The authors explain the background of a program they designed for people teaching or conducting tefillah, which they hope will spawn a cadre of professional tefillah educators.

Background Fifteen years ago, very few people were talking about tefillah in day schools. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t an area of concern. At a day school conference several years ago, the Pardes Center for Jewish Educators (PCJE) offered a workshop entitled Tefillah: The Vietnam of Jewish Day Schools. We were told to expect 20-25 participants, as this was one of many choices offered by RAVSAK within its own network. In fact, close to 60 people came from across the networks.

In supporting our 147 alumni of the Pardes Educators Program (most of whom worked as teachers in day schools, across denominations and across North America), tefillah is almost always viewed as a struggle. In a survey Ezra Kopelowitz did in 2011, 93 non-Orthodox day school leaders were asked to identify those areas that were most needed for professional development. Tefillah was the #1 response. While some schools have begun to revisit their tefillah education program, few if any, have attempted a thorough re-examination of the situation. Over the past few years, the Pardes Center for Jewish Educators has begun just such a systematic examination of tefillah.

This next section includes a brief summary of the challenges to tefillah education we have seen in each of the four educational commonplaces delineated by Ralph Tyler: the teacher, the student, the curriculum and the milieu/community. We will share what attempts are being made in the field to remedy the situation, and finally, the last section will report on what we, at the Pardes Center for Jewish Educators have learned from observation, action research projects by alumni, and our efforts to address teacher training and making change in schools in tefillah. Many questions still remain.

Problematic state of the field

The Student

Many schools report that tefillah appears to “work” through grade 4 or so and then it “begins to fall apart.” With the onset of the pre-teen years, and particularly in middle school, engaged and enthusiastic elementary school students (singing, leading with peers and participating in discussions) disappear and in their place are students who are apathetic, resistant, or acting out. What we know of ages and stages of child development clearly shows that major changes, both emotional and intellectual, are taking place in the middle school years. What once worked – repetition, singing, pleasing the adults in their lives – no longer does, yet tefillah in the upper grades looks very much the same, only longer.

The Teacher

There are Bible teachers, Rabbinic teachers, Hebrew teachers, and teachers of Jewish history, and there is pre-service training and in-service training in all of these areas. That is not the case for tefillah. There is no established field of tefillah education, and pre-service training is usually limited to a course, if at all. Many teachers feel ill-prepared for the role; others admit to not having time to prepare on a regular basis. While some schools pay a small stipend to teachers who lead, in many schools it is considered a duty (like lunch, recess, or carpool). Only a very small number of schools consider tefillah facilitation to be a prep. As one teacher stated, “At night when I am preparing for the next day, I have four academic preps plus tefillah. Honestly, if I have time at all, tefillah is last on my list of what to think about.” Many of those in middle or high school who are assigned to either lead tefillah or support the facilitator admit to disliking this above all other assignments; they feel more like policemen than educators. Some young educators (especially those who have informal education background) start out enthusiastic but are eventually beaten down by the experience. Others express displeasure at having tefillah responsibilities as this often not what they were hired for. One elementary school lead tefillah facilitator shared her frustration at trying to work with her teachers:

I have experienced significant passive resistance to the whole idea of examining our practice when it comes to teaching tefillah and guiding students on their spiritual or experiential journey. Mostly this means that teachers come unprepared to meetings, and say the equivalent of “oh right, we were supposed to read that article or reflect on that question, I forgot,” or “I know we are supposed to talk about tefillah today, but can we talk about writing narratives for report cards” and so on. When I meet individually with teachers and review the weekly schedule for Judaics classes, I find that frequently teachers are borrowing time from tefillah to work on a holiday or other project…

The Curriculum

A number of schools have what they call a tefillah curriculum, but these rarely meet the standard in both scope and content that we demand of curricula in other areas. Typically absent are an overall vision, goals, or benchmarks for how those goals might be achieved. Furthermore, there is little if any assessment of skills, knowledge, or what tefillah might mean to the students. While there are some schools that actually teach tefillah in a class, most rely upon daily repetition of the tefillot together with teachers’ instruction/sound bites to get across some lessons connected to the prayers. Few schools plan out how they will help the students develop their own theology of prayer as they grow. For example, certainly the God that is appropriate for middle and high school students is very different than what they imagined in grade 2.

The Milieu

Milieu is “the invisible commonplace” that we often forget about when thinking about our schools. It refers to aspects that surround the more obvious elements of teacher, students and curriculum, such as physical setting and community. Certainly, where and in what configuration tefillah takes place makes a difference. Decisions of rooms and combinations of grades are often determined by the physical plant and available staff, rather than by pedagogical decision. The milieu can also refer to the adults in the surrounding community: parents, board members, area rabbis, etc., all of whom might have their own expectations for tefillah – only further complicating a school’s attempt to think or re-think its own path and vision. Parents can range from those who feel including tefillah is a waste of time, to those who feel strongly that a full matbe’a needs to happen every shaharit with at least an optional minha. Often both of those groups of parents (and many in-between) exist side by side in the same school.

