Focus on What We Teach (Winter 2004)

Introduction – Shalom Berger
The MaToK Curriculum – Deborah Miller
Adaptive Teaching and Learning the Bible – Bruriah Michman
The Barkai Method – Dan Be’eri
Teaching Tanakh in a Pluralistic Day School – Susan Tanchel
The Torah Aura Text Method – Joel Lurie Grishaver

Introduction

In introducing this section of our Applications, I would like to draw your attention to Joseph Schwab’s description of what curriculum is – or, at any rate, what it should be.

Curriculum is what is successfully conveyed to differing degrees to different students, by committed teachers using appropriate materials and actions, of legitimated bodies of knowledge, skill, taste, and propensity to act and react, which are chosen for instruction after serious reflection and communal decision by representatives of those involved in the teaching of a specified group of students known to the decision makers.
(Schwab, Joseph J. The Practical 4: Something for Curriculum Professors to Do. Curriculum Inquiry 13 (Fall 1983): p. 240)

The following section includes essays written by a wide spectrum of educators – from Israel and the Diaspora, some radically traditional, others modern in thought and conception – who describe what works in their schools, reflecting the needs of their students and communities.

In presenting the following compendium, it is essential to understand that they are not “recommended models”. The purpose of sharing them is to inform and encourage thought about the very real differences that should be recognized and encouraged when preparing curricula for use in your school. In particular, the importance of Schwab’s commonplaces – students and teachers, environment and subject matter – becomes clear when examining different schools and their curricular assumptions.

The Applications section continues with Eli Kohn’s description of how a group of schools with common aims and goals chose to collaborate on a curriculum project. His portrayal of the process makes clear how important it is for all of the different players and components to be sensitive to one another in order to successfully implement curricular change.

Shalom

The MaToK Curriculum
Deborah Miller

Solomon Schechter Day Schools are the day schools of the Conservative Movement in North America. Although the schools have to meet certain requirements for affiliation, each school is independent. In spite of this independence, the schools are remarkably similar. The mission statements are almost interchangeable, stemming, as they do, from shared worldviews.

Here are excerpts from one example:

The Solomon Schechter Day School of Greater Hartford is committed to excellence in dual-curriculum education. It provides its students with outstanding, integrated instruction in both Judaic and secular studies. The objective of our school is to create a model egalitarian community of Jewish religious expression and ethical thought and action.

Our school welcomes Jewish students of diverse backgrounds. It is guided by the tenets of Conservative Judaism in matters of religious observance, in the interpretative approach to classic Jewish texts and in the embrace of both tradition and modernity in all of its enterprises.

Nevertheless, there is no standard Schechter curriculum. This creates a major challenge for Solomon Schechter Day Schools since most of their Jewish studies teachers are neither identified with nor trained by the Conservative movement. Primarily due to the schools’ emphasis on the Hebrew language as the language of learning in Jewish studies, there has been a heavy reliance on Israeli teachers, who are educated in one of two school systems.

The mamlakhti (state) schools are self-consciously secular. Their reading of TaNaKH (the Bible) stresses historical, geographic and archeological connections with the modern State of Israel while God is treated as a minor character in the saga. The acceptance of the Torah’s origins as entirely human poses no difficulty. The emphasis is on national identification and celebration rather than on religious obligation, and “religious coercion” is avoided at all costs.

In contrast, the mamlakhti-dati (religious state) schools are Orthodox. These schools adhere to the mamlakhti schools’ national cultural connection with TaNaKH. Their stance, however, emphasizes the divinity of every word of the Torah, admits no moral challenges to the text, and demands adherence to halakhic life. For most of this community, the ancestral figures of the Bible are tzaddikim (wholly righteous). A second, similar, teaching population comes from the North American Orthodox community.

