<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Phorum 5</title>
    <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/index.php</link>
    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:50:26 -0600</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:50:26 -0600</lastBuildDate>
    <category>Phorum 5</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.24b</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Technology in the Teacher: How's it going?</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20373,20373#msg-20373</link>
      <author>Gershom Tave</author>
      <description><![CDATA[This forum saw an earlier thread titled ”Technology in the Classroom: How’s it going?”  I then proposed that the better discussion was “Children in the Classroom: How are they doing?”  The point there being that many of us are doing things on the SMART Board just because we can – trying to create a wow factor to keep our students’ attention  -- effectively confusing entertainment with education.  Teaching lessons rather than students.  All the classical clichés.  They’re true.  We more effectively keep our students’ attention by helping them to reach the feeling of “I can do it.”  It’s called empowerment and it’s accomplished by knowing what we want them to be able to do, what they are currently able to do and how we might direct them from one stage to the other.
 
Even worse, by imposing technology on teachers that don’t know how to use it, we are hampering their ability to teach and creating havoc in the classroom.  If a teacher is able to empower his students and leave no one behind without the use of technology, it is tragic to force him to use technology in the classroom when he’s not ready for it.  A rebbe’s job is to transmit &amp;#1488;&amp;#1492;&amp;#1489;&amp;#1514; &amp;#1514;&amp;#1493;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1492; and &amp;#1497;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1488;&amp;#1514; &amp;#1513;&amp;#1502;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1501; even more than information, and he can’t do that if he’s fumbling with a computer.  If, however, he’s failing to empower each of his students, he should intensely explore what other tools might be available to help him in his &amp;#1502;&amp;#1500;&amp;#1488;&amp;#1499;&amp;#1514; &amp;#1513;&amp;#1502;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1501;.
 
I propose now a parallel thread titled “Technology in the Teacher: How’s it going?”.  I have seen many SMART Notebook files which are little more than glorified textbooks.  Those Notebook files which win the awards are usually by teachers who have been exposed to PowerPoint presentation software and who therefore add animations and such which utterly fail to accomplish what Notebook software and other technologies allow us to do.  The greatest criticism for lack of understanding and vision should perhaps be reserved for those that sponsor/judge the contests.  What most of us are failing to grasp is that the SMART Board interactive whiteboard is a new and different technology which allows us to do different things.  Education is a lot more than just presentation and in order to optimize our use of the different technology, we need to learn to think differently.  Imagine how you would approach walking if you were to suddenly sprout wings!
 
Once upon a time, education was mostly experiential.  We learned math and biology and a host of other relevant subjects in the kitchen or out in the field or barn.  Even reading which lends itself to classrooms and books was and could be experiential with street signs and cereal boxes.    
 
I benefitted enormously from teaching in a school heavily influenced by the Montessori model in which learning occurs through interaction with manipulatives.  Now, when I create a lesson, I take advantage of the interactive quality of the SMART Board by creating an activity through which the student can experience rather than merely observe what I’m trying to teach.  If necessary, I add informative Notebook pages to support the activity so as to ensure that the experience will be successful but the focus is on the experience.  If the lesson is incremental, I try to create an interactive activity for each step.   Examples from my Parsha files include setting baby Moshe’s basket into the Nile before setting it adrift,  removing Moshe Rabeinu from his shoes at the &amp;#1505;&amp;#1504;&amp;#1492;, inserting one layer of the Aron HaKodesh into another and many more.  These are all available for free download at http://www.teq.com/erc-categories/viewcategory/171-judaic-studies-parsha.  I try to engage as many of the multiple intelligences as I can, adding sound where appropriate to the already present visual and kinesthetic.  I created a SMART Notebook file on trop (not yet available) in which the objective is to teach the &amp;#1502;&amp;#1508;&amp;#1505;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1511;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1501; and &amp;#1502;&amp;#1513;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1514;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1501; for the sake of punctuating a possuk.  The student can not only hear a chanting of the notes, but also independently reproduce the pauses by tapping the correct rhythm on the notes – engaging musical intelligence as well.  The concept of the moveable alphabet is very powerful and very easy in Notebook when working on textual skills and is central to the massive Chumash project currently being piloted by Teq.
 
Interactivity and experience are not limited to Notebook lessons.  There is a wealth of resources out there.  Google Earth is better than sitting on the floor with a globe and lends lessons involving places a dose of reality.  It’s also available with a  Hebrew overlay.  Vizzle (http:/www.teq.com/vizzle) is a visual learning tool which not only looks great on the SMART Board and works great with Hebrew but can also be used by individual students on an iPad.  The SMART Ideas software is phenomenal for charting the flow of a Mishna or Gemara.   See http://teq.com/links for an expansive list of resources for Kodesh and Chol.
 
Technology not only allows us to more easily tap multiple intelligences, but it allows us to turn almost any classroom into a virtual laboratory.  Do we really need to chain our talmidim to their chairs in order to preserve the feeling of being a link in the chain of the Mesorah?!  Can’t the rebbe stand on Har Sinai and supervise his talmidim as they teach each other?  Moshe Rabbeinu did.  Classical yeshivah learning is and always was collaborative.  Ultimately, I would like my talmid to be able to independently lein the Gemara and sit down with an old-fashioned pencil and paper and outline the &amp;#1513;&amp;#1511;&amp;#1500;&amp;#1488; &amp;#1493;&amp;#1514;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1488; of the Gemara, but without the right preparation that becomes cruel and unusual punishment.  Give him and his partner a prepared digital text from which they can extract selections and move them around and create a flowchart full of easily corrected mistakes and we’re beginning to talk about exciting and engaged learning.  Have students record their own readings and then critique their own work.  Most adults also have difficulty producing and critiquing at the same time.  I can just imagine an artistic student working with the math whiz creating a SMART Notebook scene in which they use the protractor to determine the exact midpoint between a man and his wife and then depicting &amp;#1505;&amp;#1508;&amp;#1511; &amp;#1511;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1493;&amp;#1489; &amp;#1500;&amp;#1493; &amp;#1511;&amp;#1512;&amp;#1493;&amp;#1489; &amp;#1500;&amp;#1492;.  After such an experience, those boys would think their rebbe is even greater than Moshe.  How about visualizing zmanei tefillah in Tefillas HaShachar?  If the rebbe doesn’t know how to use the SMART Board, let the kids use it! (I’ll get stoned for that one, for sure.)  Perhaps ask an administrator for help coming up with the ground rules for doing so, or ask me.
 
