Guest Post by Sarah Attermann

When I was first approached to become a member of the Ramah Service Corps and create “Ramah style” programs to implement in the synagogue setting, I was thrilled. I would be given the opportunity to bring the magic of Ramah to others through experiences and activities often found only at camp. To me, Ramah has always been a place where campers are proud to learn and experience what it means to be Jewish, where they can participate in activities that make Jewish learning enjoyable, and a place where programs are innovative and fresh. It was my hope, that bringing this “Ramah approach” into the synagogue and school setting would allow the students to see that learning can be entertaining and worthwhile, and that more specifically, Jewish learning is not just found exclusively from textbooks or classrooms.

When planning programs for synagogues across the southeast region, I often found myself remembering activities implemented during past summers in camp. I planned an Israel exploration, where students learned about the culture, geography, and foods of Israel in a deeper way. Instead of just a surface-level understanding of the sites in Israel and learning about the various places in Israel, students dug their way through an “archeological dig” to find tiles that they could use to decorate wooden Jewish stars. For a more engaging way to learn about Israeli foods, students experimented in making their own hummus and participated in a blind taste test of homemade and store bought hummus. They learned Hebrew phrases to use when asking for food in the “Israeli restaurant” that we created. Students quickly saw that the features and ideas they learned in textbooks could come alive in the class. They became excited to continue learning about Israel and expressed hope about visiting Israel one day.

Like many activities in a school setting however, it is a challenge to get the students excited when first beginning programs. Students had to see that the activities offered a variety of experiential opportunities, and that there was more than just traditional classroom learning. Once students began having positive experiences in the activities, I found that that this momentum carried into future programs. In fact, students were stepping up to contribute Jewish knowledge of their own to the exercises. For example, when asked to decorate their favorite Jewish holiday on a cake, the students requested to include three facts about the holiday and how it is celebrated. The students were creating their own connections, taking an activity that was about creativity, and adding additional meaning to the experiences. It was truly amazing to see.

Looking back on the programs, I found that they not only increased student enjoyment of classroom activities, but also allowed the students to see that learning did not just have to take place in the classroom or with a teacher lecturing to them. The students also asked for more opportunities to participate in these “camp style” activities. It was at these moments that I knew that these students were not only learning the lesson, but were having a Jewish experience. They were becoming just as passionate as I am about these Jewish programs, and they wanted more. To me, it’s not just about teaching information to students, or participation in activities that implement Jewish values. Instead, it’s about blending the learning of Jewish values and ideals in a way that allows all ages of students to fully experience the subject matter, using a variety of techniques. Taking the idea of ‘learning Jewish’ into the more experiential ‘being Jewish’ brings a level of interest and excitement that is not usually seen in the typical classroom. This is something seen every day in the camp setting, and can be brought into the community setting. This is what I learned from Camp Ramah, and I am blessed to have been able to share it with others outside of the camp environment. I want the students to believe and feel excited about being Jewish and experiencing Jewish ideals and values. That is what I got from Camp Ramah, that passion and excitement, and to be given the opportunity to share that with future generations is truly an amazing experience.

On Hebrew School Change: An Opinion

By Rabbi Paul Steinberg

I hated Hebrew school as a kid. So, I suppose it’s kind of ironic, perhaps funny, that I now oversee a Hebrew school and am working so hard to develop a program that is meaningful and, dare I say, enjoyable.  Admittedly, it’s not easy.  It’s not easy because there is a lot for Hebrew school to contend with.  The hours of the day and competition with other extracurricular activities are just two of the major obstacles.  But let’s face it, a sweeping challenge is that Hebrew school is countercultural.  Heck, Judaism is countercultural, and Hebrew school may be the most explicit manifestation of its expression for most of our families.  That is to say, it is countercultural for a kid to go to another “school” after school and/or on Sunday mornings to learn about something that is hardly relevant or possibly totally irrelevant to the rest of their lives.  Hebrew, Tefilah, Shabbat, and Kashrut exist only within the walls of the synagogue for many of our kids.

This leads to why I am a bit skeptical of leveraging the camp experience as our model par excellence for a new Hebrew school paradigm.  Camp is a completely isolated experience from the world and there (like in Israel) Judaism is no longer countercultural.  It has its own culture, its own biorhythms, its own model of leadership, and there is an inimitable, calm independence kids get there.  Jews can be Jews all day and night there.  Let’s just remember: we have to “go away” for the camp experience. 

By the way, we also have to admit that, for a large number of campers, the Jewish component is their least favorite and many merely tolerate it. I know kids that refuse to go to Camp Ramah, or have abandoned it after one summer, because there’s “too much praying.”  In fact, many of us who have been to Ramah have witnessed or perhaps had to personally force teenagers to begrudgingly show up for their Yahadut class. I am certainly a Ramah fan and my family is a Ramah family, but we should be cautious as to not exaggerate its Jewish educational successes when staking our resources and ideas upon the model.

Looking to experiential education and informal, camp models to give us tools to address the challenges of Hebrew school is surely a good thing.  Before we go too far in changing our paradigm, however, let’s make sure we have implemented and applied the best practices that could accompany any program.  Here are a few:

 1.    Raising Prestige and Denying the Negative Stigma

It is too often that we hear of Hebrew school in negative terms. It is often devalued both implicitly and explicitly, even the butt of Jewish jokes.  Indeed, some of the recent conversations around Hebrew school take their assumptions of its failure too far.  The truth is that there is a lot of good happening in Hebrew schools that is often overlooked.  There needs to be a lot more “good-mouthing” about our Hebrew schools.  Student work should be held to standards of excellence and showcased throughout the synagogue.  The rabbi should get to know the Hebrew school staff and classes, and then exclaim from the bimah of the wonders of the learning and teaching that is going on.

Moreover, it is not uncommon for synagogue leadership to refer to the Hebrew school as an economic drain and that the synagogue “subsidizes” the Hebrew school.  That conversation needs to be turned upside down.  It may in fact be just as accurate to say that the Hebrew school subsidizes the synagogue.  A lot of the membership money comes from parents who simply want to enroll their children in Hebrew school, adhering to minimal years of B’nai Mitzvah requirements.  Most people don’t join synagogues for the services or the sermons. It is more common that they join for the school and, if they like it and find it worthwhile, they’ll continue to pay membership and stay. Thus, the culture and language around Hebrew school from the synagogue leadership must change, so that, instead of it being viewed as a separate appendage, it is referred to as a centerpiece of the mission of the synagogue and as the primary educational organ of the institution.  Increased prestige will improve the quality and social forces surrounding it.

