Introduction
Jewish Cultural Literacy And Hebrew
Peoplehood, Israel The Holocaust And Values-Based Jewish Religious Education
     The Holocaust
     Israel
     The Holocaust and Israel
     The Solution
Text Study
     General Approaches
     Suggestions regarding text studies in Reconstructionist curricula
Building Upon Family Programming And Non-Classroom Education
Suggested Next Steps
     Examples
Incorporating Reconstructionist Curricular Materials
Appendices

Reconstructionist curriculum development should be conceived as an ongoing iterative values-based process involving the entire congregation and educational staff. Curriculum itself should be conceived as the entirety of learning and experiential activities that occur within a structured educational program (including classroom instruction, workshops and retreats, special programs, junior congregation, summer camp). To the extent that a Reconstructionist educational program is designed to affect religious practices that occur in the home, curriculum also includes those experiences and practices in the home that can be realistically affected by an educational program. (This is one reason why family-life educational programming should be incorporated into all Reconstructionist educational programs.) Curriculum includes how material is taught and the structured activities and experiences of the learners as much as subject matter content. Pedagogical methods are part of curriculum -- and matter as much as subject matter in terms of outcomes. This is especially true where some educational "outcomes" are defined in terms of experiences (e.g. "experiencing an immersion in a 24-hour shabbat" or "participating in the lighting of the shabbat candles").

Curriculum is a practical endeavor. Time and (human, fiscal, capital) resources are always limited. A good curricular plan does what is practicable now while maintaining a broader vision of "the ideal curriculum" -- and a plan for mobilizing the resources necessary for that ideal state. A good curricular process will continually re-vision and reassess that ideal end-state.

Curricula are implemented by people and are limited by the pedagogical skills of the staff. Bringing staff capabilities into line with curricular goals is a complex process. The most successful curricula are the ones in which there is staff development to bring human resources into line with curricular goals while simultaneously staff participation in curriculum development to modify curricular goals with staff interests, passions and capabilities. It is never good practice to try to implement curricula that require capabilities a staff does not have. It is always preferable to temporarily modify curricular goals with staff capabilities rather than insist that staff implement programs for which they lack training and skills.

The Board of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation and the Education Commission of the Reconstructionist movement have set a standard of six-weekly hours of educational programming and a minimal standard of at least four hours per week. These standards apply to grades Alef through Hay. These do not have to be classroom hours. Indeed, the Reconstructionist movement encourages congregations to incorporate intensive retreats, workshops, and similar innovative programs into their curricula. These standards have been set after evaluating many educational programs and concluding that six weekly hours (or a minimum of 180 actual educational program hours yearly -- excluding summer camp) are necessary to achieve the outcomes that almost every Reconstructionist congregation defines for itself as minimal and that it is absolutely impossible to achieve desirable outcomes in less than four hours per week (or a minimum of 120 actual educational program hours yearly -- excluding summer camp).

• The education program should average six hours per week for thirty weeks for grades Alef through Hay. (Nine monthly three-hour family workshops, for example, would add 27 hours toward the annual 180-hour "best practice".) Creative approaches used by other congregations include restructuring their Sunday schedules, having classes or educational programming on Shabbat, extending the school year, and increasing required participation in Shabbat services and intensive retreats or workshops.

The School Committee, families, and staff should develop a clear integrated vision of the entire seven-year educational program. The curriculum should include a plan of what will and will not be taught and experienced in each grade level. The curriculum should provide staff with clear guidelines regarding what should and should not be taught in each grade. The curriculum should define how the school will provide a solid elementary Jewish education over the multi-year schooling experience.

