of the main educational issues the first immigrants faced was learning the English language. Thus, several types of language books were published: dictionaries, textbooks, language methods, Greek and English grammars, conversational books, letter writing books, and books with technical vocabulary. Parallel to those books for adults, books for children entered the market in the 1910s until they received a permanent position on publishing catalogs in the 1930s. During the first years of Greek American publishing at the beginning of the twentieth century, publishers considered the demands of the newcomers. As the first generation of immigrants was comprised mostly of bachelor men, who were gradually forming their families in America, there was not an immediate necessity for children’s books. The situation looks different in the 1930s, when children who by that time were born in America, had to receive a proper education. Only then does it become obvious that there was a dearth in the pedagogical material needed to fulfill the educational needs of the younger generation. The book catalogs of the main publishers in America (Atlantis, Ethnikos Kyrix, and D.C. Divry)6 showcase the range of Greek children’s literature that circulated in America. The listings in those catalogs make obvious the fact that interest for educational books for children materialized later than adult educational books. In the first book catalog by Atlantis in 1912, there is a limited selection of children’s books.7 These are illustrated books with short stories, novels, fairy tales, and myths. One entry refers to an anonymous spelling book for children. Atlantis believes that “the first need is to learn English,”8 and a series of English-Greek educational books for adults is published. Atlantis’ choices reflect the time and social situation of first generation Greek immigrants—namely the importance of learning their host county’s primary language.

44 

M. KALIAMBOU

In 1930, the National Herald published a book catalog in a “methodical and elegant manner” to serve as “a mirror through which one can see […] all the richness of the library of his bookstore.”9 Examining the book entries, it becomes evident that the market in the late 1920s and 1930s had a more profound interest in children’s books and children’s education. The catalog has a lengthy section on pedagogical books. It starts with books for elementary schools, such as spelling books, readers for all grades, grammars, books on moral behavior, syntax, history, religion, sciences (physics and mathematics), geography, and maps. The publisher considers the teachers as well. In order to support teachers with relevant material, the National Herald offers in a separate section publications about pedagogy, practical advice on teaching, and a collection of poems, songs, and theater skits for school festivals. The next section in the catalog lists books for use in high schools, such as ancient Greek and Latin literature, and dictionaries for modern and ancient Greek language. Finally, the publisher dedicates a section to children and young-adult stories and books, which are mostly translations of European-authored stories and books. This lengthy list demonstrates that the publisher offers a wide variety of books for all schools (elementary, Greek schools, and high schools), as well as supplementary books for teachers, and recreational books for children and adolescents.10 The third known publisher D.C.  Divry was almost exclusively dedicated to publishing educational books. One book list, printed on the last page on one of the readers in 1944, shows the publisher’s pedagogical interests in language, religion, history, and some literature.11 The majority of all publications are books for learning the Greek language (spelling books, reading books, grammars, dictionaries). Divry is interested in publishing religious books (such as the Old and New Testament, books about religious history and catechisms) and history books (Greek mythology and ancient Greek history). In addition, Divry publishes the first anthology with collected poems to be recited during school festivals. The choice of books speaks for itself: Language books for both adults and children receive special attention on all publishing agendas. Adults should learn English, and children should learn Greek. This is in accordance with the Greek educational prerogatives of the time. Learning Greek, and thus saving the language, was the utmost priority of the immigrants, as educator and priest Demetrios Callimachos, in the Sunday edition of the newspaper National Herald emphasized. He wrote, “The perpetuation of the Greek language, being taught as something that

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

45

inspires the highest ideals of humanity, is our highest duty. The neglect of this duty would be an unforgivable misdeed not only for the Greek nation but for America too.”12 “Throw It Out of the Window!” One significant problem arises here. The majority of educational books for Greek schools in America were imported from Greece. According to the Greek educational system at that time, these books were chosen after a competition, and were valid for five years. After their evaluation and approval by the Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, these books could be reprinted (after introducing any necessary changes) and used for an additional two years. However, these imported books did not reflect the realities of the Greek immigrants in America. Greek children in America had different educational and pedagogical needs than the children in Greece. Several types of Greek schools were founded by immigrant communities, and all were very different from the standardized national school system in Greece. Although there were day schools where children were taught in Greek, the majority of Greek children attended American public schools during the day, and Greek schools in the afternoon. Fewer children attended Saturday and Sunday Greek schools.13 Also, the Greek Orthodox Church, which was an important institution in the preservation of Greek cultural and social life in the United States, played a significant role in supporting the Greek schools.14 Educators were aware of the importance and influence that the Church played in the school system, from a political, social, and historical perspective. The principal of the first day school in America, founded in Chicago, mentioned that Church and school were “the two pillars which support our national aspirations.”15 All these heterogeneous Greek schools in America espoused the same mission: to promote Greek language and culture. Fear of assimilation, and preservation of the Greek language, culture, and identity were the driving forces behind the curricula. However, offering more courses in English and following the American educational system became inevitable. For some pedagogues, the successful future of Greek schools in America relied on the combination of both Greek and American education.16 Demetrios Callimachos argued that Greek education was important not only to save the Greek language and tradition, but moreover to become “good” American citizens. Callimachos, moreover, believed in a “healthy

46 

M. KALIAMBOU

Americanization,” which would keep the Greek language and Greek values in alignment with American values.17 Educators emphasized through the curricula a continuity of Greek culture from past to present, with ancient Greece and Byzantine Greece serving equal roles: Immigrants demonstrated their “dual pride in classical heritage and commitment to the Byzantine tradition.”18 The lack of a uniform Greek educational system in America, and the inability to develop a robust Greek-American curriculum, were major challenges which led Greek immigrants to seek help from Greece. Thus, the first schoolbooks arrived from Greece. One common technique among the Greek American publishers was to take imported books and substitute their own cover with their logo.19 For instance, the publisher Atlas in New York took one of the first circulated readers by the author Ioannis Arsenis, originally published in Athens in 1906 by the publisher Dikaios, and substituted the Greek publisher’s name with Atlas on the title page.20 Another example is the well-known alphabet book O Helios (The Sun), which was published in Athens by Dimitrakos in the 1930s. The publisher Atlantis in New York published it in 1938 by adding the cover of its own company.21 Despite all these efforts, the imported books were not suitable for Greek children in America, both in terms of pedagogy but also in aesthetics. The reaction of children toward these books was not positive. According to Boston cleric Athenagoras Kavathas, “when children here in America saw a Greek book in front of them, the only reaction it caused was to throw it out of the window. Loathsome in outside appearance, unappetizing in its content!”22 In order to address the above problems several educators in America advocated for writing and publishing schoolbooks in America. They acknowledged the unsuitability of the imported material and emphasized the need for schools to  produce their own books.23 Only in the 1930s were the first schoolbooks for Greek American children written and published in America. These were mostly readers and primers for the elementary schools. The following analysis of the first four schoolbooks produced in the United States reveals the central concerns of the community toward the development of a Greek education in America.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

47

“The Foundation of Hellenism” In 1927 the National Herald announced in its catalog the publication of the first Greek primer on American soil. The publisher praises its schoolbook as “the most beautiful and most artistic spelling book from all so far”24 and strongly recommended the adoption of the book to all schools. However, it is not known if this first edition went into circulation. In 1930, three years after the publication of the first Greek primer, the National Herald published a new spelling book written by Venetia Vidali.25 This reader received a positive review from the National Herald (the ethnic newspaper)  which called it “the Messiah of American Hellenism”.26 The publisher was aware of the problematic situation regarding children’s education, and openly advocated that schoolbooks be adapted to the needs of Greek American students. Thus, this reader is “the first schoolbook which was created specifically for the children in America.”27 In the preface, the publisher explained his educational mission. He claims that the book “is the last word of the pedagogical science for schoolbooks like this.”28 With this reader he aimed to address the pressing concerns of parents and teachers. The publisher emphasized the value of those educational books for the future of Hellenism: “The Hellenism of future generations depends on the schoolbook for the Greek children in America. The school book, which helps the teacher and the parents, sets the psychological and intellectual foundation, upon which the Hellenic identity of the child will be built.”29 The publisher also saw his reader as a “new contribution to the struggle to preserve and perpetuate the Greek language, the Greek tradition and the Greek culture in America.”30 Greece reacted positively toward the first reader published in America. The Greek Minister of Education  and Religious Affairs, Georgios Papandreou, congratulated the publisher and appraised this book publication as “a national work indeed.”31 For Papandreou, learning the language meant also preserving the “holy bonds” between the Greeks in America with their motherland Greece. The reader was printed in two parts. In Part A, the child learns the letters of the alphabet, the numbers, some words, and basic phrases. To make the material more appealing to a young audience, the publisher inserts colorful images, which “are adapted not only to the theme but also to the general psychology and aesthetic reception of the child.”32 The images depict scenes from nature or from the everyday life of children (such as playing games, or playing with beloved pets). All illustrations have the

48 

M. KALIAMBOU

signature “printed by the National Herald” [Tipois Ethnikou Kirikos]. They are drawn by anonymous artists, excepting only one image, which bears the signature of the American  illustrator M.E.  Musselman. Most likely, these images were copied from American books and therefore, depict the lifestyle of an American middle to upper class. The Greek touch is visible only through two images of Greek soldiers in traditional costumes. The image accompanying the letter E (“Ellinopoulo,” Greek Child) depicts a young boy dressed in a folk soldier’s costume (as “tsolias”). The text reads: “The Greek Child is full of braveness,” demonstrating pride in being Greek.33 Part B targets reading practice, and thus is comprised of longer texts. Again, the textual and visual elements illustrate general family scenes and moments of children’s lives. There are efforts to establish “the holy bonds” with Greece by including a few poems by well-known Greek poets, such as Zacharias Papantoniou, Ioannis Polemis, Georgios Drosinis, and Dionysios Solomos, author of the Greek national anthem. The poem by Georgios Drosinis “Greek Soil” describes the common ritual among immigrants of taking some Greek soil with them during their long journey to the xenitiá (foreign lands); a ritual which demonstrates a strong desire to remain connected with the homeland and eventually return back home.34 The schoolbook ends with a small section with phonological instructions for readers unfamiliar with Greek. A vocabulary list of Greek words with their translation in English concludes the book. Finally, the last page of the second volume ends triumphantly, showing the double-headed eagle above the Greek flag with the slogan of Greek irredentism “Again after many years, they will be ours again” (“Pali me chronia me kairous, pali dika mas thanai”) (Fig. 3.1).

“The Water of Life: Our Language” While the first school reader published by the National Herald was intended for Greek students in Greece, and only included minor revisions for a Greek American audience, the next schoolbook, published in New York City in 1935, was specifically written for Greek American children. The author Eleni Konstantopoulou-Rompapa, another woman active in writing schoolbooks, published a first-grade reader in two volumes. Because of the success of the reader, this led the author to further develop the book and reprint it several times.35 The titles, as well as the text, change slightly from one edition to the next.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

49

Fig. 3.1  Venetia Vidali. New alphabet book for the Greek children of National Herald. Part A. New York: National Herald, 1930

The first volume with the title The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child (Το Alfavitarion tou Ellinopaidos), published by D.C. Divry in New York City, teaches the Greek letters and diphthongs. The author begins  with easy texts and moves gradually to more difficult ones. Her purpose is to write a schoolbook that relates to the lives of children; thus, as she mentions in

50 

M. KALIAMBOU

her explanatory  note to  the teacher, “all the units are derived from the everyday life of the children at home, at school or at their games, and are with images designed particularly for those lessons.”36 The author understands the struggle of Greek children learning two languages. She advises the teachers to keep in mind that Greek American children simultaneously learn two languages (English and Greek). According to her pedagogical suggestions, the teaching of the Greek language should proceed in parallel with their American schooling.37 She occasionally uses English words with Greek endings38 as a linguistic strategy to help Greek American students understand the language more readily. Triantafyllidis described this linguistic phenomenon as a “language mix” on the vocabulary level, observed in the first generation and intensified in the next.39 This mixed language form, according to Constantakos, provided “solidarity and cohesiveness, a common bond of special sentimental attachment and value” to the community.40 The book clearly has an indoctrinating character, particularly toward the formation of Greek American identity. The text with the characteristic title “The Good Children” (“Ta kala paidia”)41 narrates the proper behavior children in America should  adhere to: they should attend  American school, then Greek school in the afternoon; they should  attend Greek Orthodox services on Sunday and also  attend Sunday school. Of course, they have to be punctual, quiet, respectful, eat their meals, and drink their milk. The text reflects the mixed everyday life of children  in America straddling between two schools, two languages, and two cultures. Similar to adults, Greek children are depicted expressing their longing to visit Greece. “I would like to go by the big boat to Greece” says one of the protagonist children looking over the wide ocean.42 Or in another chapter, while they are watching a ship arriving from Greece and disembarking new passengers, they express a wish to board a similar ship to Greece in the summer to see friends and family members.43 The texts in the first volume, even if brief, familiarize the young readers with the immigrants’ experiences. The stirring images of the blue sea and the long transatlantic sea trip evoke feelings of longing for the homeland, and mediate a nostalgic but hopeful notion of returning to Greece one day. The second volume named The Reading Book of the Greek Child in America (Το Anagnosmatarion tou Ellinopaidos tis Amerikis), was also

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

51

published by D.C. Divry in New York City, and consists of longer texts, short essays, and poems. The author clearly states in the preface that the book’s aim is not only to teach the Greek language but also “to educate the children to form their characters, and mostly to implant to their hearts the love to the values and ideals of the Greek family.”44 The ultimate goal is “to inspire in children the love toward Greek letters and the Greek environment.”45 The use of artistic images both entertained and helped the children to love their Greek books. Regarding the language, the author consciously chooses “a well-spoken Demotic Greek.” However, as she explains, she refrains from using words that remind one of the vulgar demotic (“malliari”). Less familiar words are introduced as a way to assist children in expanding their vocabulary. Konstantopoulou starts the second part of the book with one of her poems dedicated to the Greek child (“Sto ellinopaido tis Amerikis”) who thrives in America but whose roots are in Greece. The children will be proud to feel themselves as descendants of a great generation of Greeks. The book she wrote is like a vessel holding  “the water of life, the language,” which the child should nurture  with great care and joy.46 The introductory poem makes it clear: Greek children should not forget their ties to Greece, that the beginning and end are Greece, and that a Greek American identity should be centered around Greece (Fig. 3.2).

“In Greek American Spirit” In 1935, the first Greek American anthology with theater dialogues for the school festivals was published in New  York by D.C.  Divry.47 The author Mimes Demetriou, an experienced teacher at Aristotle School in New  York City, aims with his anthology to offer “original works in the Greek-American spirit.” By offering new material, his goal was to “fill a gap” and help Greek children “to feel differently for every Greek thing.” He even compares himself with the Greek revolutionary writer Rigas Feraios. As Feraios inspired the enslaved Greeks to fight for their freedom, similarly, Demetriou wished to enlighten Greek Americans through Greek learning.48 The collection contains three extensive units: The first part consists of poems and monologues, the second of dialogues and theater skits, and the third offers longer theatrical pieces (comedies or dramas). At the end, some Greek poems and folksongs are printed. All of the above were to be

52 

M. KALIAMBOU

Fig. 3.2  G. Konstantopoulou. The alphabet book of the Greek child in America. First volume. Second edition,  expanded and improved. New  York: D.C.  Divry, 1942 [1935]

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

53

recited in school ceremonies. The author also inserts a list of letters written by Greek students who visited Greece, noting their impressions of Greece. According to the author, these letters can be useful tools for teachers when they teach geography and history. A subscriber’s list, which is printed on the last two pages, delivers important information about the distribution and readership. Sixty-seven names are listed as subscribers, out of which twelve are recognizable as female names.49 The author indicates that there were more buyers whose names could not be printed because the book was already in press. The subscribers are from fourteen states in America. Some of them provide their profession next to their names (teacher, lawyer, doctor, or priest). Interestingly, the National Steamship of Greece ordered ten copies of the book. The list indicates that 300 copies were pre-ordered, a significant number for the distribution of books of that time. The author believes that his work is of “national importance”; therefore, it is a “national-­ religious duty” for the Greek communities to spread the word about his anthology so that every Greek family receives the book.50 A recurring topic throughout the anthology is the paramount importance of Greek schools for the community. The poem “We Want Schools!” demonstrates it passionately: Do you want us to remain pure Greek children? To take care of you, at your late years? Do you want us to know Homeland and Religion? And Greek family? Oh, give us schools! Give us, oh Greeks, Our language, the mother language, We don’t want Janissaries in America. If you want not to cry Later, bitterly, Schools should you give to us Greek schools!51

54 

M. KALIAMBOU

The poem stresses the importance of Greek traditional values, such as home, religion, and family, in receiving a proper education. Next to these values, learning the Greek language completes the picture of the Greek child who will become a real patriot (and not a Turk janissary.)52 Good Greek schools will cultivate the ethnicity of the next generations. The future of Greek communities is based on a good education of the young generation. The schools will teach them to become model Greek Americans who will care for the elderly, contribute to their communities, and help manage their churches. Thus, children have to learn their ancestry, their religion, and history.53 However, Greek schools did not always function well. One major challenge that Greek schools in America faced was the lack of pedagogically trained teachers. As Lagios acknowledges, there is “a shortage on teachers besides priests.”54 Lagios offers two explanations for the teacher shortage: first, women were discouraged to become teachers because of lack of opportunities; and second, early immigration laws prohibited entry to some categories of immigrants, among them new competent teachers.55 Some teachers were old-fashioned, strict, and physically abusive, thus, children were reluctant to attend Greek school. The theater play The Greek School in America offers contrasting examples of good and bad teachers. The dialogues emphasized the importance of good teachers in inspiring children to love Greek school.56 Some scenes in the play show friendly and charitable teachers who support young girls and boys, and deliver candies to entice them to go to school. Another recurring topic in the collection is the return to Greece. In the poem “The longing of the émigré”57 the protagonist expresses his strong desire to return to Greece: “I want to go back to my Homeland, /to my wife, to my poor children, /I got fed up with the wretched xenitiá [foreign lands], /ah, xenitiá weighs heavy on my heart!” The hero desires to return to his unforgettable village, to visit his local church, and to forget all his burdens from the xenitiá. Also, the common wish among immigrants of “Happy Homecoming”58 (meaning a good return to the homeland) interspersed throughout the texts shows the desire for the true-loved homeland of Greece. There is also the motif of a mother–daughter relationship where Greece is the mother and America is her first daughter.59 The mother’s sorrow is the departure of her children. “Live well, my children—in the foreign lands, but come back to me, to your mother. To me!”60 Moreover, the dilemma  continues with a  constant comparison

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

55

between the two homes, but where Greece triumphs: In Greece things are always better! The author, an immigrant himself, is trying to impart his own wishes for return to his children. He aims to indoctrinate the next generation through his own emotional lenses by inculcating these sentiments upon the Greek children born in America. There is one text which challenges the notion of  return. In the text about the first Greek judge in America, the author, answering the question of why are there not more Greek judges in the US, explains that American Greeks had always intended to return to Greece, thus they did not enter politics or take public positions because those occupations required almost a lifetime of service. The author continues by saying that now there is a larger Greek population in the US, thus, the next generation should be organized in order to play a larger public role in American life. The longing to return to Greece precluded the first generation from progressing and advancing. The idea of return functions here as a handicap for the people, because they could not invest themselves fully in America.61 Mimes Demetriou offers an anthology with poems and short stories with a clear ambition to educate and indoctrinate Greek children. An educator himself, he knows and responds to the needs of the Greek educational system in America. His texts are imbued with nationalistic statements: “Without Greece the world would be in darkness. There wouldn’t be culture,”62 are the straightforward words of a student in a short theater play, which demonstrate the  perceived  exceptional position of Greece. The anthology shapes the identity of young children  by explicitly  directing them to become proud Greeks in America by reminding them of  their glorious ancestral roots. The anthology is important for one more reason: its texts are to be presented in school performances or festivals. These school festivals were important not only for the education of children, but also for the coherence of the whole community. The cultural messages in the performances were even more powerful when presented in theatrical texts, where ideology is inserted within the educational framework. Festivals such as these offered a very effective way to teach values and norms while entertaining the community. Thus books for those purposes, such as the anthology by Demetriou, were sources for deciphering the ideological background behind the goals of stakeholders (Fig. 3.3).

56 

M. KALIAMBOU

Fig. 3.3  Mimes Demetriou. First Greek American children’s anthology for the Greek children in America. New York: D.C. Divry, 1935

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

57

“The Palaces of My Fatherland” In 1932 the school reader with the title The Palaces of my Fatherland won a competition held by the Supreme Educational Council of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, and therefore was approved as the only appropriate reader book for the fourth grade of elementary schools. Its first edition was published in 1934 by the National Herald and the author was Platon Papazoglou.63 The emblematic title The Palaces of my Fatherland shows the pride Greeks in the US (should) have for their heritage. The young generation has inherited significant wealth, equal to palaces. The implied message is keeping intact those worthy traditions. The reader is simply structured into fifteen chapters, most of them followed by grammatical exercises. The contents cover three areas: religion (episodes from the Life of Christ, such as Christ’s birth, Christ’s miracles, and the Holy Passion), Greek history (ancient and modern, particularly about the Greek revolution), and a few themes related to Greek Americans (their history and their contribution to American culture). The texts and all the grammatical drills are written in purified Greek katharevousa. The author, concerned about the future of Greek communities in America, states his mission in the preface: This book aims to give to Greek children in America not only the material on religious studies, Greek history and grammar, everything taught in the schools in Greece, but moreover the necessary knowledge regarding the organization of the communities and the associations, the religious and nationals festivals and gatherings in which the Greek child will be participating after his graduation, and has not to act as a stranger, but has to understand the words he hears from the religious and community leaders.64

The author implies that only when the young generation maintains a connection with their ancestors, will Greek American communities be able to  thrive. With his remarks, the author supports the integration of the young generation into the Greek community; this integration will guarantee the continuation of Greek Hellenism in America. Children learn about the history and achievements of Greeks in America. There are several texts referring to the role that Greek Americans played in American society. There is a hymn to Greek heroes who participated in the American wars, such as the famous and honored George Dilboy.65 Also, the author acknowledges those successful Greek teachers,

58 

M. KALIAMBOU

who through their acts and teaching educated the American youth. However, the author praises mostly the laborers who “by their sweat and honorable blood progressed this country.”66 The aim of those texts is to help young readers position themselves both within the Greek communities and within American society as well. “And within famous America you will see Greece sitting in its own throne” sings the poet (and collaborator for the volume) N.I. Vavoudis whose poem The Palaces of my Fatherland opens the reader and presents the title of the book.67 The Palaces of my Fatherland had a successful publishing history. A number of individuals worked together in order to bring a high quality reader to the public. The author thanks the teachers and the priests who used the schoolbook and sent their comments to the author to develop it further. There is also a great collaboration with the publishers, who did their best to produce a beautiful reader. The reader was reapproved by the Supreme Educational Council. From its first publication in 1934 until 1944, the reader was published in four different editions by the three largest publishers in New York City (National Herald, Atlantis, and Divry). Each edition was slightly different from the previous one because the authors had to implement the suggestions of the Council. These changes provide insightful information regarding the concerns of the educational community, as well as the process of decision-making and the  stakeholders behind those changes. They offer a window into the educational scene in Greek America. The overriding concern among educators was the language. Diglossia was the major issue that the authors had to address: which linguistic form to choose, purist Greek or demotic? The linguistic and political debate regarding the controversy between demotic and purist language was transplanted in Greek America as well. Both parties had their advocates, but gradually demoticists dominated the scene. The negative reaction toward the persistence of purist language in schoolbooks testifies that several agents (teachers, clergy, authors, publishers) involved in the production of books were very sensitive to the issue. Whereas the first edition of the reader uses katharevousa throughout the book, the consequent editions are in demotic Greek. The recommendations of the Council based on the reactions of teachers, required that the authors change their texts to demotic, which they did.68 However, the author Vavoudis, in the preface of the fourth edition was straightforward: “This book is not propagandistic by suggesting one particular type of Greek.”69 The author argues that he doesn’t want to eliminate completely purist Greek since these grammatical forms are still spoken by the people.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

59

Fig. 3.4  Nikolaos Vavoudis. The palaces of my fatherland. Reader for the fourth or fifth grade of the Greek Schools in America. Third improved edition. New  York: D.C. Divry, 1938

60 

M. KALIAMBOU

He offers two sections on grammar: one with exercises in demotic and one in purist, and suggests the teachers teach those archaic forms too. Besides grammar, vocabulary is the second pillar of Greek language the authors deem most relevant. In the text “The Glory of Greece” (E Ellada tis Doxas) the author praises Greek vocabulary as paramount for the foundation of other languages too; for instance, he comments that forty percent of English words are derived from Greek.70 The author emphasizes the need for learning new vocabulary, and highly recommends that teachers introduce the children to  complex and  challenging Greek words in order to enrich their repertoire. Following the recommendations of teachers who used the book in the classroom, from the second edition forward, the authors inserted Greek–English vocabulary lists at the beginning of each chapter (Fig. 3.4).

Conclusion: “Love the Greek Letters!” Education was of paramount importance for immigrants, who demonstrated serious efforts to provide a proper education for their children. Educational books were part of the publishing agendas of Greek publishers in the US. However, the majority of those books were imported from Greece, and unfortunately did not address the actual needs of the children in America. From the 1930s, in order to resolve this problem, the few well-known Greek publishers in New York City produced the first schoolbooks in America, mostly spelling books and readers for the lower classes of elementary school. Authors were both men and women who lived in America and had experience teaching in the Greek schools. The publishers undertook serious efforts to produce aesthetically pleasing books by using colorful images in order to make them more appealing to the children. The first four schoolbooks printed in America in the 1930s (two spelling books, one reader, and one anthology of poems for school festivals) epitomize the ideology of Greek education in America during the first half of the twentieth century. The mission of the Greek schools was based on the very well-known ideological triptych “Homeland–Religion–Family”; an ideologeme that prevailed in Greek society from the beginning of the twentieth century.71 The homeland is one of the main foci in the schoolbooks. Children need to love both of their homes, and a good Greek American child is the one who combines both American and Greek values. With the exception

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

61

of the first spelling book by the National Herald, the other schoolbooks have sections directly related to the lives of the Greek American children. Texts and pictures show children playing in familiar playgrounds, going to their day or afternoon schools, or talking about Greek holidays. Besides familiar everyday life scenes, there are also texts in the schoolbooks imbued with nostalgia for a return to Greece. The selection of texts, particularly in the anthology, demonstrates the desire of the authors to instill in children a love for Greece. Religion and faith were part of the official education in Greece, and so likewise in the diaspora. Additionally, the Archdiocese in North America had direct control of approval of some of the educational books, such as the above-mentioned reader The Palaces of my Fatherland of the fourth grade. It is important to recognize that the majority of the Greek schools were organized around the local churches. Consequently, the Church-­ approved books included religious topics, such as prayers, lessons about the life of Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. Religion as part of the culture could not be absent within those pedagogical books. Moreover, the family and its values embrace the highest moral duties that children’s education should seek to promote. All of the above-­ mentioned schoolbooks emphasize the value of family. Konstantellou writes that “educational institutions substitute or complement traditional institutions such as family.”72 It might have been expected that education in the diaspora would have focused on the socialization of the children into American society, and thus placed Greek families in the background. However, Greek Americans continued to prioritize the family and to maintain their traditions, but they also simultaneously challenged American society.73 Family, home, and religion remain basic values for Greek Americans. Greek American educational institutions (schools and churches) are influential for the cultural resilience of Greeks in America. Above all, language is of primary importance. As an overarching value, the Greek language connects American Greeks with their homeland, enables a special communication with family members, and mediates within religion. “The Greek language holds symbolic meaning in ethnic identification,”74 thus, keeping their language alive and transferring it to the following generations was a core concern of the educators. “Read Greek” and “love the Greek letters” was the ultimate goal of the books. These first schoolbooks, published in the United States by Greeks are a testimony of the conscious efforts the first generation undertook to keep alive the Greek language and culture in the diaspora.