Neither of these groups has been educated to carry out whole-heartedly the agenda of a Conservative day school.[1]

Curriculum Goals

In 1997, the SSDS Principals’ Council decided that a Conservative day school Bible curriculum was necessary for the schools, with the express intent of promoting the teaching of TaNaKH from a Conservative perspective, irrespective of the background of the instructors. The curriculum was to reflect the Conservative movement’s vision of the Torah as polyvocal — speaking with several voices or, at least, with several possible interpretations. These interpretations are not confined to the medieval commentaries or even to contemporary talmidei hakhamim (scholars). Rather, the Torah is seen as intrinsically open to a wide range of (but not unlimited) interpretations. Additionally, the principals wanted a curriculum that would guide teachers in excellent pedagogy. Thus, the curriculum was to be a vehicle for change in orientation and in instructional methods. The two goals were consonant with each other – emphasizing inquiry and discovery, alongside participation in the centuries-old exegetical dialogue.

This confluence of needs was the impetus for MaToK (Mivtza Tanakhi Konservativi), the Bible Curriculum for Solomon Schechter Day Schools. The MaToK curriculum provides a challenge for teachers: if students are to be deeply involved in constructing personal meaning from texts, teachers must learn to assume a different role from the one they are used to. Rather than leading the whole class in a frontal explanation of a text, the teacher should help students develop the skills needed to study Torah independently, or in hevruta pairs or in small groups. By necessity, studies would then take longer time, and teachers would have to resign some control over the class.

An additional challenge was to incorporate Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences. Given that most teachers teach according to their own styles and excel in verbal and logical thinking, provision also had to be made for other ways of studying – via music, activities, art, introspection and collaboration.

Guiding Principles

MaToK is founded on a list of “Principles Governing the Development of a Bible Curriculum for Solomon Schechter Day Schools.” The following are some of these principles:

1) Revelation: Conservative Judaism believes in revelation, the uncovering of truth emanating from God. We recognize that there is a range of views within Conservative Judaism about the nature of revelation, all of which understand revelation as being mediated by humans. In interpreting the Bible, we reject fundamentalism and do not assume that the Torah is a historical or scientific account. We do assume that it contains great ideas, values and meaning, that it reflects the meeting of God and Jews, and that it constitutes a place where God and Jews continue to meet. We endeavor to instill in children the view that TaNaKH, and particularly the Torah, is a text that is different in kind from any other text and that it is a sacred text.

2) The Role of the Learner: Learning Torah should empower children to think of themselves as living links in the chain of Torah shebe’al pe. From the beginning of their Biblical studies, we want students to be engaged in constructing meaning through the interpretation of Biblical texts. Learning Torah should focus on a Nechama Leibowitz-style reading of the text, in which the teacher guides children to develop an ear and an eye for subtleties. We want our students to uncover the p’shat (the contextual meaning) of the text. What we teach is informed by traditional commentaries and modern Biblical scholarship. We study midrash and traditional commentaries – which are also part of Torah, broadly understood – in order to learn how Jews in the past interpreted TaNaKH. We also want our students’ engagement in constructing meaning to be informed by philological, literary, archeological and comparative tools used in modern disciplines of biblical studies. The eternity of the Torah is explored side-by-side with the historic influences it reflects.

3) The Place of TaNaKH in the School Program: TaNaKH is one of the pillars of the school’s program for nurturing spiritual development, teaching theology and living a Jewish life.

4) Morality: We recognize that there are some Biblical passages that challenge our moral sensibilities. Not all things in the Bible need to be justified as morally right. Asking questions is desired and legitimate.

5) Hebrew Language: We are committed to teaching Hebrew both as the present day language of the Jewish people and as an access skill to the study of sifrei kodesh (sacred texts). Our aim is that, by middle school, students should have the ability to read and understand appropriate Biblical texts with little or no assistance from teachers. TaNaKH study, however, should not replace Hebrew lessons.

Adaptive Teaching and Learning the Bible
Bruria Michman

The gishah hamutemet (adaptive teaching and learning approach) to the teaching of the Bible developed by Matach (Hamercaz Letechnologiah Hinuchit – The Center for Educational Technology) is designed to improve the process of both instruction and learning. The educational principles which form the basis of the program are applicable to different grade levels, and can be used as a helpful tool in the instruction of the various Biblical formats and content matter – be it a narrative chapter, lyrical chapter or Halakhic chapter – in Humash (Pentateuch), Nevi’im (Prophets) or Ketuvim (Writings).