 2.    Ongoing Staff Development

I came into the synagogue and Hebrew school world as a Director of Jewish Studies and Hebrew at a Solomon Schechter school.  The first thing that struck me about Hebrew school is that the teachers never met to discuss the program, student work, planning, or problems.  In fact, many of the teachers didn’t know each other.  I wondered how we were teaching and modeling community if the staff itself wasn’t a community.

Therefore, when I moved to running a Hebrew school, my first act was to establish a weekly, two-hour staff development meeting.  I trimmed down the budget, cutting many line items in half in order to pay my teachers to attend this meeting.  That’s right, my teachers are paid to learn and it has been worth every penny.

For those two hours, we study Jewish texts together, as well as discuss aspects of general education including developmental psychology, school vision, classroom management, and lesson planning.  We also make time for co-planning, sharing ideas, engaging in critical group protocols, and celebrating each other as colleagues and friends.  For me, as the leader, this is a lot of work to prepare, but I cannot imagine a school without ongoing meetings that involved genuine engagement, as opposed to monthly ones wherein policy paperwork is simply read aloud.

This seems to be an area where funding could play a large role.  National philanthropic organizations could be helping to train lead educators to be staff developers and assign individual staff development consultants to each synagogue (the Hebrew program NETA, has such a development model).  Hebrew school staff development workbooks and guides could be created.  We need to incentivize our talented and bright young people to teach in Hebrew school and paid staff development is one way to do it.  Simply put, we haven’t yet invested in developing the “textpeople” that we need our Hebrew school faculty to be.  This will have a profound impact on the teachers, inspiring them, nurturing them, and growing their sense of self-worth in the community, which reverberates throughout the whole community.

3.    Parental Investment

Ultimately, all educational roads lead back to the home.  Heschel is to have once said, “Judaism is caught, not taught.”  That has actually become the catchphrase of our program.  It means that everything we do, and especially everything parents do and say about Hebrew school is being learned.  If mom complains about the hours of Hebrew school or the schlepping carpool, it sends a message to the child about its value.  If a child brings home a mezuzah that she made in Hebrew school, which goes in the trash the next day, while the 100% math test is posted to the fridge for weeks, it sends a message to the child.  If the dinner table conversation is always about school, homework, TV, or sports and it’s never about Torah or Israel, it sends a message to the child.

First, parents need to be involved and valued “prosumers” (as Jonathan Woocher called it) in the Hebrew school.  There need to be committees and task forces to do the kinds of things that such committees do in any good school. They should be fundraising, organizing staff appreciation events, recruiting, setting up community and class events (e.g., Sunday brunch in the sukkah, Shabbat meals at people’s homes, Purim booths, arranging oneg for children and family Shabbat services) and acting as a sounding board for the administration.   They need to learn the program and communicating the mission to other parents and constituents.  

Second, parents need to have their own learning opportunities.  Not as the general part of the adult education program, but just for them.  This can be family education, but it also has to be education just for parents.  They represent their own constituency, with many interests that are specifically relevant to them about parenting and family, for working parents and single parents, and how Judaism provides wisdom and guidance in these areas.  We need broad educational opportunities for all parents, but also parent havurot.   This group needs to be a valued group and given more places to connect with one another and their Judaism.

 4.    Re-orienting B’nai Mitzvah

American Jewry has created a monster out of the B’nai Mitzvah.  B’nai Mitzvah dominate much of synagogue life.  They impact the spiritual life through Shabbat services; they dominate the financial life through enrollment and B’nai Mitzvah fees; they effect the social and cultural life through the parties and programming calendar; and they deeply influence the educational goals of the Hebrew school.  All of this is an institutional disaster waiting to happen, as institutional loyalty wanes and the cheaper route of private tutoring and ceremonies become more popular.

Focusing specifically on the educational influence of B’nai Mitzvah, we discover at least two significant problems.  One is that we risk reducing the entirety of Hebrew school and Jewish education to preparation for a performative ceremony.  This diminishes our enduring educational goals toward transmitting a sense of positive Jewish identification and connection.  Furthermore, it sends a message that once the Bar or Bat Mitzvah is over, so is the Jewish education, violating the fundamental Jewish values of Torah Lishmah and life-long learning for the sake of spiritual and moral betterment.  This is why the post-B’nai Mitzvah dropout-itis phenomenon is so heartbreaking.

Secondly, the emphasis of the B’nai Mitzvah in our educational program damages Jewish prayer and spirituality by virtue of the fact that prayer is reduced to reading and chanting skills.  There are countless Jews who have spent months, even years, preparing for their Bar or Bat Mitzvah – a ceremony of prayer – yet they are repulsed by Jewish prayer, finding it dull, meaningless, and irrelevant.  B’nai Mitzvah need to remain a spiritual lifecycle event for the whole family and disconnected from the Hebrew school; the Hebrew school cannot be viewed as a B’nai Mitzvah training lab.  This issue is largely an organizational structural issue, which can be fixed.

Much of what I have said above is nothing new.  We have just not asserted the political will to make the necessary changes.  Educational directors may complain about such issues, but, for whatever reason, many synagogue boards have not acted upon them.  There are cultural and organizational solutions that will require taking some risk, maybe even a financial risk in restructuring some costs and dues as they apply to Hebrew school families.  I am suggesting that taking such risks are necessary because the long term sustainability of our synagogue and Hebrew school model is in jeopardy; a programmatic change in the Hebrew school is a mere scratch on the surface of the major sociological and organizational problems at play.

So, given the foregoing discussion, is there anything at all that we can learn from camp?  Of course.  Camp has a way of offering independence, autonomy, and power to its campers and young counselors.  Campers, especially as they grow older, have great say in their projects and programs.  Genuine project-based learning happens at camp.  This is not simply assigning projects to kids to complete, but asking them to create something that meets both their interests and the teacher’s educational goals.  Then they are asked to develop it and employ outside skills and higher-level understanding, such as application, synthesis and evaluation.  The counselors or teachers are facilitators – “guides on the side” rather than “sages on the stage.”  Ron Berger writes about this clearly in his book An Ethic of Excellence.  Hebrew school should be a project-based learning endeavor that incorporates formal, informal, and experiential learning models, utilizing technology as an ally.

Again, any model or solution we raise will require the four points mentioned above because ours is ultimately a sociological and cultural challenge, not a programmatic one.  We should feel compelled to collaborate on these issues on national, communal, and institutional levels.  There are a lot of wonderful people in the world of synagogues and Hebrew schools, and I pray that we will progress with hope and enthusiasm into this new dimension of Jewish life in America.

