Counseling Of Students
On One-Year Programs In Israel:
Models And Techniques

by

Ari Shames

Project Mentor:
Rabbi David Ebner

ATID Fellows
5761

Counseling Of Students On One-Year Programs In Israel: 
Models And Techniques
By: Ari Shames

Ari Shames is the assistant director of Midreshet HaRova, has rabbinic ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate and a degree in psychology from Bar-Ilan.

Description:
In this research project the author surveys the current state of psychological counseling in overseas programs in Israel. Interviews were conducted in post high school programs for women and a general picture is presented based on these interviews. Recommendations are presented for the implementation of a three tiered system in dealing with personal counseling in such schools, and in addition suggestions are made for the basics of any systematic treatment of the issue in like environments. A call is made for systematic treatment of this neglected side of the year in Israel.

Abstract:
The year in Israel in post high school programs provides an opportunity for many students to learn intensively while at the same time this year is a turning point in the students’ lives. Often the students are trying to work out major and minor crises in their lives, both in relation to the past and looking towards the future, and there is a need for personal counseling. The various programs in general are focused on the educational aspects of the year and the personal side of the student’s lives is often not given much systematic thought. This study examined how this question is being dealt with in different institutions of Torah learning for women and how the teachers and other staff are being prepared and trained for the challenges at hand. The nature of the interaction between educators and mental health care professionals in this area was also studied. Interviews were carried out at four post high school programs for women. A description of the overall picture is drawn noting differences between different schools. The author points out the general lack of a systematic approach to the issue in the schools. A detailed three tiered model is suggested for implementation and key elements for building models are suggested in an attempt to raise awareness that a well thought out plan of action can be much more effective than ad hoc handling of particular cases.

Forward-
I began to show interest in this topic as a result of my experience as an educator. As I entered the field of education in the context of the one- year programs in Israel, I found that teaching texts and skills was only part of the job. On many occasions students sought advice on all kinds of personal issues. Beyond not really having answers to some of the calls for advice, I found myself feeling that I was dealing with some very sensitive issues that required more qualified treatment. 
Sitting across from a student who poses a question concerning “Kibbud Av Ve’am” in an abusive home, posed a challenge for me that I felt that I was not trained to deal with.
My investigation began with the question of “Should we be teaching or counseling”? which quickly proved to be a question that could not be quantified nor could its parameters be easily defined. My question turned to an examination of the systems used in the various schools to deal with counseling issues. 
I found, for the most part, an interest in the subject, on the part of the major players in the schools, while at the same time it seems that there is plenty of room for improvement. In reporting the results I avoided mentioning schools by name, while this may have gotten a better “rating” it would have made the paper impossible to have ever been made public (or at least it would have made my life much more difficult). In addition I did not think that the details on each school would add to the overall importance of raising awareness of the issues at hand.
Rabbi Ebner was key in helping me focus on the right questions, and even more importantly how to read the answers. His insights into nuances and details and what is behind them were truly valuable tools. In my work with him it has become clear to me that despite the fact that I call for a “systematic” approach to counseling in the schools, theoretical models and ideas cannot suffice, years of spending real time with students provides lessons that are crucial.     

Introduction and Background-
Spending a year in Israel after high school has become more and more popular in the last decade or two. The number of students and schools has been growing by leaps and bounds. Students are provided with the opportunity to spend a year dedicated to Torah learning in a manner, that for many, is a once in a lifetime event. This, the learning aspect of the year provides for most programs the “bread and butter’ of the program. Most hours are dedicated to the classes and the staff members are well equipped to provide a good education as far as text skills are concerned.
However, the year of Yeshiva or Seminary in Israel is much more than a year of academic pursuit. Each institution, in its own unique manner, provides the student with particular outlooks on life, religious observance, the State of Israel and a wealth of other topics. For some, providing answers to questions, while for others, raising new ones.

In an attempt to outline the overall goals of the “year in Israel” Jay Goldmintz (Ten Daat Vol.V No.2 (1991) pp. 32-36) describes five major goals: To reinforce learning, foster skills, Ahavat Torah, Eretz Yisrael and Medinat Yisrael. I am sure that each institution would have its own list of goals for its students but I believe that all would be similar to Golmintz’s list in one way or another.

