BETWEEN TRADITION AND MODERNITY: ON JUDAISM AND AN OLD-NEW PEDAGOGY
AUTHORSHIP INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY Amir Mashiach
The School of education, Ariel University. Israel. Head of teacher A.SHIFTS IN PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING training program. The public educational systems known to us at ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8803-2108 present in the western world evolved and E-mail: [email protected] became established in the wake of processes Nitza Davidovich that occurred in 18th-19th century Europe, and
The School of education, Ariel University, Israel. Head of The School of particularly the industrial revolution. This education. resulted in the gradual development of the ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7273-903X “factory model school”, aimed at allowing E-mail: [email protected] Received in: Approved in: parents to work in the factories and preparing 2021-06-20 2021-007-07 children for a similar future. The core of DOI: https://doi.org/10.24115/S2446-622020217Extra-D1116p.376-390 pedagogic thinking changed only recently, with what is called the new pedagogy. (WILDS & LOTTICH, 1970; NAIK, 1991, 14; SAPORTA, 2008, 74-77) In contrast to the factory model school, the school system in Jewish tradition was established as early as two millennia ago by a sage called Yehoshua ben Gamla:
For at first if a child had a parent, the parent taught him, and if they had no parent, they did not learn at all… They then made an ordinance that teachers of children should be appointed in Jerusalem… Then came Yehoshua ben Gamla and decreed that teachers of young children should be appointed in each country, and each town, and that children should enter school at the age of six or seven (Bavli, Bava Batra 21a).
The rabbinical educational system seems to have been based on an ancient tradition that has nothing to do with the new pedagogy. We claim, however, that many elements of the new pedagogy were already tried and proposed in Jewish tradition, in the pedagogy of the sages. This refers to the Jewish sages who lived in the land of Israel and Babylonia from the second century BC to the sixth century AD. This paper discusses the pedagogy of the sages and shows how they preceded their times, for instance on issues such as the teacher’s status, the teacher’s role, the role of the learner, centering on the student, teaching critical thinking, peer teaching, cooperative learning, admitting mistakes and intellectual integrity, equality, apprenticeship, personal attention, the academic climate, and even the “flipped classroom”. We do not wish to err on the side of anachronism. Obviously, all the technological aspects did not exist then; in addition, the new pedagogy is comprised of three categories: teaching, learning, and assessment. Alternately, the focus is on cognitive, emotional, and value-related elements. And these, as a whole, had no part in the sages’ pedagogical awareness. We shall inspect several modern approaches customary at present, with a view of the past: to independent learning One of the fundamental Jewish precepts is “and you shall explain to your son” (Exodus 13:8), i.e., conveying the traditions to one’s children and students. From time immemorial, knowledge has been passed from parents to children and from teachers to students, as instructed in this precept. The parent or teacher were the source of knowledge and of authority, and the children and students received from them, watching, listening, and experiencing. For example, the traditional-rabbinical approach ascribes great significance to looking at one’s teachers, as looking contributes to deeper learning. For instance: “Rabbi said: [The fact] that I am more incisive than my colleagues is [due to the fact] that I saw Rabbi Meir from behind. Had I seen him from the front, I would be [even more] incisive” (Bavli, Eruvin 13b). The source of this is the verse: “And your eyes shall see your teacher” (Isaiah 30:20). And therefore, “Rav Mesharshiyya said to his son: When you seek to enter and study before your
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 377 teacher… look to his mouth, as it is written: ‘And your eyes shall see your teacher’” (Bavli, Horayot 12a ). Hence, in order to see and to achieve improved learning the seating order must be strictly maintained, as the sages said (SHUKRUN, 1990) : “A Sanhedrin was [arranged] as half of a circular threshing floor, in order that [all the judges] will see one another” (Mishna, Sanhedrin 4:3). In recent decades, a significant change occurred in the pedagogic process. This happened mainly since the emergence of technology in life and in teaching. The parents and teachers have not remained the source of knowledge, rather this function has been assumed by the internet. In addition, psychological-sociological-educational outlooks have shifted. The center of gravity has changed. In the past, the teacher was at the center; in the new pedagogy, the student is at the center. In 2018, the OECD presented seven principles of modern learning (PANIAGUA & ISTANCE, 2018) : • Centrality of the learning process and encouraging involvement and awareness of learning strategies; • Ensuring the social and cooperative manner of learning; • Orientation to motivation and emotional involvement in the learning process; • Sensitivity to individual differences between the students; • High demands of each student, but without overburdening. There is need to be sensitive to each student and his abilities. This concept derives from the understanding that there are multiple types of intelligence, as well as different levels within each type; • Changing the assessment according to the main goals of the learning, with an emphasis on formative assessment; • Promoting horizontal links between learning activities, building connections between different disciplines, forming a learning plan that includes learning within the school and learning outside the school. The perception of pedagogical innovativeness has at its base several principles, with the main guiding principle being the student’s role as an active partner in the learning process (VOLANSKY, 2020). Moreover, cooperative learning emphasizes the responsibility of the learners. It takes place in a team-based environment that forms commitment and encourages responsibility towards struggling students. We will address this further below, when examining the issue of peer teaching within the pedagogy of the sages. A.2 Teaching literacy and digital literacy In the past it was customary to think that there is one objective truth, while at present the post- modern conception is one of multiple truths and a subjective truth (Ofir,1997); learning upgrades the student’s proficiency to consume knowledge wisely and create new knowledge. Therefore, teaching one to think is a significant part of the general curriculum; learning leads to the development of critical thinking, which addresses a world in which access to knowledge is democratic in essence. One example of this is Wikipedia, where “the wisdom of the masses” is fully manifested and anyone can express his knowledge and share it with everyone else. In the present era, in the context of teaching, the ability to screen and critique information, to separate the wheat from the chaff, is a necessary, central, and significant skill (Volansky, 2020). These principles led to a real transformation and essential change from the traditional-didactic pedagogy to the new pedagogy. For example (VIDISLAVSKY, 2017): • In the traditional pedagogy, students should be taught what to think and what not to think, while in the new pedagogy students should be taught how to think and not what to think; • In the traditional pedagogy, knowledge is passed on traditionally via speech, reading, and experiencing, while in the new pedagogy, knowledge is a process created in the student’s mind;
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 378 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