• Repetition of material or themes from year to year should be minimal. Any repetition should be purposeful and by design. (Concrete suggestions and tools for accomplishing this are provided as part of this guideline.)
• Deciding what will not be taught is as important as deciding what will be taught. The curriculum provides a blueprint of the complete educational experience and a guideline for achieving educational goals. To get to one’s destination one has to follow the map.
• Deciding what not to teach provides the discipline necessary to create a complete multi-year curriculum. I may want to travel the entire country, but if I allow myself to take detours every time there is something interesting to see or do on the road, I will never reach my destination. This may be okay when one has all the time to leisurely travel. It is not okay when one has an ultimate destination and a limited amount of time and money. Similarly, a decision to spend all of September and half of October in each grade studying about Rosh ha-Shannah, Yom Kippur and Sukkot is a decision not to do other things. Maybe I want to curtail the time spent on these holidays in some grades – or perhaps even not teach about these holidays in a particular grade because there are other things I want to accomplish.
• Deciding what not to teach also provides the guidelines necessary to change direction. I may decide that I don’t have enough time on my cross-country trip to visit both the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone. Once on the road, however, I discover that much of Yellowstone has been closed to tourists and so I decide to alter my trip and include the Grand Canyon. By having had an original plan, I am now able to make this decision with full knowledge of the implications of this change. By changing direction I am not only substituting the Grand Canyon for Yellowstone, but I am also deciding to not travel in the northwest. Similarly, I may have decided to teach Jewish peoplehood by focusing on the Jewish communities in Europe in grades Bet and Dalet and on the Jewish communities in Israel in Gimmel and Hay. However, the local federation has established an exchange program with the Jewish community in South Africa and will be providing resources to schools in conjunction with this program. I can take advantage of this – but only if I am willing to teach Jewish peoplehood by focusing on the South African community instead of the European communities in Bet and Dalet or instead of teaching about the Israeli Jewish communities in Gimmel and Hay. Having a blueprint and map helps me make these choices.
• Choice of texts and other materials should be consistent with these decisions. The School Committee and faculty should determine curriculum content -- not textbook publishers making commercial decisions.

The overall strength of the curriculum is very much related to the school’s general approach of treating Hebrew language skills as skills for Jewish cultural literacy. Hebrew language skills teaching is integrated with developing the ability to participate in congregational activities and Jewish rituals. In supplemantary Sunday or after-school Jewish schools, Hebrew language skills should be taught for Jewish cultural literacy. In most Jewish educational programs (including day schools), the primary purpose of teaching Hebrew language skills is to empower and enable the students to participate as fully as possible in the cultural life of the synagogue and the Jewish community.

It is inappropriate and impossible to teach Hebrew as a modern spoken language -- except in a program that devotes an absolute minimum of 180 instructional minutes spread over an absolute minimum of 3-days/week and which makes the acquisition of this skill its single top priority.

The school and congregation should begin a process of reviewing how Hebrew language skills for cultural literacy are taught. This review should include a review of how the teaching of Hebrew decoding skills is integrated with the teaching of other subjects (e.g. Tfilah and Torah). The first year of this process should involve a review of existing approaches and choices. The second year should involve consideration of the approach(es) the congregation wishes to consider given staff and resources available. (This will not be an easy process and will involve some hard choices. One possible – and legitimate(!) – choice is to retain a weak, but improved, Hebrew-language-skill curriculum.) The end goal is to have a consistent approach used in a disciplined manner in all grades.

The school and congregation should begin a process of reviewing how Hebrew language skills for cultural literacy are taught. This review should include a review of how the teaching of Hebrew decoding skills is integrated with the teaching of other subjects (e.g. Tfilah and Torah). The first year of this process should involve a review of existing approaches and choices. The second year should involve consideration of the approach(es) the congregation wishes to consider given staff and resources available. (This will not be an easy process and will involve some hard choices. One possible – and legitimate(!) – choice is to retain a weak, but improved, Hebrew-language-skill curriculum.) The end goal is to have a consistent approach used in a disciplined manner in all grades.

There is a disconnect between the stated objective of studying significant historical events in the life of the Jewish people and the content of most Reconstrucitonist curricula. Curricula tend to deal almost exclusively with the Biblical period, the Holocaust, and Israel. The vast period between the Biblical period and the Holocaust are almost entirely absent. American Jewish history is ignored. Jewish communities around the world, including other English speaking Jewish communities, are invisible. While History is very high among congregational priorities (as measured by the December 1999 survey), Israel and the Holocaust are low.

These imbalances characterize much of Jewish education in the United States. The root problem is the inability of the Jewish community to understand the Holocaust or its relationships to Israel. American Jewry has forged a false consensus that treats both of these as "sacred history" not open to critical reflection. American Jews feel an obligation to treat the Holocaust and Israel as sacred objects despite our growing recognition that this is the wrong approach.