While all of these educational goals are being pursued we must at the same time devote some thought to the students we are teaching.  The average post high school student is at a juncture in his or her life, making decisions about university studies and career choices. For most it is their first time not living at home for an extended period of time and they are experimenting with independence and responsibility. It has been noted that this age, is, for most, a testing ground for developmental tasks such as separation and attachment (Heyno, P.29). Any change in one’s lifestyle creates a certain amount of stress and the combination of multiple changes of country, culture, social setting, mores, obligations, language and a multitude of other factors would be expected to compound the problem.

A significant factor is the living quarters that the students share during their year. Lambert and Royston (1975) show that the dormitory experience has a major impact in the promotion of self-reliance, social sensitization, the development of management and authority skills and in general emotional development. This very intense, 24 hour a day experience will clearly yield challenges and issues that we must treat properly.
It is also not surprising to find that the reactions to the dormitory experience are related to the relationships that the student has encountered in the home environment  (Kenry and Donadlson, 1992).

 In addition, it has been my experience, and based on conversations with others in the field it is evident that I am not alone, in feeling that the “well adjusted” standard family structure is for the most part a thing of the past. The incidence of children from homes with divorced parents is so prevalent that standard application forms almost assume separate addresses for each parent. Sadly, a considerable percentage of students come from troubled homes and some have been the subject of abuse in many different forms. It has been pointed out that the contemporary social context that the students are part of must be on the minds of those trying to offer advice and counseling (Heyno, 1999). In my mind this is even more important when students may come from countries that some of the teachers or counselors have very little experience with.

The need to take stock of our attitude toward psychological counseling of students is critical on two levels. On a very basic level, interest in the wellbeing of others is simply a component of the mitzvah of “chesed” and indeed in some cases even “hashavat aveida”. In addition to the basic level incumbent upon all, as educators we must realize that psychological issues and character development are very closely related. In our attempt to develop our students in the full sense of the word we cannot ignore their own personal challenges and issues that they are grappling with.
As educators we must ask ourselves what is the goal of education in this context. On one the hand, we could claim that we are there only to impart knowledge and skills to the students. Psychological counseling is not the profession of the teacher, and the one-year programs are not therapeutic institutions. On the other hand, we can take a more holistic view of education rejecting the constraints that the narrow model presents: “learning is too often thought about as a cognitive activity, split off from the emotional life of the person” (Heyno 1999 p.26). We might adopt a more encompassing interpretation of education. According to this view we are “preparing immature personalities for full membership in the adult society” (Hamblin 1978, p.313), in all aspects of the student’s personality.

I believe that an argument can be made for a need for a serious approach to counseling in the one year programs regardless of the position we take on the dilemma of the boundaries of education. Clearly if we adopt the latter, more encompassing view of education, the case is clear-cut. We must be qualified to carry out our mission. The counseling of the students is no less important than the text- studies and skills- development that we concentrate on. However, even adopting the former, more limited version of educational philosophy, we can still argue for a well- planned approach to counseling. To quote the description of the counseling services at Amherst College “Student services at Amherst have as their primary mission facilitating, complementing and enhancing the instruction of students at the College” (May1999,p.14). The major goal of the College remains the instruction, however, the necessity of the “student services” is recognized as a needed element in assisting the educational process.

The diversity of the institutions that we are dealing with is a major issue that I hope to touch upon later, but for now it suffices to say that each school subscribes to one level or another of a structured counseling system.
 In certain schools the sole purpose may be that of self-defense, in order to avoid potential disasters or at least be able to claim no responsibility for them if they happen. If a student caused damage to themselves or others as a result of a personal crisis, parents and the community in general would be curious as to whether the school was aware of the problem and what steps were taken to assist the student.
In other schools the goals will be much broader. In general terms the goals can be seen on three fronts: (May 1999, pp14-16)
A)	“To heal the wounded among the student body”.
The terms “heal” and “wounded” obviously come in differing degrees of severity and effectiveness. This aspect is, while the most crucial, also the one with the most stigma attached and therefore problematic to integrate into the fabric of any school, a problem that we will address later in this paper.
While the overwhelming majority of the student body is in good mental health a certain percentage of minor “wounds” should be expected. Low level depression, adjustment difficulty and even possible minor eating disorders would not be strange to find in even a healthy group. In more severe cases serious depression or even suicidal tendencies may have to be dealt with.
B)	“To promote the psychological aspects of education”.
As stated above the narrowly defined “education” has much to gain from professional psychological insights and guidance.
C)	“To work with the social system”. 
The schools that are the focus of our discussion are small in number and various phenomena in social psychology arise from time to time that would benefit from a well-organized approach.