• In the traditional pedagogy, asking questions indicates a lack of understanding, while in the new pedagogy, asking questions indicates inquiry and critical thinking; • In the traditional pedagogy, quiet classrooms indicate learning, while in the new pedagogy, noisy classrooms indicate thinking and learning; In the traditional pedagogy, education can occur even without changing the student’s personality, while in the new pedagogy education cannot occur without changing the student’s personality (Paul, 1992). A.3 Learner-centered Indeed, “the educational pendulum moves, albeit irregularly, between the customary didactic instruction and child-centered education” (BEREITER & SCARDAMALIA, 1993), but the center of gravity has moved to centering on the child. The student is required to be an active part of the learning process and to be capable of relating to knowledge critically and creatively. If knowledge is so readily available but at the same time full of wrong information that exists on the web, it is necessary to know how to screen and critique. The learning process now focuses on structuring the student’s knowledge (BEREITER & SCARDAMALIA, 2003). B. INSTRUCTION A UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR OBLIGATION The significance of teaching needs no explanation. This is self-evident in all cultures. The Jewish sages, however, ascribed far-reaching meaning to teaching children specifically, unlike the category of adult studies. “He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet” (Mishna, Avot 4:20). This indicates not only a higher standard of learning. The sages were of the opinion that Torah study by children guarantees the existence of the Jewish people and the existence of the world. The sages were able to relate that before God gave His people the Torah he demanded ir guarantors forןgood guarantors”. Only when the Israelites said that the children are the“ receiving the Torah, did God consent:
At Sinai, when the Jews were ready to receive the Torah, God said… Bring some good guarantors that you will keep it properly, and I will give it to you. Jews: Our ancestors will be our guarantors… Our prophets… Our children are our guarantors. God: Now, that’s a guarantor! (Song of Songs Rabbah 1:4)
The sages also claimed that children’s studies maintain the world. And why is it not maintained by the study of adults? The sages responded that adults have sinned a little and children have yet to sin (Bavli, Shabbat 119b). Moreover, children’s study protects the people of Israel from grave decrees. This is based on the verse: “From the mouths of infants and sucklings You have founded strength on account of Your foes, to put an end to enemy and avenger” (Psalms 8:3). They also relate that when Haman the wicked sought to eliminate the Jewish people he erected a tree to hang Mordechai the Jew. “After Haman made the tree he went to Mordechai and found him sitting in the study hall with the children surrounding him wearing sackcloth, studying Torah… At that time, God took the letters that he signed with the decree… and ripped them up” (Esther Rabbah 9:4). Hence, children’s Torah learning also protects the very existence of the Jewish people and vanquishes their enemies. (MASHIACH, 2013-2014; MASHIACH, 2020) In summary: In the sages’ doctrine, teaching children exceeds mere imparting of knowledge. According to them, teaching children has existential and protective meaning for the very existence of the Jewish people and of the entire world. Therefore, providing an education is an obligation.
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 379
C. THEIR TEACHERS The attitude that the student is required to show the teacher is one of great respect, even more than that accorded a father. The reason is: “as his father brought him into this world, and his teacher, who taught him wisdom, brings him to life in the world-to-come” (MISHNA, BAVA METZIA, 2:11; RIVLIN, 1985, 95-107; SHINOVER, 1999, 213-225). The sages required the student to take an active part in his studies, to ask and challenge and not be shy. At the same time, they demanded that the teacher not be impatient and inflexible: “nor can a timid person learn, nor can an impatient person teach” (MISHNA, Avot 2:5).
C.1 Students who impart knowledge to their teachers and the principle of equality The relations between the teacher and the student generate mutual inspiration. The teacher teaches and advances the student, and the student enhances and hones the teacher’s mind through his questions. The highest point in this process is reached when the student imparts knowledge to his teacher. “Just as a small [piece of] wood can ignite a large piece, so too, minor Torah scholars can sharpen great [Torah scholars]” (Bavli, Taanit 7a). And the sages end this message with the statement: “And this is what Rabbi Hanina said: I have learned much from my teachers and even more from my friends, but from my students more than all of them” (Ibid). Hence, the learning process is reciprocal, both for the teacher and for the student – a statement that refers to the principle of equality in teaching. Another example of the principle of equality in teaching: “As [with] water, a great man is not ashamed to say to a small [man]: Give me some water, so [with] words of Torah, a great [man] is not ashamed to say to a small [man]: Teach me” (Song of Songs Rabbah 1:2:2c). An example of a student who imparts knowledge to his teacher is the criticism that is allowed towards the teacher himself. R. Yosef became ill and forgot what he had learned. When he recovered, he would often err. Abaye his student would correct him politely (Bavli, Nedarim 41a). And sometimes R. Yosef would respond to Abaye’s correction and say that he does not agree with him. Abaye would answer politely: “That is what you taught us”. The possibility of a student correcting the teacher and the teacher’s acceptance of the correction indicates the equality inherent in the teaching process. The reciprocal learning of teacher and student by asking questions and critical thinking is evident in the story of R. Yohanan and Resh Lakish. The former was the teacher and the latter the student. In time, Resh Lakish died. R. Yohanan the teacher was strongly affected by the death of his student. The sages sent R. Elazar ben Pedat to learn with him instead of Resh Lakish. However to every sentence R. Yohanan the teacher said the student, R. Elazar, would respond that he is right and back him up. R. Yohanan grew angry and said:
Are you [comparable] to Resh Lakish? Resh Lakish, when I would state a matter, he would raise twenty-four difficulties against me, and I would answer him with twenty-four answers, and the halakha by itself would become broadened. And you say: [There is a ruling which] is taught that supports your [opinion]. Do I not know that what I say is good?! (Bavli, Bava Metzia 84a)
R. Yohanan did not seek support, he wanted criticism, independent thinking, a challenge. The teacher experiences a learning process no less than the student and if the student does not pose difficulties and criticize then the teacher too is loses out. The principle of equality is also evident in the controversy between the House of Hillel and the House of Shamai, on the issue of accepting students to a school. “The House of Shamai says: A man should only teach one who is wise and modest and one who has fathers, and wealthy” (Minor Tractates, Avot deRabbi Nathan, Version 1, 83). Not every person is worthy of learning. They set conditions that relate to the student’s intellectual level, moral level, genealogy, and financial state. In contrast to this statement, those of the House of Hillel said, “He should teach any person”. Everyone should be accepted. Everyone is entitled to learn. Equality (BRANDES, 2019, 216- 237). As we know, the method of the House of Hillel was accepted as Jewish law. Equitable teaching between the teacher and student was also manifested in the manner of learning and teaching. Either they both sit on chairs or they both sit on the floor (Bavli, Megilla 21a). Eliminating social gaps is essential for equitable teaching (AUERBACH, 2008, 127).