The Reconstructionist values-based method points to a solution. Our starting point should be our values. We teach history because we value our diverse traditions and because we value peoplehood. Knowing our past helps us understand how our lives have been shaped by the lives of previous generations of Jews. Understanding our diverse past enables us to root ourselves in our traditions as we creatively attempt to deal with our present challenges. Understanding our diversity – in our past and present – is an important prerequisite for acting upon our value of peoplehood.

Elementary schools should teach Social Studies rather than History. History cannot truly be taught until Hay (or, possibly, the end of Dalet). Until that time, it is developmentally inappropriate to formally teach history. Until that age, students do not have the cognitive capacity to understand historical time or our temporal relationship with our past. However, it is entirely appropriate to teach our traditions and the value of peoplehood in the elementary grades and to lay the framework for learning Jewish history in later years.

The elementary social studies curriculum should therefore be recast and be informed by values and developmentally appropriate pedagogy. The goals of the curriculum and the congregational practice of providing adult education courses that facilitate the integration of parental learning with children’s’ education are consistent with the JRF’s "Jewish and Alive in America" adult education program. I strongly recommend that congregations Reconstructionist consider this program to complement a revised elementary school social studies curriculum.

It is particularly inappropriate to teach the Holocaust in elementary grades. If students do not become emotionally distraught while studying the Holocaust then the material has not been properly taught. The proper emotional reaction to the material is to become emotionally (and perhaps even physically) "sick to one’s stomach". If this reaction does not happen, the material has neither been properly taught nor understood. Our tradition does provide clear guidance regarding how to handle this subject in the early grades. We read in the haggadah: "To the child who does not even know how to ask a question one simply says ‘This is because of what happened to me’." To the elementary student who cannot possibly comprehend the Holocaust one simply teaches that something (horrible) happened to us. And then we have to remind ourselves that our children need to learn about our past so that they can find fulfillment as they build the Jewish future and that in the elementary grades we should be providing them with what is developmentally appropriate towards that end. They don’t have to know the details of the Holocaust. They do need a sense of what it means to be part of the Jewish people.

Israel is important to us because we value peoplehood. Israel and the Jewish community in Israel play central roles in contemporary Jewish life. The centrality of Israel had been an unrealized tenet of the Zionist movement. It is now an empirical reality. Our commitment to and our relationships with communities, organizations, and institutions in Israel come from the value we place upon Jewish peoplehood. Peoplehood – not the political state of Israel or the political ideology of Zionism or the policies of any Israeli government -- is the core value. The way we relate to Israel in our communal life and in our educational curricula should reflect this value. The way we teach about Israel and the values we inculcate should lay the foundation for bonds of Jewish identity that transcend any particular set of political concerns.

Teaching about Israel needs to be within the context of the congregation’s Jewish values. Ultimately, a connection to Israel that is value-based will be more enduring than one based on contemporary Jewish politics or political allegiances or upon non-values based cultural ties. Consideration should be given to teaching about the totality of contemporary Jewish communities and cultures. Israel will naturally be prominent in any such curriculum – particularly when Hebrew language skills are also part of the curriculum.

Much of what what our educational programs actually impart regarding values and bonds of peoplehood are outcomes of experiences rather than formal content. We do not have to formally teach about Israel to impart Jewish bonds with the Jewish communities in Israel. Israel is taught formally through content and non-formally through rituals and celebrations and community events in all grades. Even if the subject matter of Israel is formally eliminated from the specific content taught by teachers, Israel will retain a prominent place in the curriculum while allowing teachers to focus their energies on areas which require formal classroom instruction.

I therefore recommend that Israel be removed from the content of material to be covered in the earliest grades. Students will be exposed to Israel in a large variety of school, congregational and community events. Students are also exposed to Israel through learning Hebrew decoding skills. Classroom time learning about Israel in early grades contributes little to the overall multi-year educational experience and diverts scarce time that could be used more wisely.