A particular arena that illustrates the effectiveness of a professional approach is the attempt to identify roots of the problems and their triggers. In many cases a student may be complaining of a certain problem or stressful issue when in reality the root of the problem is somewhere else entirely and the complaints, as real as they may be, are simply the triggers for the crisis. If no system is in place to help the student, and communication between the various members of staff is ad hoc in nature, the student may not receive the needed assistance. In fact, in some cases the advice and help offered by one member of staff may hinder the efforts of a different member and may render both of them useless if not harmful.
Method-
In order to get a picture of what is going on in the various schools I conducted interviews in four of the Torah institutions for women’s learning: Midreshet Harova, Midreshet Moriah, Midreshet Mevaseret Yerushalayim and Midreshet Lindenbaum.
In each school I interviewed an administrator and an individual who is specifically in charge of the students’ personal issues. In some of the schools I was able to meet with the Aim Bayit or Madrichot and in all cases I held informal conversations with junior members of staff. The interviews lasted approximately 50 minutes and I took notes during the interview and later wrote a more detailed report of each interview. 
I had a prepared list of questions to be asked but I began with a general question about the topic and allowed the conversation to proceed naturally making sure that by the end of the interview all issues on the original list had been covered.
 The questions included:
1.	A general statement concerning how things were handled in the particular school.
2.	A flow chart of the flow of information and the attention given to personal problems in the school.
3.	A description of the role of the specific individual whose responsibility this is.
4.	Policy concerning confidentiality.
5.	Parental Involvement
6.	Staff training
7.	Policy for referrals to mental health professionals.
8.	Policy for mental health issues on the medical forms and acceptance policy for students with a history of mental health treatment.
9.	A list of symptoms which would require outside intervention.
10.	A “wish list”, of what the school would like to have to improve the tools available to them.

Similar interviews were conducted with Dr. Rikki Bernstein and Dr. Rael Strous who work closely with students from the various schools. In these interviews, the interaction between the schools and the mental health professionals was investigated from the psychologist/psychiatrist side of the equation.
The size and nature of the sample that I studied make the findings very important for this type of school, while at the same time the issues discussed, in general, are of utmost importance to a wider audience of educational institutions as well. 
The fact that one person conducted all the interviews has an advantage with regards to neutralizing the bias of the interviewer. However, I must point out that I am the assistant director of Midreshet Harova and therefore I can be assumed to have certain biases regarding all of the schools that I interviewed based on previous experiences.  As well it was clear to the interviewees what my position is, beyond my being an ATID Fellow, which conceivably may have affected their responses.
All of those interviewed were exceedingly cooperative and forthcoming on all issues. 

Results-
It is clear that there is a healthy level of diversity among the schools and therefore generalizations would miss the mark. Having said that, I think that certain elements exist in all of the schools and it is with these that I would like begin. I would like to avoid the use of the names of specific schools in this paper, as I think that all of the schools have what to learn from each other.

1.	In all of the schools a similar skeletal structure is used. Usually there are madrichot who spend a lot of informal time with the students and are on the front line as far as noticing problems. In each school people there are those who are in charge of overseeing the madrichot and filtering the information that comes to the surface who decid what to do in various cases. While in certain schools the level above the Madrichot is held by someone in the administration who assumes many other duties, in others, this position is held by an individual who deals exclusively in this area.

2.	One of the most interesting findings, I believe, is while each school has some sort of system for dealing with the personal problems of the students, the hierarchy is rarely clear to all parties. It could be that the administration has set up a system but yet, has never bothered to inform the teachers of how it is supposed to work and what their role is. In many cases, the students are not informed, at least in a formal way, of who to turn to if they feel the need to discuss personal problems.

3.	There was a marked difference in the attitudes of the administrators in regard to the incidence of students requiring counseling during any given year. In some of the schools it was felt that a significant portion of the student body needed assistance of one type or another at some point during the year, while others felt that the majority had no issues of this sort and it was a very few who required help. This difference in attitude may stem from a different student body at the different schools or it may be an oversight by those wishing to think that all is well when indeed there is work to be done. I personally was a bit taken aback by the lax attitude in certain institutions.