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 380 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
Equitable teaching continues until reaching the stage when the student himself becomes a teacher. “A person whose teacher taught him the Torah: until such time as he finished teaching him, the teacher would teach and the student would repeat after him. Once he finished teaching him, his teacher says to him: You and I shall [both] speak” (Tanhuma, Ki Tisa, section 16). The student and the teacher together. Equality.
C.2 Apprenticeship and active learning Another principle learned from the rabbinical literature and related to the new pedagogy is apprenticeship. In the past, the apprentice would assist the professional and learn the profession for himself. In the modern era this idea exists in the academic world. A person who writes research studies is supervised by a more senior academic. In the new pedagogy, the teacher serves as the professional while the student is the apprentice. The principle of apprenticeship is manifested in rabbinical literature in the statement whereby “Service of Torah is greater than its study” (Bavli, Berakhot 7b). Serving the sages is more significant than studying Torah. The mere experience of being with the teacher, seeing him throughout the entire day, is more important than theoretical study. Active learning and the experience of learning are an essential component that shapes the student. Not only frontal- theoretical-textual learning, rather also experiential-equitable-practical learning. The statement whereby the latter is greater than the former emphasizes and enhances experiential learning and active practical learning.
D. In their pedagogic practice, the sages focused on the teacher himself and his attitude to the students (RIVLIN, 1985, 115-125; ASSAF, 2001, 23-43). The respect is not one-sided, i.e., the student’s duty to respect his teacher, rather two-sided, the teacher is obliged to respect his student as well. “Let the honor of your student be as dear to you as your own” (MISHNA, AVOT 4:12). We Shall Now See Several Examples In Rabbinical Literature Of Statements That Are consistent with the new pedagogy:
D.1 Integrity The teacher was the source of knowledge, and therefore his professional integrity bears primary importance. The teacher might fail in his teaching due to a lack of professionalism or knowledge, or unpleasantness stemming from deficient knowledge of the material and inability to answer the students’ questions. The sages saw fit to warn the teachers: “Be careful with your words” (Ibid., 1:10). The teacher bears the considerable responsibility of conveying the knowledge truthfully and honestly. And if he does not know, he should not be reticent about it. “Accustom your tongue to say: I do not know” (Bavli, Berakhot 4a). On the contrary, by admitting that he does not know he attests that the rest of his teaching is truthful and certified. His ethos will only grow. The greatest of the sages demonstrated this in practice. Integrity is more important than teaching, and if a mistake was made in the process of teaching they would have a man say to everyone out loud and in public that they were wrong. For instance: “When Rav Dimi ascended to Neharde’a, he sent to [the yeshiva students:] The statements I said to you, they are my mistake” (BAVLI, SHABBAT 83b), and also “Rava declared: The statements that I said to you are a mistake on my [part]” (Bavli, Bava Batra 127a; Bavli, Niddah 68a), and many more (Bavli, Eruvin 16b; Bavli, Hulin 56a). We should not make light of the readiness to admit a mistake. In the rabbinical period, the Hellenistic ethos was dominant. Aristotle claimed that dignity is a quality of the noble souled. The noble souled should not be modest or feel guilty. Aristotle saw these as unworthy attributes that befit the young or the mediocre (Aristotle, Nicomachean ethics, Book IV, chapters 3, 9). Mistakes do not suit the noble and the wise. Mistakes are committed by those who did not think properly to begin with. The wise do not err, because everything is done based on thought. Admitting a mistake means admitting imperfection. Not so the sages. Intellectual integrity is the foundation of teaching, certainly of equitable teaching. The teacher is not omnipotent and certainly not superhuman. He is a human being, and as such might err. Admitting a mistake is no less important than accurate teaching. Moreover, when the student
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 381 sees his teacher admitting a mistake this teaches modesty and integrity, exemplary values in rabbinical ethics.