Most Jewish curricula juxtapose the teaching of the Holocaust and the teaching about Israel. It therefore does a serious injustice to both topics. In contemporary Judaism, the tendency is to misteach both of these two centrally important twentieth century events by teaching them together. The juxtaposition of the two subject matters reinforces the mistaken mythology that Israel came about because of the Holocaust. Juxtaposing these two subjects implicitly denigrates the role of the Zionist social movement and of the revolutionary Zionist haluzim (pioneers) in transforming modern Jewish life. In some versions of this mythology, the Holocaust is treated as divine punishment and Israel is treated as redemption. This is bad history and bad theology – and results in the miseducation of our children.

The solution is to heed the results of the December 1999 survey or Reconstructionists. The low priority Reconstructionist congregants give to the Holocaust and to Israel probably reflect a gut-level understanding that there is little value in the "usual way" of treating this material. These two topics should be reevaluated and placed in their proper values-based context of Jewish Peoplehood.

I strongly recommend recasting the social studies curriculum so that it is values-based and pedagogically appropriate to the developmental stages of elementary and middle school age students.

• Discard the notion of teaching history (except perhaps in Hay).
• Replace the history curriculum with a values-based social studies curriculum.
• Eliminate the subject matter of Israel from the curriculum and replace it with "Peoplehood".
• Create a multi-year social studies curriculum that emphasizes ties to the diversity of Jews and Jewish traditions and creates the foundation for strong bonds to the contemporary Jewish community.

Text study should be aligned with the values and goals of the curriculum. A common mistake is to devote an inordinate amount of time to the study of the narrative portions of the Torah and to the medieval midrashim and commentaries of these narratives. Rabbinic and modern texts – which are often better guides to Jewish ethics and moral decision-making – are almost wholly absent in most Reconstructionist curricula.

Reconstructionist values and approaches do not clearly inform the curriculum regarding text study. A holy text is central to the curriculum yet there are no guidelines to teachers for how to treat the Torah as a holy text that is not a revealed text. What do Reconstructionists mean when we say the Torah is holy? If we do believe the Torah to be neither a divinely revealed text (in the sense of having been "dictated" or "written" by God and transmitted verbatim through Moses) nor authoritative, why is it virtually the only text presented in the curriculum? Students are exposed to narratives in which God is a major actor yet there are no clear guidelines regarding God-language or how to deal with a theology in the text that is at odds with Reconstructionist understandings and values.

Reconstructionist congregations should develop explicit guidelines for teaching about God and for teaching traditional texts. These guidelines should include explicit statements about acceptable and unacceptable theological beliefs and approaches to Torah. The purpose of explicit guidelines is not to enforce a form of congregational or Reconstructionist "orthodoxy" upon the faculty but rather assist the faculty in bridging the gap between the ideal and actual practice. I strongly recommend that the congregations provide faculty with curricular resource materials on these subjects published by the JRF and arrange in-service workshops for incorporating these materials into their curricula.

Curricula should clearly distinguish between the teaching of Torah and the teaching of central Jewish myths. Teaching Torah implies teaching text. This implies teaching about a text and its contents and why it is important in Jewish culture. It also means teaching an understanding of the actual text. Finally, it means developing the capacity to use the text in ceremonies and rituals. At an advanced level, it means developing the capacity to use the text to extract values and meaning. In the elementary grades only some of these goals are feasible. Decoding Hebrew is essential for developing the ability to participate fully in Torah services in the synagogue. In a program of less than six hours per week it is not advisable to try to accomplish any other goals of Torah text study in Hebrew.

Text study is quite distinct from teaching the stories within the narrative sections. If one uses any other text other than the Torah itself (whether in Hebrew or in translation) one is teaching the stories and myths – but not the text itself. There is value in transmitting the central myths of Jewish culture. I am not suggesting that this is an illegitimate goal. Transmission of our central myths is an important component of transmitting Jewish culture. Many of our values are contained within our central myths.

However, in developing a curriculum it is important to be clear about what wants to teach -- and why. It is also important to decide how much time should be devoted to each component of the curriculum because time spent in one area is time that is unavailable for achieving other goals. Teaching the stories about the patriarchs and matriarchs or about Moses and the Exodus should not be confused with developing an ability to use the Torah in services or the skills necessary to become a bar/t-mizwah.