62 

M. KALIAMBOU

Notes 1. Yiorgos Anagnostou, Contours of White Ethnicity: Popular Ethnography and the Making of Usable Pasts in Greek America. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2009; Yiorgos Kalogeras, Ethnic Geographies: Sociopolitical identifications of a migration. In Greek. Athens: Katarti, 2007; Alexander Kitroeff, “The Transformation of Homeland–Diaspora Relations: The Greek Case in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries.” In Proceedings of the First International Congress on the Hellenic Diaspora: From Antiquity to Modern Times, ed. John M.  Fossey (Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben, 1991), 233–50; Ioanna Laliotou, Transatlantic subjects: acts of migration and cultures of transnationalism between Greece and America. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 2004; Theodore Saloutos, The Greeks in the United States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964. 2. Regarding social, public policy, educational, and psychological issues on Greek American education see Spyros D.  Orfanos, Harry J.  Psomiades, and John Spiridakis, ed. Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects. New  York: Pella, 1987. Regarding bilingual education in the United States see Vivian Anemoyanis, “Greek Bilingual Education in Historical Perspective.” In The Greek American Community in Transition, ed. Harry J. Psomiades, Alice Scourby (New York: Pella, 1982), 171–9. For more contemporary research on Greek education in America see Giannis Spyridakis and Chryssa Constantakou, “The Greek Education in the United States: The Main Research Foci.” In Greek. Hellenoglossi ekpaideusi sto  exoteriko [Greek Speaking Education Outside Greece,] ed. Michalis Damanakis. In Greek. (Rethymno, Greece: University of Crete, 1999), 82–90, as well as Michalis Damanakis, ed., Education of the Diaspora Greeks: Theoretical and Empirical Approaches. In Greek. Rethymno, Greece: University of Crete, 1999. For general issues about the education of various ethnic groups in America see George Pozzetta, ed., Education and the Immigrant. New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1991. 3. Mimes Demetriou. First Greek American Children’s Anthology for the Greek Children in America. Original work in Greek-American spirit. Namely: poems, monologs, dialogs, comedies, dramas, skits, letter, songs. For the various performances of the Greek schools in America. In Greek. (New York: D.C. Divry, 1935), 43. 4. Robert Darnton, “What Is the History of Books?” Daedalus 111, no. 3 (1982): 65–83, and Robert Darnton “‘WHAT IS THE HISTORY OF BOOKS?’ REVISITED,” Modern Intellectual History 4, vol. 3 (2007): 495–508.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

63

5. Dalbello argues that “the arriving populations carried the stigma of illiteracy even though nearly seventy percent were in fact literate at the time of ­landing.” Marija Dalbello, “Reading Immigrants: Immigration as Site and Process of Reading and Writing.” In Reading and Writing from Below: Exploring the Margins of Modernity, ed. Ann-Katrin Edlund, T.G. Ashplant, and Anna Kuismin (Umeå: Umeå University and Royal Skyttean Society, 2016), 175. 6. From the first years of Greek immigration in the US there were Greek immigrants who devoted themselves to printing and publishing. Several small businesses started up (mostly run by individuals) which could survive only a few years on the market. The two main publishers were Atlantis and Ethnikos Kyrix [National Herald]. Besides books, both Atlantis and National Herald published a newspaper bearing their name; they were the biggest newspapers in Greek America. A third big publisher, D.C. Divry, is known exclusively for educational books for both adults and children. 7. [Price Catalog Atlantis]. Big Bookstore “Atlantidos” in New  York. Price Catalog 1912. In Greek. (New York: Atlantis, 1912), 52–56. 8. Ibid., 4. All translations hereafter are the author’s. 9. [Price Catalog National Herald]. Big Bookstore “National Herald”. General Price Catalog. In Greek (New York: National Herald, 1930), 4. 10. Ibid., 14–39. 11. Nikolaos. I. Vavoudis. The Palaces of my Fatherland. Reader for the Fourth Grade of Elementary School. Approved after competition of the Supreme Educational Council of the Archdiocese in America. Fourth Edition. Developed after the suggestions of the SEC and the teachers of the United States. (Possible to be used to the Fifth Grade in schools in co-teaching with the Fourth grade.) In Greek. (New York: D.C. Divry, 1944), 160. 12. In Panagiotis Dimitropoulos. The educational problem of the Greek Diaspora in America. In Greek. (Athens: n.p., 1956), 18 (Initial reference in National Herald, August 21, 1949, p. 10). 13. For early education efforts in America, in particular in the New York City area, see Fevronia K. Soumakis, “A Sacred Paideia: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, Immigration, and Education in New York City, 1959–1979.” (PhD diss., Columbia University, 2015), 71–121. For the types of Greek schools in America in recent years see Giannis Spyridakis and Chryssa Constantakou. Symposium on Greek Day Schools in Diaspora: Proceedings of the Symposium, University Town of Rethymno, July 5–6, 2008. Series Education of the Diaspora, editor Michalis Damanakis. In Greek (Rethymno, Greece: University of Crete, 2009), 37–92. 14. According to Kopan, during the first decade of the twentieth century, Chicago had the first permanent communities consisting of a church and a school. Andrew Kopan, “Greek Survival in Chicago: The Role of Ethnic

64 

M. KALIAMBOU

Education, 1890–1980.” In Ethnic Chicago: Revised and Expanded, edited by Melvin Holli and Peter d’A. Jones, 109–68 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William Eerdmans, 1984), 117–19. 15. Ibid., 159. 16. “The solid soil where the educational training of the young Greek American generation can be founded is the combination of the Greek and American academic system.” In Dimitropoulos 1956, p. 19. 17. In Dimitropoulos. The educational problem. In Greek. 18 (Initial reference in National Herald, August 21, 1949, p. 10). 18. Kopan, “Greek Survival in Chicago,” 164. 19. It is a known phenomenon in publishing (particularly in popular prints) that one publisher takes a book by another publisher, adds a cover with his logo, and sells it as its own. The lack of copyright reinforced such behaviors. This tactic helped the Greek American publishers, who did not have the capacities to produce many books, to present more books as their own productions, whereas in fact they were produced in Greece. 20. Ioannis Arsenis. Greek Alphabet Book. First Part. Approved at the competition for five years. New edition. In Greek (New York: Atlas, 1914). 21. Syntaktike Epitrope (Writing Committee). Alphabet Book o Helios. Part B.  Fourth Edition (19th). In Greek (Athens, New  York: Dimitrakos, Atlantis, 1938). 22. Unpublished papers by Demetrios Callimachos, January 21, 1932. 23. Asterios Asteriou. Greek Schools in America. What they are, what they should be. Report to the second conference of Greek teachers in America. In Greek. 1931, 43. 24. The description in the catalog reads: “Spelling Book by National Herald, edition of 1927. The most beautiful and most artistic spelling book from all so far. Easy to understand, simple, clear, easy in methodology, with abundant artistic images, a truly automatic teacher for the child, printed out of love to the progress, with a section for toddlers. We highly recommend it to be imported to all schools of our communities. It is priced elegantly bound $0.30.” [Price Catalog National Herald] 1930, p. 14. 25. The full title reads “New Alphabet Book for the Greek Children of National Herald. On the basis of the best current pedagogical systems. By Venetia Vidali. Printing stores by National Herald, in New York, 1930.” The book was reprinted in 2017 by the Greek newspaper To Vima, edited and with an Afterword by Lamprini Kouzeli. 26. Initial reference in National Herald, August 29, 1931, 3. (In Afterword of the 2017 reprinted edition, page θ.) Original by Venetia Vidali, [New Alphabet Book]. In Greek. 27. Vidali, [New Alphabet Book], 1. 28. Ibid., 1.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

65

29. Ibid., 1. 30. Ibid., 1. 31. Ibid., 2. 32. Ibid., 1. 33. “The Greek Child Full of Pride,” in Vidali [New Alphabet Book], 8. 34. “Greek soil,” in Vidali [New Alphabet Book], 75. 35. G.  Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America. Highly recommended by the Supreme Educational Council. First Volume. Second edition, enlarged and developed. In Greek (New York: D.C. Divry, 1942 [1935]), 3. 36. Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, 6. 37. Ibid., 7. 38. For instance, in two places the author uses the word “keki” meaning the cake. Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, 16 and p. 22. 39. Manolis Triantafyllides, “The Greek language of the Greeks in America.” In Greek. Ellenika 12 (1953): 311–16. 40. Chryssie Costantakos, “Ethnic Language as a Variable in Subcultural Continuity.” In The Greek American Community in Transition, ed. Harry J. Psomiades, Alice Scourby, (New York: Pella, 1982), 157. 41. Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, 64. 42. Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, 27. 43. Konstantopoulou, The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, 36. 44. El. Konstantopoulou-Rompapa, The Reading Book of the Greek Child in America. Second Volume. Fourth edition (same as the second), enlarged and developed. In Greek. (New York: Divry, D.C, 1948), 5. 45. “I give you a pot which has the water of life, our language,” Konstantopoulou-Rompapa, The Reading Book of the Greek Child in America, 6. 46. Konstantopoulou-Rompapa, The Reading Book of the Greek Child in America, 7. 47. The full title reads: Mimes Demetriou. First Greek American Children’s Anthology for the Greek Children in America. Original work in Greek-­ American spirit. Namely: poems, monologs, dialogs, comedies, dramas, skits, letter, songs. For the various performances of the Greek schools in America. In Greek. New York: D.C. Divry, 1935. 48. Demetriou justifies himself, by paralleling his writings with Rigas’s writings: “Let’s not forget, that Rigas Feraios enlivened the temper of the enslaved by the way he wrote his several and diverse patriotic works.” (Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 6). 49. “Penelope’s Daughters” from Columbus, Ohio is one of the subscribers who orders one copy of the anthology (Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 157).

66 

M. KALIAMBOU

50. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 157. 51. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 22, 23. 52. Janissaries were soldiers of elite Turkish troops during the Ottoman Empire. Greek male kids were forcefully abducted from their families in order to serve to the Ottoman army and become janissaries. 53. A theater skit with the title “The Greek School in America” demonstrates clearly the mission of the schools: “This is the reason you come to the Greek school: to become perfect Greek Americans!” Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 104. 54. George Arthur Lagios, “The Development of Greek American Education in the United States: 1908–1973: Its theory, curriculum, and practice.” (PhD diss., University of Connecticut, 1977), 260. 55. Ibid., p. 259 f. 56. “We are sending our kids to school, but with our action we are limiting our kids without knowing it. Whereas the other kids are playing outside, we are sending our poor kids to learn the Greek language, and…” … “How could children love a teacher who calls names on them and hits them with a broom stick?” Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 98. 57. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 32. 58. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 37. 59. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 43, 68–9. 60. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 29. 61. The return of Greek Americans to Greece has been part of scholarship attention. After the seminal work by Saloutos, who interviewed first-­ generation returnees (see Theodore Saloutos, They Remember America: The Story of the Repatriated Greek-Americans. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1956), there are recent projects on the return of the second-­generation Greek Americans: see Anastasia Christou, “American Dreams and European Nightmares: Experiences and Polemics of SecondGeneration Greek-­American Returning Migrants.” Journal of ethnic and migration studies 32, no. 5 (2006): 831–45; Anastasia Christou, “Deciphering Diaspora: Translating Transnationalism: Family Dynamics, Identity Constructions and the Legacy of ‘Home’ in Second-Generation Greek-American Return Migration.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 29, no. 6 (2006): 1040–56; Anastasia Christou and Russell King. Counter-Diaspora: The Greek Second Generation Returns “Home”, Cultural Politics, Socioaesthetics, Beginnings. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2014); Evangelia Kindinger, Homebound: Diaspora Spaces and Selves in Greek American Return Narratives. American Studies. A Monograph (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, 2015); Theodora Patrona, Return Narratives: Ethnic Space in Late-­Twentieth-­Century Greek American and Italian American Literature (Madison, Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2017).

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

67

62. Demetriou, First Greek American Children’s Anthology, 49. 63. Platon Papazoglou. The Palaces of my Fatherland. Reader for the Fourth Grade of Elementary School. (Possible to be used to the Fifth Grade in schools with co-teaching or to classes not having completed the cycle of the prescribed lessons.) Approved after competition by the Supreme Educational Council of the Archdiocese of North and South America. In Greek. 1st ed. New York: National Herald, 1934. The author suggests that the book can be used for the fourth and fifth grades as well. 64. Ibid., 3. 65. George Dilboy was a Greek American soldier who participated in the American Army and died heroically in the First World War. His body, initially buried in his homeland in Asia Minor, was transferred to the National Cemetery at Arlington. The American Congress posthumously awarded him a medal and named one legion after him. (Ibid., 123–4). 66. Ibid., 125. 67. Ibid., 5. 68. For instance, phrases like “teknon mou,” became “paidi mou,” or “o oikos tou theou” became “to spiti tou theou,” etc. 69. Nikolaos. I. Vavoudis. The Palaces of my Fatherland. Reader for the Fourth Grade of Elementary School. Approved after competition of the Supreme Educational Council of the Archdiocese in America. Fourth Edition. Developed after the suggestions of the SEC and the teachers of the United States. (Possible to be used to the Fifth Grade in schools in co-teaching with the Fourth grade.) In Greek. (New York: D.C. Divry, 1944), 3. 70. Ibid., 56. 71. The slogan “Homeland–Religion–Family” is very well known within Greek society and used in a popularized form as a catchword. It is associated with the conservative discourse, particularly the ideology of dictatorships. Historian Gazi traces its complicated routes in modern Greek history. She finds that this emblematic triptych started slowly in the 1880s, was institutionalized in the 1930s by the Metaxa’s dictator political discourse, and used till the 1967 dictatorship of the colonels (Effie Gazi, Patris, Thriskeia, Oikogeneia. Istoria enos synthimatos 1880–1930 [Homeland, Religion, Family. History of a Slogan 1880–1930]. Athens: Polis, 2011.) 72. Eva Konstantellou, “Education as a Means of Empowerment for Minority Cultures: Strategies for the Greek American Community.” Journal of Modern Hellenism, 1990: 125. 73. Ibid., 137. 74. Costantakos, “Ethnic Language,” 157.

68 

M. KALIAMBOU

References Primary Sources Arsenis, Ioannis. 1914. Greek Alphabet Book. First Part. Approved at the Competition for Five Years. New Edition. In Greek. New York: Atlas. Demetriou, Mimes. 1935. First Greek American Children’s Anthology for the Greek Children in America. Original Work in Greek American Spirit. Namely: Poems, Monologs, Dialogs, Comedies, Dramas, Skits, Letter, Songs. For the Various Performances of the Greek Schools in America. In Greek. New York: D.C. Divry. Konstantopoulou, G. 1942 [1935]. The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America. Highly Recommended by the Supreme Educational Council. First Volume. Second Edition, Enlarged and Developed. In Greek. New  York: D.C. Divry. Konstantopoulou, El. (Rompapa). 1948. The Reading Book of the Greek Child in America. Second Volume. Fourth Edition (Same as the Second), Enlarged and Developed. In Greek. New York: D.C. Divry. Papazoglou, Platon. 1934. The Palaces of My Fatherland. Reader for the Fourth Grade of Elementary School. Possible to be Used to the Fifth Grade in Schools with Co-teaching or to Classes Not Having Completed the Cycle of the Prescribed Lessons. Approved After Competition by the Supreme Educational Council of the Archdiocese of North and South America. 1st ed. In Greek. New  York: National Herald. Price Catalog Atlantis. 1912. Big Bookstore “Atlantidos” in New York. Price Catalog 1912. In Greek. New York: Atlantis. Price Catalog National Herald. 1930. Big Bookstore “National Herald.” General Price Catalog. In Greek. New York: National Herald. Syntaktike Epitrope (Writing Committee). 1938. Alphabet Book o Helios. Part B. Fourth Edition (19th). In Greek. Athens/New York: Dimitrakos, Atlantis. Vavoudis, N.I. 1944. The Palaces of My Fatherland. Reader for the Fourth Grade of Elementary School. Approved After Competition of the Supreme Educational Council of the Archdiocese in America. Fourth Edition. Developed After the Suggestions of the SEC and the Teachers of the United States. Possible to be Used to the Fifth Grade in Schools in Co-teaching With the Fourth Grade. In Greek. New York: D.C. Divry. Vidali, Venetia. 1930. New Alphabet Book for the Greek Children of National Herald. Based on the Last Best Pedagogical Systems. Part A. In Greek. New York: National Herald.

Secondary Sources Anagnostou, Yiorgos. 2009. Contours of White Ethnicity: Popular Ethnography and the Making of Usable Pasts in Greek America. Athens: Ohio University Press.

3  THE FIRST SCHOOLBOOKS FOR GREEK AMERICAN CHILDREN  

69

Anemoyanis, Vivian. 1982. Greek Bilingual Education in Historical Perspective. In The Greek American Community in Transition, ed. Harry J. Psomiades and Alice Scourby, 171–179. New York: Pella. Asteriou, Asterios. 1931. Ta ellinika scholeia en Ameriki. Ti einai, ti prepei na einai. Eisigitiki ekthesis pros to deuteron synedrio ton Ellinon Didaskalon en Ameriki [Greek Schools in America. What They Are, What They Should Be. Report to the Second Conference of Greek Teachers in America]. New York. Callimachos, Demetrios. 1932. Unpublished Papers. Immigration History Research Center. Christou, Anastasia. 2006a. American Dreams and European Nightmares: Experiences and Polemics of Second-Generation Greek-American Returning Migrants. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 32 (5): 831–845. ———. 2006b. Deciphering Diaspora  – Translating Transnationalism: Family Dynamics, Identity Constructions and the Legacy of ‘Home’ in Second-­ Generation Greek-American Return Migration. Ethnic and Racial Studies 29 (6): 1040–1056. Christou, Anastasia, and Russell King. 2014. Counter-Diaspora: The Greek Second Generation Returns “Home”, Cultural Politics, Socioaesthetics, Beginnings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Costantakos, Chryssie. 1982. Ethnic Language as a Variable in Subcultural Continuity. In The Greek American Community in Transition, ed. Harry J. Psomiades and Alice Scourby, 137–170. New York: Pella. Dalbello, Marija. 2016. Reading Immigrants: Immigration as Site and Process of Reading and Writing. In Reading and Writing from Below: Exploring the Margins of Modernity, ed. Ann-Katrin Edlund, T.G.  Ashplant, and Anna Kuismin, 169–196. Umeå: Umeå University and Royal Skyttean Society. Damanakis, Michalis, ed. 1999. Paideia Omogenon. Theoretikes kai empeirikes proseggiseis [Education of the Diaspora Greeks. Theoretical and Empirical Approaches]. Rethymno: University of Crete. Darnton, Robert. 1982. What Is the History of Books? Daedalus 111 (3): 65–83. ———. 2007. ‘What Is the History of Books?’ Revisited. Modern Intellectual History 4 (3): 495–508. Dimitropoulos, Panagiotis. 1956. To ekpaideutikon provlima tou en Ameriki apodimou ellinismou [The Educational Problem of the Greek Diaspora in America]. Athens. Gazi, Effie. 2011. Patris, Thriskeia, Oikogeneia. Istoria enos synthimatos 1880–1930 [Homeland, Religion, Family. History of a Slogan 1880–1930]. Athens: Polis. Kalogeras, Yiorgos. 2007. Ethnotikes Geografies. Koinoniko-politismikes tautiseis mias metanasteusis [Ethnic Geographies. Socio-political identifications of a migration] Athens: Katarti. Kindinger, Evangelia. 2015. Homebound. Diaspora Spaces and Selves in Greek American Return Narratives. American Studies. A Monograph. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.

70 

M. KALIAMBOU

Kitroeff, Alexander. 1991. The Transformation of Homeland-Diaspora Relations: The Greek Case in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. In Proceedings of the First International Congress on the Hellenic Diaspora: From Antiquity to Modern Times, ed. John M. Fossey, 233–250. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. Konstantellou, Eva. 1990. Education as a Means of Empowerment for Minority Cultures: Strategies for the Greek American Community. Journal of Modern Hellenism 7: 125–139. Kopan, Andrew. 1984. Greek Survival in Chicago: The Role of Ethnic Education, 1890–1980. In Ethnic Chicago. Revised and Expanded, ed. Melvin Holli and Peter d’A. Jones, 109–168. Grand Rapids: William Eerdmans. Lagios, George Arthur. 1977. The Development of Greek American Education in the United States: 1908–1973: Its Theory, Curriculum, and Practice. PhD. Connecticut: The University of Connecticut. Laliotou, Ioanna. 2004. Transatlantic Subjects: Acts of Migration and Cultures of Transnationalism Between Greece and America. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. Michelakaki, Theodosia, ed. 2009. Symposio Imerisia Ellenika Scholeia sti Diaspora. Praktika Symposiou, Panepistimioupoli Rethymnou 5–6 Iouliou 2008 [Symposium on Greek Dayschools in Diaspora. Proceedings of the Symposium, University Town of Rethymno, July 5–6, 2008] Edited by Michalis Damanakis, Paideia Omogenon [Education of the Diaspora]. Rethymno: University of Crete. Orfanos, Spyros D., Harry J. Psomiades, and John Spiridakis, eds. 1987. Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects. New York: Pella. Patrona, Theodora. 2017. Return Narratives. In Ethnic Space in Late-Twentieth-­ Century Greek American and Italian American Literature. Madison/Teaneck: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. Pozzetta, George, ed. 1991. Education and the Immigrant. New York/London: Garland Publishing. Saloutos, Theodore. 1956. They Remember America. The Story of the Repatriated Greek-Americans. Berkeley: University of California Press. ———. 1964. The Greeks in the United States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Soumakis, Fevronia K. 2015. A Sacred Paideia: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, Immigration, and Education in New  York City, 1959–1979. PhD, Columbia University. Spyridakis, Giannis and Chryssa Constantakou. 1999. He ellenike paideia stis EPA. Ta kyria simeia tis ereunas [The Greek Education in the United States. The Main Research Foci]. In Hellenoglossi ekpaideusi sto exoteriko [Greek Speaking Education Outside Greece], ed. Michalis Damanakis, 82–90. Rethymno: University of Crete. Triantafyllides, Manolis. 1953. Ta ellenika ton Ellenon tes Amerikes [The Greek Language of the Greeks in America]. Ellenika 12: 301–331.

CHAPTER 4

Considering the “Socratic Method” When Teaching the Odyssey and Iliad at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools Theodore G. Zervas

Introduction As discussed in previous chapters, immigrant education in the United States in its many dimensions has been an area of interest for scholars for some time. In the case of the Greek immigrant experience in the United States, the Greek American school played an important role in preserving a Greek national identity. Most Greek immigrants sent their children to Greek schools and later generations of Greek Americans continued to support a Greek American education. New York, Detroit, Toronto, Chicago, and other cities were major settlements for Greek immigrants and centers of Greek American education and culture. This chapter seeks to explain the “Socratic Method” and to connect it to a teaching approach used at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools. This chapter moreover attempts to answer the question how the Socratic Method or Dialectic along with other teaching ­techniques

T. G. Zervas (*) North Park University, Chicago, IL, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_4

71

72 

T. G. ZERVAS

are effectively used at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools when teaching Homer’s Odyssey and Iliad? Few studies have examined the teaching methods used at Greek American schools. This study explores the use of the Socratic Method when teaching Homer’s Odyssey and Iliad at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools. It defines the Socratic Method and outlines its defects and then attempts to connect the Socratic Method to the teaching approach found at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools. Although scholars continue to debate the Socratic Method, and whether it is an effective teaching approach, evidence suggests that in both the Socrates and Koraes Schools, a teaching through questioning (as identified in many of the Socratic dialogues) is effectively used at the two schools when teaching the Odyssey and Iliad.

Explanation of Data Sources Fieldwork for this study was gathered in the Spring of 2000. The participants for this study were two middle school classes from two private Greek day schools in Chicago and the Chicago metropolitan area, consisting of 22 middle school students along with their middle school Greek language teachers. At Socrates Greek American School (currently called the Hellenic American Academy) there were a total of eight students in the 7th grade class who were involved in reading the Odyssey. All the students were of Greek heritage. Three of the students were female and five were male. The student mean age was 12 years and three months. At Koraes Greek American School the students who participated in this study were 14 eighth grade students who were reading Homer’s Iliad. All the participants were of Greek heritage. The class consisted of ten girls and four boys. The class mean age was 13 years, six months.1 None of the students at the two schools had any learning or behavioral challenges. Data sources were compiled on four separate occasions at Socrates School and three separate occasions at Koraes School. The first data source at each of the schools consisted of an examination of school records from the school and the church’s archival materials.2 These included records of student demographics, letters of correspondence, memos, school history, and school curriculum. The archival sources were examined to determine whether the school formally expressed teaching the Socratic Method in the classroom. None of these sources at each of the schools explicitly revealed the use of the Socratic Method.

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

73

The second major data source consisted of interviews conducted at each of the schools. The interviews attempted to determine whether teachers and administrators felt that they used the Socratic Method and how they defined the Socratic Method. For this data source, two separate visits were made at both the schools. The questions posed sought to glean: . How teachers taught their lessons. 1 2. Each of the schools’ curricula and classroom structure. 3. Type of training that teachers received. 4. Teachers and administrators’ knowledge of the Socratic Method. 5. How the teaching approach used at the two schools was like the Socratic Method used by Socrates. The final data collection at the two schools was of a class discussion on Homer’s Iliad at the Koraes School and a class discussion on Homer’s Odyssey at Socrates School. Both discussions at each of the schools were audio-recorded and since the discussions were in Greek, they were later translated into English. The questions that were posed by the teachers during their lessons were also noted. Important to this study was defining the Socratic Method. Several scholarly interpretations of the Socratic Method (or as scholars often refer to it as the dialectic) are discussed to help provide context and shed light on what experts on the topic say about the Socratic Method and whether it relates to the teaching approach used at the two schools. The below questions helped guide the framework for this discussion. . Is the Socratic Method an effective teaching tool? 1 2. If so, why is the Socratic Method an effective teaching tool? 3. How does the Socratic Method used at the two schools relate and/ or differ from the teaching method used by Socrates?

Limitations Since the Socratic Method is a teaching method that involves a process of questioning, facilitator/teacher questions during a lesson were noted. Later this study identifies the occasion(s) when the facilitator/teacher followed her original question with a follow-up question that related to her original question. Questions were thus divided between those that are defined as “basic questions,” or questions that could be answered with

74 

T. G. ZERVAS

one word responses and “interpretive questions” or questions that involved a deeper thinking about the text and that led to further discussion about the meaning of the text. Sophie Haroutunian-Gordon’s approach to interpretive discussions and interpretive questions was used as a framework in evaluating the class discussions.3 According to Haroutunian-Gordon “…interpretive discussion is discussion about the meaning of some text.”4 And “Interpretive discussion aims to develop and address questions about the meaning of the texts, rather than simply extracting information from them or judging their worth.”5 Students at both the Socrates and Koraes Schools attempted to interpret the meaning of Homer’s texts. Both Homeric texts are mentioned in several of Plato’s dialogues and are said to have provided an early educational framework for the ancient Greeks. Socrates challenges the “traditional” Athenian teaching of Homer’s epic poems as “ineffective” because it stressed memorization and recitation rather than analysis and interpretation.6 The modern-day Greek American language schools have loosely maintained Socrates view of education, by allowing its students to interpret, analyze, question, discuss, and interpret passages found in  both Homeric poems. In the following section, an explanation of terms used within the context of the Greek language schools is explained to avoid confusion. Several scholars purport that the Socratic Method is loosely defined within Plato’s dialogues.7 It is true that the Socratic Method continues to be vaguely defined within Plato’s works and by contemporary scholars. Reasons for its ambiguity are partly attributed to the lack of a thorough explanation of the teaching method by Plato. A practical understanding of the teaching method, however, is demonstrated in several of Plato’s works, where one could see Socrates performing it first-hand.

Defining the Socratic Method What is the Socratic Method? Although sometimes difficult to define, the Socratic Method could be defined as a method that refers to discussion and inquiry that was once employed by Socrates (470–399 BC). Gustav Heckman says, “Socratic method, in the widest sense, is used wherever and whenever people try, by reasoning out a problem together, to approach the truth. This is often attempted sporadically in conversation.”8 Heckman’s interpretation of the method suggests conversation is the

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

75

engine behind the Socratic Method and the goal for the method is to reveal the “truth” in the sense that it is an agreement arrived by those discussing a particular question or problem. A Socratic dialogue typically begins with a basic question posed to an individual or group of individuals. The question must be contemplative— where it can be answered only by analytical reasoning with the use of previous knowledge and knowledge from one’s personal life and experiences. Thus, the question may not be factual. that is, “Who was the King of England during the American Revolution?”9 Ignacio L. Gotz says that the “…first part of the method consists of two stages: (1) a collection of instances or elenchos,10 and (2) a cross-­examination or discussion of the collected data to discover a common quality, logos11 or ousia12 – the essential moral truth.”13 Many scholars contend that dialectic begins with elenchos (inquiry) which results in aporia (perplexity) which thus allows one to question and search for answers. Dries Boele analogizes the method to an hour glass. He states, “…it begins wide, with a general question, and ends wide, with criteria and other suppositions, and in the middle we find the core statement that focuses on the relevant part of the example.”14 Plato refers to it as a process of questioning or as I Dialektiki Methodos (The Dialectic Method). (Republic 533C).15 Plato also describes the method as I Peri Tous Logous Techni (The Art of Discussion) and I Methodos Ton Logon (The Procedure of Discourse) (Phaedo 90b).16 Although Plato defines the method in the Republic and Phaedo, he fails to recognize clearly the spheres to which the method’s effective implementations are expanded.17 For example, have the parties involved in the discussion come to a consensus or agreement in the end of the discussion or is there still disagreement? While the focus of the discussions in most of Plato’s Republic centers around politics, government, and society, an examination of the discussion process performed by Socrates and his cohorts yield subtle nuances regarding the use of the Socratic Method. Socrates explicitly describes dialectic in the Republic as “excellence of thought” (518e) and “progress of thought” (532 a-d)18 The definition Socrates grants unfortunately is vaguely expressed. In a pedagogical model one could interpret it as reading between the lines, rather than the textual substance or quantity of information on the subject being explored that would provide one with an understanding of the Socratic Method.

76 

T. G. ZERVAS

Discussion is an apropos model for education that prepares students to examine concepts and philosophical ideas like righteousness, fairness, responsibility, and sanctity. Discussion is in basic nature conversation. However, Jane Fowler Morse divides discussions into two categories, structured and unstructured, she states, “Unstructured discussion is conversation. Structured discussion may be either contentious or philosophical. Contentious discussion seeks to persuade, even when the speaker does not believe in the argument he or she is presenting or know much about the subject. Philosophical discussion seeks progressively greater insight into what makes life valuable.”19 The Socratic Method is an ideal illustration of a philosophical discussion and for it to be successful, it must be structured. It attempts to expedite an inquisition of people’s core philosophical tenets that make possible for them to mindfully contemplate on life and question regularly normative worldly beliefs and challenge those beliefs.20 In the Republic, Socrates asserts that one must not “…keep children at their studies by compulsion but by play” (Republic 536-e). This idea reappears in many of Plato’s dialogues. In fact, the Socratic Method infers that education cannot be forcefully instilled upon another, but knowledge must be extracted from the mind of the student in a playful yet skillful approach. But how does Socrates do this? From the perspective of one whom is investigating rather than providing information, it is evident in the dialogues that Socrates listens to what others say on a question that he or others have posed to a group of discussants. Socrates carefully points out presuppositions, indicates inadequacies in thought processes, demands clarification and better examples, routinely questions, compares points of views and helps one make the vague explicit. To Socrates, finding the answer is the end of the discussion, but a laborious and almost never ending process is important, hence Socrates famous statement, “What I know is that I do not know.”21 In summary, one can say that the Socratic Method is a method of investigation, which attempts to analyze and establish the true nature of things. The beginning point of the discussion does not have to be some arcane dilemma that is limited to a few who are well informed and knowledgeable of a topic or topics. For Socrates, the beginning point of the discussion is  usually a random question raised by the discussion participants. Socrates then takes a leadership role in the discourse by challenging the initial position taken by the discussants and tests their stance with a series of ­questions and answers that arise from the participants. If the initial position “defaults,” other positions are put forth that are likewise explored.

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

77

This process of questioning and answering and re-questioning and answering goes on until an agreement or all the participants in the discussion reach a conclusion. Socrates and the participants determine by the nature of the questions and by the types of replies that arise in the discussion, they decide the direction  the inquiry will take. No agreed upon or pre-fixed path drives the direction of the discussion by Socrates and the participants of the discussion.22

Education at the Socrates and Koraes Day Schools Teachers express their concern that the school enrollment is not what it once was. One teacher says, “At one time we had over 500 students for the day school alone, today were down to almost 100.”23 I am given a warm welcome by the teachers and staff during my first visit to Socrates school. The Principal of the school, Mrs. V. introduces me to Mr. F. who is currently teaching the Odyssey in Greek. I immediately ask him if he uses the Socratic Method and he  replies, “All good teachers use the Socratic Method.”24 I then ask him what his thoughts were on the Socratic Method and he responds, “Questions lead to answers and all the answers are found within somebody.”25 I am struck by his responses.26 Socrates School was founded in 1907, and historical records indicate it to be the first Greek language school established in North America.27 The school’s atmosphere helps make it a successful school. It is an orderly, quiet, and caring environment. When I ask one student how she felt about the school she responded, “I feel proud, comfortable, it’s like being at home.”28 The building is neat and clean, where class projects are displayed throughout the school along with images of modern and ancient Greece a reminder to the students of their Greek heritage. Although the school is small, it feels spacious and personal. Guests are always welcome by teachers and students when they first walk into the school. There is no graffiti on the walls and one hears very little noise. Its many visitors as myself are immediately absorbed into the purposefulness of the day, almost unnoticed by others in the building. Socrates School and other Greek schools that followed were created to help preserve Greek culture, language, and history for Greek immigrants who began a new life in the United States. Education was a proponent for this cultural preservation. Many Greek immigrants believed that the Greek school system and the Greek community would help preserve Greek identity and Greek culture in the United States. Andrew Kopan, a well-known scholar on the topic, writes:

78 

T. G. ZERVAS

Accordingly, the Greek community in Chicago organized a comprehensive system of ethnic and bicultural education very early on. The first day or parochial school, affiliated with the Church was staffed primarily by professional lay teachers, Socrates School, was established in Greek-town in 1908—the first of its kind in the United States and still in existence29

The school continues to exist today, but has since relocated from its previous location on West Diversey Avenue in Chicago, to Deerfield, Illinois and is renamed the Hellenic American Academy. Its enlistment of students has dwindled over the years. In 1984, Socrates School was the largest Greek American School in the United States with 600 students from grades K-8. Currently the school educates a total of 50 students ranging from grades PK-8. In 1909, Koraes School opened its doors and its first school Principal Mrs. Kyriakoula Kotakis led the school in its first year of operation. There is no original record of the school’s enrollment in its first year.30 The faculty composition is primarily of teachers of Greek ancestry who have acquired the “appropriate” qualifications, obtained from one of the Teachers Academies in Greece.31 The school is named after Adamantios Koraes, who is considered the father of Modern Greek education. Adamantios Koraes who had studied in France, returned to Greece after Greece’s independence in 1831. Koraes brought with him a mix of French and Swiss theories on education. From the beginning, the Koraes School was modeled after the provincial primary schools in Greece. English was taught only as a second language. After a few years, however, more English instruction was introduced, and by the mid-1920s, Greek and English were taught almost equally. This made Koraes the first Greek bilingual school in Chicago.32 The equalization of Greek and English and the addition of 7th and 8th grade Junior High led to the first accreditation of the Koraes by the Chicago Board of Education. This accreditation enabled Koraes’s graduates to be admitted into the Chicago Public high schools without taking a required admissions exam for non-English speakers.33 Like Socrates School, Koraes’ student body has slightly dropped in the last few decades. At its peak in 1984, the school boasted 350 students grades K-8 where today that number has diminished to 250 students ­ranging from grades PK-8. The school’s current solid enrollment makes it the largest Greek American school in the Chicago metropolitan area and one of the largest Greek American schools in the United States.