D.2 Classroom climate The learner’s environment is a meaningful topic in most research studies, which tend to emphasize the social aspect of learning in the digital world specifically (DAVIDOVITCH & SOEN, 2010). Classroom climate or “academic ecology” is the site where learning occurs – the atmosphere in class. The atmosphere in class is a product of the interrelations between the physical components of the classroom and the interpersonal student-teacher relations (Smith, SMITH & DE LISI , 2010), or the intra-student relations (MOOS, 1979), or a combination of all these together (ANDERSON, 1970, 135-152). The different definitions generate a wide array of variables and portray the dynamic nature of the academic climate. This dynamic nature portrays the academic climate as a living organism. Hence, it may be treated as a biologist treats a lake - as an ecological system that is a world in its own: “The classroom is anchored in space and time and contains several autonomous components that maintain purposeful mutual relations with each other” (SMITH, SMITH & DE LISI , 2010, 7). The attempt to chart the academic climate led to a division into two dimensions: context and teaching. The context dimension encompasses the physical space, including the chairs, tables, interpersonal interactions, and other elements (SCHUBERT , 1986). The teaching dimension includes all the elements that affect the teacher and the student’s performance. Many studies have addressed the classroom climate and its psychological components (FRASER, 1982; FRASER, 1986; FRASER, 1991). These psychological components also include the academic climate, called “academic-social climate”. The academic-social climate has great value for teaching and learning processes in all educational settings. D.3 Atmosphere The sages saw the classroom climate as a significant element in students’ success. For this reason, the teacher must treat the students pleasantly. Otherwise, the teaching will not succeed and the teacher will be responsible. “If you see a student whose studies are difficult for him as iron, [this is] due to his teacher, who does not show him a friendly countenance.” (Bavli, Taanit 8a ) The teacher is blamed for the student’s failure, as he did not manage to create a warm study atmosphere in class. D.4 Humor One way of creating a positive classroom climate is by using humor. Age, social, and intellectual differences between the teacher and the student are detrimental to studying. It is necessary to “break the ice”, to erase these conscious differences and create a positive atmosphere in class. Humor is one way of doing this (ZIV, 1996, ZIV, 2001). The sages practiced this themselves. Before the Talmudic sage Raba would begin to teach, he would tell jokes. The students would laugh and the tension would dissipate. Then he would begin teaching (Bavli, Shabbat 30b). D.5 Classroom climate and the weather Classroom climate is not only a feeling. It also includes the general physical atmosphere in the place of study. In the current era we emphasize the good physical condition of the classroom, cleanliness, air conditioning, and so on. At that time, some of these things did not exist. But the sages did see fit to stress the physical circumstances of the place of study as part of the study atmosphere. For instance, R. Ami and R. Asi would teach in the winter in the sun and in the summer in the shade (Bavli, Ketubot 112b). All this in order to form an atmosphere with regard to the weather, as much as possible in those days, in order to make it easier to learn. It was clear to them that the classroom climate affects the quality of teaching and learning.
D.6 Self-speech In the traditional-didactic pedagogy, quiet classrooms indicate learning, while in the new pedagogy noisy classrooms indicate thinking and learning. The sages saw a noisy classroom as an indication of productive learning. This is evident from the sages’ requirement to self- verbalize one’s thoughts out loud. The sages relate the story of the wise woman Berurya who saw a student who was studying quietly. She kicked him and said: “Isn’t it written as follows: Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 382 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
‘Ordered in all things and secure’ (II Samuel 23:5), [which indicates that] if [the Torah] is ordered in your 248 limbs, it will be secure, and if not, it will not be secure?”. Also the Talmudic sage Shmuel said to his student Rav Yehuda: “Open your mouth and read, open your mouth and study, in order that [your studies] should endure in you and you should live a long life, as it is stated: ‘For they are life to those who find them, and health to all their flesh’ (Proverbs 4:22)”. And he interpreted the word “lemotzeihem” (to those who find them) as meaning “to those who express them, with [their] mouth”, i.e., self-verbalization out loud. When the studying is performed out loud the entire body is part of the study experience and then the studying is successful, and if not – it will fail. Indeed, the sages further attest that “Rabbi Eliezer had a student who would study quietly, after three years he forgot his studies” (Bavli, Eruvin 53b-54a).
E. EXAMINING THE STUDENTS DIALOGIC PEDAGOGY In the new pedagogy, dialogue has become central (NAVEH, 2020). Teachers, educators, researchers, and pedagogic instructors all use the term “dialogue” to stress a suitable alternative for traditional-routine learning that is based on review and revision of the teacher’s words by passive students. It is expected that dialogue between students will develop an active learning community that takes responsibility for the learning process; one that is inquisitive, based on challenging mutual relations between the teachers, the study material, and the students. Dialogic teaching and learning is expected to breach the pre-set technical pattern of learning and even to change the assessment standards. Dialogue may and is supposed to transform learning and teaching into a rewarding experience for both teachers and students. Dialogic teaching and learning are indeed a new topic of the new pedagogy, however the sages addressed it as early as two millennia ago. They required the students to participate actively in the learning process. And when necessary, they were able to stimulate the students, arouse them to ask questions and give answers, and examine whether they were indeed alert and understood the study material. When suitable, they were also able to compliment those who did well. For instance, according to Jewish law encountering a dead person causes impurity. The question is what is the law in the case of one who searches for graves before finding a grave. Can he eat in purity or is he considered impure.
R. Yohanan ben Zakay’s students asked him: Can an examiner eat? He said to them: He cannot eat. They said to him: You taught us that he can eat. He said to them: ‘You speak well. There was an event that my hands did and my eyes saw and I forgot it, all the more so what my ears heard.’ And it was not that he did not know this, but rather that he sought to stimulate the students (Tosefta, Ahalot 16:3).
So this entire conversation was only “to stimulate the students”, to see if they had listened and understood, a type of pedagogic exercise by the teacher to verify the students’ level of learning. In another incident R. Yehoshua gave his student an insufficient answer with the aim “to sharpen [the minds of] the students” (Bavli, Nazir 59b). His intention was to take the learning process up to the next level, i.e., not only repeating the material studied rather also carrying out independent syllogism. “R. Yehoshua knew that his answer was unworthy, and he only said so to sharpen [the minds of] the students, so that they would learn from this about themselves” (RASHI, on site). Some examples show that the teacher wished to arouse the students when these fell asleep in class. The teacher said surprising things that aroused the students, both from their sleep and to more thorough studying.
Rabbi Akiva was once sitting and lecturing, and the community [his students] was falling asleep. To arouse them, he said: How could Esther rule over one hundred and twenty seven provinces? (Scroll of Esther 1:1) And the answer is: Esther, as a descendant of Sarah who lived to one hundred and twenty seven (Genesis 23:1), deserves rule over one hundred and twenty seven provinces. (Genesis Rabbah 58:3)
Another example of the requirement for more thorough study is when the teacher was asked a question and instead of answering first asked to hear the students’ opinion. For instance, when one of the teachers was asked a question about the festival of Purim, why the threat to
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 383 destroy the Jewish people occurred to begin with. The religious-traditional conception links every tragedy to a sin. But what was the sin?