I suggest that Reconstructionist curricula distinguish between teaching Torah and transmitting Jewish culture and values contained in our core myths. I also suggest that the teaching of core myths be expanded well beyond those contained in the Torah and even beyond those contained in the tana"kh. Stories about rabbis, women in medieval Jewish communities, students in the heders of Eastern Europe, haluzim in Palestine, and American Jewish immigrants active in twentieth century movements for social justice should be included in a curriculum that strives to transmit our shared myths and the values embedded within them.

I find it useful to ask the following questions when making decisions about teaching about the narratives found within the Torah: How important is it to learn and relearn these narratives each year at the exclusion of everything else that we cannot teach because of the time spent on these stories? How much repetition of these stories should come from participation in Shabbat and holiday services rather than from classroom time? (Should regular attendance at junior congregation services be a school requirement?)

• To the extent possible, use the same texts in class as are used in services. Use JRF materials, linked to Kol Haneshamah, for teaching tfilah.
• Do not use the weekly sidrah approach throughout all grades. This approach should probably not be used in more than one of the five core grades (aleph through hay corresponding to grades 3-8).
• Distinguish between text study and the transmission of core myths and the values embedded within them.
• Teach more prophets. Possibly combine this with more emphasis in services on the haftarot (when appropriate) than on the Torah portion.
• Teach more rabbinic and contemporary Jewish "core myths".

• Don’t worry about not teaching the entire Torah. (Nobody does this in a supplementary school anyway.)
• Consider investing in the technology necessary to provide access to Jewish texts and cultural products today and to train teachers to use this technology. Cultural literacy today includes being able to access Jewish texts and materials on CD and on-line in their interactive modes. (Examples: Jewish calendars; Bible and Talmud in English and Hebrew; Hebrew/English/Yiddish/Ladino software and wordprocessors; Hebrew font browsers; access to Jewish art, music and texts online; virtual Jewish communities; etc.) Within 2-3 years there should be a strategy and budget for using 21^st century technology in Jewish education. Otherwise the goal of facilitating participation in contemporary Jewish life will become increasingly unrealizable.

The strength of the curriculum is the integration of classroom and non-classroom components. I have attached two tools to this curriculum review. One is a matrix of examples of specific curricular goals to be accomplished in each year. Some goals are best achieved in the classroom. Others are best achieved by participation in shabbat services or at a family workshop or by family home celebrations. Filling out this matrix can help the School Committee build upon one of its chief strengths and to more efficiently leverage the relatively high level of integration of classroom and non-classroom components of the curriculum. The matrix is a tool for making decisions about what content should be covered, which skills mastered, and what kinds of experiences provided and simultaneously deciding when these things should happen, how much repetition and reinforcement be provided, and the best settings for these things to happen.

Example: Students will learn the place of Torah in Jewish life within the Alef program about the synagogue. This will be reinforced at synagogue services, when they learn about Simhat Torah, and when they prepare for their bar/t-mizwah. We expect strong reinforcement of this message when students are called up for group aliyot during their annual class shabbat services and on Simhat Torah and when they actually carry and dance with the Torah during the haqafot that are part of the Simhat Torah services. The Hebrew-for-cultural-literacy curriculum includes reading sections of the Torah in Hebrew, especially those sections such as the Shema and holiday descriptions, which are part of our services. This will happen in Gimmel, Dalet and Hay. Extensive study of the Torah will occur during the bar/t-mizwah year. In addition to learning their own portions, class time will be devoted to text study of each individual’s portion. Asking students to chant from the Torah each year on the anniversary of their weekly portion will reinforce this.

Example: Students will develop the ability to celebrate Shabbat. They will learn about Shabbat in both kindergarten and pre-alef, Alef and Hay. This will be reinforced in all grades through participation in family home rituals (lighting the candles, kiddush, and havdalah), by regularly attending shabbat services in the synagogue, and by preparing for their class shabbat service. Furthermore, a Family Shabbat Kit is distributed at the beginning of the school year to all families in the synagogue and school. In Alef students will learn the brakhot and rituals for lighting candles and reciting the mozi. Students will learn to recite the kiddush in Hay.