I refuse to believe that we’re losing our kids because we’re failing to compete with the gadgets.  I believe that we’re losing our kids because we’re failing to reach our kids and the world they live in.  Imagine requiring the bored kid who dozes in class to write “I will not snore in class” 500 times without using copy/paste!  Now imagine challenging him to write the same assignment as fast as possible.  I would use Excel.  
 
If we let the kids teach us how they learn, we might learn better how to teach.  Let’s start trying to imagine how we can use these new tools do discover new and varying ways for our children to learn.
                                                                                                                                          Gershom Tave
Instructional Technology Specialist
Teq
Tel. 877.455.9369 
Fax 631.293.4951
GershomTave@Teq.com]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20373,20373#msg-20373</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:50:26 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Symbolic circumcision - Hatafat Dam Brit</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20365,20369#msg-20369</link>
      <author>Tzvika Kanarek</author>
      <description><![CDATA[See the response of Rav Yisraeli in Mareh Bazak Chaper 80 – can find it in  
http://www.eretzhemdah.org/Data/UploadedFiles/FtpUserFiles/Books/shotBemarehH/2.pdf 
 
See also Tzitz Eliezer, Chelek 17, Siman 48

Another opinion of Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer, Chelek 8, Even Haezer, Siman 11

B'hatzlacha
Tzvika Kanarek
Jerusalem]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20365,20369#msg-20369</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 00:47:55 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Changing trends in education</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20368#msg-20368</link>
      <author>Joel Cohn</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I think it is important to differentiate between curriculum and methodology. There are a whole lot of bells and whistles out there that certainly should be harnessed to create a vibrant presentation of curriculum-and indeed this is changing by the minute.
However, when it comes to curriculum in the Orthodox Day school there has been relatively little movement. Perhaps the area of greatest revolution has been in the jettisoning of Hebrew language as a cornerstone of a thorough Jewish education. Aside from this revolution there seems to be very little change in what we are teaching.

When you think about it, it is quite fascinating. There has been no Tanach revolution-no Mishna revolution- we're basically doing the same stuff. Does that mean no change is necessary? 

Thanks
Rabbi Joel Cohn]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20368#msg-20368</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:48:02 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Changing trends in education</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20367#msg-20367</link>
      <author>Aaron Ross</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Ironically, Yaki Blau is doing a fine job of providing us all with thought questions these days - why can't he just stick to spitback?

In response to his question on my response, the difference in my post between homework and take home assessments is that the latter come in lieu of a test.  There is no mitzva for every unit to end with a formal test; rather, students can be provided with a wide range of tasks, assignments, or what-have-yous that assess their knowledge and understanding of the material.

With regard to Yaki's challenging of the notion of essential questions, it seems to me that he is not taking the student perspective on things.  Of course, we want our students to know certain things so that they grow up to be educated adults, or at least so that they do not embarrass themselves (and, by extension, their previous teachers) when they move on to Yeshivot in Israel.  However, the students do not necessarily have those motivations in mind, and thus it becomes incumbent on the teacher to frame the material in a way that the students at least understand why they are learning that material.

Within that, Yaki is right in saying that not every essential question has to be groundbreaking.  I recall lessons as a student when the preface to class was that the lesson was going to be a bit boring and technical, but it was important for us to learn that skill so that we could move on to higher levels of understanding of other material.  That opening comment prepared us for what was to come, and perhaps helped us stay focused on a lesson that may have seemed confusing to us in terms of it goal.  

In a sense, think of a sugya like a house.  If you have seen the blueprint or the artist's rendition of the final product, then seeing it in its very unfinished form makes some sense.  If you have no idea what the building is supposed to look like, then the mess of wood, wires, and pipes just looks like a confusing mess.  The point of the approach that Yaki is critiquing is to give our students a glimpse at the blueprint so that they can better appreciate the steps along the way.

Aaron Ross]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20367#msg-20367</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:16:35 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Symbolic circumcision - Hatafat Dam Brit</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20365,20365#msg-20365</link>
      <author>Shlomo Horwitz</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi, I'm doing a presentation on the Aseret Hash'vatim this Shabbat and wanted to verify something. I believe that the Rabanut is requiring Hatafat Dam Brit for Ethiopian men under the assumption they are from Shevet Dan, but only when they get married. Is this correct? Does anyone have a link to something online that corroborates that this is what the latest Rabanut protocol is?

Thanks very much, and if you reply to the List, please cc me as this is time-sensitive.

Shlomo

{PS: I will be in Israel Feb 27 - March 5 and have two open slots for the Jewish Crossroads interactive theater program. It is ideal for Anglo programs, yeshivot and seminaries, on over a dozen standalone topics. Please see link below for information, reviews, etc.}  

Rabbi Shlomo Horwitz 
Director, Jewish Crossroads 
http://www.jewishcrossroads.org/about.htm
Reality Programming for Jews who Think]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20365,20365#msg-20365</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:24:20 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] &quot;Availability Cascades&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20269,20364#msg-20364</link>
      <author>Michael Berkowitz</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Shalom,

I came across the following paragraph in Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow, and since it so beautifully captures a certain type of Lookjed thread I thought I would hold it up to the readership, as a mirror:

“An availability cascade is a self-sustaining chain of events, which may start from media reports of a relatively minor event and lead up to public panic and large-scale government action. On some occasions, a media story about a risk catches the attention of a segment of the public, which becomes aroused and worried. This emotional reaction becomes a story in itself, prompting additional coverage in the media, which in turn produces greater concern and involvement. The cycle is sometimes sped along deliberately by “availability entrepreneurs,” individuals or organizations who work to ensure a continuous flow of worrying news. The danger is increasingly exaggerated as the media compete for attention-grabbing headlines. Scientists and others who try to dampen the increasing fear and revulsion attract little attention, most of it hostile: anyone who claims that the danger is overstated is suspected of association with a “heinous cover-up.” The issue becomes politically important because it is on everyone’s mind, and the response of the political system is guided by the intensity of public sentiment. The availability cascade has now reset priorities. Other risks, and other ways that resources could be applied for the public good, all have faded into the background.”