The students of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai asked him: For what were the enemies of the Jewish people in that generation deserving of annihilation? He said to them: Say yourselves. They said to him: It is because they partook of the feast of that wicked one [King Ahasuerus]. [Rabbi Shimon responded:] If so, those in Shushan should have been killed, those in the rest of the world should not have been killed. They [the students] said to him: You say. He said to them: It is because they prostrated before the idol. They [the students] said to him: Is there favoritism here? [so why were they saved?]. He [the rabbi] said to them: They did not do [so] only for appearance. So too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, did not [destroy them but] did [act angry] with them only for appearance. (Bavli, Megillah 12a)
The students tried to provide an answer to the question they themselves had asked, and the teacher challenged their answer. This dialogic process between the teacher and the students further accentuates the question and clarifies the answer, of both the teacher and the students. This dialogic pedagogy, where the teacher does not answer but rather urges his students to do so, situates the teacher as a facilitator and not necessarily as a teacher (Mekhilta, Beshalach, Masechta 2 parsha 5). The active learning is carried out by the students.
F. ENCOURAGING STUDENTS The modern approach ascribes much significance to the effect of positive reinforcements on children and students. Dweck showed that children who are complimented from a young age on their innate intelligence often focus on defending their “smart” image, motivating them to reach academic achievements. (DWECK, 2002; DWECK, 2007, 246-263, BLACKWELL, TRZESNIEWSKI & DWECK, 2007, 246-263). Encouraging students and positive reinforcement are also part of the sages’ pedagogic instruction, both of struggling students and of outstanding students. For instance: “An incident involving a student who was [reciting] hesitantly before Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. [Rabbi Yehuda] said to him: My son, open your mouth and let your words illuminate.” (Bavli, Berakhot 22a ) The student was having difficulties, and the teacher encouraged him and asked that his words provide illumination. Encouragement is also a method utilized with outstanding students: “When matters were said before Rabbi Yosei, he recited this verse about him (Proverbs 24:26): ‘He kisses the lips that give the right answer’" (Bavli, Gittin 9a). Other statements used to compliment good answers are "You spoke well” (Bavli, Yevamot 122b ) “May your strength be true”, or just “Well done” (Bavli, Berakhot 42b).
G. INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTION One of the innovations proposed by the new pedagogy is individualized instruction. Individual attention is a pedagogic-educational conception centering on the individual and constituting part of a wider social-philosophical outlook that emphasizes the individual and his unique status. The individual’s uniqueness has many dimensions that are manifested in educational practice (AZULAY and VARDI, 2015). The sages managed to identify that each child has unique abilities, each student is an individual.
There are four types of disciples: Quick to comprehend, and quick to forget: his gain disappears in his loss; Slow to comprehend, and slow to forget: his loss disappears in his gain; Quick to comprehend, and slow to forget: he is a wise man; Slow to comprehend, and quick to forget, this is an evil portion. ( Mishna, Avot 5:12)
This is not a general statement but rather one that bears pedagogic meaning for individualized learning. Some students struggle and some have a high level of intelligence. The teacher must reach an understanding of each student and adapt his teaching to each and every one. And a student who is struggling should receive more attention on the individual level. An example of individualized teaching is that of R. Perida and the many hours he put into teaching a struggling
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 384 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy student, who understood everything only after it was taught 400 times. For his individualized teaching and endless patience, he received a reward from heaven (TAUBENBLAT, 2011).
Rabbi Perida had a certain student whom he would teach four hundred times, and [only then would he] learn. One day they requested [Rabbi Perida’s presence] for a mitzva matter. [Rabbi Perida] taught [his student four hundred times] but [this time the student] did not [successfully] learn. [Rabbi Perida] said to him: What is different now [that you are unable to grasp the lesson?] He said to him: From the time that they said to the Master [that] there is a mitzva matter [for which he is needed,] my mind was distracted and every moment I said: Now the Master will get up, now the Master will get up. [Rabbi Perida] said to him: Pay attention and I will teach you. He taught him again an additional four hundred times. A Divine Voice emerged and said to him: [Is it] preferable to you that four hundred years be added [to your life,] or that you and your generation merit the World-to-Come? [Rabbi Perida] said: that I and my generation merit the World-to-Come. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Give him both. (Bavli, Eruvin 54b)
This is also R. Akiva’s pedagogic method versus R. Eliezer. “Rabbi Eliezer said: A man must teach his student four times”. And if he does not understand, the teacher can continue. While “Rabbi Akiva says: From where [do we derive] that a person is obligated to teach his student until he learns? As it is stated: ‘and teach it to the children of Israel. And from where [do we derive that one must teach his students] until [the material] is organized in their mouths? As it is stated: ‘Put it in their mouths’.” (Ibid ) One must teach the student until he understands. Individualized teaching and a demand for patience, even with struggling students.
H. PEER TEACHING Unlike self-study or frontal teaching, one of the innovations of the new pedagogy is peer teaching (RICH, 1996). This is perceived in the modern approach as a model for meaningful learning, part of the development of the teaching setting and the study space (VOLANSKY, 2020). The students learn and teach themselves independently. Peer teaching has several manifestations in the sages’ pedagogy. Let’s begin with the hevruta method H.1 Hevruta “Hevruta” is an Aramaic term that means friendship. The studying takes place between two students, friends. They read the text and discuss its meaning, without a teacher. There are many statements in rabbinical literature in praise of this method and against self-study:
Just as these iron implements, one sharpens the other, so too, Torah scholars sharpen one another in halakha… What are matters of Torah compared to fire, as it is stated: ‘Is not My word like fire, says the Lord’? To tell you: Just as fire does not ignite a lone [stick of wood], so too, matters of Torah are not retained [by] a lone [scholar]… [a] sword upon the enemies of Torah scholars, who sit alone and study Torah. And not only that, but grow foolish. (Bavli, Taanit 7a)
And in another place they said: “A knife will only become sharpened at the side of another. So too, a Torah scholar can only become sharpened by a friend” (Genesis Rabbah, siman 69). The student pairs, the hevrutot, are usually on the same study level and intellectual level, however sometimes one is stronger and the other weaker, intentionally. “He who reads, [let him] read; whoever does not read, let him be a companion to his friends.” (Bavli, Bava Batra 21a) Peer teaching in the hevruta method is a win-win situation: the weak student will learn how to read and study and the strong student will benefit too, as by teaching the weak he will acquire a better grasp of the material. The questions of the weak student will help him and force him to study more thoroughly. Everyone benefits. Note that the teacher is not mentioned at all. The teaching is carried out by the students themselves, be they strong or weak. Peer teaching. In the new era there are websites that provide hevruta methods for studying online. There is an option of studying with a hevruta from any place in the world, via Zoom, Skype, and other similar platforms. Dialogic study – a new-old method (BIRAN, 2005).