Camp and School: Context Matters

By Rabbi Joshua Rabin

I have never been comfortable with the question, “How we can make schools more like camp?” Yes, Jewish camps and other experiential programs are blessed with many elements that create holistic Jewish experiences leaving children with a warm feeling inside of them. However, camps are not bound by the parameters by which most schools operate, balancing the needs of general and Jewish studies in day schools, and trying to make Jewish education a priority amidst countless others in congregational schools. In truth, I find this question insulting to educators who do not work in camps, as it implies that educational institutions can only learn from camps, and that camps need not learn from anyone else.

Joseph Schwab writes that all educational experiences contain four “commonplaces”: the learner, the teacher, the subject matter, and the milieu (or context). When we think about how to use what is best about camps in schools, or vice versa, we cannot ignore the role that context plays in constructing an educational experience. For example, while a Jewish studies teacher at Schechter School and a staff member at USY or Camp Ramah might impart the same ideas about Shabbat to the same child, the context in which the child receives those ideas immeasurably impacts how the child interprets those ideas. By extension, when we are making the claim that schools need to become more like camp, we cannot forget that teaching Shabbat in a camp context is fundamentally different than teaching Shabbat in a school context. As educators, since we can identify strengths and weaknesses to teaching in each context, our task is to use the relative strength of each context to maximize the entirety of a child’s Jewish education.

As a result, rather than asking how school can become more like camp, we should ask how educators can teach one another how to use context to create robust educational experiences that are diverse and distinct. For example, a congregational school or day school will never be able to replicate the living and learning environment created at USY or Camp Ramah, yet experiential educators from USY or Camp Ramah are uniquely suited to help those schools see where their curriculum can offer more experiential opportunities for Jewish growth. At the same time, while a summer camp cannot develop the rigorous standards and benchmarks that should exist for a child who attends day school from kindergarten through grade twelve, day school educators can help educators in experiential settings see opportunities to create a more defined progression of skills, understandings and concepts to students each kinnus, each summer session, or each summer trip. No matter the subject, Jewish educators must see all the assets that each educational setting can bring to a person’s Jewish education, and then use the distinct advantages of each context to collaborate with other educators to maximize the potential of every Jewish educational institution.

Famously, my teacher Jack Wertheimer writes that we must “link the silos” to increase the impact of Jewish education. While Professor Wertheimer uses this term to outline the importance of creating connections between Jewish educational institutions, I would add that an equally important priority in Jewish education must be “tearing down the silos” of assuming that one style of education belongs in camp, another in school, another in synagogue, and so on. The more we highlight the unique strengths found in each educational context, the more educators will feel challenged to maximize the effectiveness of every Jewish educational experience, and allow different institutions to impact Jewish learners in many and varied ways.

Learning and Living: What USY Teens Can Teach Our Congregational School Teachers

USY Education in a Congregational School Setting

Guest Post by: Amy Dorsch

Reframe Key Question: What obstacles might stand in the way of ReFraming Jewish education in complementary schools to be more experiential?  How would you overcome those obstacles? 

Congregational Supplementary schools are faced with challenges to restructure and reimage their content, goals and mission. For families that prioritize Bar/Bat Mitzvah preparation, the complaint may be that learners will not be siddur fluent (content). What looks like “silliness and games” may not be regarded by parents or seasoned educators as educationally valuable (method). Learners who are encouraged to “do Jewishly” or perform Jewish values and concepts through action, are often not given the opportunity at home to reinforce the Jewish life skills they encounter through experiential learning. Thus, Judaism becomes knowing without doing, learning that ends once the learner has left the classroom or the school.

Solutions? United Synagogue Youth offers a number of approaches to educate experientially and transform content to action. In a USY setting, learners are obtaining knowledge by experiencing the content emotionally, physically, spiritually, socially and intellectually. Due to this “whole person” experiential learning approach, USYers are empowered to weave Judaism into their everyday lives.  How is this done?

Participation can either be through short term chapter programs or higher impact weekend retreats or immerse summer experiences. Although Congregational school mirrors the time frame of a lower impact chapter program, the following examples are a start as to how congregational schools can still apply USY experiential methods and ideas to “reframe” the short term program for higher impact.

  1. Focus not only on “meaning,” but personal relevance presented in the language of the learner. USY’s approach to creative Tefillah engages the learner with the structured prayer service through various creative format such as “Ipod minyan,” Facebook Shacharit or Tefillah through Spiritual exercises such as Gospel Tefillah. For more details, check out USY’s creative Tefillah webpage.
  2. Active engagement with texts through “real life” application – USYers learn by doing. Active learning techniques such as role plays, debates and physical games and exercises engage the learners with the texts through “real life experiences.”  One recent, most impactful example of learning Jewish concepts through active learning is the USY Alternative Spring Break (Participant Blog and Press coverage can be found here). Congregational schools may run a similar type of volunteer or rebuilding program as a day-long option.  Another example of Jewish learning through application to life is the human board game “Game of Chai” that one USY region planned to teach the Jewish lifecycle (See USY Pinat Chinuch or Educator’s corner for program outline).
  3. Diversity of format or method- Examples of engaging learners through different format of active learning in USY include:
  • “Israel Instagram” – USYers used the Instagram concept to teach about Israel through various “lenses.”
  • Various or specific mitzvot can be taught through a 2-hour “Mitzvah auction” or “mitzvah point system” where Middle School aged learners earn beads for every time they are “caught” doing a mitzvah.
  • Media clips from popular TV and film can be applied to any Jewish concept (“Jewtube”).
  • Specific active Jewish decisions, such as Kashrut, particularly on our USY on Wheels summer program, can become an everyday decision; learners internalize and practice Jewish food choices, both purposefully and unconsciously. Kashrut is one example of transforming content to action, of Jewish choices becoming an everyday natural decision. Congregational schools may not have the continent as the classroom, but can use cooking demonstrations, Food Network programs, or a “Build-a-meal” trip to a grocery store to illustrate Kashrut as an everyday Jewish decision.

Diverse methods that speak to the learners allow deeper impact without the immerse longer term program.

  1.  Addressing the Social and Emotional Components of Learning- USY is social by nature, as is Congregational School. Many parents choose to send their kids to Congregational school specifically for the social component. However, our programs intentionally focus on the impact of connecting learners to each other and educators to the learners, socially and emotionally. A caring and committed youth advisor will motivate a USYer to return for a short term chapter program, just as a Congregational student will look forward to being part of the Congregational community because the teacher has invested in the getting relationships formed.  The role of the USY advisor is to impart knowledge or encourage skill building, while building meaningful relationships between students, between teacher and student and Jewish content. Relationship formation, especially at the foundation or chapter level, is a key component of USY experiential education. This relationship building is what keeps USYers connected to their Jewish experiences regardless of the future Jewish decisions they make. Concurrently, they often associate or connect these positive deep, meaningful human relationships to a relationship with Jewish content and experiences.  Congregational schools can address this key component to classroom education through interactive learning techniques, ice breaker or mixer games to teach, chevruta learning or learning outside of the classroom so that relationships are reinforced when removed from the location of learning.  An advisor who has not invested in relationship building, will not succeed at inspiring involvement and connection to Jewish life.  An integral component of Congregational teacher training is addressing the impact of social and emotional learning of learners.