Educational Principles

The gishah hamutemet is an educational approach which recognizes the differences between people and believes that it is the role of the school to satisfy these differences by adjusting the learning environment to the needs of the students. This student-centered approach is tailored to the individual, accommodates different rates of learning and development, and sets individualized, educational, social and personal goals. This approach includes the student in the process as part of the effort to ensure his progress both as an individual and as a member of the group. The approach takes into consideration the educational goals of the school as well as the study program designed by the Israeli Ministry of Education.

The gishah hamutemet strives to form independent students, who are responsible for their own learning and have the requisite learning skills. The tools provided by the program are designed to enable students to continue learning beyond the formal classroom setting as part of an overall design to develop a community of life-long learners.

The gishah hamutemet to Biblical study is based on the development of havanat haMikra (comprehension of the Biblical text), which is an adaptation of a broader discipline of havanat hanikra (reading comprehension). We believe that the same skills utilized in general reading comprehension can be applied to the reading of a Humash text. The skills of havanat ha’mikrah used by Matach are based on a model of reading comprehension by Harris and Smith, and refer to two levels of understanding:

Skills on the level of literal understanding: These refer to a simple reading of the text, in other words, “reading the lines” This level includes skills such as vocabulary development, identification of details in the story, and recognizing the main idea that is explicitly expressed in the text.

Skills on the level of interpretation: These skills are needed to understand hidden and suggested meanings in the text, or “reading between the lines.” This level includes deducing conclusions, predicting events, and recognizing the main idea that is not initially obvious in the text. Goals on this level include the development of strategies in the area of literary analysis such as questions that refer to lack of clarity, words with double meaning, apparent repetitions, gaps in the text, identification of key words, and the characterization of the different personalities in the story. Various, sometimes even opposing, interpretative commentaries may be presented as possible answers to questions, while emphasizing the principle of elu va’elu divrei Elohim hayyim.

The division in the levels of comprehension is meant mainly for didactic purposes and helps clarify complex reading. In reality, the division between the levels is not as sharp and clear cut, as the process of reading is essentially based on the combination of different skills and multiple levels of understanding. This is clearly exemplified when dealing with a Humash text, in which the student needs to move from one level of understanding to another, using a variety of skills simultaneously. For example, in order to understand a particular unit or chapter, the student has to be familiar with the vocabulary in the verses (literal level), reach conclusions (deduce), decide whether they are overt (literal level) or hidden (interpretative level), identify a main idea which is not obvious in the text (interpretative level), and more.

While the program for individualized teaching of the Bible includes goals on both the literal and interpretative levels, the goals on the level of interpretation are not necessarily the same for all students. Advanced students can deal with goals on the interpretative level while others need to focus primarily on the literal level. The necessary individualization is a pillar of the Matach shitah hamutemet, and finds expression in the three levels of workbooks (designed to enable students to work independently or in small homogeneous groups within a heterogeneous classroom) in the Matach mikra series:

Perach – The Perach level is geared toward the lower level of the class. The goal of Perach is to help weak students understand and review the simple meaning of a text. For example, the Perach workbook on Shemot 3:11-12 helps the child to understand the simple meaning of Moshe’s questions regarding his ability to speak to Pharoah and to take the Children of Israel out of Egypt.
See https://www.lookstein.org/heterogeneous/Perach.htm

Bayit – The Bayit level is geared toward the middle level of the class. The goal of Bayit is to help students understand and analyze a text, and to begin to develop skills for the study of commentaries. For example, the Bayit workbook on Shemot 3:11-12 introduces Rashi’s interpretation that Moshe’s questions refer both to his own ability to speak to Pharoah and to the merit of the Children of Israel to be redeemed. The workbook accompanies the student through an understanding of Rashi’s commentary.
See https://www.lookstein.org/heterogeneous/Bayit.htm