Anyone who doesn’t recognize this pattern from Lookjed is either new to the list or hasn’t been paying attention.  (Actually, there’s a third possibility, but if I write it you’ll just censor it out; this way I get to insinuate it while staying nominally under the radar.)

Michael]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20269,20364#msg-20364</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 02:37:57 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] formal jewish studies teaching jobs in june, july, august</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20363,20363#msg-20363</link>
      <author>Benjy Singer</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hey,

I am interested in working abroad ( I live in Israel) through the summer vacation-June, July, and August, teaching jewish studies formally in a camp type setting.

Do any of you know where positions are advertised?

Thanks,

Benjy]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20363,20363#msg-20363</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:38:31 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Teaching the history of modern Israel</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20362,20362#msg-20362</link>
      <author>Abie Zayit</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I am doing some research on school curricula that exist for the teaching of modern Israel's history.

I am looking for curricula that have been written for high school students in Jewish schools for students of varied religious backgrounds.

Can anyone make recommendations?

Thanks
Abie]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20362,20362#msg-20362</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 04:19:30 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Changing trends in education</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20361#msg-20361</link>
      <author>Yaakov Blau</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Please bear with a personal story to explain what made me want to try to start a discussion about this issue. 

One of my old students, Adina Gerver, noted that one of my recent postings about testing seemed to go against the way I tested when I had her as a student, back when I first started teaching. I realized that back then my thinking about education was reacting to what I perceived was the trend at the time (too much emphasis on detail and not enough on thinking) and my thinking now is reacting to the current trend (which I see as too much emphasis on the big picture and almost denigrating the importance of actually knowing any facts). This made me think of the larger issue of how trends come and go in education and that what is cutting edge today, while old methods are scoffed at and deemed old fashioned, are just  a few years away from being themselves considered old fashioned and the source of scorn from the next generation of educators. I hear so much talk about moving into the 21st century and feel like we need some perspective and to keep in mind that every trend inevitably will create a new set of unintended problematic results which some day will lead to a new trend to replace the current one (or ones).

As an example, just 5/6 years ago everyone was talking about powerpoint and I think that at this point, most people have realized that giving  a powerpoint assignment means that your students will spend a good deal of time making “cool” graphics and very little on anything educational that they couldn’t have just as easily done without the powerpoint (see my good friend Aaron Ross’s excellent blog about that http://jewishedd.blogspot.com/ the dec 28th blog). All too often new trends are justified by people describing how miserable they were as students under the “old regime” and how the new ideas opens new vistas for their students. 

I think it’s safe to assume that many of the current students will be leveling the same criticisms against us on whatever form Lookjed has in 15 years. I certainly think that as educators, we need to keep up with the latest thinking and be willing to adapt our teaching style, but at the same time, we need to be cautious with throwing out the old and have perspective on the big picture of the ever changing trends in education.

yaakov blau]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20361,20361#msg-20361</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:38:46 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20360#msg-20360</link>
      <author>tzvi klugerman</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I, and members of the faculty at my school, have been following the Thought Questions vs. Spit Back (aka Memory) Debate with interest and I think that those who argue in favor of memorization have argued well but have yet to explain how memorizing vast amounts of text factors in to the Constructivist method of education. 

Before I weigh in with my $0.02, I beg forgiveness of the audience with the length of my post, but offer the following personal vignette as a caveat to my opinion. 

Attending the Yeshiva of Flatbush HS in the 80's, I was required to memorize psukim from chumash and navi, nivim, and a plethora of other passages on a weekly or biweekly basis. But there was a catch, I cannot memorize. (This often comes as a shock to people who discuss Torah, halacha, and educational matters with me because I often quote chapter and verse, though not verbatim. I will reference this later) No matter what method I tried I could not succeed and time after time was handed back a paper with a big zero on it and another communication home to my parents. What I quickly learned was that I could cheat if I learned the teachers' styles of testing. I would spend the first three weeks of the term learning the style and then prepare the instrument of deception that I needed to succeed. In college I prevailed upon professors to allow me to learn the passages rather than memorize them. By then, I found that if I studied the linguistic aspects of the text, and formed meaning from it, I was able to recall most of it, though not verbatim (hence my earlier parenthetical reference). 

For centuries, mastery of learning was demonstrated by memory. For years, Chumash, Mishna, and Talmud were mastered by shinun, with a select few developing the skills to take their memorized passages into the next realm of understanding and higher order thinking skills. Think of Rabbi Meir uprooting mountains and crushing to dust. The reason was that this was always the method of Talmud instruction because Talmud or Chumash, or Mishna, were taught by those who had mastered the subject through the same method. But that method evolved for a self selected group, not the nation as a whole or even a larger more heterogeneous group. 

But reacting to years of disaffected students and the advances in technology including but not limited to such programs as Bonayich or Gemara berura, has made learning Gemara, learning, and not simply memorizing vocabulary and shakla v'tarya to be spit back at a faher.

While those who can memorize will have an advantage, memory is not really a skill to be honed in school. Educational research is focused on meaning. As mechanchim, meaning and value are the keys to developing lifelong learners. And even in the study of vocabulary, memory is not the mode of learning.

Look at most vocabulary books. Back when, students were given a list of words and were expected to memorize them. At some levels students were expected to spit them back with definitions and at the more advanced level they were expected to have a sentence that demonstrated their knowledge of the usage of the word. But in our modern day, words are given with many of their nuanced meanings, and pages of exercises that develop an appreciation for the different uses of the word are offered. Then the more creative teachers assign writing exercises that promote further long term learning of the vocabulary list. That is learning. For the majority of students, the words are organically learned and stored in long-term memory. Any memorization for a test or quiz is minor and is simply review of a set of information already learned and assigned storage with value. 

Studying lists of gemara vocabulary will not make a student learn more Gemara or Chumash or Navi. Meaning and comprehension allow for more text study. In my Talmud classes, I had the students construct phrases with the vocabulary and had a nonsensical exercise where they inserted the appropriate Talmud term into an English sentence. I found that using techniques similar to the vocabulary exercises increased my students' appreciation for Talmud and helped them retain the vocabulary for later learning. 