Reality dictates that most congregational schools are limited by time and do not necessarily have the luxury of long term high impact programming such as a USY Convention or Summer Experience. The aforementioned ideas are rooted in concepts that can in fact be applied to a two hour congregational school experience. USY illustrates how congregational involvement can be more experiential even on a short term basis. These experiences, shared by a community of learners and taught by encouraging and caring role models can transform a two hour “extracurricular activity” into an inspiring way of life.

An Excerpt from Chancellor Arnold Eisen’s Address to the Educators

 

Chancellor Arnold Eisen’s Address at the ReFrame Inaugural Design Lab (4/25/13)

 

Why Is This Religious School Different from All Other Religious Schools?

Originally posted at ejewishphilanthropy.com

by Aaron Starr

Most conversations about Jewish education focus on the “how” and rarely get to the “what.” Should we invert the two?

When those of us who are leaders in the world of Jewish education seek to define and, consequently, improve synagogue-based schools, we appropriately desire to engage the most cutting edge of educational delivery methods – and, for marketing purposes, to be known by our methodology. Consequently, the prevailing trade literature overwhelmingly focuses on the latest strategies for reaching our students, but focuses little on the content that qualifies as a successful Jewish education.

Unfortunately, discussing educational delivery methods before ascertaining how we can possibly teach our students the skills, knowledge and emotions necessary to live meaningful Jewish lives and give them the opportunity to express their Judaism in less than six hours each week, is like asking at the Seder why on Shabbat we have two loaves of challah but at the Seder we have three pieces ofmatzah. Good questions … just not the “right” questions.

Rather, we as educational leaders in conjunction with our synagogue families must first decide the core elements of Jewish life that will hopefully serve as the foundation for the students’ lifelong Jewish learning. In the scope of the religious school year, our children cannot and will not learn everything they need to about Judaism; it is simply impossible. The core elements, then, must consist of 1) skills and knowledge we want our students to gain familiarity with, understanding of, and mastery over. But we have to make those decisions while admitting to ourselves that we have less than six hours per week of instructional time, and that realistically we cannot teach all that we want or even need to. Moreover, 2) the core elements must also contain uplifting opportunities for our children and their parents to engage in spirited Jewish prayer services and to perform significant acts of helping those-in-need, within that limited “Jewish time.” And, 3) we have to figure out how to inculcate the skills and knowledge and offer real time Jewish experiences while still employing every single creative and exciting educational strategy so that our students will truly love being Jewish.

Getting real about the fact that our synagogue-based youth education programs are no longer supplementary schools, but the primary source for our families’ Jewish expression is the greatest challenge facing religious school in the 21st century – not whether we should use computers or arts and crafts in the classroom.

In the best secular schools, teachers utilize a variety of instructional methods within one classroom. Why in Jewish schools do we often seek one approach?

A decade ago, family education was the rage; we were working tirelessly to engage adults and their children/grandchildren in either shared or parallel learning experiences, grappling with the fact that adults and children learn in different ways. Excitement over family education transitioned to discussions of the use technology in the classrooms. We spent tens of thousands of dollars to bring in school computer labs, wireless internet access, and trained our teachers how to integrate technology into the classroom and social media into their communication with parents. Now the latest buzz in best-practices is the camp-style approach to learning. We wrestle with the extent to which we use camp terminology (“counselors” instead of “teachers”), camp-style rewards (e.g., badges, buttons or ribbons), experiential and informal educational techniques, and the extent to which we integrate art, drama and music into our already short school week.

Of course, when used appropriately, all of these educational approaches are impactful. There is no doubt that methodology matters when it comes to educating our children about Jewish skills and knowledge, as well as imbuing them with a sense of ahavat Torah and ahavat Yisrael. In fact, we know every teacher ought to utilize all of these approaches: “Train a child in the way he is most apt to learn, and that child will not depart from what s/he has learned, even in old age” (Proverbs 22:6, paraphrased). In the secular world, the interdisciplinary approach to education is called differentiated learning or multiple-intelligences, and it is common practice that a teacher must engage in whatever style of instruction will best suit each of his/her students. Yet, unless our goals and objectives are clear and realistic within our limited frameworks, then the method of educational delivery employed becomes simply theater and the discussions in which we engage children and parents becomes a sharing of mutual ignorance.

In previous generations, Jewish families actively participated in the religious life of the synagogue and practiced Jewish rituals in their home. Now that this is no longer the case, what implications does that have for the religious school?

In most synagogue communities, Shabbat and holiday service attendance among families with children is down, compared to previous generations. In most Jewish homes the level of ritual observance is also waning; and, I believe, throughout our country, families should spend more time engaging together in acts of repairing the world. Thus, in addition to offering innovative educational approaches that teach and assess skills and knowledge, we must create within the scheduled religious school time age-appropriate, meaningful spiritual outlets and Tikkun Olam opportunities for our families. Synagogue schools must find the time to transform t’filah lessons from “just” practicing the words of liturgy to also include opportunities for children to actually pray; for most children, these t’filah sessions are their only formal opportunity for communal prayer. The liturgy is important though, and with the prayers our children have learned, schools can establish weekly services in which those children lead their parents in prayer – even if the services are Sunday morning rather than Saturday morning or Friday night. T’filahin the religious school must be both lab and practicum.

Synagogue leaders must clarify expectations of parents for home-based rituals. At Congregation Shaarey Zedek in Southfield, Michigan, we recently began sending home one page fliers about each holiday that include not only the background on the holiday and the synagogue service schedule for those holidays, but 4-5 mitzvotassociated with each particular holiday. Never do we provide all the halachahassociated with each celebration, but we consciously choose to include in those fliers a few, specific rituals that can be accomplished. Increasing the practice of Judaism in the home and Judaism in the synagogue is a primary role of the religious school, but no longer can we assume that what the synagogue school provides is being reinforced or practiced in the home. We must give tools, ideas and resources to parents as well, and support our parents in their own personal journeys.