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 385
H.2 The jigsaw method Peer teaching encompasses another study method as well, one called the jigsaw method. In this method the class is divided into groups, where each group studies a different topic than the others. After they have all studied, they teach the other groups what they themselves learned, and they also learn from the other groups. In this way, everyone teaches and learns from everyone. Peer teaching. The first to use peer teaching in the jigsaw method was R. Hiya. The Talmud relates that during an argument with R. Hanina on what would happen if the Torah were to be forgotten, R. Hiya claimed that thanks to a study method he had developed, meaning the jigsaw method, the Torah would never be forgotten:
Rabbi Hiyya said to Rabbi Hanina: [Do you think] you can debate with me? As I am acting [to ensure that] the Torah will not be forgotten by the Jewish people. What do I do? I… go to a city and teach five children the five books, and I teach six children the six orders [of the Mishna], and I say to them: Until I return and come [here], read each other and teach each other. [This is how] I act [to ensure that] the Torah will not be forgotten by the Jewish people. (Bavli, Bava Metzia 85b)
Peer teaching in the jigsaw method.
I. FLIPPED CLASSROOM A traditional teaching method utilized in most schools is when the teacher stands in the classroom and teaches frontally. Sometimes the studying continues after school hours, for instance through homework. In the new pedagogy there is a method called “flipped classroom” (HERREID & SCHILLER, 2013, 62-66). In the “flipped classroom” method, students are required to learn the study material on their own before coming to class. In the classroom itself the lesson is utilized for exercising, implementing, and deeper study of the material learned at home. The role of the teacher is not to teach but rather to guide the students and help them with material they did not understand. The “flipped classroom”, i.e., preparing in advance for the encounter with the teacher, can be found as early as rabbinical literature. The student learns the material and prepares before meeting the teacher, where the frontal encounter with the teacher is intended to further deepen the study and inquiry based on the preparation. The Gemara tells of several sages who did this: Resh Lakish would review his studies forty times, corresponding to [the] forty days in which the Torah was given [to Moses at Sinai], and [only afterward would he] go before Rabbi Yohanan [to study from him]. Rav Adda bar Ahava [would] review his learning twenty-four times, corresponding to [the] Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and [only afterward] go before Rava [to study]. (Bavli, Taanit 8a)
Each sage and the number of times he studied the material before going before the teacher to learn, based on the material studied. By telling the story of these sages a pedagogic recommendation is offered. A flipped classroom.
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION In order to emphasize the innovation encompassed by the sages’ pedagogy, particularly in light of the fact that it was devised approximately 2,000 years ago, we shall view a method of learning and teaching in medieval Christian Europe – that of scholastics. Scholastics is a technique of teaching and learning created in the 11th century by Christian scholars and theologians in Europe. Scholastics had a significant influence on education in Europe, and until the Renaissance it was the primary educational method. Scholastic pedagogy focused on reviewing texts, particularly those written in ancient Greece and Rome, in the original languages, Greek and Latin. The focus was on Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, and Roman poets, particularly Cicero, Seneca, and Virgil; teaching was based on coercion and preaching – introducing ideas in the students’ minds through the authority of the priest who taught them; the focus was on learning the words rather Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 386 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy than understanding their meaning. In time, this manner of teaching was called “dead letter” teaching, with the symbolic receiving preference over the actual, theory over practice. There was not much connection between the studies and the students’ world (SCHOEDINGER, 1996). It was for good reason that scholastics became the target of critics in the modern period, beginning with Michel de Montaigne and on (MONTAIGNE, 1580, 1,25). Interestingly, although the sages greatly appreciated learning and teaching, their teachings do not contain a tractate on education. In this article we showed that their statements on education, teaching, and learning transcend time and space, an educational classic that has withstood the test of time. Times change but the human soul remains constant. The sages understood this well, and managed to adapt their pedagogical method both to their own times and to the present. History repeats itself. It appears that pedagogy does too… “Pedagogy” in Greek means leading a child. This is the science of ways of teaching and learning, a technique for conveying information. Unlike education, pedagogy does not aim to affect behavioral patterns; the focus is on conveying knowledge. The Jewish sages were the first to deal with this science at length and they set clear rules of didactics in the declared expectation that this would have an impact on the student’s personality. When discussing rabbinical pedagogy, the point of departure must be understood, and this is that the source of instruction in their teachings is Divine. God gave the Torah and with it the obligation to teach and learn it. Hence, learning is what upholds the world, and without learning the world would be destroyed. In addition, learning is what protects the Jewish people from calamity, a type of meta-physical “iron dome” that protects and defends from illness, destruction, and loss of identity. Indeed, the sages ascribe to pedagogy value and significance that do not exist in any other culture. In rabbinical literature teaching is a duty and a religious obligation, not a prerogative. It originates from the command: “You shall love the Lord… Impress them upon your children,” (Deuteronomy 6:5-7) and is inspired by the proximity between the command to love God and the obligation to teach His Torah, “Upon your children – these are your students” (Sifri, ibid). The status of the teacher derives from this duty/religious obligation. If the student is a son, the teacher is a father. The attitude towards the teacher is one of respect and fear, as he is responsible for transferring the traditions, the link that connects past, present, and future. The teacher’s role has meaning for the world-to-come as well, more than that