Vayikra 5786: Technology Pretending to be Pedagogy

GOOD MORNING! Regular readers of this column may presume that I am a big fan of technology, and in some ways this is very true. After all, the fact that you are reading this missive is a testament to both technology and the incredible foresight and creativity of my beloved friend Rabbi Kalman Packouz, of blessed memory. He was one of the first to understand technology’s potential impact on Jewish education and it led him to innovate sending a Torah fax every Friday to businesspeople at their workplace. Eventually, it evolved into this email iteration, but the name reflects its origins – the Shabbat Shalom Fax of Life.

Rabbi Packouz was also the first person to place a 24-hour camera at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem so that people all over the world could connect to that holy place whenever they wished. To fight assimilation, he created a computer based Jewish dating service in the 1980’s. When one combines technology and brilliant creativity together with a passion for the Almighty and the Jewish people, extraordinary things can happen.

Today, the Shabbat Shalom Fax of Life reaches several hundred thousand readers around the world. When one considers that in the 1980’s – the absolute peak of print media – industry leaders like The New York Times had “only” about one million subscribers, the advantage of technology is abundantly clear. Today the New York Times has about ten million digital subscribers.

However, the disadvantages of technology are also abundantly clear. To begin with, it’s contributing to the dumbing down of society. For example, GPS navigational tools have made getting to unfamiliar places easier for hundreds of millions of drivers. On the other hand, it’s creating generations of drivers who are intensely reliant on its service; they never learn what’s around them and lack the ability to navigate on their own. I find that I almost always make better (and time saving) decisions than Google Maps or Waze, once I take their traffic pattern information into consideration. GPS navigation is just one of many technological innovations that actually make people less knowledgeable.

Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, who testified earlier this year before a U.S. Senate committee, calls himself a “former teacher turned neuroscientist.” He taught for 15 years and went back to school to earn a Master of Education in Mind, Brain, and Education (Harvard 2009-10) and then a PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience (University of Melbourne 2012-16). His research focused on human thought, learning, and brain stimulation. His testimony before the Senate committee should be required viewing for every educator (and parent).

“Since the late 1800’s when cognitive ability started getting tracked, every generation has seen marked improvement on previous generations. This is primarily due to schools and education; the longer children spent time in schools the more their cognitive abilities increased. However, Gen Z is the first generation in over one hundred years to see a reversal in this trend, they are simply less cognitively developed than previous generations.”

They score poorer in six distinct areas: 1) basic attention span, 2) memory, 3) literacy, 4) numeracy, 5) executive function 6) their general IQ is lower. Anyone who has met members of Gen Z is probably not overly surprised by any of this, though I was most surprised by number six – general IQ.

I then saw one of the most influential studies in this area led by psychologists Stuart Ritchie and Elliot Tucker-Drob. Their study included 42 datasets from more than 600,000 people and it found consistent evidence that education improves cognitive ability. In fact, each additional year of schooling increased IQ by about 1-5 points on average!

This is one of the strongest pieces of evidence that education itself – not just innate intelligence – causes cognitive gains. Researchers concluded that education may be the “most consistent, robust, and durable method” discovered so far for raising intelligence.

So what’s crashing the cognitive abilities of Gen Z? According to Dr. Horvath you can find a direct correlation from the time technology was introduced into the core curriculum of schools. He makes a distinction between using technology as a tool (e.g. smart boards) to using it as a primary source for educating students (i.e. students receiving educational instruction and required reading assignments on individual laptops). Once students started getting spoon fed education through their devices – instead of interactions with in-person instructors – their cognitive abilities stopped developing.

But, as Dr. Horvath points out, correlation does not equal causation. He posits several theories for what is actually causing this cognitive growth paralysis. Some are quite obvious; for example, memory is engaged in very specific ways. Anyone who has studied something intently from a textbook can almost always tell you where on the page that information is located. In other words, it gets imprinted in our minds in a distinct way that digital pages and scrolling simply do not.

But one of his most interesting theories is the human factor. We are wired to learn from other humans in a very empathic way, and this education is transmitted not just as information but also in human connection. This is made up of many intangibles; a teacher’s tone of voice, sensitivity, curiosity, facial expressions, and passion for the subject. There are many social and emotional factors that make information “stick.”