Pa’amon – The Pa’amon level is geared toward the upper level of the class. The goal of Pa’amon is to develop an independent ability in students to analyze both text and commentaries. For example, the Pa’amon workbook on Shemot 3:11-12 introduces Rashi’s commentary, gives the students a table with which to compare Rashi’s commentary to the literal meaning, and asks the students to deduce the implications of God’s answer to Moshe’s second question.
See https://www.lookstein.org/heterogeneous/Pa’amon.htm

The Barkai Method
Dan Be’eri

The Barkai system was developed according to the foundational principles expressed in the teachings of Rav Kook and the great Sages of Israel (Maimonides, the Maharal of Prague, the Vilna Gaon), coupled with modern educational practice. It was pioneered fifteen years ago in the Hebron Talmud Torah in Kiryat Arba, and replicated since in Gush Etzion, Binyamin, Shomron, and Jerusalem. In addition, it has been adapted for use in the Torah curriculum of a number of religious government-run schools around the country, and there are a growing number of schools who are requesting the Barkai curriculum. (A Barkai school recently opened in the New York area – ed.)

The Barkai program is founded on a number of educational and theological principles:

  1. Torah is relevant to every facet of life, including all aspects of modern life, and needs to be integrated into general studies, which are viewed as an extension of Torah studies. We believe, as during the Golden Age of Spain, that all knowledge – sacred and profane – is linked, and that the teacher must be a model for this integrated approach to knowledge.
  2. The Barkai student is a thinker who is sensible, sensitive, and trained to analyze the intricate richness of Biblical and Talmudic texts through the sophisticated dialectics of our People. This implies developing in students an open-minded attitude that includes contemporary approaches from the world of general education. Intelligence, both scientific and humanistic, needs to be constructed methodically from general evidence and the acquisition of foundation principles. Critical thinking involves expanding one’s knowledge base, engaging curiosity, stimulating creativity, exploring a variety of media, constructing and testing theories, analyzing texts, reading, travelling, experimenting, writing, and expressing oneself in the plastic arts – all this combined with an appreciation for the natural world and human contributions.
  3. While thinking is the process of relating facts to facts, facts to thoughts, thoughts to thoughts, sound thinking presupposes mastery of relevant facts and sources. The mastery of large amounts of information is critical, particularly in the early years.
  4. The Jewish personality should be built on a foundation of faith and ethics emanating from the careful study of source texts, the experiential development of the child and an engagement with the world. Part of every student’s ethics must be a concern for the general society in which he/she lives and a preparedness to share the responsibilities of that society. In Israel, this includes a commitment to national and military service, alongside an appreciation for the historical uniqueness and theological significance of the modern Jewish State.
  5. The school, in its interaction with students and parents, should be a model of respect. Students should be given respect and addressed maturely, both intellectually and emotionally. Concomitantly, students should respect teachers and the learning process. Learning is a privilege that requires personal sacrifice on the part of the student and sensitivity towards the concepts being taught and the individuals teaching them.
  6. It is essential to include parents in the educational process, particularly in the case of younger students. Parents should share the school’s vision regarding learning and become active partners in their child’s education. The school reach out to the parents to help facilitate this partnership.

The Barkai method is based on a Mishna in Pirkei Avot, which is consonant with cognitive developmental theories of the twentieth century. The entire Hebrew Bible is taught by age 10, including content knowledge, grammatical principles, and a broad conceptual vision which encompasses the spiritual, historical, cultural and geographical perspectives of each book. The entire Mishnah is then studied by age 15, with a focus on a precise understanding of each case, law and reasoning behind it, on the recognition of the Sages and their world, the Midrashic literature and Biblical exegesis. The study of the Talmud is built on the foundation of Mishnah-fluency and fluency in the other sources of the Oral and Written Law, and focuses on the study and analysis of perspectives, laws, opinions and methods. Issues of faith are explored through the study of Torah Aggadah, Jewish thought and ethical literature.