of the father. “His father brought him into this world, and his teacher who taught him wisdom shall bring him to life in the world-to-come” (RIVLIN, 1985, 95-107; SHINOVER, 1999, 213-225). Indeed, teaching and the teacher’s status may arouse criticism. Is this not “brainwashing”, indoctrination, as in scholastics? Is there room for independent or critical thinking if the student faces the conveyor of tradition, the representative of the Divine Torah? This is certainly a concern. Smilansky raised this general problem (SMILANSKY, 1974). Do educators not engage in shaping students’ views as they would like them to be and not as the students would like to see themselves, while independently examining their way? In the religious school system the problem is even greater, as there is an uncompromising duty to obey the teacher’s way and to embrace tradition in its entirety. Independent thinking can be an obstacle and so is allegedly undesirable. In the article we became familiar with the pedagogic teachings of the sages, who not only did not call for blind obedience but rather on the contrary, called for and encouraged critical thinking and asking questions, as in the new pedagogy (AREND, 2000, 2, 81; ROSENAK, 2003, 11-29). It is desirable to become familiar with the sources and with the old traditions. Every social and cultural building is based on the foundations of past traditions. Indeed, naturally, what was true in the past is not necessarily suitable for the present. Pedagogy too changes, and it must be modular. Times change and pedagogy does too. Therefore, it is necessary to perform periodic inspections. The past does not always remain in the past. Sometimes, as evident from the article, the new is in fact old. Many principles from the new pedagogy were already customary centuries ago, in the pedagogic teachings of the sages. We often encounter a type of
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 387 instinctual urge to change the existing while completely eliminating the past. In the words of the Internationale: Of the past let us make a clean slate… The world is about to change its foundation. However, the article shows that also renewal, which has many positive elements, must occur while taking into account the old world. At times the “old” contains quite a lot that is “new”, and it can serve as a foundation for renewal. Pedagogic modularity demands this.
REFERENCES ANDERSON, G.J. “Effects of Classroom Social Climate on Individual Learning”, American Educational Research Journal 1970, 7, p. 135-152. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00028312007002135?journalCode= aera. Access: May 22, 2021.
AREND, M. Jewish education in an open Society. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University, 2000, Volume 2, 81.
ARISTOTLE. Nicomachean ethics - Bartlett, Robert C.; Collins, Susan D. Nicomachean Ethics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011.
ASSAF, S. A source-book for the history of Jewish education from the beginning of the Middle Ages to the period of the Haskalah, New York and Jerusalem: JTS, 2001, Volume 1, p. 23-43. [Hebrew].
AUERBACH, M. Jewish education in the time of the Mishna and Talmud. Jerusalem: Reuven Mass, 2008.
AZULAY, S.; VARDI, O. “Answer to a question – what is individual attention”, Eureka 2015, 29. Available at: https://www.matar.tau.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/newspaper29- doc03.pdf. Access: June 21, 2021.
BEREITER, C. & SCARDAMALIA, M. "Building knowledge", 2nd ed. Encyclopedia of Education. New York, 2003, p. 1373-1370.
BEREITER, C. & SCARDAMALIA, M. Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago, IL: Open Court, 1993, p. 199.
BIRAN, I. et al. “Teaching and learning in hevruta”, 2005. Available at: https://cms.education.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/5649125F-8DF1-432E-A08F- 45E76EA5961C/204149/NetivimHevruta.pdf. Access: June 21, 2021.
BLACKWELL, L.; TRZESNIEWSKI, K. & DWECK, C.S. "Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention", Child Development, 2007, 78, p. 246-263. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17328703/. Access: May 22, 2021.
BRANDES, Y. In his way. Alon Shvut: Herzog College, 2019, 216-237. [Hebrew]
DAVIDOVITCH, N. & SOEN, D. Supportive social-academic climate in online teaching as a key to perceived learning success. D. Chen and G. Kurtz (Eds.), IT, learning, and teaching. Or Yehuda: The College for Academic Studies. (Hebrew). 2010, p. 183–206. Available at: http://essays.quotidiana.org/montaigne/education_of_children/. Access: May 22, 2021.
DWECK, C.S. "The development of ability conceptions", In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.), The development of achievement motivation, New York: Academic Press, 2002.
DWECK, C.S. Mindset, New York: Random House, 2006. Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 388 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
FISKE, E. Smart Schools, Smart Kids, A Touchstone Book, 1991p. 14.
FRASER, B. J. & WALDBERG, H. J. (Eds.). Educational environments: evaluation, antecedents, consequences. London: Pergamon, 1991.
FRASER, B.J. “Development of short forms of several classroom environment scales”, Journal of Educational Measurement, 1982, 19, p. 221-227. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1434576?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents. Access: May 22, 2021.
FRASER, B.J. Classroom environment, London: Croom Helm, 1986; Fraser, B.J., “Twenty years of classroom climate work: Progress and prospect”. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1989, 21, p. 307-327. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0022027890210402. Access: May 22, 2021.
HERREID, C. F & ,.SCHILLER, N. A. "Case studies and the flipped classroom", Journal of College Science Teaching, 2013, 42(5), p. 62-66. Available at: https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/PKAL_regional/CRWG-SPEE-REF- 01.pdf. Access: May 22, 2021.
MASHIACH, A. The failure of the major revolts and its impact on jewish identity. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, vol. 19, issue 56 (Summer 2020), p. 96-109. Available at: http://jsri.ro/ojs/index.php/jsri/article/download/1254/848. Access: June, 20, 2021.
MASHIACH, A. The performative speech-act in jewish law interpersonal vs. human-divine speech. Hebrew Union College Annual 84-85 (2013-2014), p. 173-206.
MONTAIGNE, M.E. (). Essays, book 1, 1580chap. 25: "On the education of children". Available at: http://essays.quotidiana.org/montaigne/education_of_children/. Access: June 21, 2021.
MOOS, R. H. Evaluating educational environments, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1979.
Naik, J. P. “Relevance of education to development – especially in rural areas”, In: J. V. R. (ed.), Education and the new international order, New-Delhi: Concept Publishing Company, 1982.