4.	The policies concerning confidentiality were also quite varied. Some felt that all information should “float” to the top of the hierarchy. In order to properly run the school, the administration should be aware of all that is going on, while others felt primarily that the school was not entitled to any information unless it could pose a danger to the student or to others. In a related topic it was also not clear that all the institutions had clear guidelines as to who has access to the files of the students and what type of information should be included in those files.

5.	One finding that I found to be particularly troubling was the lack of staff training. This manifests itself in two areas: the administration and the teachers. As far as the teachers are concerned I found no attempts to educate the staff as a whole as to problematic patterns of behavior or how to deal with a student who is quite clearly going through a crisis situation. This finding must be combined with my conversations with junior staff in all of the schools who had all encountered at some point the uneasy scenario of being made aware of a problem without having a clue as to what to do about it.

6.	As far as the administration is concerned the problem, is even more critical. At the top of most of the pyramids is an administrator. It is he or she that in the end makes the decision as to the severity of the problem at hand and decides what course of action should be taken. In some cases the student is referred to a mental health professional, or even sent home due to a very serious issue that is outside the scope of the school’s ability to handle. For the most part the person making these decisions is working with “intuition and experience” only. “I know one when I see one” is a very common attitude, and I assume that in such a system the best predictor of how things will be dealt with in the future is how they have been dealt with in the past. I am not sure that the experience that all of those making such decisions have, stems from the best models of counseling.
7.	Concerning the criteria for referral to mental health professionals, most of those who I spoke to felt that a triage system was used. The most basic level treated the simple cases, needing “first aid” in-house; those with more serious worries were dealt with more intensely and the serious cases were referred to professionals. While this seems to be a very logical and well thought out plan its weakness is in the lack of operative definitions of classification. The seemingly “easy cases” are, in many instances,  the low level symptoms of much deeper and severe problems. 
8.	Differing “wishes” were expressed concerning the “wish list”. Some of the schools were interested in staff training but felt that the staff itself would be reluctant to attend. Other schools were interested in bolstering the middle level “counselors”, creating a group of individuals who would have as a primary function personal assistance to the students. It is interesting to note that an in-house psychologist was rejected as a possibility even as a “wish” in two schools. One, opining that it would create a conflict of interest as to whom the psychologist should report to, while another felt that such an arrangement would only lead to “invented” or “imagined” problems that could be better dealt with in a less obvious manner. It must be pointed out that one of the schools does have a psychologist on staff part time for student consultations and assistance to the staff.

Discussion and Recommendation-
Based on the information that I have gathered both from “the field” and from the literature on the subject I would like to recommend implementation of certain elements into the system for student counseling in like schools.
It is clear that each individual institution has its own attitude toward education and its own set of goals. There is a significant effect of many basic assumptions on the final product. 
In general terms we can use two conceptual models concerning these very small educational institutions. One is the family model: The limited size of the student body, the 24 hour day being together as a group, and the holistic style of education create a feeling of extended family. The second model is the “academic model”: In principle the schools provide an education in Jewish studies, the independence of the students is almost as in a university setting, with the exception being, that as religious institutions, certain norms of behavior are expected and even demanded.
As with all models, it is clear that no one school subscribes to either extreme and each school can be placed on a spectrum between the two points described above. 
Having said that I would like to offer a few models and suggestions that I think could, and should, be used in this area, each school within its philosophy and needs. As Hamblin (1978 p.313) noted “When this variety is linked with differences in buildings, intake and teaching methods, it is easy to see why one formula for pastoral care and counseling would be meaningless. It has seemed to me that the most useful step is to provide a general guide to which individuals add specific content”.
As I mentioned in the previous section, most of the schools use a system of “triage” in the area of counseling. This seems to be the most logical and natural system to use, (to the extent that one of the administrators felt that the my entire research was not going to yield very interesting results given that all schools pretty much use the same system).
 I would like to point out that the use of the same skeleton of a system by two schools does not indicate that the final product in one school looks anything like what goes on in the other institution.
 