Yet prayer and ritual experiences are not alone in their importance. When I came to Shaarey Zedek five years ago, we sought to make a bold statement about the role community service must play in our families and in our congregation. Thus we instituted Project Tikkun Olam: an annual family day of service for the entire Religious School. Each year we dedicate a full morning – three hours – toward repairing the world. While there are certainly learning opportunities built into the activities, the main goal is to provide service to those in need. Families with children of all ages call it one of the highlights of the Shaarey Zedek experience. Certainly, throughout the year each class of students engage in age-appropriate service learning opportunities. But, given our limited number of classroom hours and the lengthy list of skills and knowledge we hope to impart to our students, how can we add more of these important opportunities that not only allow for fulfillment of mitzvot but bring families together in such a powerful way, within the fixed religious school schedule? The situation is the same in all of our communities: religious school hours are families’ Jewish time. If schools do not schedule prayer and community service experiences in addition to study, the vast majority of Jewish children will not participate in formal prayer and large-scale acts of tikkun olam.

If examining our educational methodology is not the sole way of achieving success in the religious school, what must we do to create synagogue-based youth education programs that speak to the 21st century Jew?

For most educational leaders, we know how to write curriculum; we know how to establish the KNOWs, DOs, and FEELs our students ought to gain. But we are hard pressed, especially when we ask our teachers to use creative approaches, to accept the reality that we cannot teach everything we consider essential to living a Jewish life AND figure out how to give our families real-time Jewish experiences. No matter how creative or effective our faculty, there are not enough hours in the week, for example, to teach children how to read prayer-book Hebrew, write Hebrew cursive, and speak modern Hebrew. Let’s be honest: to try to accomplish a little bit of each is actually to fail at them all, and this is true whenever our curricula aim for tremendous breadth over meaningful depth. Rather, we must turn toward our families to partner with us in the creation of articulate mission and vision statements along with clear, assessable, realistic KNOWs, DOs, and FEELs so that we can create effective Jewish educational, spiritual and emotional avenues for our families. Only then, having established achievable goals that support the school’s mission and vision, may we decide the most successful differentiated learning approaches to accomplish our sacred lessons.

At Congregation Shaarey Zedek, we recently decided on eighteen specific stories from the Torah that we want mastered in our fourth through sixth grades. Mastery includes understanding the stories as literature, recognizing their role within the broader story of the Jewish people, and appreciating the dynamic interplay between Jewish life and our sacred texts. It means being able to explain specificmitzvot that come forth from the text, its p’shat or drash, and the modern-day fulfillment of those mitzvot. In other words, our students will be able to list the commandments of welcoming guests, visiting the sick, brit milah and kashrut asmitzvot found in the story of Abraham and Sarah welcoming the angels and expound upon, how as Conservative Jews, we understand and accept these mitzvotin a particular way. Delving deep into these eighteen stories, however, also means that there are countless other “important” stories, including a parashah byparashah study of the Torah that our children simply will not receive. Moreover, our Hebrew curriculum focuses almost exclusively on the Shabbat morning liturgy from the Torah service through the concluding prayers, as well as the Friday night dinner table rituals. During their time in religious school, our students might never be exposed in more than a passing conversation to P’sukei D’zimraKabbalat Shabbat or, sadly, learn to write Hebrew letters in cursive. But, given our time constraints, school mission and other goals, this is a reality we have knowingly chosen to accept. Then again, we recently began a process of Family Covenant: a sacred, personalized contract for accessible, meaningful, tangible steps toward greater, more mindful Jewish living in which their families might actively pursue such knowledge or experiences outside the religious school schedule.

Synagogue schools’ curriculum guides, mission and vision statements must clearly articulate its institution’s goals so that it can adequately provide for and assess its students’ learning. Moreover, the goals within those guides and statements must reflect the fact that – for most religious schools – there are less than six hours each week of the school year to educate children and their families. Such goal statements should reflect the reality – again, for most if not all schools, that the majority of our families do not come regularly on Shabbat and holidays, but on Sundays and midweek. And, finally, the Jewish community in America today is obligated to address the fact that religious schools are no longer supplementary schools, but the primary avenue of Jewish education and spiritual outlet for children and their parents. These are the key points of reality that a successful school must address to build a Jewish experience that is meaningful and relevant to 21st century families.

In less than six hours each week of the school year, we must help our students discover the knowledge of how Jews pray and create a forum for the experience of prayer. We must help our students develop a knowledge of Jewish ethics and provide for them the opportunity in time and resources to engage in mitzvot bein adam l’makom and bein adam l’chavero. We must help our students wrestle with sacred scripture and relate it to their hyper-assimilated, very modern lifestyle. These requirements are not native to the supplementary school model; they are new realities of Jewish life in 21st century America.

To be successful, the synagogue school must utilize camp-style experiences along with technology. The synagogue school must provide meaningful, engaging family education opportunities and reach out to parents and children individually. The synagogue school must offer its students art, drama, music, chevruta, and more. But creative educational methodologies alone will not succeed in inspiring a new generation of Jews. To be successful, synagogue curricula must be concise and practical with measurable goals and religious school teachers must employ every creative, multi-faceted educational strategy imaginable. Why is this religious school different from all other religious schools? Because it is a school that is asking all the right questions, and answering them as well.

 


Aaron Starr is a rabbi at Congregation Shaarey Zedek in Southfield, Michigan and past president of the Metropolitan Detroit Board of Jewish Educators. He is the author of Taste of Hebrew from URJ Press and Tradition vs. Modernity: The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) and Conservative Halachah, published in the Journal of Conservative Judaism.

Excellence in Experiential Jewish Education

Guest Post by: Rabbi Avi Katz Orlow

Excellent Experiential Jewish Education:

  1. Is executed with kavanah, intention, in which each activity is done with the purpose of achieving a larger goal

Activity for activity’s sake is not experiential education—it’s just an activity. Educational experiences should be intentionally designed to convey Jewish learning outcomes and values in an authentic way. In formal settings, a popular version of this process is “Understanding by Design.” It is essentially designing a program ‘backwards’. Educators need to begin with the goals and end with developing the activity itself. Regardless of how trivial the behavior may be, the activity must be founded on ‘big ideas’. Moving from just trying to socialize participants toward experiential education only happens with hyper-intention, using moments of ‘planned spontaneity’ to achieve carefully considered specific and concrete educational goals. Feedback is critical to ensuring that this is education and not merely activity. Not being able to rely on traditional tests and papers that are prevalent in formal education, experiential educators can and must utilize other forms of feedback for evaluation. Educators will only know if they have achieved their intended outcome if they build feedback mechanisms into their regular practice.

 

  1. Has inherent and authentic Jewish content

We are living in a time that cherishes the rare commodity of authenticity. To be authentic, Jewish content needs to be inherent to Jewish education. Educators should not shy away from content. Jewish education needs to be steeped in content that is relevant to all stages of life. Students know when something is “pasted-on” and inauthentic as compared to “passed-on” and heartfelt. Judaism and Jewish culture cannot be an afterthought, it can and should be integrated and inherent in the learning itself. Claiming something is a Jewish value by simply calling it one (for example, rebranding making sandwiches for the homeless as Tikkun Olam) is not sufficient to root this as a value in our tradition. This value claim must be in authentic dialogue with the text, stories, art, music, actions, and practices of the Jewish People.