Bikkurim: First fruits

Despite the difficulty, some individuals, institutions and funders have decided to invest in tefillah, and there are pockets of success. First and foremost, tefillah is no longer a taboo subject; it is on the agenda of what schools want to address.

Second, a number of academics and practitioners have begun to suggest directions, one of which is the cultivation of the child’s spiritual self. Lisa Miller’s (2005) research and writings have contributed a great deal to what we know, as well as those in the Jewish educational world (i.e. Lawrence Scheindlin, 2013; Michael Shire). They have called on schools to respond accordingly – not only in tefillah itself, but in how we help students view the world and express their spiritual selves. Others – like Saul Wachs (2009) and Jay Goldmintz (2009, 2014) – in addition to advocating for developing the spiritual side, emphasize the importance of studying the tefillot themselves in order that students will find meaning in the prayers they recite.

Third, attention is being paid to ages and stages of child development. We know that elementary school students like repetition, singing, pleasing adults, etc. (which is why tefillah seems to succeed with younger children) while middle school students are more interested in change, choice, empowerment. To that end, some schools are changing it up, offering middle and high school students a choice of or exposure to different types of tefillah options (meditation, discussion, art, etc.) on different days, as well as a variety of settings or configurations. This can be more difficult within a school committed to a halakhic framework. However, we have seen such schools offer all halakhic choices, such as a Sephardi or Ashkenazi minyan, a learner’s minyan, and a minyan with more singing.

Some schools now do minha in place of a shaharit service, which can have a number of benefits. Quite a few schools have designated a day a week for iyun tefillah (learning about tefillah) in place of actual davening. One school decided to tell parents to have the students daven at home every day, then took that time to include a course on tefillah. (In fact, a number of schools are weighing how to balance the actual “obligation” for davening, with the need for real tefillah education.)

There are those who recognize that for many students, it is important that they be given responsibility (and thus empowerment) in tefillah. This can include, for example, deciding on configuring the tefillah space, choosing specific tefillot (when that is an option), making decisions as to how the tefillot are said (aloud or silently, responsively, or in English), teaching/helping younger students, and actually planning and running the service.

Schools are coming around to acknowledge that assessment is crucial – we assess what we value – yet assessing the areas not related to skills or knowledge is challenging. Self–assessment is certainly one way to go for non-skills related goals. One high school has students set their goals for the year for tefillah together with a faculty member. Students are expected to journal and meet with their faculty tefillah advisor monthly to discuss “where am I.” The message is that tefillah is important; students are expected to grapple with tefillah and to grow.

As adults, we know that the quality of the shaliah tzibbur can impact our own davening, yet even upper elementary school students had what to say about the impact of their colleagues’ leadership skills. There are some schools that are starting to think about leadership training and how they then have students lead – not in packs but as individuals – even doing a single piece of tefillah.

There are more resources that are now available from a variety of publishing houses, including new siddurim. The Koren High School edition, with commentary by Jay Goldmintz, is a resource not only for students but for teachers of all ages. Siddur Sababa’s strong educational bent reflects its development by a day school teacher, Sarah Beckerman. These are but two examples. Several schools have invested the time and resources in creating their own siddurim, with commentaries and illustrations by their own students (another path to student empowerment). PaJeS (Partnerships for Jewish Schools in England) has created some wonderful on-line materials for the teaching of tefillah (albeit with local cultural bias).

Lisa Exler has created a very serious K-8 curriculum as a joint project between Beit Rabban School and Machon Hadar in New York, built somewhat on the model of the Standards and Benchmarks. Machon Hadar has also created materials for learning about various tefillot which are a good resource for teachers. As more individual schools create curriculum for tefillah and tefillah education, it is hoped that these include clear and realistic goals as well as tools for assessment.

Finally, in terms of resources (and the proof is in what you are now reading), is that there have been a number of journal issues devoted to the topic of tefillah (by The Lookstein Center and Hayidion). Sharing our struggles and achievements, ideas, and materials can only enrich the field.

Teacher training

While these are important steps toward establishing a field, as we well know, teachers are key. The wonderful work of the Standards and Benchmarks Project could only happen with teachers who could grow through professional development. And so, as PCJE became more involved with tefillah in the field, the focus has been on teacher training. We ran a five day retreat in June 2015 entitled Aleinu L’eshabeach – as a think tank and pilot. We were funded by The AVICHAI Foundation for ten educators, and with very little publicity we received thirty applications (of whom we took seventeen). We knew that whatever else we needed, the teachers themselves had to reflect upon and grapple with their own experience as pray-ers. Only then could we go on to think about the needs of our students.

Many of those in the first group had already achieved some modicum of success in leading tefillah in their own schools. We drew upon their expertise, as well as what we knew. For a second cohort (summer 2016), we decided to expand to teachers who were struggling in their own settings to see if what we had developed would work for them as well. The following comments are illustrative of our success:

I loved the cross-denomination make up of the group of attendees. All of the differences that exist among us fell away amidst our shared love of teaching t’filah and our desire to give that joy to our students.