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

79

The Greek immigrants accepted cultural transition, even while adapting to other customs and associations, but sought to combat any attempt at complete assimilation through the formation of Greek bilingual schools.34 Socrates School, which was the first formal Greek school in the United States, was affiliated with the Greek Orthodox Church of Holy Trinity and was organized academically as today for the preparation of bilingual and bicultural education.35 Both the Socrates and Koraes Schools’ mission statements stress the importance of ethnic and religious preservation. “Socrates School is in a unique position to shape the Hellenes of the future and to assure that the Greek language, culture and ideals will be preserved for future generations of Greek Americans.”36 Similarly, Koraes’ School mission statement maintains, “As an integral part of, the Greek Orthodox Community of Saints Constantine and Helen, Koraes School considers it a part of its mission to incorporate the teachings of the Greek Orthodox faith into its curriculum.”37 When asked how the students felt about Socrates school, Mrs. S., principal of the school responded. “The children feel emotionally secure. There is a cultural uniformity in the school between the students. They all come from similar backgrounds all are Greek Americans. Some but few are products of interethnic marriages, but they too feel they are the same with the other students. All the students therefore have similar experiences and a shared identity. My experience reveals to me that students understand one another in the school. No student feels that he or she is a foreigner in the school. They all treat each other like brothers and sisters and the teachers are somewhat like second mothers and fathers to the students.”38 School culture and student social interaction is important at both the Koraes and Socrates Schools. Members of the staff do not feel they have anything in particular to overcome in working with these students. The teachers’ own family and ethnic backgrounds are quite similar to their colleagues and students. Many of the teachers were born or spent a majority of their lives in Greece. There are only a few teachers who are not of Greek origin. The newer teachers who are assigned to teach the English instruction courses tend to be Greek American. Early on in its establishment, Socrates School, a day school, divided its bilingual education almost equally to both Greek and English studies. Koraes, which was opened two years later (1909), would adopt a similar educational format to Socrates School. Other Greek schools as the Plato School, also a bilingual day Greek American language school

80 

T. G. ZERVAS

also founded in Chicago, would also seek to help accommodate the demands of the increasing Greek population.39 Throughout the century, fresh Greek immigrant arrivals to Chicago and the city’s metropolitan areas increased student enrollments in these schools and allowed for the founding of more Greek bilingual schools. One author writes, “The purposes of the Greek day or afternoon schools are to foster the Greek language and culture among, second, third and even fourth generation Greek Americans. These schools are a testament to the Greek ethnic vitality of any given community in which they are found.”40 Not all the newly founded Greek bilingual schools were day schools. Afternoon Greek schools were later established and met after regular school hours twice a week for two hours each session.41 The afternoon schools followed instruction in Greek and focused primarily on the teaching of the Greek language and Greek culture. The students of these after school hours schools consisted principally of Greek American students attending the American public schools. Afterwards, Saturday Greek schools were opened and followed a similar instructional format as the Greek afternoon schools, but met during the day on Saturdays for four hours each school week.

Presentation and Interpretation of Findings Classical texts in general, and Homer’s Odyssey and Iliad in particular, have for some time been included in the secondary curricula. Most of the literature relevant to the teaching of the Odyssey and Iliad suggests that it’s a piece of literature needing interpretation; and that very few instructional discussions link the texts to the Socratic Method. Although several articles and books have been published on the Socratic Method as an instructional teaching method in the classroom, little research on the use of the Socratic Method when teaching the Odyssey and Iliad has been published. Three instructional teaching techniques are utilized in both the Koraes and Socrates Schools when teaching both the Iliad and the Odyssey. • The first of the three teaching approaches is both teacher and student-­centered. The teacher asks the questions and students recall prior information. The teacher then assesses her students’ ability to recite and repeat information. Usually this approach is incorporated in the beginning of each class session. The teacher would begin the

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

81

class by asking a student to summarize what was discussed the previous class and sometimes call on other students to fill in the gaps missed by that student. • The second teaching procedure can be best characterized as “discussion based.” The teacher takes a somewhat different teaching approach from the traditional method. The teacher asks her students to voice their opinion(s) using evidence found within the text. The students are not expected to respond back to the teacher with a question, but merely attempt to answer the original question posed by the teacher. The questions derived by the teacher are factual questions where it asks the students to identify a character, date, place, or time in the poem. The structure of the question leaves little room for interpretation. • The third method is perhaps the most similar to the Socratic Method. It is centered on the students and asks the students to interpret a passage or meaning from the text. Students moreover can sway the direction of the discussion by their questions and remarks. Here, the teacher plays the role as facilitator of the discussion, which is similar to Haroutunian-Gordon’s description of the teacher’s role during interpretive discussions.42 Furthermore, the program indicated for the study of each lesson can be divided into three parts. First the teacher presents and reads the text out loud to the class and asks students to state their verbal reactions and make mention of textual items which need elucidation or are deserving of a more elaborate discussion. Second, teacher and students peruse the text in detail, following a succession of four steps: 1. They define any unfamiliar words or phrases exclaimed by the author of the text; 2. They discuss the historical, legendary, or mythological aspects found within the text. 3. They examine elements relevant to the structure of the text such as the gradual development of myth, language, religion, and morality (see graph). 4. They discuss the theoretical and cultural condition of the text, and students are encouraged to reply on present cultural aspects connected to the civilization being presented.43

82 

T. G. ZERVAS Greek Grammar Legendary History

Morality/ Ethics

Mythology

lliad and Odyssey

History

Religion

Language

Culture

Fig. 4.1  Thematic dimensions in teaching a text

The teaching of the text is often taught through several thematic dimensions. At the core of the teachings are the two texts (Fig. 4.1). The texts are not solely investigated as a work of literature. Several other themes and interpretations of how one could look at the text arise when teaching both the Odyssey and Iliad. The teachers at both the schools use the text as a versatile tool of teaching several other content areas from the information gathered from the texts. When Greek educators teach the Odyssey and Iliad, they follow the Guidelines for the Curriculum and Instruction for Junior High and High School, prepared by the Greek Ministry on Education.44 The curriculum guide states that the main goal for teaching ancient Greek texts in translation is the humanistic education of students, which will enable them to, . Function intellectually, emotionally, and morally 1 2. Become familiar with the diachronic values of the ancient Greek civilization; 3. Receive civic education; and 4. Develop intellectually. The question that arouses interest is whether this procedure involves the use of the Socratic Method to accomplish these objectives. In other

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

83

words, does the approach suggested in the Curriculum Guide allow students to develop not only the intellectual aspects of learning through the teaching methods utilized by teachers in the classroom?

Conversation I: Introduction to the Odyssey at Socrates Greek American School The reader may recall that in the Odyssey, Odysseus struggles to make it back home to Ithaca after the Trojan War has ended. Odysseus is one of Greek great heroes of the War. He is most remembered for coming up with the Trojan Horse, which is used to defeat Troy. Once the wooden horse is brought into Troy, Odysseus and few other Greeks sneak out of the horse and open the gates so the Greeks can enter and defeat the Trojans. The class discussion at Socrates School begins with an introduction to the text that attempts to challenge student’s assumptions about the text and then shifts to the final defeat of the Trojans. The following excerpt is a portion of the discussion that occurred at Socrates School. Mr. F. Where did the Odyssey gets its name? Helen From Odysseus. Mr. F. Who was Odysseus? Helen A hero in the poem. Mr. F. Where was Odysseus from? Helen Greece. Mr. F. Yes, he was from Greece, but where in Greece? (Classroom Pause) Mr. F. He was from Ithaca and he was also the king of Ithaca. Mr. F. points to Ithaca on a map of Greece which is at the front of the room. Mr. F. The great poet who wrote the Odyssey was named …. (pause, Christina raises her hand). Yes Christina. Christina Umm … Homer Mr. F. How many books did Homer write? Christina Two. The Odyssey and the Iliad. Mr. F. Very good. Which book was written first? Christina The Odyssey. Mr. F. And where did the books get their names?

84 

T. G. ZERVAS

Christina

Umm … The Odyssey is named after Odysseus and the Iliad is named after the city of Troy. Mr. F. And what does Iliad mean? Christina It’s what the Ancient Greeks called Troy. Mr. F. Very good Christina. Mr. F. How did the Trojan War start? Adam Over Helen the beautiful. (Note in the Odyssey Helen of Troy is referred to as Helen the Beautiful.) Mr. F. So, tell me Adam what happened? Adam Paris who was a prince of Troy kidnapped Helen and brought her back to Troy. But she really wanted to go with him because the goddess Aphrodite put a spell on her so she would fall in love with him (Paris). Mr. F. But Paris did more than just kidnap Helen. Right? Yes Theodore. Theodore Paris kidnapped her while her husband was away. Mr. F. Good. And tell us who was her husband? Theodore I can’t remember. Mr. F. His name starts with “M” and he was king of Sparta. Adam Menelaus? Mr. F. Yes. He was Menelaus and his brother was Agamemnon who was the king of Mycenae. Mr. F. Go on Theodore what happened next? Theodoros Menelaus came back from his trip and discovered his wife was missing. Mr. F. Before he found out his wife was missing what happened in the story? (Short Pause) Mr. F. Paris was welcome to Menelaus’ home. Menelaus fed him and let him sleep in his home. Adam Then he kidnapped Helen because she was so beautiful and took all his (Menelaus) gold. Mr. F. Yes. How would you feel if someone was welcomed to your home and then they kidnapped you brother, sister, father or mother and took all your possessions? Veronica I would be angry. Mr. F. Yes. And Menelaus was extremely angry. He was insulted by Paris and Paris took advantage of him. Menelaus wanted revenge.45

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

85

The above portion of the class discussion could be identified as factual. Students are requested by the teacher, (who is the center of the discussion) to regurgitate information by identifying characters, events, and places that are mentioned in the text. Mr. F. who is the head 7th grade literature teacher at Socrates School, regulates the conversation, keeps it in order, and provides students with valuable contextual information. However, there is little or no room in the questions posed by the teacher for interpretation by the students. The students are assessed on knowledge about the text, its character, events, and places that are seen to be relevant. The students also seem concerned and possibly overtly so, about following the teacher’s instructions and pleasing him. This was observed because the students all seemed enthusiastic of the text and always willing to take a shot at responding to the questions posed by Mr. F. Nevertheless, the students’ comments and the teacher’s questions are tied together with follow-up questions by Mr. F. Question after question help unravel the events that occurred in the text in a chronological format. Characters and places are also identified when using this method that gives students a sense of place and time. Still and all, a dramatic shift in the discussion occurs toward the end of the lesson when students are required to employ more critical thinking skills because of the nature of the questions posed by the teacher. Mr. F.

Helen Mr. F. Christina

The Greeks had their ships hidden behind the rocks off the coast of Troy. When the few Greeks entered the walls of Troy while hidden within the wooden horse they opened the gates to the city to allow the other soldiers to enter. When the soldiers entered the walls they slaughtered almost every man, woman and child that resided within the walls. This particular incident is unique in the sense that it is one of those few historical occasions that Greeks have gone on the offensive with extreme prejudice and an overabundant thirst to destroy anything and anyone that came in their way. Perhaps someone could explain why they think the Greeks did this to the people of Troy? So, they could once again take back Helen of Troy. But did they have to slaughter everyone in order to take back the Princes of Sparta? I think they did what they did, I mean kill all the people inside the walls of Troy because they were mad at the Trojans.

86 

T. G. ZERVAS

Mr. F. Christina Mr. F. Christina Mr. F. Christina Mr. F.

Adam Mr. F. Adam Mr. F. Adam Mr. F.

In what way were they mad at the Trojans? They hated the Trojans even though both groups (Achaeans and Trojans) were Greeks. They were fighting them for so long. They were tired of fighting. What happened during the fighting that may have yielded this massacre inside the walls. A lot of people died. Like Achilles lost his best friend and was mad and wanted to umm … take revenge for his death so Achilles then kills Hector. Yes the Greeks were mad they wanted to take revenge for the lives of their friends. So they took all their anger out on the innocent people. That is true and that has happened in more recent times during wars. The Nazis had a policy of executing ten civilians for every German soldier killed by members of the resistance during the German occupation of Greece. Could there be another reason why the Greeks did this to the Trojans. Annihilating Troy? The fighting would stop. What do you mean when you say the fighting would stop? Well if they killed everyone and there was nobody left, then they knew the War would end. How would the War end? There would be nobody left to fight because everybody would be dead. Yes. What you say could be true. Maybe the Greeks were so tired of fighting. Fighting for so long. They had not seen their wives and children for ten years. Their children had become men and women. An annihilation of the Trojans would assure their ticket home, as you said, because the war would undoubtedly be over because all would be destroyed.46

It is evident that the thematic focus of this conversation was on the history of the Trojan War. Although many of the teachers at the school asserted that the female students tend to lack an interest in events that occurred during major battles in the Trojan War, several of the female students in Mr. F.’s classroom were willing and interested to participate in conversations dealing with war. Mr. F shifts gears in his teaching approach toward the end of the lesson. He feels that the students have sufficient

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

87

information to engage in a conversation that requires far greater critical reasoning.47 Moreover, Mr. F.’s question of why the Greeks destroyed the entire city of Troy requires some life experiences and an understanding of human nature to critically answer the question. More importantly, his question causes aporia or induces the students in a state of perplexity, but does not make the students unwilling to attack the question at hand. Information from the text is important, but the question goes beyond the boundaries of the information found within the text. The question also implicitly suggests to the students that they need to come to some resolution or conclusion about the question or find the truth. Christina begins the conversation and the other students follow with their own interpretation. Their comments are not at all random and disjointed from one another’s comments. Christina begins the conversation by offering her remarks. Her remarks are worked off Mr. F.’s comments. Mr. F. facilitates the conversation, but also guides the students’ responses with another question. The follow-up questions Mr. F. introduces seek to clarify what the students originally meant with their remark. This is seen when Mr. F. asks such questions as, “But did they have to slaughter everyone to take back the Princes of Sparta?” “In what way were they (the Greeks) mad at the Trojans?” and “What do you mean when you say the fighting would stop?” Mr. F. then continues the questioning with Adam. Looking at the transcript, Mr. F.’s questions helps Adam arrive to a conclusion using the original question asked by Mr. F. as to why the Greeks killed all the Trojans? Mr. F. then agrees with Adam and elaborates on Adams’s remarks. It seems that Mr. F. from this example is employing a didactic Socratic discourse.48 Mr. F. who is better versed in the subject under investigation and helps his students arrive at a judgment of their own by reasoning and analyzing information they have gathered in the past. Furthermore, while in the discourse every student concentrated on one another’s comments again and again, to come up with a remark that related to the previous responses voiced in the discussion (Table 4.1). The transcribed source analyzed was for a 20-minute class discussion. The questions become interpretive in that the questions need critical analTable 4.1  Results of transcribed source Number of questions

Follow-up questions

Interpretive questions

20

13

7

88 

T. G. ZERVAS

ysis and reflection to be answered. Moreover, students are asked to apply their life experiences in answering the questions while simultaneously using information they have studied in the text. The above chart shows the number of questions posed by Mr. F., the number of follow-up questions, which means questions that immediately followed a question that related to the main topic of discussion, and the number of interpretive questions. The interpretive questions require greater analysis and critical thought by the students for the questions to be answered correctly. In this lesson, Mr. F. asked a total of 20 questions. Thirteen of those questions were follow-up questions and seven of the questions we found to be interpretive questions.

Conversation II: Homer’s Plea for Inspiration. Class Discussion of the Iliad at Koraes Greek American School The interlocutors in the following discussion presented here approach Homer’s Iliad as a fertile point of introduction for reconsidering enduring problems in Greek religion, language, history, and traditions. The conversation at Koraes Greek American School begins with Homer’s appeal to the muses for inspiration to write the story of Odysseus.49 The conversation then shifts on a reading found in the Iliad. Mrs. T. Pamela

Mrs. T. Pamela

Let us start from the beginning. We have been reviewing. Pamela please read. (Reading) “The hero of the tale which I beg the Muse to help me tell is that resourceful man who roamed the wide world after he had sacked the holy citadel of Troy. He saw the cities of many peoples and he learnt their ways. He suffered many hardships on the high seas in his struggles to preserve life and bring his comrades home.” Go on, continue, read the last few lines. (Continues reading) “But he failed to save those comrades in spite of all his efforts. It was their own sin that brought their doom, for in their folly they devoured the oxen of Hyperion the Sun, and the god saw to it that they should never return. This is the tale I pray the divine Muse to unfold to us. Begin it goddess, at whatever point you will.”

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

89

Mrs. T. Who is talking in this passage? Several students in the class Homer? Mrs. T. Whom is Homer pretending to talk to? Vanessa The goddesses. He has called the goddesses to help him write the text. The students immediately begin their discussion with a passage from the text. The lines read by Pamela out loud to the class are the introductory lines of the Iliad. The classroom procedures at Koraes School are similar to the ones used at the Socrates School. At both schools, the teachers assign students to read passages from the text. Class sessions on the Homeric texts last almost two hours a week at each of the schools. Students are assigned to read passages for homework and the students reread the passages during class sessions. The ultimate purpose for rereading the text is to assess students’ Greek reading skills. While passages are read out loud in class, the teacher evaluates students on their Greek vocabulary. Explanations of the meanings of the words are offered by the instructor as well as biographical information of the main characters in the text and historical explanation of the period. After the passages are read, individual students are requested by the instructor to explain specific passages found in the text. Passages are interpreted by the students, which in turn the student attempts to unravel the meaning of the passage. Students are encouraged to explain passages in their own words and make connections relevant to their own lives. Students are also welcome to predict what lays ahead in the poem’s story lines.50 Mrs. T.

From what we have looked at thus far, who brought upon all the suffering to the Greeks? Marina Achilles Mrs. T. The use of adjectives is typical in Homer’s text. How does Homer describe the souls of the Greeks. With what adjective? Mary Andiomenes Mrs. T. Zeus is also called in the text as what? Mary Dias Mrs. T. Rather than saying Agamemnon, Homer calls him the son of Atreus. Why? Is it still common in modern Greece to refer to one as the son of …?

90 

T. G. ZERVAS

Pamela Yes. Mrs. T. Today in Greece people are sometimes referred to as the son of, so and so. Sometimes people are introduced this way even today in Greece. When Agamemnon is introduced this way it shows the importance of his status, and his royal lineage to the reader. Angie could you continue reading where Pamela left off. Looking at the above portion, Mrs. T. makes a connection between present day cultural traits with ancient Greek culture. Students are reminded that the cultural similarities persist today. Students also become familiarized with the writing style of Homeric times. Characters in both the Iliad and Odyssey are often referred to by many names; this is to remind the reader of the characters’ relation to others mentioned in the text. Moreover, Homer places an importance from whom some of the characters are descended. For example, Achilles was the son of Thetis who was a goddess and Achilles’s father was Peleas who was a king. Therefore, Achilles in the Iliad is often referred to as the son of Thetis or the son of the mortal Peleas. Angie (Reading) Mrs. T. You could stop here. Who are the two parties arguing in the passage as described by Homer? Angie The son of Atreus and Achilles. Mrs. T. And who is the son of Atreus. Mary Agamemnon. Mrs. T. Very good. Mrs. T. Nike, go on begin reading the second page. (Nike Reading. Is stopped in the middle of the paragraph.) Mrs. T. Here is another example where Homer refers to the characters in the epic poem by another name. How does he refer to Apollo? (Pamela raising her hand) Pamela He is called Litos and the son of Zeus. Mrs. T. Yes. You will see later on in the text when Apollo is also called Phoebus. What did Apollo bring to the Greek army? What is the adjective Homer uses. (Pamela Raising her hand) Mrs. T. Yes Pamela. Pamela A wicked disease and the adjective Homer uses is wicked. Mrs. T. Why did he infect the Greek army with a disease?

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

91

Mrs. T. Vanessa Mrs. T.

(Vanessa and Panayiota raising their hands) Yes, Vanessa. Because Achilles disrespected his prize. And what adjective does Homer use to describe Apollo Vanessa. Vanessa Macrosagitari. Mrs. T. And what is the priest Chrisis wearing and holding in his hand. (Angie raising her hand) Mrs. T. Yes Angie. Angie He is holding a staff and wearing a reef on his head. Mrs. T. Why? Angie Umm. Because Apollo is the god of religion and religious leaders were dressed that way at the time. It was also a sign of his status as one of the major gods on Mount Olympus. Mrs. T. Yes, He is Apollo’s favorite priest. His best supporter on earth so to speak. And he wants back his daughter that was given to Agamemnon as a price for winning a battle against the Trojans. Will Chrisis get back his enslaved daughter? (Panayiota raising her hand) Panayiota I think so? If Apollo decides to help him. And Apollo has already started helping him by casting a terrible disease on the Greek troops. As described by Mrs. T., students bring with them misconceptions about the text. There is no mention of the Trojan Horse in the Iliad. The Trojan Horse only appears in the Odyssey. Furthermore, the Iliad only covers the last 52 days of the Trojan War. The reader may recall that the opening scene of the Iliad begins with the quarrel between King Agamemnon of Mycenae and the heroic young Achilles. Agamemnon and Achilles’s armies have been victorious at many of the battles in the War. For their success in battle, both leaders are awarded two captured girls as gifts. Agamemnon is later unwillingly forced to return his gift back to her father, the high priest Chrisis, after the god Apollo castes a plague on the Greek camp. Achilles however keeps his gift and is unwilling to return the girl as Agamemnon had done. An overtly jealous Agamemnon then begins to quarrel with Achilles. Mrs. T. Rita

Let’s go back to Atreus. How many children did he have? Two. Agamemnon and Menelaus.

92 

T. G. ZERVAS

Mrs. T. Mrs. T.

Christina Mrs. T. Rita

Mrs. T. Rita Mrs. T.

Rita Mrs. T.

Mrs. T.

Rita Mrs. T.

Did he have any daughters? I don’t know if he did. The text does not tell us if he did. For our purpose it is irrelevant if he did or not. However, what are the two wishes Agamemnon wants from the priest in exchange for the girl. To go back home to Greece and to win the War. Is Agamemnon asking too much from the priest? Yes. The second part he is. The priest supports the Trojans and not the Greeks. He does not want the Greeks to win the War, but he does want them to leave Troy and go back to their country. Very good. Let’s go to the next page. (Rita raising her Hand) Mrs. T Homer describes the priest as seeming very wealthy. Was he wealthy? The priests at the time were not the poor humble priest of today. They were respected in society. They were counselors, civic and religious leaders that formed part of the elite class in Ancient Greece. Let’s go on. Here Homer describes Agamemnon as Atheofovos. What does this word mean? Fears no god? Yes. We know this from the manner he talks to the priest. He is telling the priest to stop coming around him requesting back for the girl. He also threatens the priest and Agamemnon tells the priest that if continues to bother him the he will suffer some serious consequences. Let us shift our discussion, I need you to remember some facts. Agamemnon was king of which city. Anybody? Anyone? It was Mycenae. Mycenae is a city outside Argos that is why Agamemnon’s army is sometimes referred as the Argonauts in the text. Where was Menelaus from? Sparta. I need everybody to write it in your notebook. So, Menelaus was king of Sparta and Agamemnon was king of Mycenae.

Rita one of the students in Mrs. T.’s class asks whether Atreus had any daughters. Mrs. T. responds that the text does not inform the reader whether Atreus had any daughters, but the text does tell the reader that Atreus had two sons, Menelaus and Agamemnon. In this instance, Mrs. T. is using the

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

93

Table 4.2  Results of transcribed source Number of questions

Follow-up questions

Interpretive questions

26

12

14

text as evidence. She is suggesting to her students that they should use the information found in the text as evidence. Later in the discussion Mrs. T. again shows her students how to make inferences using the text. Agamemnon is identified as one who does not fear any of the gods. Mrs. T. points out to her students that we know this from the manner Agamemnon talks to the high priest. Mrs. T. also reminds the students of the scene where Agamemnon goes as far as to threaten the high priest Chrisis (Table 4.2). Mrs. T. Panayiota Mrs. T.

What happened to Helen of Troy after the War? She went back home with Menelaus in Sparta. Yes, she went back home and we know this from the Odyssey. Odysseus’s army does not find its way back to Greece and his son Telemachus goes in search for his father. He travels to Sparta from Ithaca to talk to Menelaus and is welcomed to the palace by Helen. Agamemnon on the other hand witnessed a terrible life after the War. His wife Klytem nistra killed him and she was latter killed by her son Oreste in revenge for his father’s death. O.K., study your vocabulary and we will continue again tomorrow.51

In the 35-minute lesson a total of 22 questions were asked by Mrs. T. to her students. Of those 26 questions, 12 of the questions were follow­up questions and 14 of the questions were interpretive questions. Reflection on Conversations While the remarks in both discussions seem arbitrary at times, the questions they explore are generally the ones not answered in the text. The students in the discussions form a struggle with textual issues. The discussions however may help to draw out and deepen students’ interests. It is unclear in both instances whether the discussions held by the teachers at the two schools were truly Socratic. Most of the literature however sug-

94 

T. G. ZERVAS

gests that a Socratic discussion may be any type of discussion that uses reason to solve a problem or the truth. What is the truth? In the first conversation, the students toward the end of the discussion sought to determine why the Greeks killed all the Trojans after they had entered the walls of Troy. There could be several interpretations to this question. Historians have tended to argue that the Trojan War was over economic reasons and a competition for commercial markets. But the destruction of Troy would put fear on other civilizations aspiring to challenge the Greeks. Essentially the Greeks were setting an example. “This will happen to you, as what happened to the Trojans if you get out of line.” The students at Socrates School go beyond the historical interpretation of the destruction of Troy. They use the text to find the “truth.” Although the students do not quote passages from the text, they use the event to support their arguments. The students know that the Greeks were fighting for some time and were tired of the constant warring with their enemy. Christina suggests that many people from both sides have died and Adam later deduces that if all the Trojans were killed there would be nobody left to fight, thus the Greeks could finally go home. Although Adam’s response may be characterized by some as morbid like, he used the information he has gathered from the events found in the text and any previous knowledge he has of the Trojan War to respond to the question. After Adam had responded, the other students in the class nodded their heads as to agree with him. Some of the students raised their hand and said that they also agreed. Several scholars have suggested, as you will see in the following section that the final step of a Socratic discussion is an agreement among the discussants. It seems in this case that the students came to an agreement after Adam’s response. Therefore, the students found the truth for the question in the context of their setting and discussion. In both discussions, at both schools, there are a series of questions that could be called for the purposes of this study as factual. The questions are one-answer questions that do not require deep analysis and interpretation. What the teachers seem to be doing is setting the scene for the discussion. They are essentially testing the water to determine whether the students have sufficient information to engage in a more complex discussion or answer more complex questions. Mrs. T. does this by reminding the students of the characters, events, and places in the texts. Essentially, she is putting things into context or helping paint a picture for the students so that they gain a better understanding of the text.

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

95

At Koraes School the text is used more often than at Socrates School. This is evident when the lesson begins with a reading of the text from the students. Mrs. T. also uses the text to respond to student questions and to help students determine the feelings, goals, and aspiration of the characters found within the text. Toward the end of the discussion, Mr. T. recaps what the students have discussed thus far about the text. Students are reminded of the characters and from where some of the characters come from. In addition, Mrs. T. helps students define words and students are requested to point out familiar adjectives Homer uses to describe the characters and various meanings in the text. The discussion is teacher centered. Mrs. T. is looked upon by her students as a source of information or as someone who is well informed about the text. Mrs. T. asks several interpretive questions during the discussion. Students can answer the question or find the “truth” using the information found in the text. The students seem to agree with the responses; therefore, the students are at a resolution or at a consensus with one another’s responses. In this manner, the teaching technique used by Mrs. T. is Socratic.

Conclusion An attempt was made in this chapter to identify the Socratic Method and to show how it is applied at the Socrates and Koraes Greek American Schools. There are some limitations to this study that should be considered in interpreting the results. The first is the study’s small sample size. The results were gathered from only two classes in two separate bilingual schools. The second is the limited number of times the classes were observed by the researcher to decipher whether the method was applied as a teaching technique. Although the Socratic Method appears to have evolved from its original structure, this study’s evidence suggests that in both the Socrates and Koraes Schools, a teaching approach like the one used by Socrates is used as primary teaching technique when teaching the Odyssey and Iliad. Without question, as discussed earlier, the Socratic Method is vaguely defined as a pedagogical praxis in all of Plato’s dialogues where the method is formally implemented. Reasons for why the method is ambiguously defined, is to some extent attributed to the lack of a thorough definition of the method by Socrates and Plato. Recent scholars however have attempted to define the method.

96 

T. G. ZERVAS

Furthermore, an adaptation of the technique exists today at both the Koreas and Socrates Schools to which it satisfies an effectiveness of the method for those schools. Other schools who also say that they use the Socratic Method may as well have modified the technique to suit their specific audience, culture, and setting. Several questions arise about the role of the teacher. For example, should the teacher be neutral and merely guide the discussion as a facilitator and not as someone who possess a wealth of knowledge? Should the teacher express his or her views about a topic? To what extent should the teacher follow the interests of his/her students? Is everyone’s point of view worth hearing a discussing? Is anything one says in a discussion of equal value? Should a teacher interject during a discussion? The motivation of this project was to examine the Socratic Method and determine how it is used at the Socrates and Koraes Schools. Age, location, socio-economics, culture, and race all play a significant role as to how the teachers at the school have modified the method whether consciously or unconsciously, so it could be an effective teaching tool for their students. More importantly, the goal of this study was to spur future discussions on the Socratic Method. In some respect “interpretive discussion” is like the Socratic Method, but it could be more clearly identified as a by-­ product of the original method. There is also the conventional “Great Books” program created by Mortimer Adler and Robert M. Hutchins.52 Their programs too, like interpretive discussion carry with them a manifestation of the original method, which is generally geared for children. There are some questions that arise from this study. How effective is the Socratic Method for middle and junior high school students? Do middle school and junior high students have sufficient life experience to engage in a Socratic discussion? If the Socratic Method a successful teaching technique, and if so, why are not more schools using it? And finally, because data for this study was gathered almost 20 years ago does the Socrates School (now Hellenic American Academy) and the Koraes School continue to employ what they believe to be the Socratic Method when teaching the Odyssey and Iliad? Perhaps future researchers will attempt to answer these questions. The old is blended in with the new. What the Athenians may have not known is that their ideas would survive and in many ways in our classrooms. They of course are not the same, but refined to work well with those who live today. Though there has been a great deal of discussion in this chapter about the nature of the Socratic Method one may be skeptical

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

97

whether the Socratic Method implemented at the Socrates an Koraes Schools is the same method used by Socrates? The truth is that the method used in these schools in not the same method employed by Socrates but occupies characteristics that resembles the Socratic Method. Thus, the method is effectively used with the incorporation of other teaching techniques.