Covering such a vast body of knowledge requires a significant amount of rote learning, which is facilitated in Bible study through the use of te’amim and chanting in the Mishnah and Talmud. Rote memorization expresses love and fidelity to the Torah, and brings students together in an educational experience filled with love and fervor, which remains with them throughout their lives. This approach presents particular challenges, as it is very rarely used in other spheres of contemporary society.

The Barkai method takes great pains to maintain a strict separation between the study of the Written and Oral Torah. Although traditional Bible study often introduces Midrash and/or Rashi at an early age, the Barkai method departs from this model for it contends that such an approach clouds the mind of the child, presenting him with a fantastical and imaginary world as though such a world existed in reality, thereby inculcating in him an immature and limited view of both the Bible and the teachings of the Sages. While the Barkai method introduces the study of Midrash and Aggadah as an independent discipline (connected with the study of Mishnah), it insists on a clear separation between these texts and the literal study of the Biblical text.

In the first years of study, it is particularly important to orient the child towards clear thinking, and to a deep understanding of the literal meaning of each text. The peshat is discovered through an engagement with the text’s language by studying grammar, syntax, meanings of words, contexts, and the natural and social setting of each subject. These are the very skills required to study the Bible upon which much effort will be expended in later years. The study of the Bible, in its literal sense, is a vital Torah value and an important educational value. It encourages clear thinking, love of the truth, intellectual humility and the ability to analyze texts.

The analysis of texts should be carried out in a systematic and gradual manner. At the early stage, it is important not to overwhelm the child with exegetical problems, but to provide him with the tools needed to understand the Bible. As the student progresses, his growing intelligence will permit him to use his own powers to deal with difficult passages and use the commentaries to resolve problems.

This approach is emblematic of the Barkai system, in which the natural strengths of students are capitalized upon at every stage of their development. The students will then emerge as knowledgeable, thinking, committed, integrated members of the Jewish people.

Teaching Tanakh in a pluralistic Jewish high school
Susan Tanchel

What is involved in teaching Tanakh in a pluralistic Jewish high school? What should students know, what texts should they study, what issues should they discuss? What is important given our school’s mission and the realities of the setting? These are some of the questions I wondered about before and since the opening of Gann Academy – the new Jewish High School of Greater Boston. The interplay between content, teachers, and context was in my mind, as well as the following goals of the program:

  • Ensure students gain knowledge of the basic narrative flow of the master story of the Jews, its central themes and ideas, and the evolution in practices from the time of the Bible to today.
  • Teach students skills that will enable them to become fluent readers and independent interpreters of biblical texts.
  • Make biblical study intellectually compelling.
  • Expose students to the works of selected medieval Jewish interpreters and encourage students to consider themselves as the latest link in the ongoing chain of Jewish interpretation.
  • Provide students with opportunities to confront issues of sacredness, truth, and authorship of the Tanakh through exposure to modern critical approaches, and to grapple with the meanings of these texts in their lives.
  • Imbue in students a love for Tanakh and its interpretation and a desire to keep exploring these texts.

We determined a scope and sequence of content, skills, and methodologies based on these goals and the idea that Tanakh is as serious a subject as Math or History and students should thus be as challenged in Tanakh as they are in secular subjects.

We divided the year into three unequal parts: Torah (the largest), Nevi’im and Ketuvim (the two shorter sections), reflecting the relative role (and importance) of each section in Jewish tradition. The order of teaching the Books was guided by many factors including themes (for example, the themes of leadership and authority in Bemidbar work well in 9th grade), connections between books (Shmot should precede Devarim), historical contexts (for the period of the Babylonian exile Yirmiyahu and Yehezkel are studied consecutively), and which methods we considered appropriate for certain texts (an example of this was the decision to teach Bereshit in twelfth grade because of the complex theological issues the texts raise and because of the opportunity to teach parallels texts from Mesopotamia). I suggest specific chapters for teaching and leave teachers room to make their own choices.