Learning that results in long term memory is organic and simply memorizing is artificial (unless it comes naturally).]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20360#msg-20360</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 01:44:12 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Rules of Study</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20359,20359#msg-20359</link>
      <author>Marshall Gisser</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I have been in Jewish education for over 25 years including grade schools, high schools and at university. I have also lectured at conferences. My experience 
repeatedly shows me that the most primary &quot;rules of study&quot; are not taught, and that Rebbeim and teachers blindly repeat notions absorbed from Jewish culture.

The most vital lessons not taught:

- The only 3 methods for accepting anything as true, outlined in Maimonides' Letter to Marseilles.

- The blind acceptance that &quot;all that is in print is true,&quot; must be challenged. Rambam writes this too. Students are taught to accept that books other than Torah, Prophets and Writings are true, as they too are in print. When in fact, many Jewish authors, even Rabbis, write nonsense and even heresy, but teachers do not train students to challenge, to use their OWN minds to determine truth. This is a grave injustice to students. Students are not asked to take a stand on a position. This develops a weak-minded, insecure Jew, a Jew who will not be able to make decisions about his or her Judaism.

- The 13 Principles are not taught

- That Jewish ideas must be &quot;Jewish.&quot;  Sounds humorous, but many students are not taught that we go back to the Chumash to determine philosophical truths, and reject 
popular &quot;Jewish&quot; notions.  

- Shivim Panim L'Torah does NOT mean &quot;all&quot; views are correct. The Rishonim admit this in their rejection of other Rishonim! Have you taught students that as Moses 
erred, so too all others below his stature are not infallible? So we must encourage students to select a position when confronted with Rishonic arguments.

- A student can be right, and a Rebbe can be wrong

- Comparative religion, how Judaism is distinct from all others and provable, must be taught. Students do not know the most fundamental truth of Judaism: &quot;how&quot; it is true 
and why all others are false.

I wonder, whether all educators reading this know these issues and possess the answers. 

Marshall Gisser]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20359,20359#msg-20359</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:28:29 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20358#msg-20358</link>
      <author>Yaakov Blau</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Thank you all for the rather thoughtful replies. I didn’t really ”get” my friend Aaron Ross’s critique. What’s the difference between homework and a take home assessment?
I’d like to take the discussion one step further, but I believe that it’s the same basic topic. One of the terms that get used a good deal these days is “essential question.” Now, the term means many different things to different people (just google it and you will see what I mean), but there’s an extreme application that I disagree with strongly. I have heard it been suggested that before every lesson, the teacher should ask him/herself what the big picture take away is and why am I using this particular material to get to that take away. So, one should even question why they are teaching about the Civil War in History of Ein Mukdam U’meuchar Batorah in Chumash. Now, the straw man that often comes up in these discussions (I’ve seen it in several blogs) is the “old school” rebbe who just wants to teach the next daf and that’s the extent of his planning. I certainly agree that teachers should ask themselves what are the key words, important structures of the shakla v’tarya, key concepts etc in the given sugya that they are teaching(just to use gemara as an example, this would be true in every subject in a way that is appropriate for that subject). I also agree that a thoughtful teacher will determine which sugyot he/she does during the year depending on whether the kids will be able to understand it , will be engaged etc, although these latter considerations  are highly subjective questions which very much depend on the particular teacher and class. However, I don’t think there’s any reason to question why a teacher should teach the Civil War or Ein Mukdam U’meuchar Batorah, the only justification needed is that if you don’t, your students will be ignorant of the basics. Sometimes you’ll do a sugya that isn’t so exciting, because it’s something that they ought to know. Yes, we should consider the big picture take away, but our students need to know things and that’s a value all by itself. (I will admit to having only skimmed “Understanding By Design”, but don’t think the authors meant to go to such extremes as the position that I am disagreeing with; they have a category of topical understanding and questions besides just overall understanding and questions.) I think that one of the essential questions we should be asking ourselves (and I use high school as an example, because that’s what I know) is will our students sound like a bunch of am aratzim when they get to yeshiva in Israel and how can we prevent that.
Yaakov Blau]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20358#msg-20358</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:27:21 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Source for piyyut</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20320,20357#msg-20357</link>
      <author>Tzvika Kanarek</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dear Shalom,

Machzor Vitri Chap. 103, Heading of &quot;ata kidashta&quot;, Siddur Rashi Chap. 477, Bet Yosef Orach Chaim Chap. 281: &quot;Others say, Chemdat Yamim is not mentioned anywhere, it is just indicating the fact that this is a nice, pleasant and a lovely day (interpretation of the word &quot;nechmad&quot;) for the people of &quot;Am yisrael&quot;.&quot;

Tzvika Kanarek]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20320,20357#msg-20357</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:42:17 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20356#msg-20356</link>
      <author>Tzvi Pittinsky</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dear Shalom and List:

Regarding the query by my colleague at The Frisch School, Rabbi Yaakov
Blau on Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;, I believe that the best
answer, as is often the case, is there is a place for both on these
types of questions on well written assessments.

My philosophy towards testing is greatly influenced by a seminal class
that I took a number of years ago with Dr. Scott Goldberg in the
Azrieli Graduate School for Jewish Education and Administration. We
used the textbook, Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice for
Effective Standards-Based Instruction by JH McMillan
(http://www.amazon.com/Classroom-Assessment-Principles-Standards-Based-Instruction/dp/0205485847)
which I would highly recommend. In the course, Dr. Goldberg advised
that the teacher first identify Learning Targets for their course and
then make sure that all assessments address at least some of these
goals. This is similar to the Understanding By Design approach where
you &quot;Begin With the End in Mind&quot;, as Stephen Covey would say, or put
another way, &amp;#1505;&amp;#1493;&amp;#1507; &amp;#1502;&amp;#1506;&amp;#1513;&amp;#1492; &amp;#1489;&amp;#1502;&amp;#1495;&amp;#1513;&amp;#1489;&amp;#1492; &amp;#1514;&amp;#1495;&amp;#1497;&amp;#1500;&amp;#1492;, as we describe the Shabbat in &amp;#1500;&amp;#1499;&amp;#1492;
&amp;#1491;&amp;#1493;&amp;#1491;&amp;#1497;. The learning targets should include the areas of Knowledge and
Simple Understanding, Deep Understanding and Reasoning, Skills,
Products, and Affective Targets.