Notes 1. Interview. Mrs. T teaches both the Iliad and Odyssey at Koraes Greek American School (April 23, 2000). 2. Both the Koraes School and Socrates Greek American Schools are affiliated with a Greek Orthodox Church. Interview. School Principal. (April 12, 2000). 3. Haroutunian-Gordon, Sophie, Interpretive Discussion: Engaging Students in Text-Based Conversations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014). 4. Ibid., 11. 5. Ibid., 4. 6. Teloh, Henry, Socratic Education in Plato’s Early Dialogues (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1986). 7. Robinson, Richard, Plato’s Earlier Dialectic (London, UK: Clarendon Press, 1984) and Teloh, Henry, Socratic Education in Plato’s Early Dialogues (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1986). 8. Heckman, Gustav, “Socratic Dialogue,” Thinking, 8, no. 1 (1988): 34–37. 9. Portelli, John P. “The Socratic Method and Philosophy for Children,” Metaphilosophy. 21, no. 1 & 2 (January/April 1990): 141–161. 10. Elenchos means of proving or examination. 11. Logos has several meanings. In most of Plato’s works logos is used to mean discourse or mode of speaking. 12. Ousia in the context of the Platonic works means essence and substance. 13. Gotz, Ignacio, “On the Socratic Method,” Philosophy of Education. 88. no 1 (1999): 84–92. 14. Dries Boele, “The Benefits of a Socratic Dialogue or: Which Results Can We Promise?” Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across Disciplines, 17, no. 3. (1997): 51. 15. Robinson, Richard, Plato’s Earlier Dialectic. (London, UK: Clarendon Press, 1953). 69. 16. Ibid. 17. Ibid.

98 

T. G. ZERVAS

18. Morse, Fowler Jane, “Socratic Dialectic for the Twenty-First Century.” Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across Disciplines, 17, no. 3. (1998): 9–23. 19. Ibid. 20. Ibid. 21. Portelli, John P. “The Philosopher as Teacher: The Socratic Method and Philosophy for Children,” Metaphilosophy, 21, no. 1 & 2, (January/April 1990): 141–161. 22. Ibid. 23. Interview with Mr. F., 7th grade Greek School literature and history teacher at Socrates Greek American School. (April 14, 2000). 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid. 26. Interview. Mrs. S., Principal at Socrates Greek American School and Middle School Greek Language Teacher. (April 14, 2000). 27. From Socrates Greek American School, Church, and School Archival Materials. 28. Interview with a student from Socrates Greek American School. (April 14, 2000). 29. Kopan, Andrew, “The Greeks in Chicago: The Survival of an Ethnic Group Through Education.” The Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, 16, no. 1–4. (1989): 47–60. 30. Lekkas, Heracles, “The History and Development of the Koraes School of Saints Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Church.” (MA, thesis, DePaul University, 1985). 31. Ibid. 32. Ibid. 33. Ibid. 34. Bodnar, John, The Transplanted: A History of Immigrants in Urban America (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1987). 35. Ibid. 36. “Socrates Greek American School: The Future of Hellenism in Chicago,” School Pamphlet, Church and School Archival Materials. 37. Koraes Greek American School. Church and School Archival Materials. 38. Interview. Mrs. S., middle school literature teacher at Socrates Greek American School (April 12, 2000). 39. The Plato Greek American School was closed in 1998 due to low student enrollment. The school was reopened recently at its new location in Des Plaines, Illinois. 40. Triandis, Harry C. “Education of Greek Americans for a Pluralistic Society,” Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects, ed. Spyros D.  Orfanos, Harry J.  Psomiades & John Spiridakis. 19–34. NY: Pella Publishing Company, Inc., 1987.

4  CONSIDERING THE “SOCRATIC METHOD” WHEN TEACHING… 

99

41. Kopan, Andrew T. “Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892– 1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival,” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1974). 42. Haroutunian-Gordon, Sophie, Interpretive Discussion: Engaging Students in Text-Based Conversations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014). 43. Papacosta, Chryssi, “Teaching Homer’s Iliad: A Comparison of Two Approaches” (MA Thesis, National Louis University, 1990). 44. The Guidelines for the Curriculum and Instruction for Junior High and High School are governed by the laws established by the Greek government. Greek Law 309/1976. The Organization and Administration of the Educational System of Greece. Bulletin of Government Publications 78/1976 vol. A. 45. The names of the students at the Socrates Greek American School have been changed in order to protect the identity of the students. 46. Ibid. 47. Interview. Mr. F., (April 14, 2000). 48. A didactic Socratic discourse is usually teacher centered. The teacher needs to know more on the topic than the students for the discussion to be categorized as such. Essentially, during this type of discussion the teacher leads students to the answer. The Meno by Plato provides examples of this method. A classic example where the method occurs is in the Meno, when Socrates helps a slave boy solve a geometric problem. For an extensive look at the didactic method see, Heckman, Gustav, “Socratic Dialogue,” Thinking, 8, no. 1 (1988): 34–37. 49. It is significant to remind the reader that the Trojan War occurred some 300 years before the time of Homer. Therefore, Homer’s accounts of the war in the Iliad and Odyssey are not first-hand accounts. For example, Homer has been thought to exaggerate the true size of the city of Troy. It is not until 1870, when Heinrich Schliemann excavated the ancient city of Troy, now in modern Turkey, and finds the size of the city to be significantly smaller than what Homer indicates. 50. Interview. Mrs. S., Principal and middle school literature teacher at Socrates Greek American School (April 12, 2000). 51. The names of the students at the Koraes Greek American School have been changed in order to protect the identity of the students. 52. For a more elaborate discussion of the Hutchins-Adler program, see M.J. Adler, Reforming Education: The Opening of the American Mind, ed. A. Van Doren, New York: Macmillan, 1988.

100 

T. G. ZERVAS

References Bodnar, John. 1987. The Transplanted: A History of Immigrants in Urban America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Boele, Dries. 1997. The Benefits of a Socratic Dialogue or: Which Results Can We Promise? Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across Disciplines 17 (3): 51. Gotz, Ignacio. 1999. On the Socratic Method. Philosophy of Education 88 (1): 84–92. Haroutunian-Gordon, Sophie. 2014. Interpretive Discussion: Engaging Students in Text-Based Conversations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Heckman, Gustav. 1988. Socratic Dialogue. Thinking 8 (1): 34–37. Kopan, Andrew T. 1974 Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival. PhD diss., University of Chicago. Kopan, Andrew. 1989. The Greeks in Chicago: The Survival of an Ethnic Group Through Education. The Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora 16 (1–4): 47–60. Lekkas, Heracles. 1985. The History and Development of the Koraes School of Saints Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Church. MA thesis, DePaul University. Morse, Fowler Jane. 1998. Socratic Dialectic for the Twenty-First Century. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across Disciplines 17 (3): 9–23. Papacosta, Chryssi. 1990. Teaching Homer’s Iliad: A Comparison of Two Approaches. MA thesis, National Louis University. Portelli, John P. 1990. The Socratic Method and Philosophy for Children. Metaphilosophy 21 (1 & 2): 141–161. Robinson, Richard. 1984. Plato’s Earlier Dialectic. London: Clarendon Press. Teloh, Henry. 1986. Socratic Education in Plato’s Early Dialogues. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Triandis, Harry C. 1987. Education of Greek Americans for a Pluralistic Society. In Education and Greek Americans: Process and Prospects, ed. Spyros D. Orfanos, Harry J. Psomiades, and John Spiridakis, 19–34. New York: Pella Publishing Company, Inc.

CHAPTER 5

Breaking the Traditional Greek School Mold: The Case of the Aristotle GSL Program Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei

Introduction At the end of the nineteenth century, the first mass wave of Greek immigration began, with more than 350,000 Greek immigrants arriving in the United States between 1900 and 1920.1 At first, mostly young, single men who were seeking their fortunes came to America. However, after 1910, wives, children, grandparents, and other close family members joined them. Greek communities soon emerged, as the immigrants began settling in major urban areas and smaller cities scattered across the country. In addition to sending money back to relatives in Greece, a high priority among many immigrants was raising money to build a church and then, shortly after, a Greek school. For the Greek American children who spoke only Greek at home, the school would become an integral part of their community. Not only would it serve in perpetuating their shared language, religion, and traditions; it would also imbue them with Greek values and character while rearing them as Greeks.2

A. Balodimas-Bartolomei (*) North Park University, Chicago, IL, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_5

101

102 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

In the early twentieth century, Greek schools began opening their doors to Greek American children, especially within large cities. Initially, the schools were founded by Greek associations, fraternities, regional brotherhoods, and labor unions.3 The first Greek school to open outside of Greece was the Socrates School of Chicago, founded in 1908.4 Classes were held for three primary grades with lessons taking place in two old houses on purchased property.5 The school, which belonged to the Holy Trinity Parish, eventually became a K- 6 parochial school where children were taught in both English and Greek.6 In other states, parishes began organizing Greek schools with lessons being held either on the church premises or at local neighborhood schools. Some of the pioneer parish Greek schools included the Annunciation/Evangelismos of Elkins Park of Philadelphia (1901),7 Holy Trinity Day School of Lowell, Massachusetts (1906),8 Annunciation/Evangelismos of Buffalo, New York (1916),9 and the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary (1920) of Los Angeles, known as the “San Julian” Church because it was on San Julian Street.10 Beginning in 1922, the newly established Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America located in New York City began coordinating afternoon and Saturday Greek schools throughout the country. In 1930, Metropolitan Athenagoras was appointed to serve as Archbishop of North and South America. The Archbishop established the Supreme Educational Council that oversaw and coordinated Greek language schools. This led to the separation of Sunday schools and Greek schools, which, up until then, were mostly run simultaneously, as one class. Religious instruction would, however continue to be conducted in Greek until the next decade.11 Other initiatives supported  by the Archbishop were the founding of the Holy Cross Theological School (1937) for training future priests and the Ladies Philoptochos Society—a women’s charitable, benevolent, and philanthropic organization. The Archbishop directed a special appeal to the Philoptochos asking that they devote themselves to the Theological School “where their children would be educated as teachers and priests.”12 George Papaioannou states that no other department of the Archdiocese received more of the Archbishop’s attention than the Greek Language School.13 This was evident from the augmentation of Greek schools and student enrollment in North America. By 1932, there were 284 afternoon and Saturday schools operating throughout the country, with 12,712 students and 330 teachers. Four years later the numbers nearly doubled with

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

103

450 schools, 25,000 students, and 517 teachers.14 According to Soumakis, in 1935, six community day schools were in operation: The Greek-­ American Institute, Bronx, NY; Hellenic-American School of the Holy Trinity, Lowell, MA; Socrates School of the Holy Trinity, Chicago, IL; Koraes School of Sts. Constantine  and Helen, Palos Hills, IL; Socrates School of the Holy Trinity, Montreal, Canada; and the Greek-American Boarding School of Ms. Pallikari-Vedova, New Rochelle, NY.15 During World War II, Greeks school enrollments began to decline in number, mainly for two reasons. First, second-generation Greek American parents were unwilling to send their children to Greek school since the Americanization Movement was encouraging all immigrants to integrate into the national fabric. Second, because immigration from Greece had greatly decreased due to the Quota Acts of the early 1920s, fewer Greek teachers were immigrating to America, resulting in a lack of the qualified teachers to replace those who had retired or passed away.16 Orfanos and Tsemberis note that for the next few decades, there were only small increments in the number of Greek day schools consistent with the immigration pattern of those years.17Archbishop Athenagoras knew that the future of Greek education was in danger. Through the financial assistance of the Ladies Philoptochos Society, he  supported St. Basil’s Academy—an orphanage that would later include a teacher training institute where young Greek American women could become educated and trained to serve the needs of the Church in various capacities such as teachers and church secretaries. The program consisted of a three-year course of study and its curriculum comprised: Religion, Greek and English Languages & Literature, Sciences, Social Sciences, Education, and Music.18 The Academy flourished during the 1950s, under the leadership of the highly esteemed Archbishop Michael who took over the position in 1949 and served until his untimely death in 1958. The need for additional Greek schools and teachers was hastened when the second wave of Greek immigrants arrived in the 1960s. Archbishop Iakovos was now the Primate of Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of the Americas. Deeply respected by all religious leaders in the United States, for his charismatic personality19 and for serving as the longest reigning Archbishop of the Archdiocese (1959–1996),20 the Archbishop would soon encounter the changing face of the Greek American identity that was transforming the composition of Greek parishes and their schools throughout the country.

104 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

Between 1965 and 1975, more than 142,000 Greeks immigrated to the United States.21 Many were escaping the harsh and dangerous military dictatorship in the motherland.22 Most of the newly arrived children along with those born to immigrants in America during the next decade grew up speaking only Greek at home. With the 1968 Bilingual Education Act, new developments in Greek education emerged. Bilingual education programs and curricula were established in public schools of large cities for non-English speaking students. Numerous Greek speaking children in Chicago and New York attended such programs. Many others attended the private or church run Greek schools. By the end of the 1970s, there were close to 400 afternoon schools with an enrollment of over 30,000 students.23 There were also 18 Archdiocese day schools serving about 5000 students—mostly in New York and Chicago.24 The Greek speaking children that enrolled in afternoon and Saturday Greek schools were placed in the same classes with second-, third-, and even fourth-generation Greek Americans. This phenomenon would create several problems and challenges for the children who were not speaking the heritage language at home. The traditional, molded Greek School of the United States was still based upon an outdated curriculum, inadequate textbooks, and unqualified teachers who were not trained in second language acquisition. To better understand the situation, it is necessary to first examine the conditions of Greek schools during the twentieth century.

The Greek School Curriculum, Textbooks and Teachers In McCallum’s and Faires’ (1988) chapter on the Greek community of Birmingham, Alabama, the authors mention that the purpose and focus of the Greek school was that the “Americanized children [would be] secure in Greek thought, legend and tradition.” To accomplish this the daily afternoon classes were taught in a “shack” behind the church.25 Numerous elders describe what Greek school was like in the early decades of the twentieth century.26 Their stories are reflective of other Greek schools during this era. According to one former student, it was often impossible to distinguish between the Greek school and Sunday school in many churches, because both the personnel and curricula overlapped. The parish priest, or occasionally an educated layman, who often served as the choir director, taught in both schools. Sooner or later, more lay people from the

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

105

community served as Greek teachers. Many were newly arrived women immigrants from Greece. Saloutos (1964) informs us that their knowledge of the United States and the English language was limited as that of the pupils’ parents. Thus, for the children who attended public schools during the day and were taught by American-born and American-educated teachers, afternoon Greek school “was often a contradictory and confusing experience.”27 At first, the subject matter was limited to Greek reading, writing, and grammar along with the rudiments of the Orthodox faith with the latter using only Greek as the medium of instruction. As described by McCallum and Conklin, textbooks were absent except for the teacher’s book that was imported from Greece. The teacher would transfer the book contents to the blackboard.28 The students were required to copy the information first on scrap paper and then in their composition book—flawlessly with no smudges or mistakes. All lessons had to be memorized and recited perfectly, otherwise, the students would be punished. Thus, the students were forced to learn the material. One student commented that: “He was very strict, but we learned; he made us learn. I knew the Greek geography as if I did, better than I knew the U.S. map. And I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the Greek School.”29 Depending on each parish, the afternoon Greek school was either held every day or a few times a week, after “American” school—as it was called by Greek Americans, with instruction lasting for two to three hours. If students were fortunate, instruction took place in a classroom where the desks and rows were arranged by age and ability.30 Otherwise as Saloutos describes, lessons were organized for children of various ages, sometimes as young as five and six, in a rented hall, a vacant store, a basement of a church, or a community center.31 Strict disciplinary measures were enforced in all schools. As the number of Greek schools and enrollment increased, the curriculum expanded to include Greek history (particularly the Greek War of Independence), geography, orthographia (penmanship), classical studies and much later, Greek literature, mythology, folksongs, drama, culture and dialogue. In addition to learning to read and write the language, traditional songs and dances were taught in Greek school. A few times a year, the school held special events for various holidays and commemorations. The biggest event was the celebration of the March 25th Greek Independence Day in which children dressed up in traditional, ethnic costumes. The program included skits about the bravery of the Greek guerilla

106 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

fighter throwing off the oppressor, the Ottoman Turk and was followed by poems, folk songs, and dances of their forefathers. “The families would return home, proud that they were imbuing their children with a sense of their Greek identity.”32 Teaching and learning methods included rote learning, and recitation based on the material provided by the teacher. The first available Greek school books for students in America, were imported textbooks that were used in the public schools of Greece. They were often written in the formal katharevousa that incorporated the polytonic system of writing. At the turn of the century, two local publishers, D.C.  Divry and Kentrikon, emerged in New  York  City. D.  C.  Divry  was owned by Demosthenes Constantopoulos who began writing dictionaries and books for Greeks learning English, which were categorized by the Bureau of Education under “Books for Aliens.” Divry’s book, which included dialogues in both languages, first appeared in 1910. He then became known for his Readers (Anagnostika), and The Alphabet Book of the Greek Child (Το Alfavitarion tou Ellinopaidos). In 1927, the Greek American newspaper National Herald, published a children’s  Alphabet Book (Alfavitarion) that was revised in 1930 and referred to as the  New Alphabet Book  (Neon Alfavitarion). Since many Greeks of this era did not have access to Greek school, the book served as a teacher for the immigrant children. Before writing the children’s alphabet book, the author Venetia Vidali, sought advice from 25 Greek and American educators. The book which circulated in two parts was considered a prototype due to its fine subject matter and the aesthetics which contained rich images in eight colors. The first page of the book also included a signed letter from then, Greek minister of education, Georgios Papandreou.33 Except for adult language books which often included translations, none of the above-mentioned books were written for Greek as a second language, perhaps since most students arrived at Greek school already speaking the language and also because most Greek teachers and authors were unfamiliar with the pedagogy for second language acquisition during this era. Greek textbooks did not incorporate the foreign language direct method, often called the natural method, that was popular at the time both in Europe and the United States. Having broken away from the grammar translation method of the nineteenth century, this method was teacher/ learner centered and interactive. It focused mainly on speaking through the use of student teacher dialogues. In accordance to the direct method, grammar rules were never taught, nor did instruction focus on verbs and

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

107

verb conjugations. Students acquired both grammar and vocabulary through the use of situational contexts and drills.34 Whereas mimicry and memorization were used in drills and exercises, this method differed greatly from the teacher centered Greek instruction in which students only spoke when reciting and memorizing grammatical language patterns, prayers, and other class content. After Archbishop Athenagoras established the Supreme  Educational Council, more attention was given to Greek school textbooks. Contests were held for new textbooks and it was determined that the primary grades would be instructed in Modern Greek and the upper grades in ­katharevousa.35 Frustration grew in finding textbooks that would be appropriate for the more Americanized second-generation Greek Americans. Dr. Theodore Papaloizos, a disheartened teacher from St. Sophia Greek Orthodox Church in Maryland chose to resolve the issue by writing in his free time, material that was more focused on teaching Greek as a second language.36 In 1957, Dr. Papaloizos published his first book. Receiving positive feedback, he kept writing and publishing additional books which many Greek schools adopted and still use today. His books were among the first to: incorporate new vocabulary and phrases translated into English while assessing students through objective questions that included multiple choice, fill-in-the blank, matching, and true–false exercises—all of which students were exposed to in American public schools. The Papaloizos books also presented both Greek and Greek American culture and themes that focused on the American-born, second-­ generation Greek students. This would be seen in his future books such as A Trip to Greece (Taksidi Stin Ellada) that tells the story of a class trip to Greece where students can visit various sites; The Greek American (Ellino Amerikanopoulo) a story about a fifth-grade Greek American boy who attended Greek School in America. Finally, many of the textbook series included audio cassettes with both dialogues and exercises that were particularly helpful for self-study. Fifty years later, Papaloizos Publications, with an inventory totaling over 100 titles of instructional materials in print, on DVD, on CD, and on CD-Rom,37 would be taken over by his sons who continue his legacy.38 By the mid-twentieth century, teachers who had trained at St. Basil’s Academy were being assigned to various Greek communities; however, there were not enough graduates to fill all the positions. Thus, several Greek schools still employed unqualified teachers and continued to operate in the outdated system. We can verify this by examining some

108 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

comments made from students who attended the Buffalo Greek School in the 1950s and 1960s. They indicated that although some of their teachers spoke the Greek language fluently and were dedicated to the preservation of Greek language and culture among the younger generation, they were unqualified to teach, especially since “they could not relate well to the Greek American experience.”39 The method of teaching was completely different from that of the American school. Greek schools in America were employing the old schooling model that was dominant in Greece but falling behind modern educational practices.40 In 1973, the teacher preparatory school was merged with Hellenic College in Brookline, Massachusetts and a four-year BA program was created with a focus on teaching Greek. The goal of this program was to train a number of more qualified teachers who could be sent to Greek schools across the nation. In the late 1970s, the Archdiocese and the Greek Ministry of National  Education  and Religious Affairs began publishing language books. Under the supervision of Archdiocese director of education, Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, the series Mathaino Ellinika - I Learn Greek was written by his wife, Athena, an educator. Another series, focusing on Greek culture and history, was published and included: The Minoans, The Mycenaeans, and Our Roots and The Golden Age of Athens. Hatziemmanuel also supervised the development of a self-study Greek language program consisting of books, cassettes, and video cassettes.41 In 1979, Demosthenes Triantafillou presented his three-book kindergarten series Mathaino Ellinika (I Learn Greek). Greek schools now had a larger selection of Greek books to circulate throughout the schools, however most were still written with the assumption that the students came to school speaking the language. Although several of the above-mentioned textbooks claimed to be written for second-generation Greek Americans, they lacked much content that foreign language textbooks in American public schools contained while also falling short from including current pedagogical and second language methodologies. Most Greek primers were still based on instruction in Greece using the analytic phonics approach in which children analyze letter-sound relationships in words. This clashed with the whole language approach and inventive spelling that was now being introduced in American public schools. In the area of foreign language instruction, the CLT communicative language approach was also gaining popularity in foreign language programs and textbooks across the country. Teachers were encouraged to use classroom activities and textbook exercises that

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

109

included role playing, collaborative group work, scavenger hunts, interviewing and total physical response—all of which were still unheard of in Greek school classrooms. Still based on rote memorization and recall, the Greek textbooks failed to utilize higher thinking skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The physical appearance differed greatly from other foreign language textbooks in that the books lacked authentic real-life photographs and cultural images—making them unexciting and trivial in content. Lastly, the textbooks failed to reflect on the students’ own culture, lives, and personal interests. In the 1980s several schools adopted the textbook series, My Language (I glossa mou). Originally written for public schools in Greece, for years, the books remained the only available textbooks, sent over for the Greek schools in America. The textbooks were eventually considered unsuitable for students educated outside Greece.42 Within the same decade, the Pedagogical Institute of Greece developed a series of pre-­ primary to secondary education textbooks entitled Mathaino Ellinika. The books were specifically written for Greek American Children who did not speak Greek at home, however they could also be adapted to classrooms comprised of Greek speaking students. The 6-level series which consisted of 16 books, was designed for beginners, intermediate, and advanced learners. Based on the communicative approach, the textbooks incorporated activities, grammar exercises that promoted real communication and cassettes with songs and dialogues. The books contained live photos and illustrations that were both colorful and authentic. Stories focused on both Greek and Greek American themes in which the students could relate too. Each textbook was accompanied by a teacher’s manual that specifically provided suggestions on how to teach Greek as a second language. Several Greek schools in America were chosen to pilot the new textbooks including St. Haralambos Aristotle Greek School in Niles, Illinois. It is through this initiative that the GSL (Greek as a Second Language) program was created.

St. Haralambos Aristotle Greek School GSL Program In the early 1940s, a handful of Greek Orthodox immigrants, living on the northwest side of Chicago began to organize a small parish, Holy Taxiarchai-Archangels in the Humboldt Park neighborhood. The

110 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

community did not advance to purchase a church until Father Chrysostomos Economakos was recruited in 1951.43 Through funds, the parish members then purchased a former Protestant church on 1035 North Richmond Avenue. The priest requested that the name of St. Haralambos be added to the church’s original title, in memory of his father.44 Andrew Kopan explains that the parish of St. Haralambos Holy Taxiarchai-Archangels was comprised mainly of Greek immigrants living on the near Northwest Side of Chicago.45 By 1956, the parishioners established the Aristotle Greek School with Father Economakos becoming its first teacher.46 The following year, both the church and Greek school moved several blocks north, to 1357 North California. They relocated in a building that was formerly a Jewish synagogue. According to Kopan, in 1956 enrollment was at 43 students. Once enrollment tripled, a two-story building adjacent to the church became the new home for Aristotle Greek School.47 By 1973 enrollment reached 196 students.48 As the neighborhood began to change and community members started moving to the suburbs, the parishioners decided to sell St. Haralambos. In 1976, the parish purchased a parcel of land in Niles, Illinois. It took several years to reestablish the parish, find a permanent priest, and raise funds for a new church and community center that would house Aristotle Greek School. In 1982, Father Constantine Botsis was assigned as interim priest and eventually became permanent. Throughout the years, as the community grew, the parish succeeded in accomplishing its goals. By 1990, Aristotle School had two sections, the weekly afternoon school that functioned twice a week and the Saturday GSL program. By the mid-1990s, the total enrollment for both schools would reach over 300 students. In May of 1989, a teacher’s conference was held for Greek School teachers from across the country at St. Basil’s Academy in Garrison, New York. Two educators, Manolis Vasilakis and Zoe Kavvalaki from the Pedagogical Institute (Paidagogiko Institouto) of Athens presented their new textbook series entitled Mathaino Ellinika. In collaboration with the Pedagogical Institute and the Archdiocese Office of Education, the textbook that was designed specifically for Greek American children learning Greek would be piloted in a few selected schools across the country. After showing much enthusiasm for the book, Dr. Angelyn BalodimasBartolomei, a conference participant, returned to Chicago to discuss the book and pilot program to Father Dean Botsis. In June, the St. Haralambos Aristotle Greek School was selected as a pilot school by the Hellenic Republic and the Greek Archdiocese of America. Accordingly, Father

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

111

Dean Botsis of St. Haralambos Church and Professor Angelyn BalodimasBartolomei designed and initiated an experimental, pilot program class for the upcoming 1989–1990 school year. Initially 11 children signed up however, within months, after word was out about the program, the enrollment reached 21. The first year was challenging, especially because 21 children of different ages and competencies were placed in one classroom. Half of the older children had previously attended the traditional Greek school and knew some Greek. Since the pilot textbook was designed for the beginning level, it was not age-appropriate for the older children who were enrolled. Thus, additional material had to be quickly created either with handouts or by modifying the preexisting textbooks that were too difficult such as those in the Papaloizos series. Nevertheless, the program was met with much enthusiasm and success, demonstrating that this type of Greek school was a priority for educating future Greek-American children. It was immediately decided that the Aristotle GSL (Greek as a Second Language) Program would be launched the following school year (1990–1991) with lessons taking place on Saturday mornings, from 9 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. The mission of the GSL program was to teach Greek as a second language in an environment conducive to the needs of the children while continuing to pass on the traditions and teachings of the Greek Orthodox faith, culture, and heritage. Only children whose primary language was English and had little or no command of the Greek language would be accepted into the program. Children who spoke Greek fluently would attend the already established, traditional afternoon Greek School which operated twice a week. The problems and challenges encountered during the pilot year helped in developing the curriculum, class materials, and program. It was evident that levels would be the only solution to successful teaching. Therefore, children were carefully placed in such, according to similarity in age, performance, and academic ability. Each year a new level was added as the enrollment increased and the students advanced. When necessary, sublevels were also created for students who were performing in between two levels. Eventually the GSL program consisted of a preschool class and seven levels (1–6 and upper) with enrollment reaching over 100 students and remaining at that for several years. The main goal of the GSL program was to teach Greek as a second language to children in a stress-free and favorable environment. A variety of methods, approaches, and strategies that included TPR-Total Physical

112 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

Response and Communicative Language Teaching were embedded into every area of instruction. A competency-based curriculum indicating what the students were expected to learn was designed for each level (See Appendices). Whereas emphasis was placed on conversation, the other three language skills (listening, reading and writing) were highlighted through the curriculum that included Greek geography, history, archeology, religion, mythology and culture-which today is considered one of the 5 Cs of language learning (Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, Communities). In addition to incorporating a variety of teaching methods and a curriculum appropriate for second language learning, the didactic material played an important role and only that suitable for second language instruction was used. Each year, the Pedagogical Institute sent over the next level book of the textbook series. The authors constantly asked for our feedback on the material and often modified the books based on our comments. Eventually, nearly 75 percent of the Greek American schools use this series49 the series was retired either due to the authors/educators from the Pedagogical Institute retiring or being replaced by others when a new political party came to rule. Whereas, the beginning level books were appropriate for the young students, the more advanced texts proved to be too difficult and didn’t meet the criteria of the GSL program. Thus, additional new teaching material was either created by our teachers or purchased from other sources which included the Asterias textbooks by Evangelia Georgantzis and Greek phrase and grammar books published in America. The teaching material and curriculum were continuously updated and eventually computers and the language lab became part of the program. Modern-day travel videos were used to familiarize the children with Greece. Current Greek educational games, toys, and flashcards were purchased from teachers’ stores in Greece and America for all levels. As in most modern-day foreign language settings, visuals and labels also became an important feature in each classroom. Numerous studies have proven that learning outside of the classroom is an essential part of the student’s academic and personal development. In the GSL program, activities outside of the classroom played an important role in helping to create a stress-free and favorable environment. Every month, the school calendar consisted of a different hands-on activity. One of the students’ favorite activities was Greek cooking in which Presvytera Georgia (Father Dean’s wife) would take the students into the community

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

113

hall kitchen and teach various Greek meals. Her menu ranged from sweets, to meals and even prosphora—the holy bread used in the liturgy. Other activities included singing, traditional Greek dancing, Greek arts and crafts, and Greek cartoons. The children also learned more about their religion by visiting the church and having the priest explain the significance of the icons, vestments, and other ecclesiastical artifacts. Activities were often centered around upcoming holidays. During the Christmas season, the students made Greek Christmas ornaments, decorations, and cards. After the New Year when school resumed, Father Dean gathered the children to cut the Vasilopita (St. Basil’s) bread. Before Easter, children made Lambathes (Easter Candles) and sold them after church to raise money for the program. An occasional field trip relating to a Greek theme (a Greek grocery store, restaurant, Hellenic Museum) was also worked into the schedule. Another fun and enjoyable activity focused on establishing Greek pen pals from an elementary school in Greece. Since internet and email were still non-existent, the students wrote letters that were sent directly to the school. Furthermore, the GSL program offered Greek dance classes every Saturday after class for students who were interested in learning a wide array of dances from Greece. The lessons were available for a minimal fee. For decades, many Greek schools employed unqualified and ineffective teachers. Studies have demonstrated that effective teachers are one the most important factors contributing to student learning and achievement.50 The GSL program put much emphasis on teacher selection. It was critical that the teaching staff consisted not only of teachers that were highly proficient in the Greek language but also of those who were currently teaching in American schools. Being familiar with the American educational system and understanding how the students were educated in this country were crucial factors for teaching Greek American students. The teachers also needed to be familiar on how to teach a foreign language to children. The GSL’s dedicated and highly qualified teaching staff greatly contributed to the program’s success. Through monthly meetings, workshops, and professional development, the teachers shared new ideas, skills, and knowledge that they had acquired in their own schools. The students’ progress was evaluated mainly through informal assessment grounded by the competency-based curriculum. Each Saturday, the teachers followed a lesson plan and evaluated each student’s comprehension of the various taught material often through quizzes or worksheets. Twice a year, checklists were used to formally assess the students both

114 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

written and orally. The results were compiled into a progress report that was also based on a check system rather than a grade system. Dealing specifically with level objectives, these reports clearly demonstrated the child’s progress. Absences and tardiness were not included in this progress report. Through this modified marking system that differed from the traditional Greek school report card, the GSL program created a non-­threatening and stress-free environment. The material was checked off as follows: 1. Frequently demonstrates–the student has mastered the material taught. 2. Is now learning–the student is in the process of learning the objective. 3. Needs improvement–the student needs to learn and improve in this area. Throughout the year numerous, GSL school events took place. Every October and February, the School hosted an Open House. Parents had the opportunity to meet teachers and learn about the class objectives by sitting through their child’s class session. Professor Balodimas-Bartolomei also gave presentations on second language learning along with guidelines and suggestions on how to reinforce the learned material at home. Guest speakers were often invited to speak on specific themes. As in most Greek schools around the world, the GSL program held two annual programs. The first was the March 25th Greek Independence Day Program commemorating the start of the War for Greek independence in 1821. It is through this program that the children relived the glorious victory of their forefathers and foremothers’  fight for independence after being under Turkish Occupation for 400 years. The GSL program placed a strong emphasis on celebrating and understanding the meaning of freedom rather than accentuating the actual war against the Turkish oppressors. As in the traditional Greek school, children dressed up in ethnic costumes and participated in plays, sang patriotic songs, recited poems, and Greek danced. Many of the traditional poems and songs were rewritten according to the students’ level of proficiency. The second event was the annual end of the school year program or Exetasis, as it is called in Greek. It honored the graduates and all the students who were promoted to the next level. Children proudly demonstrated their achievements by participating in various Greek dances, skits, songs, and poems—all of which again were tailored to their academic level. At both events, students who played in public school bands were invited to bring their musical

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

115

instruments and accompany the students as they sang songs. Weeks before the events, the students gathered after school to practice. Another strength of the GSL program was the P.T.A group that was comprised of the students’ parents. Through their continuous help and generosity, the program was able to grow, achieve high standards, and purchase an array of educational material that was used throughout the school. The parents also took an active role in participating in school programs, field trips, and various other events. For 15 years, the GSL program excelled and achieved it goals, under the guidance of Professor Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei, the dedicated teaching staff, the PTA, and through the love and support of Father Dean Botsis and Presvytera Georgia Botsis. Based on the belief, “If our children are to understand who they are, they must first understand where they came from,” the program managed to help nearly 2000 second-, third-, and fourth-generation Greek American children develop and be proud of their ethnic identity while also permeating the Greek language and heritage. Unfortunately, in 2004, after receiving her Ph.D., Dr. Balodimas-­ Bartolomei left the GSL program to take on a new position in the university. Since then, the school has had other directors with Mrs. Andriana Panagiotou currently serving in this capacity. Beginning in 2012, the Saturday school stopped being referred to as a GSL school since today most Greek schools are operating second language schools for second- and third-generation children. When Mrs. Panagiotou first took on the directorship, many Greek schools in the area were in a decline, including the Saturday program that only had 30 enrolled students. Through extensive advertising, reaching out to parents both in person and on Facebook, Mrs. Panagiotou, has managed to bring the enrollment to 130 students. Her passion for teaching Greek is also a major factor for bringing several new students into the program. The school currently uses the Archdiocese Greek School textbook series Ta Ellinika Mou. It also prepares students for the Ellinomatheia Exam that if passed leads to a worldwide recognized certificate of attainment in the Greek Language, in which several students have successfully obtained. As Mrs. Panagiotou mentioned in an interview, both she and her staff listen very carefully to every parent’s request for improving the program as this helps them achieve their school goals. Since teaching Greek is a challenge, especially on Saturday mornings when children would rather be sleeping or participating in some other activity, the teachers must make Greek school fun—just as it was in the days of the GSL program.