Using the tool provided could help congregations and faculty strengthen the curriculum and fully integrate the classroom and non-classroom components in a multi-year program that builds upon itself from year to year rather than unnecessarily repeating the same material because of lack of proper curricular planning.

The tool is also an aid to congregations in deciding which non-classroom activities should be required and which will be optional. Similarly, the tool will help parents and students make informed decisions about their voluntary participation in optional activities and programs.

Early drafts of curricula should contain:

• Creation of defined goals for the entire multi-year school program broken down by material to be taught and experiences to be provided to students and families year by year. This can be accomplished using the two tools provided.
• Breakdown of year-long goals into units which the teachers will fill with their own lesson plans
• Statement of preferred, acceptable and unacceptable teaching methods

Much of this material already exists in the form of teachers’ syllabi and lesson plans, and in the form of planned programs. Indeed, in one sense the teachers’ lessons plans comprise the "real curriculum". An immediate task would be to begin incorporating this material into a formal document that explicitly states the material being taught, experiences provided, and skills being developed. A benchmark timeline for the length of each unit would also be helpful, especially when the teacher in consultation with the principal needs to make adjustments. This part of curriculum development requires major input and participation of the faculty. Indeed, it would be entirely appropriate to ask the faculty to develop the first drafts.

The purpose of benchmark timelines is to provide a guide for the school director and faculty. Benchmark timelines should never become rigid rules for teachers. Timelines are indications of congregational values and therefore help teachers prioritize their plans and allocate time in their lesson plans.

Benchmark timelines aid faculty in making tradeoff decisions. In practice, timelines are frequently violated or altered by a variety of factors. A teacher is ill. Weather forces cancellation of classes. A unit took longer than planned. A decision was made to spend more time on a project than was originally planned. Knowing how these things affect the rest of the schedule allows the faculty to make the necessary adjustments.

Benchmark timelines aid faculty in maintaining a disciplined approach towards implementing the overall curriculum. A teacher may have learned about an exciting program they would like to bring to students. With a published curriculum and benchmark timelines, the teacher will be aware of the implications of instituting the innovative new program upon the curriculum. In some cases this will result in decisions to alter the curriculum and in some cases this will result in decisions to refrain from implementing an exciting idea because of what is best for the students’ overall education.

Simultaneously (over the summer) the School Committee and director should begin outlining the entire multi-year elementary religious school experience. Education is a process of achieving specific goals by providing training and a communal environment for personal growth. Programs with clear objectives provide the necessary support structure for teachers to create exciting learning environments. The curriculum is the totality of the content of the training and the activities of and interactions between the students and educators. Goals have to be translated into specific activities and experiences. The quality of these experiences is as much a part of the curriculum as is the content of material taught. A religious school curriculum should explicitly outline the learning experience as well as the intellectual content of the educational program. The clearer the goals, the more directed the process and the more guidance teachers have in developing their lesson plans. Each unit should ideally have explicit objectives. Some objectives will be stated in traditional educational jargon. Other objectives will describe student participation in specific activities or experiences (e.g. participation in leading a shabbat shaharit service, participating in a haqafah, holding a lulav and etrog on Sukkot, experiencing a "complete" shabbat of exclusively "shabbesdik" activities and a full cycle of shabbat rituals from lighting the candles through a seudah shlishit and havdalah). Yet other objectives will define the skills and knowledge base that students will master.

Finally, a curriculum should guide classroom teaching by delineating appropriate educational activities and environments. Are there preferred methods? Are there unacceptable methods and educational models? What characterizes the kind of educational environment that the congregation wishes to create for its learners? What kinds of student-teacher interactions should predominate and what kinds of interactions should be rare or totally non-existent? Again, we can assume that these questions have de facto answers, that there is a school culture. A next step should be to formally state the ideal pedagogies and educational environments. For Reconstructionist communities, configuring the ideal mix of activities and experiences is also an exercise in defining the points at which the community as a whole needs to support the school. This also helps parents understand the role of the home environment in their children’s Jewish education.