Obviously some of these targets would require &quot;spit back&quot; types of
questions while others would call for more &quot;thought&quot; based questions.
Even in reference to &quot;spit back&quot; questions, it is important to
recognize that there are different types of &quot;spit back&quot;. One can ask
questions for simple knowledge like basic translation and information
and one can ask more sophisticated deeper understanding &quot;spit back&quot;
that requires the learner to follow the various stages in a logical
progression like the back and forth arguments in a long Tosfot. This
is the type of high-level &quot;spit back&quot; that I believe Rabbi Blau
recommends for formal exams. However, if one's targets include skills
like using keywords to read a Talmudic sugya or applying knowledge to
new situations then &quot;thought&quot; type questions are also warranted
whether in a formal test or using alternative forms of assessments as
Rabbi Aaron Ross advocated.

Technology can greatly assist in constructing these alternative
skills-based assessments for Talmud. For example, students can
indicate their mastery of the Shakla Vetarya of a sugya by breaking
down the stages of the Gemara and classifying them using a computer
program like Gemara Berura (www.gemaraberura.com). They can also read
the sugya for the teacher to listen to later using Voicethread
(www.voicethread.com), a web-based app that allows students to record
their voices using a computer's microphone . This is much more
practical than the oral testing that Rabbi Blau advances but points
out cannot easily be done in a Yeshiva Day School schedule. Since the
teacher can listen to the Voicethreads at his/her leisure, these types
of assignments can be assigned regularly. They can also include any
Hebrew text including Talmud, Tanach, Rishonim, or Acharonim so they
can be easly adapted for many levels of learners.

At the same time, when I have taught Gemara in the past, I also
included skills-based &quot;thought&quot; questions on my formal tests as well
by giving my students &quot;unseen&quot; Gemara texts containing the same
keyword structures studied in class. My students were naturally
worried about these &quot;unseen&quot; texts but soon realized that they were
eminently doable since I only asked them to replicate exactly the
skill learned in class; to use the keywords to explain what a new
Gemara is doing in terms of unlocking the Shakla Vetarya, the back and
forth of the debate, rather than decipher what an unfamiliar Gemara is
saying in terms of the content of the &quot;unseen&quot; Gemara. This is an
important skill for students to master so they can learn to &quot;make a
laining&quot; on a new Gemara as we would say in Yeshiva, to gain the
ability to independently read an unfamiliar Gemara. Since this is an
important learning target, naturally I included this on my exams. I
also included application questions on my tests as well, although I
usually limited them to one or two questions at the end for many of
the same reasons Rabbi Blau mentioned.

The bottom line is that one should test to the learning targets that
one teaches. Therefore, I believe that a good assessment should
include simple knowledge and deeper understanding &quot;spit back&quot;
questions, skills based questions, and some application type questions
as well. If a test is balanced and closely aligned to the clearly
communicated learning targets then students will adapt to them and use
these assessments to show their knowledge and grow in their
understanding.

I welcome continued feedback on this most fruitful discussion.

Kol Tuv,
Rabbi Tzvi Pittinsky
Director of Educational Technology
The Frisch School]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20356#msg-20356</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:43:19 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20355#msg-20355</link>
      <author>Tova W. Sinensky</author>
      <description><![CDATA[A few thoughts on the &quot;spit back questions&quot; discussion:

Thinking questions often tend to demand from students thinking skills
that we have not necessarily taught them in class. Therefore, while
some students can answer these questions &quot;correctly&quot; (however that is
defined) without instruction and practice, many students cannot
because we have not worked on it during class. Assuming that the goal
of our assessments is to assess whether the students have mastered
what we have taught, these questions do not really achieve that goal.
Although I have found that students actually enjoy taking tests that
require them to think and apply their knowledge and not just &quot;spit
back&quot; information, I think that critical thinking should remain an
in-class or at-home activity unless we can honestly say that we have
focused on these skills in class enough such that it would fair to
assess our students on them.

-- 
Tova]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20355#msg-20355</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:41:52 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Two (Somewhat) Related Queries to Tefila in High Schools</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20354#msg-20354</link>
      <author>Chana Zweiter</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I would like to respond to Rabbi Kaminetsky’s questions and reflections by sharing comments that yeshiva high school students made after participating in our Ohr Hadash Tefilla workshops. The first comment was made by a 9th grade boy during our reflection after one workshop.   I asked the students, “What have you learned here about yourself? What have you learned about tefilla?”  One student responded,” I learned that I could relate to tefilla better if I had more time to think about it before and after I davened. The trouble is that we don’t have that time in school.”  The other comments were made by 10th grade girls. I came back to the school a few months after the workshop to assess the effect that the one workshop had on the girls’ davening.  One girl answered that she kept the work sheet that we used in her siddur and looked at it before she davened. “My tefilla has really changed because I focus on it before I daven.” Most of the girls said that “You can’t just have one workshop. We are busy with so many things that the effect wears off unless you keep it up.”

I think it’s critical to listen to these reflections when implementing tefilla programs.  They are telling us how important time, reflection and an ongoing process are to tefilla. We have used the strategy of working with select groups that Rabbi Kaminetsky proposes (not yet with our Ohr Hadash program) when the object is that they become mentors for their peers, the other students. Our approach is based on the positive effects that peer tutoring can have and on a constructivist approach to education where we begin to pave the way and they learn through their own exploration and constructing. It changes a program into a school culture.  And it is based on Rav Kook’s approach to tefilla, making it meaningful by connecting it to our daily lives.  We connect it to social and emotional competencies. It’s a spiral effect – the tefilla affects how they develop these skills and the skills affect their tefiilla.