116 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

Conclusion For decades, Greek Americans were successful in establishing Greek schools that aimed at imbuing thousands of students with their rich and ancestral language, history, religion, and culture. In addition to enhancing knowledge and Hellenic consciousness, Greek schools served as an important social and cultural vehicle for many Greek American children. At first, most of the students were children of immigrants who came from homes where Greek was the spoken language. With the help and determination of the grandparents and parents, they managed to keep the ancestral language alive and raise children who became fluent in the mother tongue— many which often started American school with a limited knowledge of English. Within the last decades of the twentieth century, many transitions impinged the status of Greek education. The cessation of Greek immigration and an increase of mixed marriages lessened the need and desire for children to speak Greek at home. Furthermore, competitive extracurricular activities such as sports and music that were deemed more important, redirected the attention of both students and parents away from the traditional Greek education classes. For the second-, third-, and fourth-generation Greek Americans who continued to enroll in Greek schools, new challenges arose when they were placed in classrooms with Greek speaking children. The methods of teaching remained the same for all students with no instructional and curriculum modifications being applied for those with little or no command of the Greek language. This led to much confusion for both the student and teacher, resulting in a very high dropout rate and eventually, a tremendous decline in afternoon Greek schools. In 1990, a new type of Greek school—the Aristotle GSL Program of St. Haralambos Church was designed for second-, third- and fourth-­ generation Greek American children who did not speak Greek in their homes. For nearly two decades, the school succeeded in permeating the Greek language and culture to nearly 2000 students. The program became a model for several other Greek schools in the United States. Fortunately, many of the current Greek schools have also broken the traditional Greek school mold and are operating under the GSL principles that were established nearly 30 years ago. In short, for Greek schools to survive, this is the only way that they can continue to attract Greek American children of the twenty-first century.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

117

Appendix G.S.L. Program Curriculum  reschool Program: Four Years Old P Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Clearly pronounce name. 2. Recognize name written. 3. Identify family members. 4. Tell the names of family members. 5. Repeat the days of the week. 6. Count from 1–10. 7. Identify colors. 8. Recite the alphabet. 9. Say basic greetings. 10. Recognize name of basic fruit. 11. Recognize name of vegetable. 12. Recognize name of food. 13. Identify simple buildings such as the house, church. 14. Identify simple animals. 15. Identify simple body parts. 16. Recognize means of transportation. 17. Ask basic questions, using where, what. 18. Use simple verbs in 1st and 2nd person forms. 19. Use simple adjectives. 20. Follow simple directions. 21. Repeat simple words and phrases. 22. Repeat simple poems and songs. 23. Identify basic shapes. 24. Make sign of cross and say simple prayers. 25. Identify Greek holidays.  evel One: 5–6 Years Old L Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Clearly pronounce name. 2. Write name. 3. Identify family members.

118 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

4. Know the names of all family members. 5. Recite the days of the week. 6. Recognize the months of the year. 7. Count from 1–20. 8. Recite telephone number. 9. Identify colors. 10. Recite alphabet in order. 11. Identify Greek letters and sounds. 12. Use basic Greetings. 13. Recognize and name basic fruit. 14. Recognize and name vegetables. 15. Recognize and name food and tableware. 16. Identify buildings in the community. 17. Identify animals. 18. Identify body parts. 19. Identify simple means of transportation. 20. Ask basic questions using where, what. 21. Understand simple present tense verbs in all persons. 22. Use simple adjectives in all forms. 23. Use correct articles in front of nouns. 24. Follow directions. 25. Repeat simple phrases. 26. Know the names of shapes. 27. Repeat poems and simple songs. 28. Make sign of cross and say simple prayers. 29. Identify holidays.  evel Two: Ages 6–7 Years Old (with Little or no Previous L Greek Instruction) Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Recognize letters both orally and written. 2. Recite alphabet in order. 3. Recognize the difference between Greek letters and English letters including the sound each letter makes. 4. Read simple words. 5. Write simple words. 6. Know basic greetings and responses.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

119

7. Know days of the week. 8. Know months of the year. 9. Know different seasons. 10. Count from 1–50. 11. Know all colors. 12. Understand adjective endings. 13. Understand articles and nouns. 14. Name rooms of the house. 15. Identify shapes. 16. Identify animals. 17. Identify family members. 18. Know parts of body. 19. Ask simple questions. 20. Answer simple questions. 21. Identify fruit, vegetables, and food names. 22. Identify buildings. 23. Follow directions. 24. Know basic verbs in present tense forms. 25. Recite Lord’s Prayer. 26. Understand holidays, customs, and traditions. 27. Know simple Greek dances.  evel Three: Ages 7–8 Years Old L Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Know and identify all letters of the alphabet. 2. Identify double vowels and consonants. 3. Read and write basic words. 4. Write words without seeing word written. 5. Count from 1–100. 6. Recite the days of the week. 7. Recite the months of the year. 8. Identify seasons. 9. Identify fruit, vegetables, and food names. 10. Identify colors. 11. Tell time in Greek. 12. Use correct articles with nouns, 13. Understand simple verb endings in present tense.

120 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

4. Understand different adjective endings. 1 15. Use and answer basic greetings. 16. Communicate with simple phrases. 17. Follow directions and commands. 18. Talk about one’s self. 19. Ask questions. 20. Use personal pronouns. 21. Identify animals. 22. Recognize professional names. 23. Identify family names. 24. Describe objects. 25. Identify Greece on the map. 26. Recite Lord’s Prayer. 27. Identify Greek holidays, saints, and customs.  ance Basic Dances. Level Four: Ages 8–9 Years Old D Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Easily pronounce and write first and Cast name. 2. Count from 1–500. 3. Determine the date. 4. Determine the year. 5. Recite days and months. 6. Easily read any word. 7. Recognize all double consonants and vowels. 8. Easily use greetings. 9. Describe objects and communicate in simple way. 10. Repeat simple sentences correctly. 11. Understand all present tense verbs. 12. Use articles in all three genders. 13. Understand pronouns. 14. Use noun endings in singular and plural correctly. 15. Translate from Greek into English. 16. Identify all rooms of the house. 17. Identify buildings in the community. 18. Identify all professions. 19. Identify all family members. 20. Identify different regions in Greece.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

121

21. Determine time. 22. Understand all question words. 24. Recite Lord’s Prayer and other prayers. 25. Identify Greek holidays, saints, and customs. 26. Dance basic Greek dances.  evel Five: Ages 9–10 Years Old L Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Easily pronounce first and last name. 2. Count from 1–1000. 3. Determine the date. 4. Determine the year. 5. Recite all days of the week and months of the year. 6. Identify time. 7. Easily read any word. 8. Recognize double consonants and vowels. 9. Use greetings correctly. 10. Repeat sentences correctly. 11. Ask questions correctly. 12. Describe objects and self. 13. Write compositions. 14. Translate from Greek into English. 15. Use present tense verbs for all persons. 16. Recognize verbs in past tense. 17. Use articles and nouns correctly. 18. Understand all noun endings in singular and plural 19. Can change adjectives to match nouns in all tenses. 20. Use pronouns correctly. 21. Identify fruit, vegetables, and food names. 22. Identify all professions. 23. Identify members of family. 24. Recite Lord’s Prayer and other prayers. 25. Know all regions of Greece. 26. Identify important Saints, holidays, and customs. 27. Dance basic and advanced dances. 28. Follow directions.

122 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

 evel Six: Ages 10–11 Years Old L Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Count and identify all numbers. 2. Determine date and year. 3. Recite acc months, seasons, and days of week. 4. Easily read any unfamiliar word. 5. Follow all directions. 6. Describe objects and communicate well. 7. Use all greetings correctly. 8. Use all articles with nouns correctly. 9. Understand all noun endings. 10. Use verbs (regular and irregular) in present tense. 11. Use passive voice verbs correctly in present tense. 12. Use all verb types correctly in past tense. 13. Use all verb types correctly in future & continuous tense. 14. Understand the present and past perfect tense verbs. 15. Use nouns in objective case. 16. Use pronouns correctly. 17. Understand diminutives. 18. Recognize English words developed from Greek ones. 19. Identify all clothing. 20. Identify all food products. 21. Identify furniture. 22. Write letters and compositions in Greek. 23. Explain important events in Greek history. 24. Describe geographical parts of Greece. 25. Identify Saints, holidays, customs. 26. Dance various Greek dances. 27. Recite Creed. 28. Explain the Greek contributions to civilization.  pper Level: Ages Eleven and Up U Through classroom instruction, the child can do the following in Greek: 1. Recognition of all numbers, dates, and years. 2. Recite all months, seasons, and holidays. 3. Easily read unfamiliar words.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

123

4. Easily translate from Greek into English. 5. Recognize English words derived from Greek words. 6. Follow all directions. 7. Easily communicate. 8. To express oneself in Greek. 9. Use all articles with nouns correctly. 10. Use verbs in present tense. 11. Use verbs in past and present tense. 12. Use verbs in continuous tense. 13. Use verbs in future tense. 14. Use commands. 15. Use nouns in objective case. 16. Understand diminutives. 17. Carefully use pronouns. 18. Identify clothing. 19. Be comfortable in telling time. 20. Understand Greek currency. 21. Ability to correspond in Greek. 22. Write letters and compositions in Greek. 23. Write in Cursive Greek. 24. Explain important events in Greek history. 25. Know important saints’ days and holidays. 26. Identify Greek customs and traditions. 27. Dance various Greek dances. 28. Explain the Greek contributions to civilization. 29. Explain the different types of Greek columns.

Notes 1. Immigration in the United States, “Greek Immigrants,” accessed October 8, 2018, http://immigrationtounitedstates.org/529-greek-immigrants.html 2. Theodore Saloutos. The Greeks in the United States. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1964). 3. Nikos Nikolidakis, “Greek Education in the United States,” Etudes Helliniques 13, no. 2(Autumn 2005). 4. Andrew Kopan. “Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival.” PhD diss., The University of Chicago, 1974, 270.

124 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

5. Ibid. 6. Hellenic American Academy, “History,” accessed October 8, 2018, http://www.hellenicaa.org/history-about 7. Annunciation Elkins Park Greek School. accessed October 7, 2018, http://anngoc.org/ministries/cultural-ministries/greekschool 8. Hellenic American Academy, “History.” 9. Lydia Fish, “The Greek School at the Hellenic Orthodox Church of the Annunciation, Buffalo, New  York,” in Ethnic Heritage and Language Schools in America. Studies in American Folklife no. 4, ed. Elena Bradunas and Brett Topping (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1988), 249–265. 10. Greek Heritage Society of Southern California, “Greek School,” accessed October 7, 2018, http://www.greekheritagesociety.org/greekschool.htm 11. Fevronia K.  Soumakis, “A Sacred Paideia: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, Immigration, and Education in New York City, 1959–1979” (PhD diss., Columbia University, 2015), 15. 12. Greek Orthodox Ladies Philoptochos Society, Inc. “More Than Seventy Years of Christian Philanthropy. A History of Philoptochos,” accessed May 9, 2019. https://www.philoptochos.org/index/history/historypt2 13. George Papaioannou. From Mars Hill to Manhattan: The Greek Orthodox in America under Athenagoras I. (Minneapolis: Light and Life, 1976). 14. Ibid. 15. Soumakis, “A Sacred Paideia,” 81. 16. Papaioannou, From Mars Hill to Manhattan. 17. Spyros D. Orfanos and Sam J. Tsemberis, “A Needs Assessment of Greek American Schools in New York City,” in Reading Greek America: Studies in the Experience of Greeks in the United States, ed. Spyros D.  Orfanos (New York: Pella Publishing Company, Inc., 2002), 195. 18. St. Basil Academy. “The History of St Basil,” accessed October 12, 2018, http://www.stbasil.goarch.org/about_us/ 19. Greek News. Greek  – American Weekly Newspaper. “Leaders in Greece and the “Omogenia” Mourn Iakovos.” accessed May 9, 2019. http:// www.greeknewsonline.com/leaders-in-greece-and-the-omogenia-mourniakovos/ 20. Soumakis, “A Sacred Paideia,” 2. 21. “A Timeline of Greek Immigration.” accessed October 16, 2018, http:// chnm.gmu.edu/greekam/timeline.html 22. Ibid. 23. Charles C. Moskos, Greek Americans: Struggle and Success, 2nd ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. 1990). 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

125

26. Brenda McCallum and Nancy Faires Conklin, “Lebanese Arabic School at St. Elias Maronite Catholic Church and Greek School at Holy Trinity-­ Holy Cross Greek Orthodox Cathedral Birmingham, Alabama.” in Ethnic Heritage and Language Schools in America. Studies in American Folklife no. 4, ed. Elena Bradunas and Brett Topping (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1988), 195–248. 27. Saloutos. The Greeks in the United States.73–74. 28. Brenda McCallum and Nancy Faires Conklin, “Lebanese Arabic School at St. Elias Maronite Catholic Church and Greek School at Holy Trinity-­ Holy Cross Greek Orthodox Cathedral Birmingham, Alabama,” 219. 29. Ibid., 220. 30. Ibid. 31. Ibid., 73. 32. Greek Heritage Society of Southern California. “Greek School,” accessed October 16, 2018, http://www.greekheritagesociety.org/greekschool.htm 33. Εθνικός Κήρυξ (NationalHerald). “Στο «Βήμα» αλφαβητάριο του 1930 που είχε εκδώσει ο «Ε.Κ.» για τα Ελληνόπουλα της ΝΥ. In “Vima” the Alphabet Book of 1930 that the Hellenic Herald published for the Greek children of New York.” 27 Νοεμβρίου, 2017. 34. Eileen Riza, Noorchaya Yahya, Carmen Morales-Jones, Hanizah Zainuddin. Fundamentals of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages in K-12 Mainstream Classrooms. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing; 4th edition, August 31, 2015, 93. 35. Soumakis, “A Sacred Paideia,” 79. 36. Amazon. “My First Book. About the author.” accessed October 21, 2018, https://www.amazon.com/My-First-Book-Theodore-Papaloizos/ dp/0932416136 37. Ibid. 38. Catherine Tsounis. “Learn Greek the Easy Way.” Greek US Reporter. Accessed May 13, 2019, https://usa.greekreporter.com/2013/10/08/ learn-greek-the-easy-way/ 39. Lydia Fish, “The Greek School,” 254. 40. Panagoula Diamanti-Karanou. “The Relationship Between Homeland and Diaspora: The Case of Greece and the Greek American Community.” (PhD diss., Northeastern University, 2015). 41. The Greek Archdiocese of America, 2015 “Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, 94, Passes Away in the Lord” accessed October 16, 2018, https://www. goarch.org/-/emmanuel-hatziemmanuel-94-passes-away-in-the-lord 42. Hellenic Link Inc. “A Hellenic Education Plan for America,” accessed October 16, 2018 http://helleniclink.org/wp-content/docs/eplanenglish1.doc

126 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

43. Holy Taxiarhai & Saint Haralambos Greek Orthodox Church. “Honoring the Past,” in Celebrating 50  Years of Parish Life. Holy Taxiarchai & St. Haralambos Greek Orthodox Church.1951–2001, 16. 44. Ibid. 45. Kopan, Andrew. “Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival.” PhD diss., The University of Chicago, 1974. 317. 46. Holy Taxiarhai & Saint Haralambos Greek Orthodox Church. “Honoring the Past,” in Celebrating 50  Years of Parish Life. Holy Taxiarchai & St. Haralambos Greek Orthodox Church.1951–2001, 19. 47. Holy Taxiarchai, 22. 48. Kopan, Andrew, 318. 49. Hellenic Link Inc. “A Hellenic Education Plan for America,” accessed October 16, 2018 http://helleniclink.org/wp-content/docs/eplanenglish1.doc 50. Darling Hammond, Linda & Bransford, John. Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do. United Kingdom: Wiley, 2007, 14–15.

References Amazon. About the Author. https://www.amazon.com/My-First-BookTheodore-Papaloizos/dp/0932416136. Accessed 21 Oct 2018. Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church. Annunciation Elkins Park Greek School. http://anngoc.org/ministries/cultural-ministries/greekschool. Accessed 7 Oct 2007. Diamanti-Karanou, Panagoula. 2015. The Relationship Between Homeland and Diaspora: The Case of Greece and the Greek American Community. PhD diss., Northeastern University. Εθνικός Κήρυξ (National Herald). 2017. Στο «Βήμα» αλφαβητάριο του 1930 που είχε εκδώσει ο «Ε.Κ.» για τα Ελληνόπουλα της ΝΥ. In “Vima” the Alphabet Book of 1930 that the Hellenic Herald Published for the Greek Children of New York. 27 Νοεμβρίου. Fish, Lydia. 1988. The Greek School at the Hellenic Orthodox Church of the Annunciation. Buffalo, New York. In Ethnic Heritage and Language Schools in America, ed. Elena Bradunas and Brett Topping, vol. 4, 249–265. Washington, DC: American Folklife Center, Library of Congress. Greek Heritage Society of Southern California. Greek School. http://www. greekheritagesociety.org/greekschool.htm. Accessed 7 Oct 2018. Greek News. Greek  – American Weekly Newspaper. Leaders in Greece and the “Omogenia” Mourn Iakovos. http://www.greeknewsonline.com/leaders-ingreece-and-the-omogenia-mourn-iakovos/. Accessed 9 May 2019.

5  BREAKING THE TRADITIONAL GREEK SCHOOL MOLD… 

127

Greek Orthodox Archdiocese. 2015. The Archdiocesan School System. http://www. goarch.org/archdiocese/departments/greekeducation/archdiocesanschools. Accessed 10 Jan 2019. Greek Orthodox Ladies Philoptochos Society, Inc. More Than Seventy Years of Christian Philanthropy. A History of Philoptochos. https://www.philoptochos. org/index/history/historypt2. Accessed 9 May 2019. Hammond-Darling, Linda, and John Bransford. 2007. Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do. San Francisco: Wiley. Hellenic American Academy. History. https://sites.google.com/a/haamail.net/ hellenic-academy/calendar/history. Accessed 8 Oct 2018. Hellenic Link Inc. A Hellenic Education Plan for America. http://helleniclink. org/wp-content/docs/eplanenglish1.doc. Accessed 16 Oct 2018. Immigration to the United States. 2015. Greek Immigrants. http://immigrationtounitedstates.org/529-greek-immigrants.html. Accessed 8 Oct 2018. Kopan, Andrew. 1974. Education and Greek Immigrants in Chicago, 1892–1973: A Study in Ethnic Survival. PhD diss., The University of Chicago. McCallum, Brenda, and Conklin Faires Nancy. 1988. Lebanese Arabic School at St. Elias Maronite Catholic Church and Greek School at Holy Trinity-Holy Cross Greek Orthodox Cathedral, Birmingham, Alabama. In Ethnic Heritage and Language Schools in America, ed. Elena Bradunas and Brett Topping, vol. 4, 195–248. Washington, DC: American Folklife Center, Library of Congress. Moskos, Charles C. 1990. Greek Americans: Struggle and Success. 2nd ed. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Nikolidakis, Nikos. 2005. Greek Education in the United States. Etudes Helliniques 13 (2): 79–97. Orfanos, Spyros D., and Sam J. Tsemberis. 2002. A Needs Assessment of Greek American Schools in New York City. In Reading Greek America. Studies in the Experience of Greeks in the United States. New  York: Pella Publishing Company, Inc. Papaioannou, George. 1976. From Mars Hill to Manhattan: The Greek Orthodox in America Under Athenagoras I. Minneapolis: Light and Life. Saloutos, Theodore. 1964. The Greeks in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Soumakis, Fevronia K. 2015. A Sacred Paideia: The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, Immigration, and Education in New  York City, 1959–1979. PhD diss., Columbia University. St. Basil Academy. The History of St. Basil. http://www.stbasil.goarch.org/about_ us/. Accessed 12 Oct 2018. The Greek Archdiocese of America. 2015. Emmanuel Hatziemmanuel, 94, Passes Away in the Lord. https://www.goarch.org/-/emmanuel-hatziemmanuel94-passes-away-in-the-lord. Accessed 16 Oct 2018.

128 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI

Timeline of Greek Immigration. http://chnm.gmu.edu/greekam/timeline.html. Accessed 16 Oct 2018. Tsounis, Catherine. Learn Greek the Easy Way. Greek US Reporter. https:// usa.greekreporter.com/2013/10/08/learn-greek-the-easy-way/. Accessed 13 May 2019.

CHAPTER 6

An American and Greek Language Integrated Curriculum for a Dual Language Immersion Program: The Case of Odyssey Charter School Marina Mattheoudakis

Introduction Founded in 2006, Odyssey Charter School (OCS) is a K-12 school in Wilmington, Delaware. Its story began in 2004 when Chapter 95 of the local Greek American organization, the American Hellenic Education Progressive Association, also known as AHEPA, filed an application to the State Board of Education for a K-5 Charter School that would teach the Greek Language and Hellenic History and Culture (The Greek Program) with an additional focus on Mathematics and Sciences. The school was created by the AHEPA as a gesture of gratitude and to contribute to the quality of life of the community via the domain of free and accessible public education. The mission and vision of the school has at its core the Greek Program, which allows the Odyssey students to learn the ideals of Hellenism, the adop-

M. Mattheoudakis (*) Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_6

129

130 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

tion of democratic methods, lifelong enthusiasm for learning and awareness of world citizenship and culture. In June of 2006, the school opened its doors with 135 students in Grades K-2; based on its excellent academic performance and sound financial management, the school was approved by the Delaware Department of Education to expand into a K-12 operation. As of September of 2019, Odyssey matriculated approximately 2000 students in grades K-12 and will graduate its first senior class in June of 2020. Currently, 1811 K-11 students are enrolled in OCS; 50.06% are girls and 49.94% are boys. OCS has a highly diverse student population with students of different racial and ethnic backgrounds and increasing numbers of English Language Learners (ELL), special education students as well as students receiving free or reduced lunches. According to the office of records and registration of the school, the current school year (2018–19), the majority of the student population is white (59.26%). The second larger population is African American (26.05%) and the Asian student population ranks third (13.19%). The rest of the students come from a diversity of ethnic backgrounds including Hispanic/Latino, American Indian, and Hawaiian. As regards the socioeconomic status (SES) of the enrolled students, currently 4.21% of them are ELL, 24.5% live in low income families, and 14.86% receive special education services. The school promotes an educational model based on the instruction of the Greek language and the Hellenistic Heritage of Western Civilization, knowledge-based society and pedagogy. Odyssey students learn through their instruction in the Greek language and culture and through building cross-curricular links between the Greek language, Mathematics, Sciences and the Arts. This vision was developed by the founders of the school who were themselves Greeks and envisioned the foundation of a school inspired by the Greek ideals and supported by the American standards of education. It is worth noting that although the school promotes actively the instruction of the Greek language and civilization, only 1.5% of its current student population are students of Greek background. As a charter school, OCS admits students through a lottery-based system and as such, the students enrolled are a random selection of the applicants. As a result, the student population includes mainly students of non-Greek background who receive intensive instruction in Greek—both language and content-­ based. Those families chose the particular school initially because of its academic excellence; the most telling indicator of OCS’ exceptional educational quality is that 2224 families applied for 296 openings for the 2018–2019 school year. However, by enrolling their children at OCS, parents are required to provide a written consent that their children will be

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

131

attending the Greek language program of the school from K-12; and they happily do so. Greek is not among the most sought-after languages in the business world and, most probably, parents would not have selected it, had they been given the choice. Having said that, we should also note that families appreciate the fact that their children are learning the particular language for reasons related to its very long history, its relationship to Ancient Greek, and also its influence on the English language vocabulary; learning Greek is like a journey of discovery of their own language roots. Of course, parents are also informed or reminded at the beginning of every school year of the cognitive, linguistic, and cross-cultural benefits of learning a foreign language, which are always the same regardless of the language being learned. In 2012, the school adopted the Foreign Languages in Elementary Schools (FLES) model for the learning of Greek language and culture and placed “…emphasis on the importance of young children learning the Greek language in context of supporting and enhancing the content of the other subject areas (specifically social studies, science, mathematics and English language arts).”1 In accordance with the FLES program, in grades K-4, Greek Language is taught for 40 minutes, Greek Math for 40 minutes, English Language Arts for 120 minutes, Math for 60 minutes and Science/Social Studies for 40 minutes (Fig. 6.1). In grades 5–11, Greek Language is taught for 40 minutes while, additionally, there are electives, like Greek Mythology in grade 8 and Greek Studies I, II and III in grades 9–12, which aim to enrich OCS students’ knowledge of Greek history and literature, Greek traditions and culture. In the school year 2017–2018, the school launched the first dual language immersion (DLI) program in English and Greek in the state of Delaware; this decision marked the beginning of a new era in the history of OCS with regard to the foreign language educational model it promotes. At the same time, the adoption of a DLI program aligns with the Delaware’s recent World Language Initiative2 and aims to equip OCS students with the language skills and cultural competence that twenty-first-­ century citizens are required to have in order to thrive in the global society.