Compelled by my goals and the realities of the setting, I created a program that emphasizes skills over content, and depth over breadth. Skills enable students to formulate their own interpretations and to keep doing so after specific content is forgotten and after they have left high school. The tension between depth versus breadth is managed by reading selected chapters in depth in Hebrew and the rest of the Torah in English for the purpose of gaining an overview of the narrative’s flow, ideas, themes, and main characters.

Students in 9th grade start by studying the biblical text without commentaries; they learn to develop their own analyses, support them, persuade others of their validity, and critically evaluate their classmates’ ideas. The main focus is on learning the fundamentals of biblical Hebrew grammar, as this is an essential building block for producing competent interpreters. A related focus is on learning literary skills; students thus learn to read texts closely. They learn that multiple interpretations are possible for any text and this strengthens the pluralistic mission of the school. Developing the ability to critically evaluate interpretations prepares students for the task of assessing the different methods and interpretations they will explore in the coming years. Becoming sensitive readers enables students to better appreciate the comments of Jewish exegetes.

In 10th and 11th grades, students are introduced to the works of Rashi, Rashbam, and Ibn Ezra. We chose these interpreters because of their importance to Jewish thought and because of the differences in their methodologies. It is impossible to cover every comment written by commentators. Instead, students learn about the parshan’s methodology through selected examples and are taught skills to understand their insights, which they can then apply to new contexts. Students implicitly learn that Jews have studied these texts for centuries and that this activity connects them with Jews across the world.

Along with reading selected biblical texts in 12th grade, students critically assess secondary articles representing modern critical perspectives and some contemporary traditional commentaries on the texts. They are also exposed to other ancient texts from the Near East and they evaluate the extent to which these texts shed light on the meaning of biblical texts. These experiences afford students opportunities to examine key theological issues. In this way, their final year of study prepares them for the mature engagement with the text which they will encounter in college courses and Jewish educational settings, and solidifies a life-long connection to Tanakh.

The Torah Aura Text Method
Joel Lurie Grishaver

Torah Aura Productions is a Jewish educational publishing company that specializes in providing students with access to primary Jewish sources. Our goal is to empower students to approach the text and to construct personal meaning from it. We try to equip them with a variety of exegetical tools, both classical and modern, that enable them to derive meaning from Biblical texts, both narrative and legal in nature. Our special relationship with Jewish texts is reflected in the fact that our materials develop directly from the sources, that is to say, the text itself is the central component of our educational materials. We have developed a particular method for shaping materials around the sources in order to enable students to process them independently. This methodology involves four steps.

Step One: Shaping the Text

Every text we use is shaped for a particular lesson. Shaping a Hebrew text involves inserting line breaks, highlighting particular words, etc. in order to provide an apparatus that enables students to decode the meaning of the text. In shaping a text for a lesson, we make the central issue in the text visually clear through the actual scanning of the material. We also prepare translations that are specially aligned to the purpose of the lesson. Here are some ideas. First the vocabulary must be adjusted to the grade level being taught, for example, our book Being Torah is a real study of the Torah that is keyed to 3rd and 4th graders. We want the textual problem to remain clear. If there is a word in the text whose meaning is unclear, we will leave it in Hebrew or transliterate it, then use commentaries to suggest meanings. We frequently use blank verse formats (with line breaks by phrase) and highlighted or bold passages etc., to make the text “sing.” Ideally, just by reading the text on their own, students will already: (a) see the problem in the text; (b) have a sense of the elements that will be used to arrive at solutions to the textual problems.

Step Two: Editing the Text

The next question is “how much of the text?” or perhaps, “how little of the text?” should be presented to the student. The goal here is to show the least amount of text as possible while still including all the elements that are needed to understand it. For example, if Rashi quotes a midrash that explains a biblical text by using a second verse from a parallel text, both texts should be included so that students can see the parallels and anticipate Rashi.