Remarkable.

Thank you so very much for empowering me in this journey. I feel privileged and lucky. It was so helpful and nourishes my need with my struggles with tefillah and G-d.

Thank you! I am approaching Tefillah with a new perspective. I came quite disheartened and now I am excited to get started on next year’s plan!

While the participants were largely empowered by the retreats, we also noted the deficiencies in the model. Having helped to develop prayer facilitators and leaders, we were sending them back to their schools (by and large) alone, without support. Some found it hard to make any headway with colleagues and administration. To bring about real change we would need to bring together teams from schools, a commitment from administration that this was to be a change process, adequate time to work, and support to the schools from our coaches. Thus we created a pilot project, focusing on tefillah in middle schools with schools from the Greater NY area. Each of five schools (from a range of denominations) was asked to commit to sending a team of four educators each (teachers and at least one administrator) to two gatherings and to make a commitment to work on change in tefillah in their schools. Year one (2016-17) was meant to be an opportunity to study, think and dream. Year two (2017-18) was meant to introduce and assess a strategy for change.

As with our conferences – and all the work we do in tefillah – we felt strongly that we had to start with our own challenges as pray ers before we could speak about our students. We then looked at the siddur and other texts to help us think about different possible approaches to prayer as a way to connect to ourselves (how we act in the world), to community, and to God. We spent a good deal of time on goals and trying to help each school prioritize its own goals, in keeping with each school’s vision and mission statement. Most schools want it all and struggle with prioritizing what is most important, which will be different for each school. Is it keva, kavvanah, knowledge, skills, meaning making, the needs of the individual or that of the community, etc? In trying to set goals and benchmarks for achieving those goals, we emphasized the importance of assessment, as challenging as that can be. We had a session on “ages and stages” of child development so that we would be better equipped to make the right choices for what is most appropriate for middle schoolers. We shared best practices of what we have seen in the field. We studied a prayer together as a way of modeling what we can do with our students. Finally, we presented what should be done in terms of research and garnering support, that would give each school the best chance of succeeding in piloting some change in the coming year.

Will this pilot succeed? Will this be a model for bringing about change in our schools and building a field of tefillah education? It is too early to assess the value of the pilot to the schools – and what impact the change will have. At the same time, we have become more aware of the challenges to bringing about the change we all want.

Some of the questions we are hoping to learn more about as we move forward:

• How central to their professional success is the commitment of individual tefillah leaders to the importance of their own prayer?
• Should board members and senior administration from all schools be part of all the teams?
• How flexible and innovative can schools committed to a halakhic model be?
• Are schools willing and able to prioritize in such a way that they may have to set certain goals aside – or alternatively, throw more time at tefillah education?
• With so many demands on teachers, is there sufficient time for the teams to work together and carry out their projects?
• How does change in prioritizing one’s goals, affect other areas of school life?
• Is student satisfaction an important measure when it comes to tefillah?
• And most importantly, can these changes truly make a difference in the quality of the tefillah experience and education that the students receive?

What is clear is that we are working with five teams of smart, dedicated educators who care passionately about making tefillah better in their schools. According to John Kotter, change is built on small successes, which can be consolidated and lead to greater change. We look forward to seeing small successes from each of our pilot schools, and from sharing what we and they learn about their experiences.

References

Goldmintz, J. (2014). Ani tefillah: A weekday/Shabbat siddur for reflection, connection and learning. Jerusalem: Koren.

Goldmintz, J. (2009). Helping students find their own voice in tefilah: A conceptual framework for teachers. www.lookstein.org/articles/voice_ tefillah.pdf Miller, L. (2015). The spiritual child. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Scheindlin, L. (2013). Seeing is caring, seeing is believing: Teaching sensitivity in the classroom, in Growing Jewish minds, growing Jewish souls (J. Kress, ed.). New York: URJ Press.

Shire, M. J. (2011). Spirituality, the spiritual child and Jewish childhood, in The international handbook of Jewish education (H. Miller, L. Grant and A. Pomson, eds.). New York: Springer, 301-318.

Wachs, S. P. (2009) Towards a theory of practice: Conducting services for and with children and teens in Jewish day schools. New York: The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism.

Susan Wall oversees tefillah initiatives for the Pardes Center for Jewish Educators (within the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies). Since 2002, Dr. Wall has served in numerous capacities, first directing the Pardes Educators Program, then the Pardes Educators Alumni Support project, and finally PCJE Professional Development.

Zvi Hirschfield teaches Talmud, Halacha and Jewish Thought at the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem. Rabbi Hirschfield has worked in teacher training for classroom and experiential educators through the Pardes Center for Jewish Educators, including serving as co-director of Aleinu Leshabe’ach and the tefillah pilot project.

Seth Korelitz is Director of Jewish Studies at Frankel Jewish Academy in West Bloomfield, Michigan. Dr. Korelitz participated in Aleinu Leshabe’ach in 2015, and helped plan and facilitate Aleinu Leshabea’ch II in 2016, as well as the current pilot project.