This also has tremendous implications for how we parent our children. When we abandon parenting and a deep personal connection to our children by handing them devices because it makes our lives “easier,” we have abdicated all parental responsibilities. I encourage both parents and educators to carefully examine these issues and make the necessary changes to help our children fulfill their highest potential of who they can become.

We have a very similar example in this week’s Torah portion.

“If a nasi (king) commits a sin by inadvertently violating one of God’s prohibitory commandments, he incurs guilt. When he becomes aware of the sin, he must bring an unblemished male goat as his guilt offering” (Leviticus 4:22).

The great Biblical commentator Rashi quotes (ad loc) the teaching from the sages, “Fortunate is the generation whose leader sets his heart to bring an atonement for an unintentional sin, a fortiori to have a leader that regrets unintentional sins.” In other words, any society that has a leader who can both admit and take responsibility when he makes a mistake is lucky to have such a leader. Anyone living in the 21st century knows how true this teaching from the sages is.

Yet here the Torah uses an unusual word for king – “nasi.” The word for king is usually “melech.” Though the word nasi applies to other leaders (e.g. heads of individual tribes), according to Maimonides this law only applies to a king. So why does the Torah choose to use the word for king that is usually reserved as a general title of leadership?

When the Israelites were leaving Egypt, they were commanded to bring a Paschal-lamb offering. The Almighty spoke to Moses and Aaron and elaborated the relevant laws so that they could be conveyed to the Israelites (Exodus 12:43-50). The last verse states: “All the children of Israel did as God had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they do.” The sages are bothered by the repetition at the end of the verse; “so did they do.” The sages explain that this is referring to Moses and Aaron; that they, too, did the Paschal-lamb.

But this is odd, why would they not do it? More importantly, why do we specifically need to know that they did it as well?

The Torah is teaching us a fundamental lesson about leadership. Moses and Aaron saw themselves as part of the nation; no more, no less. They undoubtedly could have had many excuses as to why, on the night that the Jewish nation was leaving Egypt, they might have been justifiably distracted with dozens of leadership responsibilities that prevented them from fulfilling the commandment of the Paschal-lamb like everyone else. But they wanted to send a true message of leadership: We are a unified people, and we are all doing this commandment together.

This is also the message of a king who is a true leader. The Torah is celebrating a king who doesn’t use the excuse that he is distracted by royal responsibilities for his personal shortcomings. When a leader can own up to wrongdoings and take responsibility for atonement – even for an unintentional sin – then that generation is truly fortunate.

Parents often forget that they are leaders as well. Parenting can be hard, really hard. But running a household means active participation in all aspects of it. We should never just order our children to do their homework; we should become active participants. For example, if a child is learning geography, we should sit with them, connect, and learn together (did you know that since 1990 there are 34 new countries in the world?). Most importantly, we’ll show our children that learning new things is not "their problem" but rather a family value.

Teaching is also a familial relationship. The Torah says, “and you will teach your children” (Deuteronomy 6:7) and the sages teach that this applies to a teacher and student relationship as well (Sifri Devarim 34:1). A student should be considered a child of yours.

Furthermore, learning is a two-way street – teachers also participate as students. In fact, the Talmud (Ta’anis 7a) quotes Rabbi Chanina as saying, “I have learned much from my teachers, and from my colleagues more than from my teachers, and from my students most of all.” This relationship is why an excellent teacher can never be replaced with technology – it’s the deep human connection that allows us to learn and be inspired by one another.

Vayikra, Leviticus 1:1 - 5:26

The book of Vayikra (Leviticus) primarily deals with what are commonly called “sacrifices” or “offerings.” According to Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch: a “sacrifice” implies giving up something that is of value to oneself for the benefit of another. An “offering” implies a gift, which satisfies the receiver. The Almighty does not need our gifts. He has no needs or desires. The Hebrew word is korban, which is best translated as a means of bringing oneself into a closer relationship with the Almighty. The offering of korbanot was only for our benefit to come close to the Almighty.

Ramban, one of the essential commentaries on Torah, explains that through the vicarious experience of what happened to the animal korbanot, the transgressor realized the seriousness of his transgression. This aided him in the process of teshuva – correcting his erring ways.

This week's portion includes the details of various types of korbanot: burnt offering, flour offering (proof that one does not need to offer “blood” to gain atonement), the first grain offering, peace offering, unintentional sin offering (private and communal), guilt (for an intentional sin) offerings – varied upon one’s ability to pay, and an offering for personal use of something designated or belonging to the Tabernacle or the Temple.