The three tiered system is discussed extensively in the literature and a few critical points deserve our attention.
Hamblin (pp.307-314) describes a tri-level approach in the following manner:
Immediate level-
In this level according to Hamblin are the teachers who have a key position in the assessment of the problems at hand, as they work most closely with the students. Of course a teacher must ultimately remain a teacher, however with the proper training he or she can be sensitized to counseling issues and may begin to notice problems that previously they had glossed over or ignored. The teacher is as well crucial in linking the various parts of the staff, i.e. the administration and the counseling staff. 
In our context this function is carried out by some of the teachers and more often by the madrichot. The madrichot are in almost constant contact with the students and are usually the first to be able to be made aware of any problems that may arise. A weak point in many of the schools in our study is the lack of training and experience of the madrichot. In some cases this function is carried out by “Sherut Leumi” girls, who are practically the same age as the students and are experiencing many of the issues that the students themselves are going through.
Intermediate Level-
The intermediate level is extremely important and it is where the institution has to make a decision as to how seriously it wants to deal with the issues that we are discussing. The title of the person or persons filling this position may vary from place to place (counselor, mashgiach, Ram….) but the critical part is the definition of the job. According to Hamblin (p.309):
 “Their primary responsibility seems to be that of maintaining continuity of concern and of relationships. They will, by the nature of their position, have more time for interviews as such and investigation of a more thorough type…. they will undertake systematic periodic checks on the progress and welfare of the pupils although they make them unobtrusively”.
Their job includes coordination of efforts and avoiding wasting scarce resources by various people trying to do the same thing in an uncoordinated manner.
This position should be a full time position and is all the more effective if it is not mixed with other administrative responsibilities. Additional responsibilities will usually find a way of taking precedence over the more amorphous tasks at hand and a conflict of interest can be avoided if the “counselor” is not directly involved in the administrative decisions. A counselor who is also concerned about how the students behavior will effect registration for the next year will react differently to the counselor who’s sole responsibility is to the present student body.
Specialist Level-
A skilled professional counselor is at the peak of the counseling pyramid. It is clear that we should be employing such a person in cases that truly require such professional services. Clear guidelines should be established in cooperation with the intermediate level as to which cases should be referred to the next level. This should ensure the most effective use of the time and skills of the counselor. 
The professional counselor should be used not only to spend time with the students that require help, but it is equally as important to counsel the teachers and administration and assist them in their dealing with crisis situations. This individual who has come to know the particular needs of the student body and has learned the educational philosophy of the school should run in-house training sessions for the staff. 
The professional is needed, as well, to assist in the handling of a given case when other health care agencies are involved or when the need to evaluate references from other professionals is required.
If the model is set up properly and reviewed periodically to be fine tuned to the specific needs of the school I believe that the cooperation and efficacy of the treatment can be increased.