Dual Language Immersion Programs in the US Dual Language Immersion programs are a type of bilingual education programs. According to Cummins,3 immersion education refers to a program of bilingual education in which students are “immersed” in a second language (L2) instructional environment which aims to help them develop

132 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

Greek Math 13%

Greek Language 13%

English Language Arts 40%

Science 13%

Math 20%

Fig. 6.1  The FLES program: the instructional split in grades K-4

proficiency in two languages. Bilingual education is not a new educational model since it can be traced back to Greek and Roman times; currently, it is implemented, in one form or another, in most countries throughout the world.4 The main characteristic of all bilingual programs is the use of two languages in the curriculum for the teaching of non-language academic subjects. The reason for implementing the bilingual education program, the status of the languages taught, the structure of the program as well as the relationship between the community and the languages taught at school vary widely and of course impact educational outcomes.5 Immersion programs started in the 1960s in Canada in response to demands made by parents of English-speaking children who wanted their children to become bilingual in French and English. Similarly, and at around the same time, another English-Spanish bilingual program for native English-speaking and native Spanish-speaking children was established in Miami-Dade County.6 Although both programs are considered Dual Language Immersion programs, each one of them represents a ­particular type of immersion education: The Canadian example, is a one-

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

133

way program aiming at students who speak the majority language (i.e. English) and are trying to acquire proficiency in an L2 (French), while the latter is a two-way program for two groups of students from different linguistic backgrounds: each group is trying to acquire the native language of the other.7 There is an important distinction that Bialystok makes between the bilingual programs in the US and those in Canada.8 The motivation behind bilingual education programs in the US was the effort to help children who were at-risk of academic failure, because of their low proficiency in English, to attain proficiency in English (the majority language). The main criterion on which the success of these programs was based was the students’ development of English language literacy. The motivation behind bilingual education in Canada, on the other hand, was the design of programs that would enable majority language children to become bilingual. Thus, success of those programs was judged by the extent to which those students mastered the L2 while maintaining proficiency in their L1. Cohen and Swain remarked that the US educational policy, contrary to the Canadian one, did not promote the advantages of bilingual education for monolingual English speakers.9 As a result of this policy, immersion programs expanded and flourished in Canada, while in the US, up until the 1990s, there were only a few immersion programs. After that time, immersion education programs in the US saw a significant increase as a result of a variety of factors, including increased interest in foreign language learning for English speakers, research on effective language programs for language minority students, and the availability of federal and state funding for dual language education programs. As it is stated in the report on dual language education programs produced under the U.S. Department of Education, during the 2012–2013 school year, the majority of states in the US were implementing one or more dual language programs.10 In particular, 39 states and the District of Columbia reported offering dual language programs during the 2012–13 school year, with Spanish and Chinese (Mandarin) the most commonly reported partner languages. Other partner languages offered in such programs include Cantonese, Native American languages, such as Arapahoe, Cherokee, Crow, and other less spoken languages like Armenian, Filipino, French Creole, Khmer, Korean, Polish, and Urdu. The value of bilingualism is currently clearly reflected in US educational documents which stress that “…today’s learners must be able to ­communicate in other languages at higher levels of proficiency and with greater cultural competence than ever before.”11 Such documents also

134 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

underline the importance of language learning for the economic future of the US by warning that “America’s continued global leadership is at risk and will depend on our students’ abilities to interact with the world community at home and abroad.”12 The Benefits of Being Bilingual With regard to early childhood bilingualism, Patsy Lightbown has pointed out that children are capable of acquiring two or more languages in early childhood without being “confused,” as languages do not compete for “mental space.”13 In fact, when children are given adequate input and opportunities for interaction, the developmental path and the outcomes of multiple language acquisition are similar to those observed in the acquisition of a single language. Research related to bilingualism is quite extensive and indicates that students in DLI programs exhibit gains which are both academic and linguistic. In their meta-analysis of international research on the effect of DLI programs on student outcomes, Lindholm-­ Leary and Genesee conclude that “… dual language immersion education, in one-way, two-way and indigenous programs, clearly confers academic and linguistic benefits. The benefits have been found for majority and minority language speakers, for students from a range of ethnic backgrounds and for students who have special educational needs.”14 More recently, Watzinger-Tharp et al. carried out a study in Utah DLI and non-­ DLI students’ academic achievement in 3rd and 4th grade math.15 They found that 3rd grade DLI students who were taught math almost exclusively in the L2 performed at the same level as their non-DLI peers in the state-wide math tests. As for the 4th graders, on average, DLI students performed higher than similar students in non-DLI programs. The same result was obtained across three target languages and two programs (one way and two-way). As regards the linguistic advantages, the benefits of bilingualism and biliteracy for students’ language and literacy development in both languages have been evidenced in several studies.16 Children who attend immersion programs outperform students in non-immersion programs in spelling and in reading comprehension in their mother tongue, regardless of the type of writing system of the foreign language.17 According to Bialystok, “There is no evidence that education through two languages impedes progress in the development of language and literacy skills in the majority language and has the added benefit of developing and sustaining

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

135

these skills in the minority language.”18Similar results were obtained even with low performing children attending bilingual education when these were compared with children who attended English-only programs.19 There is a growing literature indicating that the development of bilingualism provides significant cognitive benefits to students. There is much less research into the effects of biliteracy and especially the effects of biliteracy in terms of writing.20 Bilinguals need to continuously shift between two languages and for this purpose they have a mechanism for controlling attention to those two language systems. This allows them to achieve fluent performance in each language without the one language interfering with the other. Bialystok’s study provided evidence that this experience of controlling attention to two language systems boosts bilinguals’ development of executive control processes in childhood, sustains cognitive control advantages through adulthood, and even protects older bilingual adults from the decline of these processes with aging.21 Research also indicates that the length of time children spent in the bilingual program as well as the degree of bilingualism they develop affects their performance on the executive function task.22 Grundy and Timmer carried out a meta-­ analysis on the effects of bilingualism on working memory capacity.23 What they found was that bilinguals’ experience in managing two languages results in greater working memory capacity over time. In comparison to adults, children were found to have the largest effects. In addition to the above benefits brought about by bilingual education, immersion programs enable learners to develop positive cross-cultural attitudes in an increasingly multilingual world. They expose students to customs, ideas, and perspectives of a different culture and create a deeper understanding of and appreciation for humanity and culture, which enriches one’s life and personal experiences in the world.24

Learning Greek as L2 in Kindergarten Learning a language at the age of 5 in an immersion context has important advantages for the acquisition of this language. As children grow up, learning a second language becomes more difficult and this is related to the structure of the human brain which gradually loses its plasticity. According to the critical period hypothesis, the optimum period for language acquisition is the years before puberty; after that, the ability to learn a language naturally atrophies.25 Younger learners have a more intuitive

136 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

grasp of L2 structures, are more attuned to the L2 phonological system and their auditory processing is better.26 At this age, children learn implicitly and relatively effortlessly. They are like sponges and pick up the new language fast and effectively just by being exposed to it and by getting involved in various game-like activities. Their great asset is their listening and pronunciation skills. Young students take pleasure in oral speech while listening to it, processing or repeating it, imitating the speaker’s intonation, pronunciation, or facial expression. That is why exposing them to native speaker language is important. Kindergarteners already know about 5000 word families in their mother tongue but they also rely a lot on visual stimuli, on their imagination and ability to guess in order to make sense of what they hear and see around them.27 These same skills are practiced for the acquisition of Greek—and of any foreign language for that matter—when kindergarteners are immersed in this language during half of their school day from the beginning of the school year. The teaching of Greek in kindergarten allows young students to familiarize themselves with the phonological features of this language–its sounds but also its rhythm, melody, intonation. To this aim, students’ exposure to the language is extensive from the very beginning, as they are listening to their teacher, songs, rhymes, fairytales, stories, and video material. The development of children’s listening and speaking skills in Greek is prioritized in the kindergarten and literacy is introduced in grade one. Thus, students are expected to develop some basic communication skills in Greek before acquiring its written system. This order in skills development (first listening and speaking, and later reading and writing) is in agreement with the order of skills acquisition in their mother tongue. Also, listening and pronunciation skills are children’s strongest skills and the primary aim in kindergarten is to cultivate them so that we can later build on them their literacy skills—reading and writing.28 Another reason for focusing exclusively on the development of oracy— listening and speaking—at kindergarten is that relevant research has highlighted the importance of vocabulary development for learners’ reading. This means that instructors should prioritize learners’ development of vocabulary in Greek so that they develop their phonetic and phonemic awareness in this language; this is expected to facilitate reading comprehension in Greek when literacy is introduced.29 There is a strong emphasis on the development of literacy skills in Greek in the lower elementary

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

137

grades as this is expected to enable learners to acquire the academic content in Greek in later elementary and secondary grades. Having said that, we should also note that while ‘literacy’, which traditionally includes reading and writing, is not introduced in the kindergarten, ‘multi-literacies’ are; by ‘multi-literacy’ we refer to the ability to interpret, create and communicate meaning not only linguistically and aurally, but also spatially and visually through gestures and in multiple modes. The texts that we all deal with nowadays are multimodal, involving written language, sound, music, image, and so on.30 The kindergarten curriculum aims to bring into the classroom multimodal representations, as these have a positive impact on language development, particularly as regards young children for whom the use of pictures, gestures, songs, or sounds is essential. Young children learn by doing and by playing. However, content and meaning are important for them. They understand how language works by actually using it—by using it to communicate with their peers, with imaginary heroes, with adults, and so on. So, language learning becomes possible only when it is used to convey meaningful messages, that is, content related to themselves and to their reality, to their own view of the world. This is exactly where the kindergarten core concepts meet with the Greek curriculum: Students in the kindergarten learn Greek while learning about themselves and their relationship to the classroom, school, family, and community. They develop skills in posing simple questions, measuring, sorting, classifying, and communicating information about the natural world by using Greek. They learn about their bodies and the behaviors necessary to protect them and keep them healthy. They learn basic body control while beginning to develop motor skills and moving in a variety of settings. Students are expected to gradually start expressing their thoughts and ideas in Greek and in English, challenging their imagination, fostering reflective thinking and developing disciplined effort and problem-solving skills.

The DLI Program at Odyssey Charter School As already mentioned, in the school year 2017–2018, OCS introduced a dual language immersion program. The implementation began in the kindergarten and is expanding one grade every year; complete implementation will take nine years to phase in.

138 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

The main features of the DLI program implemented at OCS are the ones suggested by Johnson and Swain31: (a) The L2 (viz. Greek) is a medium of instruction, (b) the immersion curriculum parallels the local (viz. American) curriculum, (c) overt support exists for the mother tongue, (d) the program aims for additive bilingualism where students “add” L2 proficiency while continuing to develop their first language (L1), (e) exposure to the L2 is largely confined to the classroom, (f) students enter with similar levels of L2 proficiency—that is, with no prior knowledge of Greek, (g) the L2 teachers are bilingual in both L1 and L2, (h) the classroom culture is that of the local L1 community. In particular, OCS follows a one-way DLI program, since English is either the L1 or the main language of communication for all kindergarteners. In particular, in 2017–2018 the demographics of the first Kindergarten immersion class of OCS was as follows: 8 African American, 8 Asian, 24 White, and 3 other ethnicities, including one Greek. The program follows a two-teacher model: one teacher is teaching students entirely in English, while the other—a Greek-American  – is teaching entirely in Greek. OCS implements the partial immersion type of education: 50% of instruction is provided in Greek and this percentage will remain constant throughout elementary school. Thus, the school day is equally divided between mother tongue classes and L2 classes and for half the day students are in the English language classroom while for the other half they are in the Greek language classroom. Similarly, the core academic content is split by subject area between the Greek and the American teacher. The Greek teacher teaches math, science, some social studies, and Greek language arts and the English teacher teaches some social studies and English language arts (Fig.  6.2). This instructional split regards grades K-3; in grades 4 and 5 the percentages for each subject will vary slightly but the time is always equally divided between the two teachers and languages. The immersion students are following the same standards-based curriculum in these content areas that non-immersion students follow. This program allows us to teach the core concepts that are part of the kindergarten curriculum in Greek and at the same time teach Greek through content. As a result, students are expected to develop not only the Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) but also the Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP).32 In other words, students will not only acquire the language skills needed in social situations so as to interact with other

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

15% Greek Language

15% Science some Social Studies in Greek

20% Math in Greek

139

35% English Language Arts, some Social Studies

15% Content transfer and Academic LD

Fig. 6.2  The DLI program: the instructional split in grades K-3

­ eople for their everyday needs; they will also become academically profip cient in two languages—their mother tongue and the foreign language— as they will be listening, speaking, reading and writing about subject area content material in both of these languages. For the purpose of the DLI program at OCS, a team of educators designed and created an innovative language and math curriculum.33 In this particular chapter, the focus is on the language curriculum, which is described in detail in the following section. As for the math curriculum, this is written in Greek and is based exclusively on the Engage New York State Common Core Curriculum for math in kindergarten, which is the curriculum chosen by OCS. The primary focus of the mathematics curriculum in kindergarten is to enable kindergarteners to develop whole-­ number concepts and use patterns to explore numbers, data, and shapes. While learning mathematics, students are actively engaged in using manipulatives and appropriate technologies such as calculators and computers.

140 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

The American and Greek Language Integrated Curriculum for the Kindergarten The language curriculum designed was informed by (a) the Delaware Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in K-12 English Language Arts, (b) the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, designed by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), (c) the ACTFL ‘can-do’ benchmarks which state the performance indicators for foreign language learners, and (d) the certification of attainment in Greek, and in particular, information provided by the Center for the Greek Language, Thessaloniki, Greece, regarding the language structures, vocabulary and pragmatics that learners of Greek as a foreign language should gradually acquire as they progress in their Greek studies. Those four components became the theoretical and conceptual foundation of an innovative language curriculum which aims to teach the Greek language at a proficiency level appropriate for young language learners through concepts and topics appropriate for kindergarteners’ level of cognitive development. This integration between language and content—Greek language and CCSS—allowed us to create a curriculum that integrates smoothly the teaching of Greek with the teaching of the American common core standards for kindergarteners. The rest of this section presents the rationale and the content of the documents that enabled us to design the curriculum. As stated in The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, “In 2012, Delaware adopted the Common Core State Standards. As these standards do not explicitly include World Languages, the national organization ACTFL created a crosswalk document that shows that the World Language Standards and the Common Core State Standards are mutually supportive. This document details the alignment of the English Language Arts Common Core Standards with the World Language Standards, giving explicit guidance to teachers on how and where each standard supports the other.”34 In 2013, ACTFL refreshed their Standards for World Language Learning and renamed them World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages; these are organized around five goals: Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities. The CCSS for English Language Arts (ELA) and Literacy in History/ Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects contains four strands: (a) Reading, (b) Writing, (c) Speaking, and (d) Listening as well as Language.

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

141

These four strands are captured in the standards for learning languages’ goal area of Communication, by emphasizing the purpose behind the communication: (a) Interpersonal (speaking + listening or writing + reading) (b) Interpretive (reading, listening, viewing) (c) Presentational (writing, speaking, visually representing) The Common Core strand of Language is described for language learners through proficiency levels that outline three key benchmarks achieved in world language programs, given sufficient instruction over time. Each one of those benchmarks is further subdivided into three levels and this allows us to describe students’ progress in detail:

1. Novice (the beginning level, regardless of age or grade) a. Novice low b. Novice mid c. Novice high 2. Intermediate a. Intermediate low b. Intermediate mid c. Intermediate high 3. Advanced a. Advanced low b. Advanced mid c. Advanced high

Upon completing the immersion program at the elementary school, OCS students are expected to reach an Intermediate (mid to high) level, have a rich knowledge of the Greek language, be able to speak it fluently and accurately, be able to read and appreciate texts written in Greek and have a deep understanding of the Greek culture and way of thinking. With respect to the students in the immersion kindergarten, these are working toward attaining the level of novice mid in Greek. A major ­difference between the immersion program implemented in OCS and those implemented in other schools in the US is that at OCS, Greek literacy is not part of the kindergarten curriculum and, therefore, the presentational writing and the interpretive reading categories are not included

142 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

in student assessment. The focus is exclusively on the development of kindergarteners’ interpretive listening and viewing, interpersonal (speaking and listening) communication and presentational speaking. As already explained in Section “Learning Greek as L2 in Kindergarten” above, this choice is related to kindergarteners’ cognitive development and based on research in child second language acquisition. Apart from the Common Core strand of Language, the standards of the other four goal areas for learning languages – Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities – also support and are aligned with the Common Core. These standards describe the expectations to ensure all students are college-, career-, and world-ready.35 The following table (Table 6.1) presents the content of the kindergarten Greek language curriculum as this is related to the five goal areas (Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, Communities) of the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages. As already stated, the target proficiency level at the kindergarten is novice mid. The Structure of the Curriculum The American and Greek Language integrated curriculum was written specifically for the DLI program of OCS.36 The curriculum is divided into two sections: The first one includes the language content, that is, themes, topics, lexis, structures, and so on to be taught, and the second one presents the performance indicators for language learners and teachers. The Language Content of the Curriculum The curriculum is presented in tables, so as to allow information to be easily and quickly located. The content is divided into thematic units and is organized chronologically. The suggested duration for each unit does not aim to constrain teachers as to the time allocated to each unit; it aims though to guide them as to the order in which these units should be covered. The curriculum includes 11 units and 4 special units whose themes are related to two national holidays (OCHI day and March 25th), a religious holiday (Christmas) and a special day (Mother’s Day). In most units, cross-curricular links are made with math, science and literature and, where possible, cross-cultural links are suggested. For example, language

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

143

Table 6.1  World-readiness standards for learning language and the Greek language curriculum in kindergarten World-readiness standards Communication 1.1 Interpersonal communication

1.2 Interpretive communication

1.3 Presentational communication

Cultures 2.1 Cultural practices and perspectives 2.2 Cultural products and perspectives

Grade level expectation

Students communicate their names, say hello and goodbye to their teacher and to each other. They are able to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ when responding to teacher’s ‘yes/no’ questions and they are able to give a specific answer when teachers ask them ‘either/or’ questions. They will also be able to respond to ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘when’, ‘where’, and ‘how many’ questions. Students understand greetings, recognize some color words and some numbers. They can also understand some food items. Students understand when people express thanks, when they introduce themselves and when they ask for a name. They can also recognize and sometimes understand basic information in words and phrases that they have memorized. They can understand days of the week and sometimes the hour. They can also recognize some common weather expressions and the names of some parts of the body. Sometimes they can understand questions about how old they are and where they live. They can sometimes understand questions about their family. Students count from 1 to 20, list the months and seasons, state the names of familiar people, places, and objects in pictures and posters using words or memorized phrases, list items they see every day. They can introduce themselves to a group. They can state their name, age, and where they live. They can say what someone looks like, they can express their likes and dislikes using words, phrases, and memorized expressions. They can state their favorite foods and drinks and those they don’t like. They can present information about familiar items in their immediate environment. They can talk about their house. They can talk about their room and what they have in it. They can recite short memorized phrases, parts of poems, and rhymes. They can sing a short song, dance and draw. Students recite and sing children’s rhymes and songs and listen to traditional folk stories of the target language country. Students play with toys and artifacts from the target language country; they taste the cuisine of the target language country. (continued)

144 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

Table 6.1  (continued) World-readiness standards Connections 3.1 Connections to other disciplines 3.2 Access to information

Comparisons 4.1 Language comparisons 4.2 Cultural comparison Communities 5.1 Transfer to communities 5.2 Enjoyment/ lifelong learning

Grade level expectation

Students reinforce their conceptual learning about colors, numbers, shapes, nutrition and wellbeing, animals and their habitats. Students sing songs and recite rhymes and poems in the target language that were written for children in the target culture. They also listen to stories, fables and fairytales written for children in the target culture. Students become aware that people use different sounds and words to talk about themselves, to greet and refer to familiar objects when they speak. Students compare artifacts from their culture and the target culture in terms of shape, color and purpose. Students perform for the school community during special school events. Students have fun learning to dance, sing, recite, and respond in the target language. Students enjoy imitating new sounds.

related to orientation (up, down, left, right) is linked with the math curriculum or connections are made between the vocabulary on animals (language) and the life cycle of the butterfly (science). Depending on the theme of each unit and the time of the year, references are made to international world days (e.g. International Children’s Book Day, World Health Day, etc.). If time permits, such days may give teachers the opportunity to expand further on the theme of the corresponding unit. With respect to the layout of the table, this has four columns: the first column (month/length) provides information about (a) the approximate time of the year each unit will be taught, and (b) its length; the length of each unit varies between 1 and 3 weeks depending on its material, its level of linguistic difficulty as well as the cross-curricular links teachers are expected to explore in each unit. The second column (Unit) presents the theme of each unit. All themes and their content are relevant to learners’ interests and knowledge and have been carefully selected so as to introduce basic vocabulary in Greek and cultivate learners’ communication skills; they also tune in with the content of the CCS and allow learners to acquire the concepts prescribed by the CCS.  In particular, the 11 themes that the curriculum covers— apart from the special themes mentioned above—are the following:

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

145

(a) Introducing myself – greetings and introductions (b) My classroom (c) My family – physical traits (d) Months and seasons – weather (e) Parts of the body – senses and feelings (f) Clothes and colors (g) My house (h) Spring is here! I like fruit (i) My favorite animal (j) I like to play! (k) I love summer! The third column is subdivided into three smaller ones. These cover the language objectives of each unit. The first one is the vocabulary and listed here are only the lexical items that young learners are expected to know by the end of each unit. The second part of this column provides the lexical chunks that children will be exposed to during each unit. Some of them are expected to be acquired, but not all. Students will be exposed to them systematically during the unit—by listening to the teacher using them in meaningful contexts—but some of them will also be produced orally by the students. The emphasis on teaching lexical phrases, rather than isolated vocabulary items, is related to the fact that lexical phrases are ubiquitous in the language. They are also easier to learn and easier to remember.37 Knowledge of lexical chunks allows learners to become more fluent speakers of the foreign language and acquire better communication skills. The third and final part of this column includes morphosyntactic information, which, however, will never be explicitly provided to learners. In the particular column, we list the language structures to which learners will be exposed through the lexical chunks taught. Therefore, there is a correspondence between the lexical phrases and the morphosyntactic structures presented in each unit, meaning that those structures underlie the corresponding lexical chunks. However, in the particular program, language structures are expected to be acquired incidentally; they will never be taught explicitly. Still, the particular information is of use to the teacher, as it enables them to create a record of the grammar, morphology and syntax children are expected to understand and use as they gradually acquire the language. The choice of the language objectives throughout the curriculum is based on the specifications for the certification of A1 level of Greek language (according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages).38

146 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

The fourth column provides a selection of possible resources and materials teachers may use for the particular thematic unit. This is only a sample of the possible choices available; more choices have been included in a separate document (Materials and Resources for Kindergarten) and, of course, teachers are also expected to develop a repository of their own resources and materials. The last column of the table—Recycling—includes vocabulary, lexical chunks, grammatical structures, and so on that occur in the particular unit but were introduced in previous units. Learners are therefore expected to know at least some of them, and teachers are expected to recycle them so that learning can be reinforced. Although recycling of known material is an inherent component of teaching, this information is expected to act as a reminder to the teacher that learners have encountered the particular vocabulary and structures before and, therefore, this is a good opportunity to revise them. We know that recycling previously taught material can boost children’s memory and improve learning outcomes.39 Performance Indicators for Language Learners and Teachers The second part of the curriculum presents the performance indicators for language learners and teachers. These include the ‘can-do’ statements and a list of descriptors about what learners should minimally attain at the end of each unit. The second part of the curriculum is meant to be used by educators as a yardstick against which they will be able to measure learners’ summative performance. The ‘can-do’ statements are based on the NCSSFL-ACTFL40 global ‘can-do’ benchmarks and they are self-assessment checklists used by language learners to assess what they can do with language in the Interpersonal, Presentational and Interpretive modes of communication. These modes of communication are defined in the National Standards for 21st Century Language Learning and organized into the following categories: • Interpersonal (Person-to-Person) Communication • Presentational Speaking (Spoken Production) • Presentational Writing (Written Production) • Interpretive Listening • Interpretive Reading As Greek literacy is not taught in kindergarten, the presentational writing and the interpretive reading categories are not included in students’ assessment.

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

147

Table 6.2  Classroom application Level/ mode

Interpersonal communication

Novice Express self in conversations on very familiar topics using a variety of words, phrases, simple sentences, and questions that have been highly practiced and memorized.

Interpretive listening

Presentational speaking

Identify people and objects in their environment or from other school subjects, based on oral descriptions.

Communicate information on very familiar topics using a variety of words, phrases, and sentences that have been practiced and memorized.

Table 6.3  The ‘can-do’ statements at the novice level Level/ mode

Interpersonal communication

Novice I can request and provide information by asking and answering a few simple questions on very familiar and everyday topics, using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and simple sentences. I can express basic needs related to familiar and everyday activities, using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and questions. I can express my own preferences or feelings and react to those of others, using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and questions.

Interpretive listening

Presentational speaking

I can identify some basic facts from memorized words and phrases when they are supported by gestures or visuals in conversations.

I can present information about myself, my interests and my activities using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and simple sentences. I can express my likes and dislikes on very familiar and everyday topics of interest, using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and simple sentences. I can present on very familiar and everyday topics using a mixture of practiced or memorized words, phrases, and simple sentences.

According to the curriculum prescribed, students in kindergarten are working toward attaining the level of ‘novice mid’ in Greek. Table  6.2 above illustrates how the performance descriptors and sample progress indicators from the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages apply in the language classroom at the novice level; Table 6.3 presents the ‘can-do’ statements for the three modes of communication at the same level.

148 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

Apart from these, however, kindergarteners are also expected to be able to (a) follow a simple story or fairytale in Greek narrated by the teacher and supported by illustrations and/or other visual stimuli, (b) sing short songs (not always accurately), (c) recite nursery rhymes or simple poems. These are not attached to any particular unit but, as all units include a mixture of stories, rhymes, songs and poems, they should consistently be taken into consideration as indicators of learners’ progress and level of attainment.

Conclusion As Kan and Kohnert have pointed out, “…young children learning L2 are one of the fastest growing segments of the global population.”41 Sociocultural competence and ability to interact and communicate in other languages with people of diverse mother tongue and cultural backgrounds may be the most valuable skill set of the twenty-first century. Immersion programs promote the development of bilingualism within the school setting by immersing students from a very young age in a bilingual learning context; It has been claimed that immersion programs are the most effective way of learning a foreign language within a school setting.42 As such, immersion programs seem to have the unique potential to equip the students of the twenty-first century with the knowledge, skills and attitudes required in order to thrive in the global society and become successful citizens of the world. The creation of the American and Greek language integrated curriculum for the immersion kindergarten at OCS is an original and pioneering project; it is only the beginning of an effort that aims to create a K-8 American and Greek language integrated language curriculum that will be available to all American students wishing to learn Greek in an immersion setting in the US. This will be growing gradually, building each year on the learning outcomes of the year before, thus allowing us to build coherence and cohesion into the curriculum and transition smoothly from one grade to the next. We hope that although this curriculum targets a specific student population, its content will be relevant and useful in similar settings in the US but also in other countries abroad.

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

149

Notes 1. Odyssey Charter School Greek FLES Curriculum Guide. Grades K-5. [Programma Ellinikis Glossas] (Greek Language Program). 2012. Odyssey Charter School. Wilmington, DE. United States. 2. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages. 2016, https://www.doe.k12.de.us/cms/lib/DE01922744/Centricity/ Domain/139/Delaware%20World-Readiness%20Standards%20for%20 Learning%20Languages%20040816.pdf 3. Jim Cummins, “Bilingual and Immersion Programs,” In Handbook of Second Language Teaching, ed. Michael Long and Catherine J. Doughty (London: Blackwell, 2011), 161–181. 4. Jim Cummins, and Nancy H. Hornberger, eds., Encyclopedia of Language and Education. 2nd Ed., Volume 5: Bilingual Education. (New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC, 2008). 5. Ellen Bialystok, “Bilingual Education for Young Children: Review of the Effects and Consequences,” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 21, no. 6 (August 2018): 667, https://doi.org/10.108 0/13670050.2016.1203859 6. Tara Williams Fortune, and Diane J. Tedick, eds., Pathways to Multilingualism, Evolving Perspectives on Immersion Education (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 2008). 7. Johanna Watzinger-Tharp, Kristin Swenson, and Zachary Mayne, “Academic Achievement of Students in Dual Language Immersion,” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (August 2016): 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1214675 8. Bialystok, “Bilingual Education for Young Children,” 667–668. 9. Andrew Cohen, and Merrill Swain, “Bilingual Education: The ‘Immersion’ Model in the North American Context,” TESOL Quarterly 10, no. 1 (March 1976): 47, https://doi.org/10.2307/3585938 10. U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, Dual Language Education Programs: Current State Policies and Practices, Washington, D.C., (2015): 19. 11. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, 2016, 3. 12. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, 2016, 4. 13. Patsy Lightbown. “Easy as Pie? Children Learning Languages.” Concordia Working Papers in Applied Linguistics1 (2008): 6. 14. Kathryn Lindholm-Leary, and Fred Genesee. “Student Outcomes in OneWay and Two-Way Immersion and Indigenous Language Education.” Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education2, no. 2 (January 2014): 175, https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.2.2.01lin

150 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

15. Watzinger-Tharp, Swenson, and Mayne, “Academic Achievement,” 7. 16. Jim Cummins, “Teaching for Cross-Language Transfer in Dual Language Education: Possibilities and Pitfalls.” Paper presented at the TESOL Symposium on Dual Language Education: Teaching and Learning in Two Languages in the EFL Setting, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey, September 23, 2005. http://www.tesol.org/docs/default-source/newresource-library/symposium-on-dual-language-education-3.pdf?sfvrsn=0; Debra, D.  Giambo, and Szecsi Tunde, “Promoting and Maintaining Bilingualism and Biliteracy: Cognitive and Biliteracy Benefits & Strategies for Monolingual Teachers,” The Open Communication Journal 9, no. 1 (February 2015): 57–58, https://doi.org/10.2174/18749 16X01509010056 17. Raluca Barac, Ellen Bialystok, Dina C. Castro, and Marta Sanchez, “The Cognitive Development of Young Dual Language Learners: A Critical Review,” Early Child Research Quarterly 29, no. 4 (4th Quarter 2014): 710, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.02.003 18. Bialystok, “Bilingual Education for Young Children,” 670. 19. Maria G. Lopez, and Abbas Tashakkori, “Narrowing the Gap: Effects of a Two-way Bilingual Education Program on the Literacy Development of at-risk Primary Students,” Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 9, no. 4 (October 2004): 334, https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15327671espr0904_1 20. Elaine Ng, “Bilingualism, Biliteracy and Cognitive Effects: A Review Paper,” University of Sydney Papers in TESOL 10 (2015): 94. 21. Ellen Bialystok, “Cognitive Effects of Bilingualism: How Linguistic Experience Leads to Cognitive Change,” The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 10, no. 3 (May 2007): 219–220. 22. Bialystok, “Bilingual Education for Young Children” 672. 23. John G.  Grundy, and Kalinka Timmer, “Bilingualism and Working Memory Capacity: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis,” Second Language Research 33, no. 3 (July 2017): 325–340. 24. See also Philippe Corbaz, “Assessing the Effect of Foreign Language Immersion Programs on Intercultural Sensitivity,” The ACIE Newsletter 10, no. 1 (November 2006). http://carla.umn.edu/immersion/acie/ vol10/nov2006_research_assessing.html 25. Eric H. Lenneberg, Biological Foundations of Language (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1967). 26. Ellen Bialystok and Kenji Hakuta, “Confounded Age: Linguistic and Cognitive Factors in Age Differences for Second Language Acquisition,” in Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis, ed. David Birdsong (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1999), 172. For a comprehensive review of language-related research in

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

151

L2 acquisition, see Carmen Muň oz, and David Singleton, “A Critical Review of Age-­Related Research on L2 Ultimate Attainment,” Language Teaching 44, no. 1 (January 2011): 1–35, https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444810000327 27. Norbert Schmitt, Vocabulary in Language Teaching (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 3. 28. Lynne Cameron, Teaching Languages to Young Learners (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 17. 29. Diane August, and Timothy Shanahan, Developing Literacy in Second-­ language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006), 4. Keiko Koda, “Reading and Language Learning: Crosslinguistic Constraints on Second Language Reading Development,” Language Learning 57, no. s. 1 (June 2007): 1, https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.101997010-i1 30. Kathy A.  Mills, The Multiliteracies Classroom (Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2010), 54–55. 31. Robert Keith Johnson, and Merrill Swain, Immersion Education: International Perspectives (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997). 32. Jim Cummins, “BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the Distinction,” in Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Ed., Volume 2: Literacy, ed. Brian Street and Nancy H.  Hornberger (New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC, 2008), 71–83. 33. Marina Mattheoudakis, Dual Language Immersion Program. Greek Language Curriculum. (Odyssey Charter School, Wilmington, DE, U.S., 2017). 34. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, 2016, 3. 35. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages2016, 3. 36. Mattheoudakis, Dual Language Immersion Program, 2017. 37. Michael Lewis, “Language in the Lexical Approach,” in Teaching Collocation: Further Developments in The Lexical Approach, ed. Michael Lewis (Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 2000), 127. 38. The A1 level is the lowest level of attainment in Greek as far as the linguistic skills required are concerned according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 39. Schmitt, Vocabulary in Language Teaching, 137. 40. National Council of State Supervisors for Languages – American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. 41. Pui Fong Kan, and Kathryn Kohnert, “Preschoolers Learning Hmong and English: Lexical-Semantic Skills in L1 and L2,” Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 48, no. 2 (April 2005): 380.