 

  1. Utilizes reflective processes to frame the journey in Jewish values

Jewish values cannot be simply relegated to an area of content. Programs should use questions and activities to ensure that participants internalize the lesson and value by asking, “How is this valuable to me?” “How does this value have a Jewish context?” “In what way is this value Jewish?” “Is it valuable to me because or despite it being a Jewish value?” Excellent experiential education does not only leave room for reflection, it demands thoughtful consideration and discussion of the meaning of activities and experiences. This experience must evoke the tension between something having been a Jewish value throughout history and it being valued by Jews today. This reflection aims at orienting the participant, helping him/her realize a new knowledge or skill, and inspiring him/her to make enduring commitments to meaningful action.

 

  1. Happens when the participant’s narrative is used as a primary text

People often describe successful Jewish educational experiences as “life-changing.” The focus of this education is personal transformation and individual growth. Relevance is a key component of any Jewish educational experience. Whereas in formal educational environments the course of study often follows the text, it is often the opposite in experiential education. Text plays the role of reacting, commenting, and transforming the students’ narratives. As the Jewish philosopher Franz Rosenzweig said, “it is learning in reverse order, a learning that no longer starts from the Torah and leads into life but the other way around: from life…back to the Torah.” Revelation is not limited to something that might or might not have happened long ago at Sinai; it is something that is happening in the learning experience itself today. Textual learning is integrated in and is a manifestation of the relationships in our lives. In this context, all learners can access and feel ownership over Jewish Text. The educator needs to trust the educational process. Like the two teams who excavated Hezekiah’s Tunnel starting at each end of the tunnel and then meeting in the middle, experiential educators must negotiate the tension between reacting to the students and reaching the ‘big ideas’ (see #1). The educator needs to maintain the trust of each student and also trust that they will navigate a meaningful path for the group.

 

  1. Utilizes the full spectrum of sensory and kinetic learning modalities to engage all of the participants

We are the People of the Book. Does that mean we are limited to books as our only mode of learning? In order to engage each student the educator needs to provide a variety of entry points for learning to meet the diversity of learning styles of their students. As Howard Gardner has written about, there are multiple entry points for diverse learners (See graph below). There are many different ways to shine and a variety of ways to contribute. The diversity of participants — range of interests, preferred learning modalities, special needs —should be accounted for when developing experiences. Authentic education succeeds in its mission when educators honor the idiosyncratic talents and interests of each student while maintaining a clear view of the common obligations and goals. To understand this idea of Multiple Intelligences in its most natural sense, please watch this video “Animal School” by www.raisingsmallsouls.com

 Image from Avi's article1

  1. Utilizes rituals to focus participants attention and solidify memories

While we tend to associate ritual exclusively with religious life, excellent Jewish experiential education is replete with its own rituals. Rituals help place the student in a context of Jewish time and help create Jewish space in which they can focus and create meaning. Done well, rituals help communicate the desired values and a sense of tradition. In understanding, creating, and enacting effective ritual it is essential that the educators are intentional in their planning, designing, implementing and facilitating programs that challenge their students to learn, grow, and develop. These rituals need not be sacramental in nature. In bringing together the timely and the timeless they are teeming with meaning. Rituals serve as vessels in which memories are cultivated and optimally transformed into habits to be utilized long beyond the educational context.

 

  1. Fosters productive discomfort to keep participants in “Flow.”

Mihály Csíkszentmihályi described “Flow” as the optimal place where we are behaving within our abilities while also being challenging enough to maintain our interest (See below graph). When people are in flow, they are completely immersed and engaged in one task, enjoying it to the point that they lose track of time. In other words, when people are in flow they do not realize that they are learning because they are having fun. Engaging Jewish educational settings are first and foremost safe spaces, and therefore they are the ideal places to encourage the sort of ‘productive discomfort’ that emerges from feeling appropriately challenged. Experiential Jewish education pushes learners to grow in this safe but challenging space. Games are excellent tools for getting students to experience flow. Games based on trivia should be avoided. Education that is solely driven toward data acquisition often misses getting or keeping students in flow.

Image from Avi's article2

  1. Is founded on open inquiry and aims to foster more questions than answers

Excellent Jewish experiential education is an interactive process. Learners should be encouraged to listen to one another and engage in respectful and meaningful dialogue. When appropriate, the role of the educator is to validate, contextualize, challenge, and help students refine their questions. Staving off the urge to answer questions, educators model the ability to sit with the questions and create the space for the students to come to their own answers. Educators need to value questions over answers because they keep the conversation going to ensure long term impact. This means that educators need to move evaluation of this education from verifying data acquisition to determination of the quality of questions.

 

  1. Creates a dynamic and collaborative environment where there is space to explore roles and identities

Where formal environments demand certain structure and hierarchy, excellent experiential educational environments invite participants to challenge these roles. Whether these relationships are between peers or role models, participants have the opportunity to play with and reimagine their new roles in the group. Since so much learning happens in these moments, educators need to give a lot of attention to the social and emotional dynamics of the group. This system works because there is a tight learning loop where young participants see older participants and aspire to become like them. This ‘role model continuum’ keeps participants’ attention and devotion at every level of the educational process. As students and staff get older they model this by taking on more responsibility in shaping their environments. The nature of this dynamic and collaborative environment mandates that the educators abandon being the “sage on the stage” and opt for being the “guide on the side”. Optimally this manifests the teaching of Rabbi Chanina when he said, “I have learned much wisdom from my teacher, more from my colleagues, and the most from my students” (Ta’anit 7a). This dynamic challenges the charismatic leader to step back (tzimtzum) and make room for other voices. This in turn fosters a vital community in which all the participants feel an urgent sense of belonging.

 

  1. Takes a holistic view of participants’ lives in and out of the learning environment

Experiential Jewish education is aimed at creating a web of experiences that foster personal growth and develops skills, relationships, and knowledge of Jews of all ages. Educational settings are often limited to a fixed time and space. Immersive environments lend themselves to excellence in experiential education and are much more porous. Educators are ideal role models selectively using aspects of their personal lives to instruct students. Experiential educators care about their students as individuals, and understand that the text of their narratives extend before and after a particular experience or program. Given the enmeshed nature of this learning community (see #9) care is necessary to maintain appropriate boundaries given that these lines are intentionally blurred.