My friend and colleague Jonathan Cohen of the School Climate Center and I have developed an approach that makes this connection between the skills of positive school climate and tefilla. We are in the process of organizing a cluster of up to eight schools to participate in its pilot programming.  We would be happy to hear from schools who would like to take part in that cluster.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20354#msg-20354</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:58:34 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Smartboard use</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20321,20353#msg-20353</link>
      <author>Marci Karoll</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Legacy Heritage Fund, in its continuing effort to support the integration of technology in Jewish education, offers Jewish educators free access to more than 2,400 SMARTBoard lessons and activities on its SJED database.  These lessons have been created by and for educators in numerous Judaic and secular subjects and are ready for use directly in the classroom. Lessons may be modified as well, to fit specific classroom/curriculum needs.  All the lessons are searchable by topic, subject and grade and can be uploaded easily from the database.  Legacy Heritage also accepts SMARTBoard lessons from educators and offers a e-newsletter which offers tips and resources to enhance the use of SMARTBoards in schools.  The SJED database can be found at www.LegacyHeritage.org.  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Marci Karoll at MKaroll@lhfl.net]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20321,20353#msg-20353</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:55:39 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Digital Textbooks in Jewish Day Schools: Is the future now?</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20343,20352#msg-20352</link>
      <author>Moshe Yeres</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Article about Ipad usage by students and staff at Frankel Jewish Academy in Detroit 
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/01/20/3091276/jewish-day-schools-putting-apple-ipads-to-the-test]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20343,20352#msg-20352</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:53:07 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Discussing current events in Israel</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20269,20351#msg-20351</link>
      <author>Hadassah Levy</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I am certainly not proposing that we ignore extremism and violence. However, there has been a lumping together of so many different issues, all designed to malign the religious community. Violent behavior requires police intervention (of which there was not enough in Bet Shemesh), while soldiers wishing to leave a concert should be dealt with by compromising, not by issuing directives that all soldiers must hear women sing. Machon Puah did not deserve to be vilified for holding one conference where only men spoke so that they could influence haredi psak (while women are invited to speak at their other events). 

I was amazed to discover halfway through the discussions of the Bet Shemesh violence that the people involved belonged to Neturai Karta. Somehow I had missed this fact in all the previous coverage of the events. Admittedly, I am often a skimmer of news, but this brought home the fact that the media was painting a skewed reality of the facts here. 

I opened up the newspaper every day for weeks to find pages devoted specifically to &quot;hadarat nashim,&quot; which included such ridiculous &quot;news items&quot; as the complaint that the Technion has a few separate hours a week at its gym (oh, and that the Knesset does too). These types of stories worry me - are people seriously concerned about the 8 year old girl who was spit on, or are they running a witch hunt?

Now that the media has moved on to other issues (such as racism against Ethiopians), it may be time for the dati leumi community to give some thought to its place in the larger Israeli society. One hopes that extremists in the religious community won't give further fodder to those looking to delegitimize it.

Hadassah Levy
Website and social media manager
http://www.jewishideasdaily.com]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20269,20351#msg-20351</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 01:20:15 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Beurei Hatefila Course</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20350#msg-20350</link>
      <author>Abe Katz</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dear Dr. Berger:

I would like to briefly respond to Rabbi Kaminetsky’s posting in which he solicited suggestions about introducing a Beurei Hatefila program at his school. 
In my opinion, a Yeshiva high school student should graduate knowing at least the following about Tefila:

1. The definition of Tefila B’Tzibbur;
2. The definition of Jewish Prayer;
3. The origin of the synagogue;
4. The origin of Kriyas Ha’Torah;
5. Why Tefila contains so many Psukim from Tanach;
6. The origin of Kaddish in Tefila;
7. The origin of Kaddish Yasom;
8. The role of Piyuttim in Tefila;
9. Birchos Kriyas Shema and Semichas Geula L’Tefila;
10. The first page of Seder Rav Amrom Gaon;
11. Sample pages from the Siddur of Rav Sa’Adiya Gaon;
12. Sample pages from the Italian Rite and the Yemenite Rite;
13. The changes to Tefila occasioned by the followers of the AR&quot;I;
14. Shemona Esrei according to Minhag Eretz Yisroel;
15. Why Ashkenazim do not perform Birkas Kohanim each day;
16. The origin of Kedushah;
17. The origin of reciting Aleinu L’Sha’Beach at the end of each Tefila;
18. Why we recite Hallel on Rosh Chodesh;
19. The Haggadah according to Minhag Eretz Yisroel;
20. Historical circumstances that influenced Jewish Prayer.

Those are my top twenty topics in Tefila. I am sure that some might add or subtract from my list. If a school does not want to teach a full course on Beurei Hatefila, it should at a minimum teach the first topic on my list. A graduate of a Yeshiva high school should know that if he comes late to shul, he must take steps to catch up with the congregation so that he recites the silent Shemona Esrei with the congregation. Any graduate of a Yeshiva high school who could have caught up by skipping parts or all of Pseukei D’Zimra but does not do so, embarrasses himself.
&amp;#12288;
Abe Katz
Founding Director
The Beurei Hatefila Institute
www.beureihatefila.com]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20350#msg-20350</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 01:14:09 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20349#msg-20349</link>
      <author>Shalom Carmy</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I see nothing wrong with a modicum of spitback, defined as the ability to report clearly on what you have learned.  

1.  In the end it's about mastering detailed material and not just about general ideas or improvisation. It all runs through the details, even the ones we don't expect students to remember a year later.

2. The sense of achievement in memorizing material or a train of reasoning is a healthy one.

3. In real life, we are often called upon to present what we know clearly: with the logic transparent, with all the details set down in a comprehensible order, without extraneous details. This is a communication skill. It is very important if you are a physician who interacts with people, or an administrator, or a person using the services of such people etc etc. etc.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20349#msg-20349</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:09:53 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Two (Somewhat) Related Queries to Tefila in High Schools</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20348#msg-20348</link>
      <author>Zvi Grumet</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Years ago I ran an explanatory/exploratory tefillah. It was mandatory, not optional. Some students appreciated it and wanted to stay, others found it curious and thought-provoking, while others outright hated it. That was to be expected. There were considerable limitations – we were bound by halakhic requirements as well as by time (our tefillah could not be longer than the school’s regular minyan.) The purpose was three-fold – to slow down the pace enough that students could actually pay attention to the words, to allow a few minutes for discussion of ideas related to general issues in tefillah, and to shake-up the experience so that it was not rote. Some of the activity was designed to make students think (there was unfortunately no time for discussion) while there were clearly other activities designed to create tefillah experiences. 
 