Step Three: Framing the Text

Framing a text is a method that enables students to consider some of the issues and concepts they will encounter in the text prior to tackling the actual biblical or rabbinic sources. This concept is more abstract and is best described through example. Behind every halakhic text is a case. Halakhic texts always answer the question, “What do we do in such and such a case?” As part of the framing process, we place the halakhic texts in a hypothetical court context. We start with a case and the reasoning behind it, we study the source, decode the text, and then work on a series of “application” texts that apply the same reasoning to real life contexts. We use a parallel method with aggadic texts. We examine differences in meaning, study a text, and then extract from it larger ideas. A similar approach is used in the study of Humash.

Step Four: Personalization

The final step in working with a text is personalization. This often involves allowing students to express their own solutions to a problem before studying the solutions of the commentators or of the text itself. Personalization also means allowing a student to evaluate the solution proposed by the text by applying it to a personal situation. Considering the question on a personal level enables the students to better understand the text, and to internalize its messages. We use the same method with narrative, halakhic, and aggadic sources. Enabling students to have a personal relationship with each text is an important part of the learning process.

Teaching texts is an art form. There is much that we can do to provide access and make texts “sing” in students’ hearts.

Tora Aura Samples

Shaping the Text – An example of this technique can be seen in the treatment of Jacob’s dream (Bereshit 28:10 and following) in Being Torah. The words “place” and “God” are highlighted throughout the text, including the sections before and after the dream. The lesson relates to the fact that the name of God appears 10 times in the brief section, and students are asked to derive meaning from this fact. They consider the question of whether the place is significant because God appears there, or because Jacob is open to perceiving God in this place? In the layout of the section, each of the promises that God makes to Jacob is highlighted and placed on separate lines. The lesson relates to the fact that there are 10 promises and the students are asked to identify them. A number of difficult words or phrases in the section are translated in simple form for young students. One such example is the phrase “ein zeh ki im beit elohim” which is simply translated as “this is the house of God.”
See www.lookstein.org/resource/grishaver_shape.htm

Editing the Text – In the case of Jacob’s dream, the entire section is included because it would be impossible to study key words and God’s promises without the complete text. In the subsequent story relating to Jacob’s struggle with the angel, however, the text is edited. The text presented to students begins with Bereshit 31:51-52, which relates to Jacob’s separation from Laban. The next two verses, 31:53-54, are omitted, and the student text continues with the separation from Laban at the beginning of Chapter 32 in the conclusion of Parashat Vayetze, followed by the story of Jacob’s preparations for his confrontation with Esav and his struggle with the angel at the beginning of Parashat Vayishlach (32:5 ff.). Why are the traditional chapter and parasha breaks in the Torah text disregarded here and some verses deleted ? The focus of the unit is on Jacob’s struggles. When his name is changed to Israel at the end of the section, the meaning of the new name is described as follows: “Because you struggled with God and with man and prevailed.” The unit is designed to combine Jacob’s struggle with man (Laban) and with God (the angel). The lesson also revolves around a key word – “to cross” – which appears frequently in the selected sections. The two verses that are omitted deal with Jacob’s vow and his sacrifice on his departure from Laban and do not contribute to the theme of the lesson or to the linguistic analysis.

Framing the Text – The study of mishna Baba Kamma 9:2 is preceded by a story about a tourist in Israel who borrows money from another tourist, and repays him after a large devaluation of the shekel. The borrower pays back the shekel amount, but the lender wants the dollar amount. After considering this real life situation, the students are better able to understand the Mishna. Similarly, the student workbook on the section about Jacob’s dream includes a Midrash in which the Rabbis discuss the significance of dreams. A discussion about dreams before studying the text helps students to decipher the significance of Jacob’s dream.

Personalizing the Text – A good example of this technique is applied in the sequel to Jacob’s dream. The text stresses the significance of the place where the dream occurred. At the beginning of the section, it is only referred to as a place. After Jacob wakes up from his dream, he realizes that “God is in this place,” and he is in awe. We realize that God is everywhere. If so, why did Jacob not recognize God’s presence before the dream? In order to make the question and resolution more understandable, students are asked to consider the following personal question: “While we know that God is supposed to be everywhere, it doesn’t always feel that way. What are some of the places where you have felt close to God?”