 

  1. Is founded on the group experience and consciously creates and continually evolves culture and community

Growth and reflection occur in a dynamic communal setting. Educators must address the needs of each learner. Excellent experiential education capitalizes on the unique benefits of group dynamics. This group is often experienced through a smaller subunit. At times, this smaller group feels like a nurturing surrogate family or a competitive team. Sometimes educators will have to limit the choices of different entry points for different students to foster the group experience. The culture of this larger group may or may not look like the tradition of Jewish life, but it needs to be a rigorous culture that is in conversation with this tradition. Consciously or unconsciously, over time this learning community is creating culture that needs to last beyond the framework of the educational experience. Ideally participants see how they will continue to grapple with these ideas and be involved with this group throughout the course of their lives.

 

  1. Acknowledges the moment of mutual trust as a requirement for the creation of moments of ‘deferred revelation’

Powerful learning is about relationships. It is only when educators meet the students’ basic needs and achieve a mutual trust that the ‘magic’ can really happen. In establishing this trust, educators do not demand transparency in the experience. Where formal education often relies on direct instruction, experiential education happens with a certain kind of ‘indirect instruction’. The deepest learning often happens when educators help students get out of their own way in the service of their learning. This works when educators trust that the process will yield future revelations and breakthroughs in learning. (See forthcoming article on ‘deferred revelation’)

 

 


Further Reading:

Ackerman, David (1998) ‘The Educating Moment’ in Judaism and Education: Essays in Honor of Walter I. Ackerman, ed. Haim Marantz, Beer-Sheva, Israel: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press.

Bryfman, David and J. Reimer What We Know About Experiential Jewish Education, What We Now Know about Jewish Education.

Chazan, B. (2003), ‘The Philosophy of Informal Jewish Education’ in The Encyclopedia ofInformal Education, www.infed.org/informaleducation/informal_jewish_education.htm.

Kress, J.S. (2012) So, You Want Your School to Be More Like Camp? http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial_opinion/opinion/so_you_want_your_school_be_more_camp

Kress, J.S. (2013) What is Experiential Jewish Education?http://blog.jtsa.edu/reframe/2013/03/18/what-is-experiential-jewish-education/

Litman, Lesley ( 2013) Prompt: What are the implications of experiential education on curriculum design?http://blog.jtsa.edu/reframe/2013/04/09/prompt-what-are-the-implications-of-experiential-education-on-curriculum-design/

Orlow, Avi Katz. Tail of Two Jewries: Some Innovative Lessons From Chris Anderson and Jewish Summer Camp. Journal of Jewish Communal Service. Jewish Communal Service Association of North America (JCSA). Spring 2011: 184-193. http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=13803

Reimer, J. (2003) ‘A response to Barry Chazan: The Philosophy of Informal Jewish Education’, The Encyclopedia of Informal Education, www.infed.org/informaleducation/informal_jewish_education_reply.htm.

The 13 Dynamics in Israel Education http://www.theicenter.org/aleph-bet

Guest Post by Daniel Silverman

People involved in supplementary or congregational school education – administrators, teachers, parents and even learners – know that instructional time is short and precious.  When describing the challenge of time, I often revert to the following analogy.  In our school at Beth Tzedec Congregation in Toronto, learners begin a two day per week program in 2nd grade for a total of three and three quarter hours of instruction per week.  Multiply this number by our 26 week school year, and then by 6 years until graduation in 7th grade, and the total is 600 hours.  This is equivalent to the number of instructional hours that a child in Jewish day school will receive in the Jewish Studies half of their curriculum in one year.  This succinctly sums up the challenge of maximizing available time.

It is clear to me that it is near-impossible to impart everything we want a Jewish child to know in only 600 hours.  This means that educators must make careful selections regarding subject matter (as stated by Rabbi Aaron Starr), but it also means that methods of instruction are built around different goals – we are now seeking ways to create interest in Jewish life so that learners will continue to seek out their own Jewish experiences once they leave the walls of our institutions.

Participating in the first ReFrame Design Lab at the Jewish Theological Seminary only reinforced my commitment to this principle.  Seeking innovative, experiential and informal (pick your term) ways to convey subject matter – and more importantly, create positive associations – is at the heart of what ReFrame is seeking to accomplish.  As easy as it is to agree with this logic, the Design Lab also demonstrated how challenging it is to move from logic to reality.

Take, for example, the challenge of teaching Hebrew, specifically reading and decoding Hebrew.  Unlike topics such as Jewish holidays or Prayer, or even acquiring a spoken language, learning to read presents challenges for experiential education.  Furthermore, many supplementary school settings tie reading Hebrew to the Siddur, meaning that a learner might figure out the tune and words to a prayer orally long before their reading becomes proficient.  By attempting to double-up content, a natural action given limited time, educators are assuming that learners are achieving proficiency when they may in fact be falling behind.  Additionally, in settings where modern conversational Hebrew and what I will call Mishnaic Siddur Hebrew are both being taught, we are asking learners to acquire one-and-a-half languages, as there are differences between ancient and modern Hebrew that are challenging for children to discern.

Our ReFrame working group attempted to tackle some of these challenges.  We first discussed the pros and cons of using the Siddur as a Hebrew text and determined that this doubling-up likely did more harm than good.  We then were left with the question of what text to use instead.  Our brainstorm produced a few interesting results, yet nothing approached the level of experiential-ness that can be achieved in other subject matters.  We also acknowledged the challenge of teaching two different versions of Hebrew, though we did agree that focus can be placed on the commonalities in each dialect.

What might be some ways to take the principles of experiential education and apply them to reading and decoding Hebrew?  How can learners be assisted in working towards the acquisition of both Siddur Hebrew and modern Hebrew, all in an environment that engrains positive experiences and puts them on the path for continued Jewish engagement?

 


Daniel Silverman is Director of Education & Family Programming at Beth Tzedec Congregation in Toronto

Prompt: How does Hebrew at camp reflect larger issues about Hebrew literacy and education?

Download this White Paper as a PDF

Writer: Cheryl Magen

Wordle - CMagenOne of the greatest criticisms of Jewish supplemental education has been its failure to teach Hebrew as an active, living language. Instead, the importance of actual language acquisition was subsumed by a focus on acquiring “siddur-Hebrew,” which left students unable to use Hebrew to communicate. This sort of supplemental Hebrew education was generally tied into a short window of time that children were available to continue their education in much the same format as their public/private school education. It consisted of classrooms, teachers, books, lesson plans, homework and tests. Although this model proliferated for decades, the expanding world of experiential education has much to add to the way we view learning.

Experiential education in the form of camps, youth groups and the like, has been extremely successful in transmitting knowledge and creating deep connections to Jewish living. However, experiential education generally existed in parallel with more traditional supplemental education, with very little crossover between them.  Merging the two has value not just in strengthening one modality of education, but in strengthening the holistic and year-round approach to Jewish learning and living, resulting in a more symbiotic relationship than it has in the past.