As I wrote in a Ten Daat article many years ago, much depends on the kinds of resources (time, space, latitude, etc.) that the school is willing to invest.
 
Kol Tuv,
 
Zvi Grumet
The Lookstein Center]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20335,20348#msg-20348</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:20:51 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20347#msg-20347</link>
      <author>Aaron Ross</author>
      <description><![CDATA[My friend Rabbi Yaakov Blau, in his familiar iconoclastic fashion, lays out the case against thought questions as opposed to spit back on tests.  While he makes some good points, I believe that there are two fundamental flaws in his argument:

1) He creates a straw man by claiming to argue against those who hold that spit back questions are awful education and we should only be giving thought questions to our students.  I do not know too many educators who actually take such a position.  My sense is that many educators value the more thoughtful and thought-provoking questions, yet realize that there is a certain degree of spit back necessary in order to ensure that students know the basics.  And, of course, even spit back questions can be phrased in ways that force the students to think a bit and not simply spit back (without being the lengthy essays that Rabbi Blau posits should be done at home).

2) Rabbi Blau seems to feel that thought questions are too time-consuming (and perhaps deserve that amount of time) to be done in the context of a one period test.  That position leads him to say that such questions should therefore not be done in class.  However, why does Rabbi Blau not consider that perhaps conventional tests are not the best method of assessment for such classes?  There is no shortage of ways in which to assess student understanding of material, and if standard tests do not allow a teacher to assess in the best way possible, then perhaps tests should be replaced by some other form of assessment.  Rabbi Blau does allude to this by saying that thought questions should be homeworks - but why stop at homework?  Perhaps give a short answer test accompanied by a more thoughtful and lengthy take-home assignment?

Rabbi Blau acknowledges this point in his discussion of rubrics.  However, he seems to discount rubrics by writing &quot;However, I don’t think it’s so fair to have a thought question where the students need to “guess” what your rubrics are.&quot; - No problem.  If you use an alternative form of assessment, you have to make sure to tell the students the rubric in advance.  I am not sure why Rabbi Blau discounts a widely-used method of grading simply because there are those people who do not know how to use them.

Bivracha,
Aaron Ross]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20347#msg-20347</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 02:48:04 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] An idea for in-between Pesach and Shavuot</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20346,20346#msg-20346</link>
      <author>Judith Abrams</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Instead of learning Pirkei Avot (again) between Pesach and Shavuot, why not
learn tractate Bikkurim.  That way you can be learning about the Omer while
you are counting the Omer as well as learning about Shavuot's ancient roots.
Tractate Bikkurim is available in Hebrew/English from Artscroll (about $35)
and makes for some enjoyable learning.  If you have questions or help
getting this going, please contact me.  I'd be happy to help.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20346,20346#msg-20346</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 02:42:41 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Source for piyyut</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20320,20345#msg-20345</link>
      <author>Leah Silver</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I was intrigued by the query about &quot;Chemdat Yamim Oto Karatta&quot;. I looked for answers in siddurim, instead of TaNaCh sources, and am proud to say that this question is addressed in the Koren Mesoret HaRav siddur on page 519. Enjoy!]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20320,20345#msg-20345</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 14:36:37 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Bar-Ilan Mekorot Vs. Straight from Sforim</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20344,20344#msg-20344</link>
      <author>AndrewIsraeli</author>
      <description><![CDATA[What are your thoughts regarding teaching children through Bar Ilan mekorot that do not give a learner the view of the gemara or rashi as opposed to teaching children with the gemara open, reading rashi texts etc. what are the positives, consequences, and negatives that come with putting a number of sources on one page without showing kids the day gemara, rashi, rishonim text itself.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20344,20344#msg-20344</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 06:57:39 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Digital Textbooks in Jewish Day Schools: Is the future now?</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20343,20343#msg-20343</link>
      <author>Rabbi Tzvi Pittinsky</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dear Shalom and List:
With the recent announcement by Apple about their K-12 textbook publishing partnerships and new software for creating and customizing textbooks for the iPad (http://www.apple.com/education/ibooks-textbooks), I was wondering whether anyone could share their experiences using digital textbooks in Jewish Day Schools. I know that there was a similar discussion was on the list in the past but it might be worth revisiting since technology keeps advancing at such a steady pace.

The way I see it there are 3 advantages to using digital textbooks on iPads and e-readers.

1. Convenience: Having one small tablet to carry back and forth from school is much easier and healthier for our students than lugging large backpacks full of books. The present situation causes many students to leave their textbooks in school or at home rather than transport them back and forth or have 2 copies of their books which is not the ideal. 

2. Multi-media content: Digital textbooks can offer much more than the traditional text and pictures. They can have audio, video, animations, and interactive content that can greatly improve the educational experience.

3. Cost savings (maybe): Digital textbooks might be cheaper than purchasing all those traditional books although, since paper books can be reused for many years, the promise of any promised cost savings has to be carefully examined.

The drawbacks of digital textbooks are that they can be lost, broken, or stolen; content needs to be created for Judaic subjects as well as General Studies; they cannot be used on Shabbat or Yom Tov; there is a large cost for purchasing iPads or similar ereaders for every student and creating/replacing textbooks.

My question to the List is does anyone have experience implementing digital textbooks in Jewish Day Schools for General or Judaic Studies and/or does anyone have any plans to pilot such an implementation in the near future?

I welcome the feedback from the collected wisdom of the various educators on this list.
Kol Tuv,
Rabbi Tzvi Pittinsky
Director of Educational Technology
The Frisch School]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20343,20343#msg-20343</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:20:01 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Is there a Judaic foundation for reflection or reflective practice?</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20292,20342#msg-20342</link>
      <author>Boruch Krasner</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Whilst learning through the classic mussar work of Ramchal, Messilas Yesharim I noticed certain parallels between the system of self-development outlined by Ramchal and the contemporary theory of reflective practice as outlined by Schon and Argryris.

Towards the end of Chapter 2, whilst explaining the importance of zehirus-caution, Ramchal introduces the concept of hisbonenus-reflection. He informs us that one of the tricks of the yester horah is to leave us with no time at all to carefully reflect on our actions and therefore one who wishes to rise to the challenge must find time and brain-space to reflect upon his actions. At the beginning of Chapter 3 he then tells us how one should go about performing this reflection. Firstly, one should carefully consider what is the ultimate good that we should pursue, and what is evil that we should run away from. 