1. Unclear objective:
1. Teach about the fall holiday cycle
2. Undefined objective
1. Teach about the holiday cycle in a developmentally appropriate manner
3. Better statement of objective
1. In Alef:
1. Teach that Rosh ha-Shannah and Yom Kippur are opportunities to think about how we can be better people.
2. Provide students with the knowledge and skills to
1. Recite the brakhot (blessings) in Hebrew for apples and honey
2. Recite the she-hehayanu brakhah (blessing for special occasions)
3. Greet people with the traditional greeting of le-shanah tovah tikatev/i/u
4. Sing le-Shannah Tovah
5. Sing the chorus of Avinu Malkaynu
3. Facilitate the blessing and eating of apples and honey in each student’s home as well as at the synagogue services
4. Teach that Sukkot is a harvest festival in which we give thanks for the summer harvest and the rains that allow crops to grow
5. Provide students with the experiences of
1. Eating in the sukkah
2. Participating in a synagogue procession of lulavim and etrogim
3. Ushpizin (having a guest at a meal during Sukkot)
4. Participation in a children’s aliyah to the Torah on Simhat Torah
5. Participation in haqafot (processions with the Torah scrolls) for Simhat Torah
6. Teach students to recite to recite the brakhot (blessings) for sitting and eating in the sukkah
7. Teach the brakhot and ritual for shaking the lulav and etrog
8. Learn the songs that will be sung during the first three haqafot for Simhat Torah
4. Best Practice for defining objectives and curriculum
1. As above, but within the context of similar defined objectives for each grade level including what material and experiences will be repeated and which grade level and with statements regarding appropriate teaching methods. For grades in which material or experiences will be repeated, any additional enhancements or enrichments should also be clearly stated.

The JRF has developed a large set of curricular materials. Some materials discuss curricular issues or subject/content areas, some describe successful programs, and some are complete educational units. All are recommended to the Reconstructionist educator. The following list, however, itemizes some of the materials this educator considers directly relevant to most Reconstructionist curriculum.

All School Committee members and faculty should consider subscribing to EdTalk, the JRF on-line forum for discussion of educational issues.

substituting your own first and last name for FIRSTNAME and LASTNAME. For further information, go to http://www.jrf.org/disc-edtalk.html .

As a general guide to Reconstructionism, I recommend that all Reconstructionist congregations provide faculty members with two books –an introduction to Reconstructionism and a series of essays on the Reconstructionist approach to Jewish education:

The following publication is an excellent general resource and should be in every Reconstructionist school’s library and at every meeting where a Reconstructionist congregation’s school committee is discussing curriculum

An important project of the Reconstructionist Education Commission was securing funding for publishing a guide to integrating educational experiences for all age groups in a congregation into a coherent educational program. The following publication is the product of collaboration between the Reconstructionist movement and its Cooperating Schools Network, the Mandell L. Berman Jewish Heritage Center for Research and Evaluation and the Jewish Educational Services Network, and the Covenant Foundation and should be an important resource for every Reconstructionist congregation:

I strongly recommend using The Kol Haneshamah Mini-Siddur and the accompanying resource materials for all congregations that use the Kol Haneshamah siddurim. The text used in the classroom should be as similar as possible to the text used in synagogue services and the transition to the "adult" or synagogue version should be made as soon as possible. The JRF has published materials based upon the Kol Haneshamah Shabbat siddur. Use of the mini-siddur solves the problem of discrepancies between Kol Haneshamah and commercially published materials. Furthermore, the resource materials address issues of motivating students, developing positive attitudes toward tfilah, using God-language in the classroom, and providing parallel adult-education.

The following article contains actionable guidelines for beginning to systematically create a vocabulary list of Hebrew terms that students (and their parents) should know and use comfortably in any Jewish setting. It outlines an approach for beginning to create a Jewish cultural environment where Hebrew terms and phrases are used normally in everyday speech.

The following set of articles is useful for beginning a review of approaches to teaching Hebrew:

APPENDICES (If links to any of these appendices are missing, please contact the author)

JRF educational publications (copies of web pages from http://www.jrf.org/pub/listmain.html and http://www.jrf.org/pub/list-educators.html and http://www.jrf.org/pub/list-recon.html)

Using the Tools (Curric Matrices Guide.doc)

Two Tools for Curriculum Development