With regard to mastering Hebrew language skills, the optimal approach is to merge the two seasons (school year and summer) in order to reinforce the acquisition of language. Language is acquired from an early age by immersion, environment, repetition, Total Physical Response (TPR)[1] and motivated need.

TPR is a language acquisition strategy that emphasizes on the coordination of language and physical movement. TPR’s goal is to mimic the way young children first learn language, in that early interactions between parents and children often often took the form of speech from the parent followed by a physical response from the child. Thus, in TPR, instructors give commands to students in the target language, and students respond with whole-body actions.

The method is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching. Listening serves a dual purpose: it is both a means of understanding messages in the language being learned, and a means of learning the structure of the language itself. Grammar is not taught explicitly, but is induced from the language input.

Learning a language through traditional supplemental education curricula is, by comparison, much harder, because it comes from the outside in. Sitting down to learn a language through vocabulary, grammar, reading and testing is a much harder and less effective way to learn a language, although such activities are certainly important components of the educational process.

However, TPR can be effectively used in a supplemental education environment, to achieve positive results. For example, TPR can be used in synagogue schools, which often emphasize siddur literacy, by using it as part of the choreography of prayer. Standing up, sitting down, bowing from the knees or waist, twisting side to side, kissing your fingers to touch a sefer Torah are all examples of total physical response. If we teach the movements along with the words and/or music, the learning can be deepened and reinforced.

Language acquisition must be organic, systemic and holistic and focus on the acquisition of everyday linguistic rubrics that are natural to communication. From a young age, we are taking in all the language we hear and go through a “quiet period” until we are ready to say words and then put them together into short phrases and then into complete sentences. The people around us however, are not changing the way they speak; full sentences are being expressed, not just one word at a time, or even two or three words at a time. This exposure to natural language patterns is what helps us learn even before we, ourselves, are ready to be verbally expressive.

The AviChai Foundation granted the National Ramah Commission support for 5 years to increase active Hebrew language usage in all the Ramah camps (8 resident camps, 3 day camps) in North America. The resulting program, known as Daber, was instituted in 2009. Through Daber, we learned essential language acquisition strategies, all of which are more broadly applicable and could easily be translated for use in the supplemental school setting. Some highlight’s of Daber’s work thus far include:

  • · Trained a group of Fellows to speak, infuse and inspire Hebrew throughout the learning environment
  • · Used  תבניות – language patterns. Emphasize the use of phrases and patterns to engender Hebrew speaking and not just peppering a word here and there throughout a sentence
  • · Encouraged repetition in activities, games, songs, תפילה, play, eating, competition and everyday routine
  • · Trained staff in all aspects of the materials and methodologies so consistency was achieved
  • · Challenged participants to use the תבניות as they were presented
  • · Created male and female cartoon characters (Hani and Rami) that came to life and only spoke Hebrew
  • · Engaged a Hebrew specialist at each site to spearhead the program and coordinate content
  • · Enlisted others who were already Hebrew speakers to be דבר חברי and support the program.
  • · Shared best practices as the program was in progress
  • · Organized ongoing check-ins and troubleshooting with the staff

There are very few remaining “Hebrew-speaking” camps – places which promote and expect routine activities to be conducted in Hebrew.[2] In these remaining experiential learning laboratories, the emphasis has shifted from vocabulary words (single nouns) to whole phrases that can be used in a variety of settings. Instead of “It is time to go to the אגם , אוכל חדר, זריף “ filling in the one Hebrew word, the phrase, “_________ ל ללכת זמן.” allows the learner to master a phrase that can be repeated and used many times a day, rather than just the one word that is specific to a particular incidence. Even if you do not know the word in Hebrew for where you want to go, it is better to learn the תבנית first and then fill in the noun later.

Ahad Ha’am (1856-1927), a liberal Russian Jewish thinker and a leading Eastern European Jewish essayist, was one of the first to recognize the necessity of using Hebrew as a modern-day language to unite Jews all over the world.  The Daber program’s Hebrew work does just that – working to ensure that Jewish children in a number of environments can be united by the common bond of language.

The key to any initiative is buy-in and modeling from the senior staff of the organization as well as thorough staff training and ongoing support. If it is a priority for the senior management team and they are willing to learn alongside their participants, willing to make mistakes and be vulnerable, willing to have fun and laugh along the way, then language can be built into the environment in important and intentional ways. In order for educators and leaders to succeed, staff members need to be trained to understand what language acquisition principles are and what the core components for successful integration look like. Appendix A provides the “10 Commandments” of successful implementation of training techniques. When staff members across the board utilize the same approach, the consistency reinforces the way language is acquired.

Other helpful elements that reinforced Hebrew:

  • · Taught cheers and songs (ם’ למורא) that can be used and repeated in all aspects of the program
  • · Developed a culture of linguistic goals for each session, activity, and program. Everyone learns the same linguistic goal and uses it consistently. No new program or learning unit is introduced without the linguistic goal being at the center of the objectives
  • · Provided resource materials (In Hebrew and English) to educators on etymology and history of Hebrew words and phrases that would be interesting and inspiring
  • · ( ת’עבר של רגע) Prepared a דברון “newsletter” to be distributed twice a week in all camps. This included facts about Israel, sports, camp, trivia, puzzles etc. again emphasizing the phrases and patterns (see Appendix B)
  • · Created card games to teach linguistic patterns and reinforce other basic vocabulary (3-4-5 and רבעות)

In 2012, The Jewish Learning Venture in the Philadelphia area, requested that the Daber method be taught city-wide to teachers in supplemental schools to begin to infuse those schools with some of the principles that were successful in the camp setting. Several of the schools whose Directors of Education were committed to the goal of Hebrew infusion were successful in utilizing the Daber approach. Although these supplemental schools will always have the challenge of time constraints, Hebrew language is the basis for Jewish education and must remain high on the list of educational priorities. In the future, a partnering program for these supplemental schools could help to ensure greater access to the language-acquiring lessons that Daber has yielded thus far.

 


Cheryl MagenCheryl Magen is on the education staff at the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education, serves as the educational consultant to the Ramah camps and is Director of the Master’s in Camp Administration and Leadership at Touro University Nevada. The official prayer book of Camp Ramah in the Poconos is Siddur Lev Yisrael, authored by director emeritus Cheryl Magen.

 

 

 


[1]  TPR is based on Dr. James J Asher’s Total Physical Response.

[2] The Ramah camps along with the oldest group at Olin Sang Ruby Union institute (OSRUI), a URJ camp in Oconomowoc, WI, are some of the only camps (still operating) where Hebrew is expected to be spoken.

 

CMagen White Paper image1

 

 

CMagen White Paper image2

CMagen White Paper image3