The significance of this statement from the perspective of the contemporary theory of reflective practice is that Ramchal is recommending a system of double-loop learning, whereby the reflection is not acting like a thermostat to modify behaviour within certain parameters, but rather in the manner outlined by Argyris and Schon; “double-loop learning occurs when error is detected and corrected in ways that involve the modification of an organization’s underlying norm’s, policies and objectives.” Ramchal calls upon us to reconsider our priorities and realign our focus on what is important and what is not. The truth is that this is Ramchal’s famous opening salvo in this work where he says that the foundation of true service of G-d involves clarification of our duties in this world, and running after anything that brings us close to G-d. Ramchal appears to assign more importance to this reflection than any other.

Once the objectives have been clarified, Ramchal, in Chapter 3 then advocates a process of scrutinizing our actions, to asses which are good and which are bad, more of a single-loop process, which as described by Schon and Argyris is an “error and correction process”. In classic “reflective practice” language Ramchal then explains that this reflection must take place “Beshaas Maaseh” and “Sheloh beshaas Maaseh”. Namely, “reflection in action” and “reflection on action”.  Thus, there is a striking similarity in the use of language employed by Ramchal and that of the contemporary theory of reflective practice.

I think that being aware of these classifications of reflection is useful as one can go through the sefer mesilas yesharim  and highlight when Ramchal is advocating scrutiny of action and when scrutiny of our outlook. Being able to define these concepts in contemporary terms can often enhance our ability to understand and apply the ideas expressed in this timeless work.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20292,20342#msg-20342</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 01:47:16 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Re: Goel Hadam</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20299,20341#msg-20341</link>
      <author>Shalom Carmy</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The subject requires more careful attention than I can offer at this moment. I would commend Prof Hendel's note (if I understand it) that the institution of goel ha-dam balances different values.

I would add two points for now:

1) The text of the Torah implies a more positive view of the goel ha-dam's activity than the actual Halakha. In other words, a person reading the pesukim without Gemara and without halakhic discussion in Rishonim would miss many limitations the Halakha places on the obligation or right to kill the killer. (This is similar but not identical to the way capital crimes are generally treated in torah she-b'ktav and in halakha.

See for example, Enc. talmudit s.v. goel ha-dam.

2) The word &quot;nekama&quot; does not appear in these sections.]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20299,20341#msg-20341</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 01:39:34 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Lookjed List Archive] Thought questions vs &quot;spit back&quot;</title>
      <link>http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20340#msg-20340</link>
      <author>Yaakov Blau</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The current conventional wisdom seems to be that “spit back” questions on tests are bad and archaic and that “thought” questions are the ideal of what a test ought to be. I would like to question this line of thought on several levels (I am only discussing from a high school teacher’s perspective, since that’s what I’m qualified to discuss; I understand that it would be a very different discussion if we are talking about elementary school or post high school teaching).
1] I certainly agree that thought questions are a wonderful method of taking the material being taught to another level, but I think that it is better used as a homework or classroom discussion than as a test question, for the following reasons:
   A] Thought questions ought to be just that, questions that the students have time to think about. Giving it as homework gives the student time to think it over in a meaningful way, whereas a test is about how quickly they can think on the spot. Usually they give the thought part just a brief amount of time, since there are many other questions that need to be answered and the test time has very definite limits. I feel like teachers will often spend somewhere in the range of an hour thinking of the thought question, but then expect the student to answer it in about 5 minutes.
B] As much as we want the test to be a learning experience, at the end of the day, we need to give a grade and have a fair system for what that grade ought to be. Thought questions are often open ended and can be analyzed in several ways. I feel like we often fall into one of 2 traps 1] the “can you guess how the teacher thinks” way of grading instead of having an objective standard (if you ask your thought question to another teacher doing the same material, I dare say that you will often get a different take than the one that you had and expect your students to come up with) or 2] giving credit for pretty much anything somewhat intelligent that they write, which, I think, undermines the value of the question as part of a test. I know that people will say that they use rubrics and I think that rubrics that are given to a student before they do an assignment are fair guidelines. However, I don’t think it’s so fair to have a thought question where the students need to “guess” what your rubrics are.
C]I think it is a truism for high school homework that anything that can copied, will be copied and that thought questions for homework are more meaningful and less likely to be just passed around during breakfast.
Now, one could reasonably argue that giving an oral bechina instead of a written one would deal with many of these points, but I don’t think that the average high school set up allows for doing that in a meaningful way.
2] I am sympathetic to the fear that when there are “spit back” questions on tests, the kids are just memorizing their notes and not really understanding them at all. However, I feel like the “spit back is all bad” way of thinking is overly simplistic. At the end of the day, our students should walk away with a baseline of knowledge of what they’ve learned. If we did a machloket ibn ezra/ramban in chumash or rashi/tosfot in gemara, they should be able to “spit it back.” First of all, any subsequent meaningful discussion requires, as a prerequisite, thorough prior knowledge of the material. Second of all, I don’t think our goal is just to enable future discussion. Our students knowing the material is a value in its own right and just knowing what rashi versus tosfot said is important in and of itself. I believe that raising the level of Jewish literacy of our students ought to be one of our major goals as teachers. I also think, and realize that now I’m on shakier ground, that thought questions often involve taking out the basic overall concept in a topic and don’t necessarily show a thorough knowledge of the overall subject. So for example, I don’t think that the take away from learning the basic rules of Shabbat ought to just be the ideas of davar sheino mitkavan, pesik reisha etc, I think that the kids ought to know the gemarot about each one and which cases the rishonim debated (assuming that that’s what you learned in class). Giving just application questions to those concepts (which is, I think, a good thought question and much less open ended than the average) is, I think, not enough.
I am sure that many of the readers will disagree what parts (if not all) of what I am saying and certainly respect the other points of view. I have seen thought questions on tests that were brilliant, but have all too often seen ones that are, I think, open to my aforementioned critiques.
Yaakov Blau]]></description>
      <category>Lookjed List Archive</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://lookstein.org/lookjed/read.php?1,20340,20340#msg-20340</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:53:22 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

