(Question of the Lesson)
Discussion of the Month!

Year 5: Mid-Autumn Term 2003

Year 5

for their discussion on:

Bereishit 41; 7

"Then the seven thin ears [of grain] swallowed up the seven healthy and full ears; Paroh awoke and behold! - it had been a dream."

Our study of this pasuk took us several very exciting, busy, thoughtful, challenging and rewarding lessons!

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4     

Stage 1:  
First, we looked briefly at explanations of this pasuk, in particular the phrase "behold, it had been a dream,"  given by three great commentators, Rashi, Ramban and Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch.

These three explanations are explained succinctly as follows:
Rashi: Paroh realised that it was a significant, complete dream that required interpretation.
Ramban: The singular form ("chalom" means "a dream") indicated that he understood that the two dreams were really one.
Rabbi Sh. R. Hirsch: The expression implies that Paroh was surprised to realise that he had been dreaming.  The visions had seemed so vivid that he thought he had seen real events.  (Stone Edition of the Chumash, Artscroll Series: Mesorah Publ. Ltd. p. 223)

The pupils worked in pairs on two tasks:  

a) to try to understand each answer, and 
b) from each answer, to try to work out the question or difficulty the particular rabbi was addressing.  We did not discuss the results of this exercise at this point.*  

*(Teachers: See Discussion on Stage 1)

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4 

Stage 2:  
Then we put the three commentaries aside and asked:
What is the difficulty with this phrase?
The pupils were asked to suggest what might be a difficulty in the phrase "veHinei Chalom" - "behold, it was a dream."  It was pointed out that if the commentators had so much to say on this phrase there must be a difficulty of some kind.  A number of individual children shared their thoughts with the class:

1.  Ayalla asked:
"What does it mean?"
There was more depth to this question than at first meets the eye.  I had told a story to the class about my Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Chaim Brovender.  He had asked a bachur (young yeshiva student) to explain the meaning of a key phrase in the text of the Gemara we were learning.  The  bachur had proceeded to simply translate the phrase literally, whereupon Rabbi Brovender retorted, "I know what it means, but what does it mean!?"  Hence, the question of Ayalla, "What does it mean?"

2.  Elisheva Tova asked:
"Why does it say, 'Behold, it was a dream?' Surely, we know it was a dream!"

3.  Adam asked:
"It says, two pesukim earlier,
                                    
which means, 'he dreamt a second time' - so, from that, we know it was a dream!"

4.  Yisca asked:
"We know the translation, but what is the purpose of this phrase?  Why do we need it?"

5.   David Yehuda asked:

6.  David Ben Chaim Tzvi asked:
"Is this referring to the first dream, the second, or to both together as one?"

All of these contributions, including the names of the pupils who made them, were written on the board so that the class could get to see the full 'picture' of the discussion as it grew.

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4 

Stage 3:
Having collected this variety of suggested questions from the class we now revisited Rashi's perush (commentary) and, in pairs / small groups, tried to see whether one of our questions was in fact the question of Rashi.  I instructed the class that once each group had decided on their choice they should:
a) be able to explain their choice, and
b) test their view by first reading the question they had chosen, followed by Rashi's answer.  If Rashi's answer made sense after asking the selected question then the question may well have been Rashi's, or similar to or part of Rashi's question.

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4 

Stage 4:
Some children now shared with the class the outcome of their discussion, either jointly or individually held points of view: which question/s (from those of their classmates) had they thought best 'suited' Rashi's answer and why?
The same process was subsequently followed in relation to the other two commentaries (see Stage 1, above) - those of Ramban and Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch.
In the following table you can see the variety of responses that came out of our discussions.
(Teachers: See Discussion on Stage 4)

~ END ~

***

Year 5!

...well done indeed!

Discussion on Stage 1

This stage can be treated as optional.  I had originally only intended to introduce the three mefarshim (commentaries) directly, highlight and discuss the different approaches, then move on.  In the event, I decided that this was a valuable opportunity to develop the children's thinking skills in relation to the mechanics of textual analysis.  Furthermore, I felt that the pupils would come to appreciate and understand both the textual challenges and the answers of the mefarshim far better through personal application, inquiry and grappling than from being presented with the difficulties and solutions on a plate.  Therefore, rather than study the mefarshim at this stage, I first changed the focus and challenged the class to suggest what questions we might ask on the text.  This became Stage 2.  (Only later did we return to the mefarshim and ask what questions in particular they may each have had.)

Next time I may begin with Stage 2, searching for textual difficulties, without first introducing the study with comments of the mefarshim.  Indeed, Nechama Leibowitz z"l was of the view that no introduction should be provided prior to a textual study: let the students discover and build the learning for themselves, with only facilitation for their own discovery provided by the teacher:

"Nechama opposed introductions of this nature not only because they are frontal, but also because they may reduce opportunities for discovery..."
Peerless, p.13: "Prohibition" no. 3

Nevertheless, I wonder whether this principle might be justifiably relaxed regarding children of this age, who may not yet have the intellectual tools to fully 'discover' everything by themselves, without a little initial push in the right direction.  Perhaps Rabbi Peerless allows us this luxury when he adds,

"When it is valuable for students to get an overview of the entire section before delving into particulars, she favoured (my English spelling!) the use of alternative activities that would force the students to independently preview the section."  (Ibid.)

Ultimately, since we did not discuss the mefarshim at Stage 1, the pupils' contributions at Stage 2 were, apparently, largely unaffected by their brief viewing of the commentaries.  In future, if I decide to prepare the pupils at all, I would do so more purposefully, giving them 'hint questions' or suchlike rather than full presentations of the mefarshim; for example, "does anything in this phrase seem strange to you?" / "do any words in this pasuk appear to you to be unnecessary?" / "think about why the Torah (ie Hashem) would have considered it important to include this phrase," / "consider what these words tell us that we do not already know."

Reference
Rabbi Shmuel Peerless, (2004)  "To Study and to Teach, the Methodology of Nechama Leibowitz"  Jerusalem / New York: Urim Publications

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4 

Discussion on Stage 4

All of the results you see in the table were written on the whiteboard and also noted down by everyone in the class.  Not only was there a high level of participation, but also the pupils who played an active part were rewarded with the nachas of seeing their names 'up in lights' - not to mention now being on this website!

As the discussions progressed and became more and more complex many pupils found themselves with ideas they wanted to share with the class.  In order to avoid repeated breaks in the flow of the process I would ask pupils to write down ideas which occurred to them and raise their hand again at a more convenient juncture.  I would sometimes indicate that it was a good time to hear points that pupils had written down earlier.  It would not necessarily matter that their points related to earlier stages in the discussion, since they could be appended to our written notes in the appropriate place. 

Text          Stage 1          Stage 2          Stage 3          Stage 4 

***