152 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

42. Virginia P.  Collier, and Thomas Wayne, “The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual Language Education for All,” NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 18, https://www.berkeleyschools.net/wp-content/ uploads/2011/10/TWIAstounding_Effectiveness_Dual_Language_Ed.pdf

References August, Diane, and Timothy Shanahan. 2006. Developing Literacy in Second-­ Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Barac, Raluca, Ellen Bialystok, Dina C.  Castro, and Marta Sanchez. 2014. The Cognitive Development of Young Dual Language Learners: A Critical Review. Early Child Research Quarterly 29 (4): 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecresq.2014.02.003. Bialystok, Ellen. 2007. Cognitive Effects of Bilingualism: How Linguistic Experience Leads to Cognitive Change. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 10 (3): 210–223. https://doi.org/10.2167/ beb441.0. ———. 2018. Bilingual Education for Young Children: Review of the Effects and Consequences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 21 (6): 666–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1203859. Bialystok, Ellen, and Kenji Hakuta. 1999. Confounded Age: Linguistic and Cognitive Factors in Age Differences for Second Language Acquisition. In Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis, ed. David Birdsong, 161–181. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Cameron, Lynne. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cohen, Andrew, and Merrill Swain. 1976. Bilingual Education: The “Immersion” Model in the North American Context. TESOL Quarterly 10 (1): 45–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/3585938. Collier, P. Virginia, and Thomas Wayne. 2004. The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual Language Education for All. NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2 (1): 1–20. https://www.berkeleyschools.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ TWIAstounding_Effectiveness_Dual_Language_Ed.pdf Corbaz, Philippe. 2006. Assessing the Effect of Foreign Language Immersion Programs on Intercultural Sensitivity. The ACIE Newsletter, 10 (1). http:// carla.umn.edu/immersion/acie/vol10/nov2006_research_assessing.html Cummins, Jim. 2005. Teaching for Cross-Language Transfer in Dual Language Education: Possibilities and Pitfalls. Paper presented at the TESOL Symposium on Dual Language Education: Teaching and Learning in Two Languages in the EFL Setting, Bogazici University, Istanbul, September 23. http://www.tesol.

6  AN AMERICAN AND GREEK LANGUAGE INTEGRATED CURRICULUM… 

153

org/docs/default-source/new-resource-library/symposium-on-dual-language-education-3.pdf?sfvrsn=0 ———. 2008. BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the Distinction. In Encyclopedia of Language and Education, Literacy, ed. Brian Street and Nancy H. Hornberger, vol. 2, 2nd ed., 71–83. New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC. ———. 2011. Bilingual and Immersion Programs. In Handbook of Second Language Teaching, ed. Michael Long and Catherine J.  Doughty, 161–181. London: Blackwell. Cummins, Jim, and Nancy H. Hornberger, eds. 2008. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, Bilingual Education. Vol. 5. 2nd ed. New  York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC. Fortune, Tara Williams, and Diane J.  Tedick, eds. 2008. Pathways to Multilingualism, Evolving Perspectives on Immersion Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Giambo, D.  Debra, and Szecsi Tunde. 2015. Promoting and Maintaining Bilingualism and Biliteracy: Cognitive and Biliteracy Benefits & Strategies for Monolingual Teachers. Open Communication Journal 9 (1): 56–60. https:// doi.org/10.2174/1874916X01509010056. Grundy, G. John, and Kalinka Timmer. 2017. Bilingualism and Working Memory Capacity: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Second Language Research 33 (3): 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658316678286. Johnson, Robert Keith, and Merrill Swain. 1997. Immersion Education: International Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kan, Pui Fong, and Kathryn Kohnert. 2005. Preschoolers Learning Hmong and English: Lexical-Semantic Skills in L1 and L2. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 48 (2): 372–383. Koda, Keiko. 2007. Reading and Language Learning: Crosslinguistic Constraints on Second Language Reading Development. Language Learning 57 (1): 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.101997010-i1. Lenneberg, H. Eric. 1967. Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley. Lewis, Michael. 2000. Language in the Lexical Approach. In Teaching Collocation: Further Developments in The Lexical Approach, ed. Michael Lewis, 126–154. Hove: Language Teaching Publications. Lightbown, Patsy. 2008. Easy as Pie? Children Learning Languages. Concordia Working Papers in Applied Linguistics 1: 1–25. Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn, and Fred Genesee. 2014. Student Outcomes in One-­ Way and Two-Way Immersion and Indigenous Language Education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 2 (2): 165–180. https:// doi.org/10.1075/jicb.2.2.01lin. Lopez, G. Maria, and Abbas Tashakkori. 2004. Narrowing the Gap: Effects of a Two-Way Bilingual Education Program on the Literacy Development of at-­

154 

M. MATTHEOUDAKIS

Risk Primary Students. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 9 (4): 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327671espr0904_1. Mattheoudakis, Marina. 2017. Dual Language Immersion Program. Greek Language Curriculum. Wilmington: Odyssey Charter School. Mills, A. Kathy. 2010. The Multiliteracies Classroom. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Muň oz, Carmen, and David Singleton. 2011. A Critical Review of Age-Related Research on L2 Ultimate Attainment. Language Teaching 44 (1): 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000327. NCSSFL-ACTFL ‘Can-Do’ Statements. https://www.actfl.org/global_benchmarks Ng, Elaine. 2015. Bilingualism, Biliteracy and Cognitive Effects: A Review Paper. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL 10: 93–128. Odyssey Charter School Greek FLES Curriculum Guide. Grades K-5. [Programma Ellinikis Glossas] (Greek Language Program). 2012. Wilmington: Odyssey Charter School. Schmitt, Norbert. 2000. Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages. 2016. https:// www.doe.k12.de.us/cms/lib/DE01922744/Centricity/Domain/139/ Delaware%20World-Readiness%20Standards%20for%20Learning%20 Languages%20040816.pdf U.S.  Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, Dual Language Education Programs: Current State Policies and Practices. 2015. Washington, DC. Watzinger-Tharp, Johanna, Kristin Swenson, and Zachary Mayne. 2016. Academic Achievement of Students in Dual Language Immersion. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13 670050.2016.1214675.

CHAPTER 7

Promoting Heritage, Ethnicity, and Cultural Identity in Diasporic Communities: The Case of the Heritage Greece Program Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei and Gregory A. Katsas

Introduction Since the late nineteenth century, social scientists have studied the intergenerational assimilation and acculturation of European immigrants to the United States. Research has demonstrated that by the third generation, most immigrant descendants completely lose or replace their heritage languages to English. Whereas language shift is an inevitable phenomenon that occurs when two or more languages are in contact, scholars have argued that the loss of a heritage language eventually leads to the weakening or even detachment of one’s ethnic and cultural identification.1 Furthermore, evidence has shown that most ethnic groups do not survive past the fourth generation unless there is renewed or constant immigration.2

A. Balodimas-Bartolomei (*) North Park University, Chicago, IL, USA e-mail: [email protected] G. A. Katsas (*) Deree-The American College of Greece, Athens, Greece e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_7

155

156 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

Among the numerous intergenerational studies performed on ethnic groups during the past century, several have focused on the changing identity of Greek Americans. These studies have demonstrated an intergenerational loss of the Greek language and identity, especially among second and third plus generations.3 Likewise, studies have shown a multi-­ decade decline of membership and participation in Greek religious, professional, and educational institutions and regional organizations. Additionally, recent research has indicated that the Greek American rate of out-marriages is at least 85%.4 Dan Georgakas, the Director of the Greek American Studies Project at the Center for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Queens College (CUNY), warns that the Greek community is in danger and possibly approaching its demise, especially if it remains in a state yearning its yesteryear and dwelling on its current negative state. Hellenism in America is facing several challenges with more Greek Americans currently identifying themselves as third and fourth generation Greeks; the rate of out-marriages is increasing; and Greek immigration to the US has ceased. Thus in order for Greek America to thrive new initiatives are essential.5 Fearing such a loss, several ethnic communities, many of which will be discussed further in this chapter have been searching for ways to preserve and promote their cultural heritages and identities while also trying to implement new initiatives. Declining memberships, due to the inability to attract young adults who are typically uninterested in attending ethnic gatherings, in addition to financial constraints have both contributed to the demise of decades-old ethnic associations in the United States. In addition to striving to keep the active younger-aged members interested and involved, organizations are seeking approaches for attracting those who are disconnected from their ancestry—the majority of whom claim ancestry anywhere from second, third, fourth, and even fifth generations. One way of doing this is through birthright heritage programs, modeled on Taglit (Discovery)-Birthright Israel—the organization that has sent hundreds of thousands of young Jews on a free ten-day trip to Israel since 1999. Concerned that assimilation was challenging the existence of Jewish life in the diaspora, two individual philanthropists, Charles Bronfman and Michael Steinhardt, founded Birthright Israel. Bronfman, a Canadian/ American businessman, and Steinhardt, an American investor and hedge fund manager, provided the initial funding while also designing and structuring the program. They also organized a means of financing that would

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

157

allow up to 100,000 young adults to participate in the program.6 From 1999 to 2019, nearly 650,000 participants, from 67 countries, have taken part in Birthright Israel which is made possible through philanthropists, Jewish federations, and the State of Israel.7 The trips are organized through approved organizations, associations, and establishments. Over the last few years, a variety of trip options has expanded for young adults aged 18–32. Birthright Israel’s website lists 287 classic programs, 344 themed and topic-focused trips designed to attract unique populations, for example, individuals with special needs or those with specific areas of concentration such as medicine, business, architecture, music, and 479 campus trips that are available through various providers.8 Additionally, ten-week internships for finance and business majors and a group for older adults have been added to the program. To qualify for the Birthright programs, the individuals must have at least one Jewish birth parent and identify as Jewish. Converted Jews also qualify upon proof of having completed Jewish conversion through a recognized Jewish denomination. The program was initially opened only to individuals who had never traveled to Israel on an educational trip however within the past five years, Birthright has changed this requirement. Since its inception in 1999, numerous studies, books, and articles have been published on the Birthright Israel programs. Of great importance to this topic is the extensive research that the Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies (CMJS) at Brandeis University has conducted to measure the impact of the program. By evaluating prior and post evaluations, the researchers have been able to determine the attitudinal and behavioral changes of the Birthright Israel participants prior and after the trip. The findings have indicated that the participants’ journey was a life-changing experience in which they established life-long and meaningful connections and friendships; a newly discovered or strengthened Jewish identity and Jewishness; a stronger connection to Israel and the Jewish community; and the creation of the next generation Jewish Americans.9 The program has also contributed economically to the country of Israel with an astounding $1billion spent on hotels, gifts, souvenirs, and activities that have generated three quarters of a million work days for Israelis.10 On the educational platform, the program has provided a journey through both Jewish history and the contemporary Jewish state. Birthright has also had a ripple effect on the participants’ parents who have been able to enhance their connections to Israel indirectly through their adult children’s experiences.11

158 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

The success of Birthright Israel has served as a model for other ethnic groups in the diaspora that are seeking ways to preserve and protect their rich cultural heritages among upcoming generations. As with Birthright Israel, the main objective of such programs is that their young people reconnect to their roots by having them discover, explore, and cultivate their ethnic identity and cultural heritage through experiential learning. In addition to perpetuating ethnicity, studies have shown that students with a strong identification to their cultural and ethnic identity are more likely to have higher academic achievement.12 To date, over a dozen heritage birthright programs have been created bringing diasporic young adults, mostly cost free, to their ancestral homelands in Europe and Asia. These include: Back to Roots Lebanon (Americans & Canadians), Birthright AFRICA, Birthright Armenia, Birthright Israel, Birthright Macedonia, Connect with Your Roots— Punjabi, CubaOne Tu Cuba, Global Irish Summer Camp, Heritage Greece, Iceland Snorri Program, Israel Taglit Birthright, Overseas Compatriot Youth Formosa Study Tour, Reconnect Hungary, Roots Program China, Voyage of Discovery Italy, and Zoroastrian Return to Roots. The duration of the programs usually ranges from one to six weeks; however, two programs (Birthright Armenia, Roots Program China), which are based on internships, can last up to one year. The in-country costs of the programs are mostly funded by donations from private sponsors, public donations, and ethnic organizations and in some cases, the hosting government. Whereas meals and accommodations in hotels, dormitories, or host family homes are usually provided cost free, travel is handled differently by each trip provider. Most of the programs require that all or a portion of the airline ticket is paid by the participants who are also responsible for getting to and from the designated city of departure on their own. Birthright AFRICA, Birthright Israel, CubaOne Tu Cuba, and Voyage of Discovery Italy provide the airline ticket for no cost. In the Birthright Armenia Program, the airfare can be reimbursed if participants serve a longer term of internship. Some programs require participants to pay an application fee such as Birthright Macedonia ($750.00 application fee for Americans) and Birthright Israel ($250.00 refundable at end of trip). Participants in the Zoroastrian Return to Roots Program are required to contribute $3000 for the cost of the trip; however, there is a reduction for those unable to do so. Each program creates or develops its own criteria for participant selection. On average, about 10 to 25 participants are chosen for the yearly

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

159

program that usually takes place in the summer. A few programs bring more participants to the ancestral lands such as Cuba One (50), Heritage Greece (65), Overseas Compatriot Youth Formosa Study Tour (400–500) and Birthright Israel (48,000) which offers several programs throughout the year. All students are required to complete an application, and many must also write an essay, submit references, and be interviewed. Heritage Greece participants are selected on their GPA (Grade Point Average in college) which must be at least 3.0. Most programs start off with a pre-program orientation session. Reconnect Hungary offers an online multi-media course that provides the future participants with basic Hungarian facts while also focusing on its people’s accomplishments, history, culture, and language. Birthright AFRICA, which has partnered with CUNY University, engages its ten scholar participants through Orientation Kick-off workshops and activities in New York City, and Washington D.C., where they explore their cultural roots and legacy of innovation before the ten-day trip to Ghana. The program is based on the Sankofa principles that emphasize “In order to know where you’re going, you have to know where you’re from.” The term is a metaphorical symbol used by the Akan people of Ghana that originates from three words: San (return), Ko (to go), Fa (to look, seek, and take) while also using the Sankofa bird as its symbol. The main objective of the year-long Roots to China Program is that the participants explore their roots and family genealogy by examining documents and artifacts in their ancestral villages. Before embarking on this journey, the participants first attend a meeting in San Francisco and then participate in a series of Saturday seminars and activities for three months which include touring San Francisco Chinatown, conducting research at the National Archives, and touring the Angel Island Immigration Station. Birthright Armenia, Birthright Israel, Birthright Macedonia, and Birthright Greece (as of 2019) offer volunteer internship work and community service programs. Such initiatives provide the participants with the opportunity to develop experience as they work in top companies and serve local communities. Participants in Birthright Armenia and Birthright Macedonia also assist economic and urban development in the ancestral countries. Birthright Israel, Birthright Macedonia, and Heritage Greece provide the opportunity for participants to receive college credits by participating in courses, seminars, and workshops. Birthright Armenia, Birthright Israel, Iceland Snorri, and Reconnect Hungary have added on shorter termed programs for older participants

160 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

and/or those who work full time. The Iceland Snorri Plus and Roots to China Plus are also open to families. Believing that the experience shouldn’t end once the trip is over, most of the birthright programs have alumni programs which organize yearly reunions, conferences, and even trips back to the ancestral country which are usually publicized through social media. A few of the birthright programs require participants to remain active in their organization following the trip. Reconnect Hungary participants are obligated to somehow participate in a Hungarian organization for the next 12 months. Mentoring a future birthright participant, fundraising, taking Hungarian language courses and even seeking Hungarian citizenship, all count toward the requirement. The interns of the Roots China Program continue working on their family trees and genealogy. Shortly after, they present their findings to the community and then record the information in the village database. Birthright Macedonia’s alumni group promotes the birthright program to other young adults in their home communities and participates in activities that support Macedonian causes. Under the auspices of the United Macedonia Diaspora (UMD), the organization’s website indicates that it is “committed to reversing the name-change while protecting the Macedonian identity and heritage. It will not ever root that campaign in anti-Greek sentiment.”13 However, even after the official renaming as the Republic of North Macedonia in February of 2019, the term is still omitted from the organizations’ names and programs. The Heritage Greece Alumni gather for a Heritage Weekend in Las Vegas, participate in a peer-to-peer mentoring program for the Heritage Greece (HG) students, network through the Alumni Portal, and become active members in NHS chapters located in areas where they currently reside. In addition to publishing a quarterly newsletter, Birthright Armenia has an alumni leadership recognition program that acknowledges the alumni’s achievements in numerous areas. It has also established the Next Step Alumni Grant that enables alumni to return to Armenia and initiate specific projects which they have designed. Back to Roots Lebanon, Birthright Armenia, and Birthright Israel have established alumni internship programs for alumni in the ancestral country. Birthright Israel providers also offer an array of both short-term and long-term internships, service-learning, academic study, and fellowships, in cooperation with Jewish organizations and communities overseas. Whereas an array of material has been written on Birthright Israel, there is a dearth of information on the more recent heritage birthright programs

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

161

founded by other ethnic organizations. The availability and exchange of such knowledge is necessary not only for evaluating and improving heritage programs but also for measuring the impact that experiential learning and diaspora travel have on heritage and ethnic identity development. The current study will focus on the Heritage Greece program that was launched in 2010 by the National Hellenic Society and is hosted by the American College of Greece. In addition to describing the Heritage Greece program in detail, the study aims at examining the eight-year long program’s impact in developing heritage and ethnic identity by analyzing the student participant reflections along with data gathered from pre-post participant surveys.

The Heritage Greece Program The National Hellenic Society (NHS) is a non-profit foundation that was founded in 2009 by a group of dedicated, prominent, and successful Greek American leaders who believed that by leveraging their skills and resources, they could help future generations remember their heritage, values, and culture. According to its website, “The National Hellenic Society’s purpose and interest is the perpetuation of those values and ideals that are embodied within the Hellenic heritage—classical ideas associated with ancient Greek democracy including the pursuit of knowledge, education, the arts and civic responsibility.”14 Striving to be a beacon for the perpetuation of the Hellenic heritage in the United States, the NHS adopted a pragmatic approach on how to develop and implement programs that would advance its mission. To date, NHS has established several community, heritage, and posterity programs—all benefiting the Greek American community. These include, but are not limited to: MyParea—the social networking website with over 1000 weekly visitors; My Greek Table—a public television series of 26 episodes featuring celebrity chef Diane Kochilas; The Greeks—a three-part mini-series produced by National Geographic; and the annual NHS Heritage America Program that aims at reconnecting college-age Greek Americans with their roots, heritage, culture, and Hellenic identity through a four-day stay in Washington, DC. After studying an extensive body of research and scholarship on the intergenerational complexities of the transforming ethnic identity among Greek Americans, in 2010, the NHS designed its signature program— Heritage Greece (HG). The founding mission of Heritage Greece was to offer a birthright Greece program, modeled after Birthright Israel that

162 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

would enable Greek Americans to learn more about their Greek identity by visiting Greece. The non-profit organization became the pioneer not only in offering a birthright program but also in measuring the impact of experiential learning on Greek identity through survey research, as explained further in this chapter. In its inaugural year, NHS selected 15 high-achieving Greek American students from across the United States to embark on the educational experiment which was entirely funded by philanthropists through the National Hellenic Society. Since providing college credits was a high priority, NHS needed to collaborate and form a partnership with a recognized American college in Greece. Thus, the American College of Greece (ACG) and more specifically Deree College that is accredited by the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, was selected as the host institution. Together, NHS and ACG carefully designed an academic and cultural itinerary that would enhance the participants’ personal notion of heritage through an intensive cultural immersion experience. During the next two years, the number of participants increased by an additional ten students—five each year. The students hailed from all regions of the United States while also representing diverse academic areas of study. At this point, seven students were selected from ACG as peer facilitators for the Greek American students, replicating the Birthright Israel concept of “Mifgashim” (encounters in Hebrew) in which young adults from both countries participate in activities together. Such encounters provide young adults with the opportunity to see the inner worlds of contemporary peers while also establishing friendships which often extend beyond the two-week educational experience. Since its launching, the number of participants in Heritage Greece continues to increase. Today over 60 highly qualified Greek American undergraduate and graduate students partake in the summer program. The participants, second generation and beyond, have been largely disconnected from their heritage with most visiting Greece for the very first time. This disconnection can be described by “symbolic ethnicity,” a term introduced in 1979 by Herbert Gans to signify pride in one’s ethnicity without integrating all its traditions, values, and beliefs in everyday life.15 The Heritage Greece Program is a gift from the NHS to the participants. Except for a portion of the airfare costs to and from Athens, all other expenses including tuition, transportation, excursions, meals, classroom materials, and other related costs are covered by the NHS.

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

163

Once in Greece, the participants engage in a two-week historical, cultural, and educational immersion journey with a peer group of exceptional students from The American College of Greece, the partner and host institution. ACG is Europe’s oldest and largest American styled college and located on a 65-acre modern and beautiful campus in the Athenian suburb of Aghia Paraskevi. The students are housed in dormitories on campus or in the school’s nearby apartments. It is also on this campus where the participants participate in various lectures, educational activities, an experiential customized one-credit Greek language and culture course, cultural seminars, and Greek dancing classes—all taught by experienced ACG faculty and staff. During their free time, students can swim in ACG’s Olympic size swimming pool or walk around the bustling neighborhood filled with stores, coffee houses, and restaurants. Heritage Greece’s busy but balanced itinerary consists of fieldtrips to archaeological and cultural sites including the Acropolis, the Parthenon, the Ancient and Roman Agora, the Acropolis and Benaki Museums, and several other monuments in the city. They tour Athens Monastiraki, the Flea Market, or Plaka- the old neighborhood of Athens. Other recreational excursions include a trip to Cape Sounion, a three-island day cruise around the Argosaronic Gulf, and three days on the island of Andros for swimming, visiting monasteries, and other sites. The students are also formally invited to meet scholars and dignitaries at Athens City Hall, the American School of Classical Studies, the Athens Yacht Club, the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, and other institutions. A trip to Greece would be incomplete without tasting the savory, authentic Greek cuisine in which the students experience through cooking lessons and by eating at local restaurants, tavernas, host families’ homes, and a formal dinner with live music in the home of Dr. Horner, the ACG president. Through the well-conceived curriculum and itinerary, the participants gain first-hand experience exploring their culture and achieving the HG Program’s goal which is to reconnect the Greek American students with their Hellenic identity and heritage while building long-lasting relationships with one another and with their peers in Greece. From 2010 to 2018, over 350 students have participated in the program. NHS programs continue to make a difference, with NHS’ signature Heritage Greece Program serving as a paradigm shift. As is evident by comments made on the National Hellenic Facebook pages, the students themselves have described this shared experience as life changing and transformative. The program provided many with the opportunity to connect with their roots,

164 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

become proud of their Hellenic culture, and establish friendships with others like them. Several students even enrolled in Modern Greek classes at their universities once they returned back to the States. The parents’ comments exemplify their satisfaction with the program. One Heritage Greece parent stated, “What the NHS did in 2 weeks, I couldn’t do in 21 years.” The student was so enamored by the Heritage Greece experience that at his urging the entire family spent their summer vacation in Greece rather than in New England—their usual vacation home.16 The success of the Heritage Greece Program has been borne out by scientific research conducted by ACG’s leading sociologist, Dr. Gregory Katsas who has completed his ninth study following the Heritage Greece Programs. At this point, the study will reflect his findings.

Exploring the Impact and Sustainability of the Heritage Greece Program Methodology This study attempts an analysis of the impact of the Heritage Greece program through the measurement of the level of learning about cultural identity and the level of sustainability of the program. The data presented in the study come from an exit survey, filled out by the Greek American participants at the conclusion of the program. The goal of the survey is to measure the effectiveness of the different components of the program and see how participants’ notions of Greek identity may have changed as a result of the program. It has to be noted that the results represent the subjective opinions as reported by the participants themselves. The chapter utilizes the data collected from all exit surveys conducted throughout the nine years of the Heritage Greece program, which included a total of 350 respondents according to the following breakdown by year (Table 7.1): Fulfilling a goal of the program, the participants represent all regions of the United States. Concerning gender, the distribution is overall balanced, with half of the participants being male and half female. In connection to college class standing, all college credit levels are represented, creating a diverse group. The specific breakdown is 20% freshman, 32% sophomores 20% juniors and 28% seniors. Finally, a wide variety of fields of study are represented, totaling more than 30 different majors.

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

Table 7.1 Respondents by year

165

Year

Number of respondents

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total

15 19 21 26 45 50 48 62 64 350

The data on the quantitative part which follows, comes from self-­ reports of participants and it is subjective in nature, as participants are asked to indicate their level of agreement to a number of statements on a scale of 1(the lowest) to 5(the highest). However, it must be noted that this is the strength of this study: it attempts to explore how subjective interpretations result in understanding the impact of the particular program on its participants. In addition, it must be stated that the study focuses exclusively on the development of Greek identity on American-­ born students. It would be interesting to explore how the same may apply to other ethnic contexts. Impact This is a significant issue for the implementation of the program as well as program assessment. It applies to any program and it is to be taken into account in program design and structure. In this study of the Heritage Greece program, impact is explored through two important dimensions both of which are at the core of the purpose of the program: the learning of cultural identity and the sustainability of the program. Cultural Identity The measure of cultural identity is comprised of an index containing five statements. All statements used are self-reports on how much learning has increased for each of the five dimensions described below.

166 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

The first statement measures increase in knowledge of the Greek language. It is considered of primary importance, as language is typically considered one of the major carriers of Greek cultural identity. The rating for this statement is consistently high. Variations may be attributed to the fact that for some years, a higher proportion of participants know more Greek already, before the beginning of the program. The second statement (“knowledge of Ancient Greece”) is important for the building of cultural identity, since much of Greek identity is directly linked to the legacy of ancient Greek philosophy, literature, and social institutions. It appears that its rating across the years is not as high as other indicators of cultural identity. This comes as no surprise, since the participants of the program are more likely to have been exposed to ancient Greece at school or within the family. As such, they come with more knowledge about this aspect of Greece. Of course, the Heritage Greece program takes the participants to experience the ancient sites from up close and this dimension definitely adds to the positive reaction of participants. The third statement (“knowledge of Modern Greece”) relates to a major goal of the program: to introduce participants to modern Greek society and culture, something that they may not have been exposed to previously. As the data indicates, the Heritage Greece program is successful in achieving this goal, since participants consistently rate this statement highly. The fourth statement is evaluating the impact on learning from the participation in the experiential language classes. As part of the teaching of Greek language, the program puts participants in settings where they experience and practice Greek. This includes shopping, asking for directions, ordering food, or conversing with sellers at the local farmers’ market. Overall, as this component of the program grew, the reaction of the participants was very positive. Finally, the fifth indicator of cultural identity is the amount of learning from the Greek Society and Culture Seminars. These are present in the last six years of the program and the aim is to introduce participants to modern Greece. Their evaluation is somewhat lower than other components, but their effect is highly regarded, since they provide information on modern Greece, a component which is highly contributing to learning of cultural identity (Table 7.2 and Graph 7.1).

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

167

Table 7.2  Rating of cultural identity 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Knowledge of Greek language Knowledge of ancient Greece Knowledge of modern Greece Experiential language classes Greek society & culture seminars Index of cultural identity

4.9 3.9 4.4 3.7 –

3.7 3.5 4.2 – –

3.6 3.2 4.2 – –

3.7 3.3 4.2 – 3.4

4.0 3.5 4.2 4.8 3.8

4.1 3.8 4.4 4.8 3.9

4.2 3.5 4.2 4.3 3.2

4.1 3.9 4.3 4.3 3.8

3.8 3.2 4.1 4.1 3.5

4.2

3.8

3.7

3.7

4.1

4.2

3.9

4.1

3.7

4.2

Average Score (1-5)

4.1 4

3.8

4.1

3.9 3.8 3.7

3.6 2010

3.7 3.6

2012

2014

2016

2018

Graph 7.1  Index of cultural identity

Index of Cultural Identity Averaging all cultural identity statements for each year of the Heritage Greece program produces a very valuable index of cultural learning as presented in the graph above. The overall indicator of cultural identity varies from a low of 3.7 to a high of 4.2 out of possible 5. This variation is expected as participants characteristics differ across the years. In addition, it is a considerably high outcome, when we take into account that a large number of participants have had no systematic or intense exposure to Greek culture before this program. Sustainability The sustainability of a program is a crucial element as it refers to the chances the program has to continue and deliver its outcomes. Measures

168 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

of sustainability cannot be direct. They are based on stated behavior attitudes or opinions of participants. Sustainability of the Heritage Greece program is measured through an index containing five statements from the exit survey. These questions are selected to reflect the major goals and outcomes of the program. The first statement asks whether participants have grown closer to their Greek heritage as a result of the program. This is seen as a necessary requirement for the success and the sustainability of the program, as it refers to one of the major goals the program sets for itself. Participants typically indicate strong agreement with the statement, despite small fluctuations across the years. Growing closer to one’s heritage signifies that the formation of personal identity is shifting, attaching more attention to the conscious inclusion of ethnic roots. The second statement (“I would plan another trip to Greece”) is indicative of the success of the program. It is consistently the highest rated statement of all 5 which comprise the “sustainability index” across all years. As such, it is a strong indicator of synergies between the Heritage Greece program and the economic significance for Greece. The third statement (“I intend to explore my ancestry further”) can be seen by itself as an extension of the first statement and indicative of a more active and dynamic approach in the self-definition of identity. The last two statements of the sustainability dimension are: “I plan to engage with the Greek American community” and “I would support a strong connection among all Greek American students.” They both relate to the potential impact of the Heritage Greece program on the Greek American community. In the context of the effort to maintain and strengthen the cultural ties among persons with Greek heritage, these questions serve as a pledge for the future of Greek America (Table 7.3 and Graph 7.2). Index of Sustainability Averaging all sustainability statements for each year of the Heritage Greece program produces a very valuable index of sustainability, as shown in the graph above. As it is evident, sustainability is consistently high across all the nine years of the program. The rating is consistently above 4 on a 5-point scale. This can be interpreted in a number of ways: First the high rate of one year, almost guarantees the success of the program the next year. Second, it is a strong indicator that the Heritage Greece program is

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

169

Table 7.3  Rating of sustainability 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 I have grown closer to my Greek heritage I would plan another trip to Greece I intend to explore my ancestry further I plan to engage with the Greek American community I would support a strong connection among all Greek American students Index of sustainability

4.5

4.7

4.3

4.8

4.7

4.8

4.6

4.7

4.6

4.6

4.8

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.9

4.8

4.9

4.7

–

4.4

4.3

4.2

4.5

4.6

4.3

4.4

4.3

–

4.3

4.3

3.9

4.2

4.7

4.4

4.5

4.6

–

4.5

–

4.3

4.8

4.8

4.8

4.6

4.7

4.5

4.5

4.4

4.4

4.6

4.8

4.6

4.6

4.6

Average Score (1-5)

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.5

4.4 2010

4.6

4.6

2014

2016

4.6

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.4

2012

2018

Graph 7.2  Index of sustainability

successful in that it addresses the core issues linking young Greek Americans with Greece and the Greek community in the United States.

