The third impediment obstructing the progress of the Talmud Torah is the employment of a non-authoritative and vague system of teaching Hebrew. It is a well-known fact that when someone wishes to express himself clearly, he uses a language which is understood by the person or party with whom he converses, and words which are so simple and understandable that the listener should be interested in whatever is being discussed. When one does not understand what is being told to him he loses interest in the conversation; no sooner is his interest lost, than every effort made to tell him anything is wasted. If this generalization be true among adults we must conclude that it is also true, even to a greater extent, among children.

Our neighbors who support the public schools understand the above-mentioned maxim. They, therefore, are very much concerned in selecting only the most 2simple and most interesting lessons for the beginner so that he can easily grasp the meaning and become interested in the subject. We would also like to carry out this maxim, but before we can do it we are confronted with a specific question which must be answered. The question is: "Which language is more familiar to the Jewish child, English or Yiddish [i. e., in which language should the Hebrew subject matter be translated, English or Hebrew]?"

Apparently the best way to answer this question would be to give a certain number of children in a locality a language test and determine the percentage of children who understand one language or the other. The language employed as a medium would then differ with the locality: Yiddish would be used in those areas where the children understand Yiddish, and English where it is better understood.

Various opinions are very often expressed by members of the board of education of the same Talmud Torah. Some believe that American children, because they attend the public schools, understand English better than Yiddish. Therefore, 3Hebrew should be taught with English as the explanatory tongue. Others oppose the use of English as the explanatory tongue. They say that by using this language system, the teacher will completely estrange the children from their parents, from their older relatives, and from the Jewish people who are scattered throughout the entire world. It is, therefore, a sacred obligation to teach in Yiddish only in the Talmud Torah, the school for religious training.

The Hebraists then appear on the scene saying: English is a gentile language; Yiddish is not our original language; only Hebrew was the language of our prophets, kings, and poets. Hebrew is our ancient mother tongue, and it should, therefore, be the language of instruction. We do not wish to delve into the above-mentioned proposition, and we shall completely omit our personal opinion as to who is right because that is not the purpose of this article. We merely wish to observe that our strength is being wasted and expended in numerous channels, in diversified debate on the difficulties confronting us in solving the problem of Hebrew instruction--not to mention [the time spent] discussing the general question of our educational philosophy. The public schools do not experience this [difficulty].

4

The West Side schools can serve as an example. There are three schools in that locality. Each has a different system of teaching the Hebrew subject matter. Two schools are conducting their classwork in English and one in Hebrew. Now what can be said about the others?

The fundamental principle of instruction deals with the arrangement of the studies. A systematic course of study is the most essential thing. If this is lacking, nothing can be accomplished. If each Talmud Torah inaugurates its own program it follows then that a child who is transferred from one Talmud Torah to another loses whatever knowledge he had previously acquired. The public school has practically one method, one system, and one program throughout the entire land. Whenever a child is transferred from one school to another school he takes along a transfer card which indicates the grade he is in, and he is immediately placed in his proper class.

The study course must be a graded one, and must conform with the degree of the child's development. When a child is taught to count, for example, you being by illustrating one object and then another object--then you explain to him that 5one and one are two. It would be impractical, even foolish, to teach a child larger numerals when he has no conception of smaller ones. Multiplication cannot be taught without a knowledge of addition.

I shall now leave the problem of elementary studies and discuss that of the study of the Pentateuch. The child translates, for example, the phrase Va-yomer (and he said), and he evidently understands the meaning of Va-yomer. Take away, however, the prefix Va (and) from Vayomer and he does not know what Yomar (he will say) [The word Yomar alone is in the future tense, but when the prefix Va is added the tense automatically becomes past and the Yomar becomes Yomer. The word Amar is the third person, masculine singular, basic conjugation form of the Hebrew word "said".] means. The word Amar is entirely foreign to him. I, therefore, ask a simple question: How can a child be taught the numeral three before knowing anything about one? Quite frequently I meet children who have studied three, or even all five, books of the Pentateuch but cannot translate correctly even one chapter. Thousands of dollars are wasted in this manner on Jewish studies annually. They yield small results because we 6are disunited--because anarchy prevails in our midst.

And what about composition? In every country in the world language is not taught without teaching the pupil how to write it. Composition is an important factor in helping the child to remember a word since he studies the separate letters of the word he is writing. In the Talmud Torahs composition was completely ignored, and that is the reason why the instructor did not succeed. We conduct classes in Bible, Talmud, and Rashi [commentary on the Pentateuch and most of the Talmud], but we ignore the main thing, writing. It is, therefore, not surprising that our synagogue leaders and many of our teachers who are capable of detecting grammatical errors in books and newspapers cannot write a letter without making mistakes. Since the founders of the Talmud Torahs were Jews who belonged to the older generation and who s studied at a time when writing was given but little attention because it was not considered essential, it is not surprising that children who study the Talmud haven't the least understanding of the language. They, therefore, forget everything upon leaving the Talmud Torah or Yeshivah. That is why the 7progress of the Talmud Torah has been so retarded.

Now let us deal with the contents of the course of study itself. Which parts of the Pentateuch should be taught to small children first when they begin to study the Pentateuch? Many teachers agree that several parts of the Pentateuch should not be taught to young children: namely, the story of Lot and his daughters, Joseph's experiences [with the wife of Potiphar], etc. The rabbis will then ask: "Why skip? We studied everything and it didn't harm us. Everything should be taught to the child from 'the beginning of Genesis to the end of Leviticus.'"

We now face still another question which is very important. If this question were properly answered the wrangling would cease. The question is: What is the Talmud Torah, a school where Hebrew should be taught as a language or a religious school where Jewish children should be taught the practices of the Jewish religion? The progressive element argues that Hebrew is a language like every other language. It should not be considered holy; it should not be embalmed and used only for prayers in the synagogues. Hebrew should be used 8daily; we should converse and write in Hebrew. In the Talmud Torah Hebrew should be taught as a language having no connection with religion. In the public school it is legally forbidden to teach religion; that is why the public schools are more successful.

The more conservative Jews argue, on the other hand, that the purpose of teaching children Hebrew is that they should understand the Bible and remain true Jews. A great deal of energy should not be expended on the Hebrew language proper. By not acknowledging the sacredness of Hebrew we tear out the essence and spirit of Jewish life and we shall quickly perish. They also state that religion is not taught in the public schools because the pupils are composed of various nationalities and creeds. Therefore, no single interpretation can be taught since this would arouse great protest. The Talmud Torah is a Jewish school, however, composed of Jewish students and supported by Jews; Hebrew should be taught there primarily for the purpose of understanding the great book, the Bible, Jewish history, Jewish religion, and everything else pertaining to Judaism.

9

These are the disputes--the different opinions regarding our courses of study--which hinder the Progress of the Talmud Torah. We discussed the above-mentioned facts regarding the course of study because they reveal how much lack of unity there exists in the courses of study in the various Talmud Torahs. All the facts pointed out are very important; they should interest the principals and teachers of the Talmud Torahs as well as the pupils' parents. Steps should be taken to alleviate or solve this difficult problem.