NAVEH, E. “Dialogic teaching and learning: goals and obstructors”, 2020. Available at: http://www.levladaat.org/content/20 [Hebrew]. Access: May 25, 2021.
OFIR, A. “Nine principles of a post-modern attitude”, in Ilan Gur Zeev (Ed.), Education in the era of post-modern discourse, Jerusalem: Magnes, 1997, p. 148-160. [Hebrew]
PANIAGUA, A. & ISTANCE, D. Teachers and designers of learning environments: the importance of innovative pedagogies. Paris: Center for Educational Research and Innovation, OECD. Ch. 1:"The importance of innovating pedagogy: Overview and key messages", 2018, pp. 19-32, 77-84.
PAUL, R.W. “Teaching critical thinking in the strong sense: Getting behind worldviews", in R. A. Talaska (ed.), Critical reasoning in contemporary culture, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992, p. 135-156.
RICH, Y. The heterogeneous classroom, Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University, 1996. [Hebrew]
RIVLIN, A. Equal to all of them – the pedagogy of the sages, Tel Aviv: Sifriat Poalim, 1985.
ROSENAK, M. On second thought: Tradition and modernity in Jewish contemporary education, Jerusalem: Magnes, 2003, p. 11-29. [Hebrew]
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
Amir Mashiach; Nitza Davidovich • 389
SAPORTA, O. “From a factory school to an educational school”, Hed Hachinuch 2008, 2, p. 74-77. [Hebrew]
SCHOEDINGER, A. B. (ed.). Readings in medieval philosophy, New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
SCHUBERT, W. H. Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.
SHINOVER, Z.Human dignity in Jewish sources, Tel Aviv: Mofet, 1999.
SHUKRUN, Y. “And your eyes shall see your teacher”, Moreshet Yaakov 4, 1990. Available at: https://www.herzog.ac.il/vtc/5778/0052965.pdf. Access: May 30, 2021.
SMILANSKY, Y. On education and on teaching values, Tel Aviv: Sifrut Min Hamoked, 1974. [Hebrew]
SMITH, J.K.; SMITH, L.F. & DE LISI, R. (). Natural classroom assessment: Designing seamless instruction and assessment, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc, 2001.
TAUBENBLAT, S.R. “The event of Rabbi Perida – Study of an agadeta”, Sha’anan 2011, 16, p. 101-112, Available at: https://www.shaanan.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/8.pdf. Access: May 30, 2021.
VIDISLAVSKY, M. “Innovative pedagogy and the desirable image of learners in the 21st century”, Kri’at Beynayim 2017, 18, p. 37-44. Available at: https://www.intechopen.com/books/new-pedagogical-challenges-in-the-21st-century- contributions-of-research-in-education/pedagogy-of-the-twenty-first-century-innovative- teaching-methods. Access: May 30, 2021.
VOLANSKY, A. “The third wave of reforms: New learning skills,” in: Students of yesterday, students of tomorrow. Tel Aviv: Schocken, 2020. Part I, pp. 146-218. [Hebrew]
WILDS, H. E. & LOTTICH, V. K. The foundation of modern education, Montana: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc. 1970.
ZIV, A. Personality and sense of humor. Tel Aviv: Papyrus, 1996.
ZIV, A. Psychological aspects of education. Tel Aviv: Yachdav, 2001. [Hebrew]
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220
• 390 Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
Between tradition and modernity: on judaism and an old-new pedagogy
Entre tradição e modernidade: sobre o judaísmo e uma antiga-recente pedagogia
Entre la tradición y la modernidad: sobre el judaísmo y una pedagogía viejo-nueva
Resumo Abstract Resumen Este artigo afirma que muitos This article claims that many Este artículo afirma que muchos elementos da nova pedagogia já elements of the new pedagogy elementos de la nueva pedagogía foram tentados e propostos na were already tried and proposed in ya fueron probados y propuestos tradição judaica, pelos sábios que Jewish tradition, by the sages who en la tradición judía, por los sabios viveram em Israel e na Babilônia dos lived in Israel and Babylonia from que vivieron en Israel y Babilonia séculos II a.C..-6. Este artigo discute 2nd BC-6th AD centuries. This desde los siglos 2 aC-6 dC. Este paper discusses the pedagogy of trabajo analiza la pedagogía de los a pedagogia dos sábios e mostra the sages and shows how they sabios y muestra cómo como eles precederam seus tempos, preceded their times, for instance precedieron a sus tiempos, por por exemplo, em questões como o on issues such as the teacher’s ejemplo en temas como el estado y status e o papel do professor, status and role, centering on the el papel del maestro, centrándose centrado no aluno, ensinando student, teaching critical thinking, en el estudiante, la enseñanza del pensamento crítico, ensino de pares, peer teaching, cooperative pensamiento crítico, la enseñanza aprendizagem cooperativa, learning, intellectual integrity, entre pares, el aprendizaje integridade intelectual, igualdade, equality, apprenticeship, personal cooperativo, la integridad aprendizagem, atenção pessoal, attention, the academic climate, intelectual, la igualdad, el clima acadêmico e até mesmo a "sala and even the “flipped classroom”. aprendizaje, la atención personal, de aula invertida". Este artigo deve This article shall inspect several el clima académico e incluso el inspecionar várias abordagens modern approaches customary at "aula invertida". Este artículo present, with a view of the examinará varios enfoques modernas habituais no momento, traditional past. modernos habituales en la com vista para o passado tradicional. actualidad, con una visión del pasado tradicional. Palavras-chave: Nova pedagogia. Keywords: New pedagogy. Palabras-clave: Nueva pedagogía. Pedagogia tradicional. Chazal Traditional pedagogy. Chazal Pedagogía tradicional. Chazal (sábios). Pensamento crítico. "Sala de (sages). Critical thinking. “Flipped (sabio). Pensamiento crítico. "Aula aula invertida". classroom”. invertida".
Laplage em Revista (International), vol.7, n. Extra D, 2021, p.376-390 ISSN: 2446-6220