Connecting Cultural Identity to Sustainability It is interesting to try to relate the two dimensions described above. When we overlay the two indexes, the one for cultural learning and the other for sustainability, an interesting pattern is revealed, as shown in the graph that follows (Graph 7.3). Our data indicates that the two dimensions are somewhat connected. As cultural identity changes, sustainability changes parallel to it. Although

170 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

4.75 4.5

4.5

4.5

4.6 4.4

3.75 3.5 2010

4.1 3.8

4.6

4.6

Index of Cultural Identity Index of Sustainability

4.4

4.25 4.2 4

4.6

4.2

4.1 3.9

3.7

2012

3.7

3.6 2014

2016

2018

Graph 7.3  Cultural identity and sustainability

this does not imply a direct causal relationship, it means that the two dimensions are connected in a way which adds to the impact of the program. Interestingly, it seems that sustainability is quite strong, as its values are closer together over the years and even in 2018 while learning of cultural identity experiences a relative decline, sustainability remains unchanged. This finding is pointing to a remarkable realization: sustainability of the Heritage Greece program reached a high level from the first year of the program and has maintained this position throughout time. Although there are small annual fluctuations, the overall consistency of the sustainability of the program cannot be ignored. The other index, that of cultural identity, presents more fluctuations over the years. This could be contributed to the fact that some questions comprising the index were not present during all years. Still, though, the index ranges from 3.7 to 4.2, something that can be described as a tight variation. Taking everything into consideration, the long-term pattern indicates a robust program with strong potential for the future. There are three major factors which arguably lead to these results. First, Heritage Greece is a well-structured and effectively delivered program. Second, it has clearly stated objectives which include a combination of learning with entertainment. Third, it enjoys the full support both from NHS and the American College of Greece. These factors attract dedicated applicants who are self-­ selected to learn and actively connect to their heritage. As a result, we are able to see high scores for both cultural learning and sustainability, which overall parallel each other.

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

171

Conclusion This chapter lays the preliminary groundwork in describing and assessing the Heritage Greece programs’ impact during the first nine years of its operation, 2010–2018. As a major initiative aimed at maintaining and strengthening Greek cultural identity among young Greek Americans, the data show that the program is running strongly and indicate that the impact of the Heritage Greece program is considerable when we account for the learning of cultural identity and the sustainability of the program. While data in the quantitative section is based on self-reports, the responses across the years reveal that the Heritage Greece program has a strong impact on its participants.

Notes 1. Joshua A. Fishman, “Why is it so hard to save a threatened language?” in Can threatened languages be saved? ed. J.  A. Fishman (Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2001). 2. Dan Georgakas, “The Now and Future Greek America: Strategies for Survival.” Kalami http://www.kalami.net/2012/omogeneia/Georgakas_ survival.pdf (accessed October 5, 2018). 3. Angelyn Balodimas-Bartolomei, “Greek American Identities in the 21st Century: A Generational Approach.” Journal of Hellenic Diaspora: Volume 38.1 & 2 (2012), 71–97. 4. Dan Georgakas, “Greek America: The Next Fifty Years,” Hellenic News of America. http://www.helleniclinkmidwest.org/documents/The%20 Immediate%20Future%20of%20Greek%20%20America.pdf (accessed October 5, 2018). 5. Ibid. 6. Leonard Saxe and Barry Chazan, Ten Days of Birthright Israel: A Journey in Young Adult Identity, (Lebanon, NH: Brandeis University Press UPNE, 2008). 7. Birthright Israel. “Our Story.” https://www.birthrightisrael.com/about_ us_inner/52?scroll=art_1 (accessed October 5, 2018). 8. Birthright Israel. “Explore Trips.” https://www.birthrightisrael.com/ market?interest=36,38,54 (accessed October 5, 2018). 9. Leonard Saxe, Shira Fishman, Michelle Shain, Graham Wright, and Shahar Hecht, Young Adults and Jewish Engagement: The Impact of Taglit-­ Birthright Israel (Lebanoon, NH: Brandeis University Press UPNE, 2013) h t t p : / / b i r. b r a n d e i s . e d u / b i t s t r e a m / h a n d l e / 1 0 1 9 2 / 2 6 1 7 0 / YAJewishEngagement.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed October 5, 2018).

172 

A. BALODIMAS-BARTOLOMEI AND G. A. KATSAS

10. Taglit Birthright Israel. “Our Achievements.” http://taglitww.birthrightisrael.com/TaglitBirthrightIsraelStory/Pages/Our-Achievements.aspx (accessed October 5, 2018). 11. Janet Krasner Aronson, “Leveraging social networks to create social change: Ripple effects of Taglit-Birthright Israel on parents of participants,” Brandeis University. PhD Thesis. 2015. 12. Richard M.  Lerner and Nancy L.  Galambos, “Adolescent development: challenges and opportunities for research, programs, and policies.” February 1998. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 413–446. 13. Jovan Meteski. “Macedonian Protestors: We Demand Our Human Rights.” May 7, 2019. https://umdiaspora.org/2019/01/21/ umd-calls-for-respect-and-civility-in-greece/ 14. National Hellenic Society. “Mission.” May 9, 2019. https://www.nationalhellenicsociety.org/mission%2D%2Dbackground.html 15. Herbert Gans, 1979. “Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in America,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 2(1) 1979: 1–20. 16. Art Dimopoulos. “The National Hellenic Society. The Dream Has Come True.” The National Herald. July 4, 2013. https://www.thenationalherald.com/1379/the-national-hellenic-society-the-dream-has-come-true/ (accessed October 5, 2018).

References Aronson, Krasner Janet. 2015. Leveraging Social Networks to Create Social Change: Ripple Effects of Taglit-Birthright Israel on Parents of Participants. PhD diss., Brandeis University. Balodimas-Bartolomei, Angelyn. 2012. Greek American Identities in the 21st Century: A Generational Approach. Journal of Hellenic Diaspora 38 (1 & 2): 71–97. Birthright Israel. Explore Trips. https://www.birthrightisrael.com/market?interest= 36,38,54. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. ———. Our Story. https://www.birthrightisrael.com/about_us_inner/52?scroll= art_1. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Dimopoulos, Art. 2013. The National Hellenic Society. The Dream Has Come True. The National Herald, July 4. https://www.thenationalherald.com/1379/ the-national-hellenic-society-the-dream-has-come-true/. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Fishman, J.A. 2001. Why Is It So Hard to Save a Threatened Language? In Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? ed. J.A.  Fishman, 1–22. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Georgakas, D. 2017. Greek America. The Next Fifty Years. Hellenic News of America. Hellenic News. https://hellenicnews.com/greek-america-next-fiftyyears-professor-dan-georgakas/. Accessed 5 Oct 2018.

7  PROMOTING HERITAGE, ETHNICITY, AND CULTURAL IDENTITY… 

173

Georgakas, Dan. The Changing Nature of Greek America. http://www.helleniclinkmidwest.org/documents/The%20Immediate%20Future%20of%20 Greek%20%20America.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Georgakis, Dan. The Now and Future Greek America. Strategies for Survival. http://www.kalami.net/2012/omogeneia/Georgakas_survival.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Lerner, R.M., and N.L.  Galambos. 1998. Adolescent Development: Challenges and Opportunities for Research, Programs, and Policies. Annual Review of Psychology 49: 413–446. Mateski, Jovan. Macedonian Protestors: We Demand Our Human Rights. https:// umdiaspora.org/2019/01/21/umd-calls-for-respect-and-civility-in-greece/. Accessed 7 May 2019. National Hellenic Society. 2019. Mission. May 9. https://www.nationalhellenicsociety.org/mission%2D%2Dbackground.html Ridella, Jessica. 2016. Heritage Greece Program. Heritage Greece 2018. October 25. https://www.facebook.com/pg/HeritageGreece/reviews/. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Saxe, Leonard, and Barry Chazan. 2008. Ten Days of Birthright Israel: A Journey in Young Adult Identity. Hanover: UPNE, Brandeis University. Saxe, Leonard, Shira Fishman, Michelle Shain, Graham Wright, and Shahar Hecht. 2013. Young Adults and Jewish Engagement: The Impact of Taglit-Birthright Israel. Brandeis University. http://bir.brandeis.edu/bitstream/handle/10192/ 26170/YAJewishEngagement.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Taglit Birthright Israel. Our Achievements. http://taglitww.birthrightisrael.com/ TaglitBirthrightIsraelStory/Pages/Our-Achievements.aspx. Accessed 5 Oct 2018. Weber, Allie. 2014. Heritage Greece Program Changing Lives. Neo Magazine, September 13. http://www.neomagazine.com/2014/09/heritage-greeceprogram-changing-lives/. Accessed 5 Oct 2018.

CHAPTER 8

Conclusion: When We Were Greek American Theodore G. Zervas

In 1921, Sotiros Papasotiriou arrived in the United States through Ellis Island. According to the passenger report, he was 34 years old, five feet four inches, with brown hair, gray eyes, and a ruddy complexion. In Greece, he left behind his wife, two young sons, and newborn daughter. From New  York City, he traveled to Chicago where he would meet a cousin. His cousin would put him up in a small garden apartment with four other men from their hometown. During the day, the men worked building the railroad lines in Chicago. After work they went home, ate dinner together, went to bed, and did the same thing almost day in and day out. The apartment they lived in had no heat and when it got cold at night the men burned old newspapers to stay warm. It was a difficult life and the men were not sure if life in the United States was all that it was made out to be. Yiorgos, one of the men that lived with Sotiros, planned to go back to Greece. With the money he would save working on the railroads he would buy more land back in Greece, marry off his three daughters (with a proper dowry of course), and work his land with his two sons for the rest of his life. In the United States, Yiorgos and Sotiros arranged that their children, Yiorgos’s eldest son Andreas and Sotiros’s daughter Eleni wed T. G. Zervas (*) North Park University, Chicago, IL, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9_8

175

176 

T. G. ZERVAS

once they became of age. Both Sotiros and Yiorgos moved back to Greece. Sotiros would come back to the United States a few years later for a short time with his eighteen-year old son Dimitri. Dimitri would stay in the United States. In Greece, Sotiros and Yiorgos’ honored their agreement and married their children to one another. Sotiros’s son Dimitri, who stayed in the United States would become a successful businessman, and in the late 1960s through the family chain migration program, Dimitri would invite his sister Eleni and her family to the United States. Sotiros lived the rest of his life in Greece, where generations of his family had lived. According to his fellow townspeople, he was a soft-spoken and kind man. He knew how to read and write, and enjoyed drinking coffee and reading the Sunday newspaper at the local café. He spent most of his day with his wife, his son Panayiotis, and his grandchildren. They all worked producing olive oil and tobacco. He wrote to his son Dimitri in the United States and to his daughter Eleni when she moved there. Sotiros lived well into his 90s. He had gone blind in his old age, but his memory was still in good tack. He died in the town that his ancestors lived. Most of his children however would move to the United States and make America their home. At the turn of the twentieth century, many Greeks came to the United States for a better life. Most however had ambitions to go back to Greece like Sotiros. Zoume stin Xenitiá, “We live in foreign lands,” Sotiros’s daughter Eleni would later quibble to her grandchildren. For those of us that were the first to be born in America, Xenitiá meant that we did not quite belong in America and that America would never really be our home. I often ask immigrant Greeks who decided to stay and raise their children in America, if it was worth it? Their responses often sounded the same, Yes, it was worth it. I have no complaints, my kids are educated, they speak Greek, we have our home our jobs, we have money, but I worry about my grandkids. If we lived in Greece, I think it would have been better. I see my friends in Greece today and hate to say this, but I am jealous of them or rather I envy them. The families there are together, and they will always be Greek. Their kids and grandkids will never be anything else.

This was the fear many Greeks had when they first arrived to America; that their progeny, would lose a sense of what it was to be Greek, that they would not learn to speak Greek, that they would marry someone who was not Greek, and that they would lose a personal connection to Greece. For

8  CONCLUSION: WHEN WE WERE GREEK AMERICAN 

177

those of us who were born and raised in a Greek American home, we felt the heavy weight on our shoulders. We were constantly reminded how important it was to be Greek. Our families also went to great lengths to assure that we were Greek. We went to Greek school, we spoke Greek, we learned all the Greek folk dances, we attended Greek Orthodox Church services, we traveled to Greece, we spent an infinite amount of time with Greek family, and we were vicariously paraded at family gatherings as the perfect Greek children. Because we were so Greek, America did not feel like home to us. At the same time when we were in Greece, we did not quite fit there either. Greeks in Greece thought we were frozen in time, a blast from a long ago past, when the first Greeks emigrated to America. They called us Xazoamerikanakia, Koutoamerikanakia (little dumb Americans) and Xenoi (foreigners), as if we were not Greek. But the truth was, we loved Greece and we loved America too. I remember introducing a Greek American friend to one of my colleagues at my university, my colleague casually asked my friend where we met. My friend coolly told him “In kindergarten, in Greek school.” My colleague was surprised that we had remained friends for so long. Greek school helped us develop a special bond with our fellow Greek American school friends that was unlike our non-Greek friends. We felt like we were all the same. We felt our families were the same and it was easy for us to relate to one another. Many Greeks fought long and hard to retain their Greek identity. Some were willing to go to great lengths to do so. My favorite story of this is of a Greek immigrant who wanted to remain in jail until his daughter’s name was changed to a Greek name. Below is the story from the Chicago Daily Tribune in 1914: Chrystos Malamatinos of Athens went to jail today and announced he would stay there until his baby, named Muriel, shall have become the namesake of Helen of Troy. The Greek’s wife is an American. After the baby came she read a novel in which the heroine was named Muriel. She fancied that name and gave it to the baby despite the protests of her husband, who insisted that it should be named Helen. Malamatinos left home and was charged today in the Superior court with failure to provide. When arraigned he told the judge that he would not support a Muriel or a Muriel’s mother. If his wife consented to change the name of the baby to Helen, he would return to support the family. Otherwise he preferred to remain in jail.1

178 

T. G. ZERVAS

But it was the Greek family, the Greek school, and the Greek Orthodox Church that would play the greatest role in maintaining our Greek identity. In Greek school, the walls of our classrooms were adorned with pictures of heroes from the Greek Revolution, icons of Greek Orthodox saints, and picturesque posters of Greece. Each year a group of students would accompany the school principal to the Greek consulate in downtown Chicago to pick up our Greek textbooks. One year I got to go with a group of my friends. I remember that we took the school bus and we all sat in the back row with the seats in front of us empty. We could only see the bus driver in the far-off distance driving the bus. When we got to the Greek consulate, we met with the Greek Consul General. She welcomed us at the door and started to ask each of us a question in Greek. She pretended to be interested in what we had to say—when she was really interested how well we spoke Greek. After she was done talking to us, she turned to our principal and told him how impressed she was with our Greek. Afterwards she took us down the hall to a large storage room. The room was filled with rows and rows of books from Greece. They were all new and smelled as if they had just come off the Greek press. There were books on grammar, history, science, music, archeology, theology, and literature. We took what books we needed for each grade level and a few extra copies just in case. We loaded the books in boxes and placed them onto the bus, and we were off back to our Greek school to distribute the books to our fellow students. I remember thinking on our way back that kids in Greece were reading the same books we were. I thought that was cool. In Greek school, we learned about Greek history, about Greek Orthodox Christianity, and how to read and write in Greek. On Greek Independence Day, we wore our finely embroidered foustanella and amalia costumes and marched down Michigan Avenue as cheerful crowds waived both Greek and American flags at us. When the Imia Incident took place, we protested outside the Turkish consulate, and when our history was being challenged, we reminded the world that there was only one Greek people, one Greek language, and one Greek history. While our Greek school was homogenous, our neighborhoods were a cosmopolitan world where disparate cultures met. Our non-Greek friends were Irish, German, Italian, Serbian, Polish, Jewish, Korean, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Black, or just American. They were surprised that we went to Greek school and they did not quite understand why we had to be so Greek. When they talked ill of our Greek heritage, or mocked our food

8  CONCLUSION: WHEN WE WERE GREEK AMERICAN 

179

and traditions, we did not think that there was something wrong with us, we instead proudly defended who we were. We were proud to be Greek and we weren’t willing to let others make us feel bad about it. When summer came, our bags were packed like inflated air-balloons and we were off to Greece. We visited family. Our parents let us roam the streets and village squares until the early hours of the morning. We played with kids from Greece and we met other Greek kids from around the world. We had our first crush in Greece, our first kiss, our first boyfriend, our first girlfriend. We spent time with our Greek grandparents and great-­ grandparents, with aunts, uncles, and cousins. They took us places and told others who we were. When we became young adults, we continued to travel to Greece. We did the tourist thing, went clubbing, hung out on the beach, and reconnected with family and friends. At the end of our stay, many of us did not want to go back home. We thought to ourselves how great it would be to live in Greece. When we had families of our own, we took them to Greece, and we wanted our children to love Greece as much as we did. I was four when I first visited Greece. I spent the whole summer in Greece. I forgot how to speak English when I came back. My wife picks on me today on some of my grammar mistakes, “Close the light” I say, instead of “Shut the light.” “Sheltered Greek!” She says. I had to straddle two cultures all my life—not quite mastering either one. Dan Georgakas helped introduce this book to the reader. He is one of the early pioneers of Greek American studies. Dan first exposed the world to the labor history of Greek American immigrants. Charles Moskos introduced me to Dan’s work and Andrew Kopan introduced me to the Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, where Dan was on the board of directors. Today, when someone has a serious question about the Greek American community, I send them to Dan. One of Dan’s greatest assets is his brutal honesty. When many of us try to glorify our community or even hide its disparaging secrets, Dan tells it how it is. What will a Greek American identity look like in the future? Will Greek culture be preserved in the United States? On this, Dan says, If Hellenic culture, rather than generic heritage soon will be central to Greek identity, the community needs to move into areas where it has not been strong. Although we have done well in preserving traditional dancing and music, there has been a weak commitment to the other arts. We must understand that if we want young people to choose Greek identity we must

180 

T. G. ZERVAS

go beyond celebrating Greek national holidays and traditions. If we wish to have work produced by, for, and about Greek America, we need to support our artists and intellectuals. Without such support, they will go to where their efforts are appreciated.2

How my son will define what it means to be Greek American will likely be different from the way I define it. And that’s OK. Angelyn Balodimas-­ Bartolomei’s 2012 study on the ethnic identification of Greek Americans found that, Nearly 72 percent of second generation [Greek-Americans] are very conscious or preoccupied with their Greek identity. There is a decrease of about 10 percent among third/third plus generations. An overwhelming majority (98.4% and 93.4%) of all participants are very proud of their Greek identity with a slight decrease among third/third plus generation Greek Americans. It will be a struggle though for later generations of Greek Americans to maintain some important cultural aspects of a Greek identity.3

Today, the community is struggling to maintain the Greek language. Most second and third generation Greek Americans don’t speak Greek. It’s not easy to learn Greek. I personally have to work hard to maintain my Greek. But Greek is not the only defining characteristic of being Greek American. Many of my Jewish-American friends don’t speak Hebrew, but they still very much feel connected to their Jewish heritage. My grandparents never cared to visit the Acropolis or the other major historical places in Greece, but they felt very much connected to the land and its people. Of all the ventures that I have seen that help young Greek Americans connect to Greece is the Ionian Village Program. For many young Greek Americans that attend the program, it is a transformative experience. They connect with their Greek heritage, their Greek history, and the Greek Orthodox Christian faith. And after attending the program, they want to be Greek. Undoubtedly, it will be difficult for future generations of Greek Americans to maintain strong personal relationships with the people from Greece. When I was a child, my family hosted a dozen or so people from Greece, both family members and non-family members. I have continued my relationship with many of these people today. I think it is important to create a robust exchange program, where students from Greece could be hosted by Greek American families and Greek American kids could be

8  CONCLUSION: WHEN WE WERE GREEK AMERICAN 

181

hosted by Greek families. This would help to build personal relationships that may be lifelong. Such an exchange program would further aim to make the benefits of American society available to Greece while enriching Greek American life to the art, history, and culture of Greece. Greek American schools are also important in maintaining a Greek American identity. The schools have done some good work recently in revising their curricula to meet the needs of the Greek American child today. Less emphasis has been placed on Greek language and more emphasis on Greek culture and Greek history. Adult Greek language classes have been introduced, and many of the schools have music concerts, special speaker series, and other events centered around Greece. Many of the schools have even carved a special niche in a shrinking market of Greek American education. Some cater more to families that speak Greek in the home while others cater more to second or third generation Greek American families. I have also been told by some of the principals from these schools that the Greek economic crisis (as unfortunate as it was) has increased enrollments in these schools because of new Greek immigrant arrivals to the United States. While there are still many Greek schools, almost all of them are afternoon or weekend schools. The all-day schools that many of my generation attended are shrinking. Moreover, by middle school most of the students at the Greek schools decide to stop attending these schools. While many of the Greek schools have relocated to help increase their enrollments, they still struggle in attracting students. I’m not sure if all these schools will survive in the future, but I hope that they will. There is no question that the Greek American community found education important and in many ways more so than other immigrant groups. Greek American families went to great lengths to educate their children. At the same time, they did not want their children to do what they did for a living. They aspired that their children would do something better than themselves. “Go to school so you do not have to work as hard as we do” was a mantra of many Greek American mothers and fathers. Many Greek American children were even discouraged from going into the family business and an education was a way out from the hard work that their parents did. The Greek Orthodox Church in the United States is also important in maintaining a Greek identity. Does one need to be Greek Orthodox to be Greek? I struggle answering this question. It is however difficult to find someone who does not agree that Greek Orthodoxy is integral to the

182 

T. G. ZERVAS

social and cultural life of the Greek American community. Today, many Greek Americans have issues with the Church. Many have left the Church. The Church has also attracted new converts who are not Greek. It is true that Greek Orthodoxy is just as much a faith as it is a Greek cultural and religious tradition. Many Greek Americans have their reasons why they have remained Greek Orthodox: For spiritual reasons, for cultural reasons, for a connection to one’s ancient Greek ancestors or because it brings about blissful memories from their childhood. These are all fair reasons. But we should also remember that along with what Judaism is to the Jewish people, there is no other religious tradition that is more tied and more important to the cultural and spiritual life of a people as the Greek Church is to the Greek people. I hear many second and third generation Greek Americans complain that they would prefer more English during the liturgy so they could better understand what is happening during the service. But it’s not just about the liturgy, its’ about the music, the community, and the overall experience. A friend of mine says, “Did the early Greek immigrants understand the liturgy in the Koine Greek? Think of it this way, would an Italian opera sound and feel the same way if it were in English?” Currently, the elephant in the room is the recent financial crisis in the Greek Orthodox Church in the United States. Saint Nicholas Cathedral and National Shrine at the World Trade Center has yet to be completed. It is to be the gateway of Greek Orthodox Christianity in the United States. Many of us remember when Costas Simitis, the prime minister of Greece, visited New York City after the September 11 attacks. He stood side by side with the priest of Saint Nicholas Church where the church stood before it was destroyed in the attacks. Days earlier the church’s Gospel had been found by clean-up crews near the site of the church. The two men held the Gospel up high in the air to a crowd of cheering Greek Americans. The Greek government and many other members of the community donated money for the building of the shrine. The shrine however has yet to be completed. As there are many successes in the Greek American community there are just as many shortcomings. We have to be honest about these. Perhaps this final chapter is not the right place to go over all of them. However, after graduating from Greek parochial school most of us went off to a public schools or Catholic schools. Those settings were foreign to us and we felt like outsiders. The Greek American school system was largely a K-8 school system. It ended up becoming a feeder system for public highs

8  CONCLUSION: WHEN WE WERE GREEK AMERICAN 

183

schools and Catholic high schools. We never developed a Greek American high school system or even a secular Greek American university like a Brandeis University, created by the Jewish-American community for the purposes of supporting Jewish-American higher education. When Dan Georgakas writes about supporting Greek American artists and intellectuals he is talking about the future of the community. It is my generation and later generations of Greek Americans who share the responsibility of preparing the future generation of Greek Americans. We need writers, artists, and intellectuals as Dan says, as well as mentors to help prepare these future generations. How well we do in these areas will determine the true success of our community as well as how we will define ourselves in the future.

Notes 1. “Greek To Stay in Jail Until Muriel is Helen: Dispute Over Name of Baby Daughter Leads to His Conviction for Failure to Provide” Chicago Daily Tribune. (April 15, 1914). 2. Georgakas, Dan “Greek America: The Next Fifty Years”. Hellenic News. https://hellenicnews.com/greek-america-next-fifty-years-professor-dangeorgakas/ (2018). 3. Balodimas-Bartolomei “Greek American Identities in the 21st Century: A Generational Approach.” Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, 38, no 1&2. (2012): 71–97.

References Angelyn, Balodimas-Bartolomei. 2012. Greek American Identities in the 21st Century: A Generational Approach. Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora 38 (1&2): 71–97. Georgakas, Dan. (2018). Greek America: The Next Fifty Years. Hellenic News. https://hellenicnews.com/greek-america-next-fifty-years-professordan-georgakas/ Greek to Stay in Jail Until Muriel Is Helen: Dispute Over Name of Baby Daughter Leads to His Conviction for Failure to Provide. 1914. Chicago Daily Tribune, April 15.

Index1

A Alphabet Book of the Greek Child in America, The, 49 American and Greek Language Integrated Curriculum, 5, 129–148 American College of Greece (ACG), 6, 161–164, 170 See also Deree College American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), 140, 151n40 American Hellenic Education Progressive Association (AHEPA), viii–xi, 3, 16, 129 Archbishop Athenagoras, 16, 34n20, 103, 107 Archbishop Iakovos, x, 7n5, 18–26, 35n29, 35n32, 35n39, 103 Aristotle Greek American School (Niles, Illinois), 5, 109–115

Arsenis, Ioannis, 46, 64n20 Athene, x Atlantis (newspaper/publisher), ix, 21, 43, 46, 58, 63n6 B Birthright Israel, 5, 156–162 See also Birthright Programs Birthright Programs, 157, 158, 160, 162 Botsis, Father Dean and Presvytera Georgia, 110–112 C Callimachos, Demetrios Fr., 44, 45 Chicago Board of Education, 78 Chrysoloras, Manuel, 13, 15 Clergy-Laity Congress, 12, 17, 19, 27, 28, 35n39, 37n62, 37n63

 Note: Page numbers followed by ‘n’ refer to notes.

1

© The Author(s) 2020 F. K. Soumakis, T. G. Zervas (eds.), Educating Greek Americans, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39827-9

185

186 

INDEX

Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP), 138, 151n32 Common Core State Standards (CCSS), 140 Confectioners’ Society, 21 Constantelos, Demetrios, 23, 32n6, 32n8, 35n29, 35n38, 35n39 Constantopoulos, Demothenes, 106 See also D.C. Divry Publishers D D.C. Divry Publishers, 43, 44, 49, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 63n6, 106 Delaware World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, 140 Demetrios Coucouzis, 18 Demetriou, Mimes, xivn7, 51, 55, 56, 62n3, 65n47, 65n48, 65n49, 66n53, 66n56 Demoticists, 58 Deree College, 162 The Dialectic Method, 75 Diglossia, 58 Dikaios Publishers, 46 Dilboy, George, 57, 67n65 Dimitrakos Publishers, 46 Drosinis, Georgios, 48 Dual Language Immersion Programs (DLI), 5, 129–148 E Early childhood bilingualism, 134 Ellenas, Soterios, 22 Ellino-Amerikanopoulo (Magazine), 24, 36n40 Emmanuel, Philippos, 27–29, 36n49, 36n51 English Language Learners (ELL), 130

Ethnikos Kyrix (newspaper/publisher), ix, 43, 63n6 See also National Herald F A. Fantis Parochial School, 22 Feraios, Rigas, 51, 65n48 Foreign Languages in Elementary Schools (FLES), 131, 132 G Georgakas, Dan, xivn7, xivn8, 156, 179, 183 Goulandris, Constantine P., 21 GreekAmerican (newspaper), x Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, 5, 12, 20, 32n1, 32n3, 33n12, 34n18, 34n20, 34n23, 36n44, 37n59, 37n63, 57 Greek-American Boarding School of Ms. Pallikari-Vedova, 103 Greek-American Institute (GAI), 21, 28, 29, 35n34, 103 Greek School Types afternoon schools, 13, 17, 19, 21, 22, 33n15, 61, 104, 110 parochial schools, 9–12, 18–23, 25, 27–29, 31, 78, 102 saturday schools, 102, 115 secular/independent schools, 23, 33n15 Sunday schools, 17, 50, 102, 104 H Hatziemmanuel, Emmanuel, 30, 37n59, 37n62, 108 Hellenic College, x, xi, xivn8, 108 Heritage Greece Program, 5, 155–171

 INDEX 

Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 102 See also Holy Cross Theological School Holy Cross Theological School, ix, x, 17, 18 Holy Trinity Church (Chicago, Illinois), 79 Home-Religion-Family, 60, 67n71 Humanistic education, 82 I I glossa mou (My Language), 109 Ionian Village Program, 180 J Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, x Journal of Modern Greek Studies, x K Kaloidis, Dimitrios and Georgia, 22 katharevousa, 15, 17, 57–58, 106–107 Katharevousa v. Demotic Greek, 58 See also Demoticists; Diglossia Kavathas, Athenagoras, 46 Kentrikon Publishers, 106 Konstantopoulou (Rompapa), Eleni, 48, 65n44 Koraes, Adamantios, 13, 15, 78 Koraes Greek-American School, 4, 71–97 L Ladies Philoptochos Society, 18, 27, 102, 103

187

M Mathaino Ellinika (I Learn Greek), 5, 108–110 Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies (CMJS), 157 Modern Greek Studies Association, x, 4 N National Hellenic Society (NHS), xi, 6, 160–163, 170, 172n16 National Herald (newspaper/ publisher), ix, x, xivn7, 44, 47, 48 See also Ethnikos Kyrix O Odyssey and Iliad, 71–97 Odyssey Charter School (OCS), xiii, 5, 129–148 O Helios, 46, 64n21 P Palaces of my Fatherland, The, 57–59, 61, 63n11, 67n63, 67n69 Panagiotou, Andriana, 115 Papaloizos, Theodore, 107, 111 Papandreou, Georgios, 1, 47, 106 Papazoglou, Platon, 57, 67n63 Parochial School of St. Eleftherios, 21 Patriarch(ate) of Constantinople, viii, xi, 12 Pedagogical Institute of Greece, 5, 109 R Proini, x Reading Book of the Greek Child in America, The, 50, 65n44, 65n45

188 

INDEX

The Republic, 75, 76 Retail Florist’s Association, 21 S St. Andrew’s Academy, 23, 25, 28 St. Basil’s Academy, 17, 18, 25, 103, 107, 110 St. Demetrios Jamaica Day School, 22 Saint Haralambos Greek Orthodox Church (Niles, Illinois), 126n43, 126n46 Saint Nicholas Cathedral and National Shrine, 182 Saints Constantine and Helen Church (Palos Heights, Illinois), 22 Socrates Greek American School (Chicago, Illinois), 12 See also Socrates Greek American School (Hellenic American Academy) Socrates Greek American School (Hellenic American Academy), 72 Socrates School (Montreal, Canada), 103 Socratic Method, 71–97 See also The Dialectic Method Solomos, Dionysios, 48 Supreme Educational Council, 12, 23, 57, 58, 102, 107

T Tassopoulou, Koula, 23 Teaching approach discussion based, 81 interpretive discussion, 74, 81 student-centered, 80 Three Hierarchs Parochial School, 22 Triantafillou, Demothenes, 108 Tsolainos, Theodore P., 21

V Vavoudis, N. I., 58, 59, 63n11, 67n69 Vidali, Venetia, 47, 49, 64n25, 64n26, 106

W World Council of Churches, 19, 25

Z Zoustis, Basil T., 13, 16, 17, 33n13, 33n14, 34n19, 34n20, 34n22, 34n23