 The following is a list of points that should be taken into account regardless of the model that one chooses to employ:
Taking a proactive approach-
Parents should be contacted before the onset of the new year and informed of the facilities available for counseling. Beyond the medical form that is sent out to the students, a letter asking for information concerning problems that may require monitoring during the year could be very helpful. It is critical that this letter be understood to be confidential and would not affect the student’s acceptance to the school. For this reason it would be a good idea for it to be written by someone other than a member of the administration and the schools policy should be stated clearly vis a vis confidentiality.
In certain schools this has be implemented with success concerning eating disorders, which has the “advantage” of being “serious” so that cooperation is easier.
The timing of this letter may be the key to its effectiveness. A letter sent out after the student has already been accepted to the school would be more effective than questions asked on an application, and a letter sent out after the student has already arrived at the school, and has spent a few weeks there, would probably elicit an even more open response.
Presentation to the Student Body (Record Keeping and Confidentiality)-
On a simple level the students must be made aware of the services that the schools provide. This should be done early on during orientation. 
One of the major problems that we face is the conflict of interest between trying to help a student in crisis and the effect on the rest of the student body. If, for example, a problem of substance abuse became evident, the best interest of the student and the best interest of the school would not clearly be the same. The last thing the student needs is to be removed from the school while for the most part that would be the plan of action in the schools studied. This conflict is clear to the students and in any counseling system the ground rules must be presented to them in an honest and clear manner. If a student is to confide in a staff member they must know if the information will be passed on and to whom and how this will affect their future. If this is not done it will encourage a state of “all is well” when indeed all may not be well, rather students may not feel comfortable in reporting that which is not well.
In general terms the ethical guidelines for counselors are: “basically any and all information gathered from a professional contact, including the fact of the contact itself, may only be divulged under two circumstances, the first being one in which the client/ patient has given explicit permission to divulge and the second being one in which the clinician’s professional judgment is that there is imminent risk of injury to self or another”. (May p. 19)
A very practical element in this discussion is record keeping. What is documented and what is not? Is every session with a counselor summarized and filed with the student’s personal file? Who has access to these files? (It was pointed out in one school that I interviewed that they do document most such meetings and the information is kept, primarily as a step of self -defense in the event that someone would like to know what was done about a specific problem).
Staff Training-
All levels of the pyramid would benefit from formal training (It should be noted that the only training in the schools today is for the madrichot who attend a short seminar run by Yeshiva University, this seminar touches on some very important issues but has been run primarily as a YU event and the subject matter dealt with could easily be different in coming years.).
Those who are in charge of referrals to mental health professionals should be made aware of the criteria of when to do so. The teachers should be sensitized to counseling issues as well.
Kotler (1993 p13) outlines the function of a teacher as a counselor. He points out that the primary concern for the teacher is teaching and it is unreasonable for us to expect them to be able to diagnose mental health problems and prescribe treatment. “However it is perfectly reasonable that with the added training and supervised experience, you would become more proficient in recognizing some of the signs of a child who is in trouble”.
Kotler’s entire book is a handbook for teachers to be able to recognize, in the classroom setting warning signs for various psychological phenomena. In 12 short pages (11-23) numerous conditions are described including depression, ADD, obsessive -compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, adjustment disorders and many others. Each condition is described, examples brought, symptoms mentioned and “usual interventions” are listed. I think this is an excellent example of a simple tool that can be provided to all levels of teachers that would take a very short amount of their time to read and would provide them with a fresh outlook of the students possibly troubling behavior.
May (p.17) suggests a report on the psychological aspects of the students be written annually and distributed to the teachers in order to familiarize them with issues that have come up in the previous year and make them more sensitive to the students needs. 
Cost-
Both the schools and the mental health professionals that I interviewed brought up this very sensitive issue. The problem being, that most of the outside counseling that would be needed is not covered by the standard insurance plans. In certain cases the help is provide free of charge, which clearly is not a real solution, while in others the financial help is provided by a donor, in some cases by the staff or even in one case by the peers of the student who felt that she needed the help.
Clearly employing a fully qualified mental health professional on a regular basis would be prohibitive to all of the schools involved and would probably be unnecessary. [For purposes of comparison, in a study quoted by May (P. 24) the range in U.S. colleges is between 1 per 113 to 1 per 1583 metal health professionals to student ratio. The median is 1 to 520 putting the idea of fully employing such a professional in the category of overkill].
It was suggested, in a similar setting by Van Hoof (p.74) that pooling the resources of the various institutions may be a better solution. Despite the differences between the schools they are in the end of the day very similar. Cooperation between the institutions would make the joint employment of a mental health professional a real possibility.    
Physical Conditions for the Counseling-
A seemingly simple, yet critical point involves the physical area that is provided for student consultations. One would except radically different results and scope of discussion if the meeting with the Mashgicha takes place in the Bet Midrash as opposed to it taking place in a private room. When the student is in session with the counselor are interruptions by others possible or maybe even frequent? All of these factors will contribute to the quality of the session. It was pointed out to me that conducting a session with a student without tissues present in the room might inhibit the student from expressing real emotions for the simple fear of embarrassment of a runny nose. 
Patterns and the Educational Cycle-
It is valuable to dissect and analyze various aspects and patterns in the students needs. Rather than simply lumping all problems into the category of “counseling” or “psychological issues”, if we can note specific patterns we will be better equipped to offer the correct assistance. One factor to be considered is the background of the students. It is important to get a full profile on their home situation and their educational experience. This will allow us to make certain predictions as to the types of issues that we are likely to be dealing with.
Another very interesting area to pay attention to is the yearly cycle. Heyno (pp.27-37) maps out a cycle of an academic year and the probable crises that will need be dealt with.  The average student may not be aware of the causes for the stress in their life and may assign their complaints to various other factors when in reality they are going through a particular stage of the educational cycle.

A most obvious stage that may cause problems is the very start of the program. The student is faced with a multitude of changes in their life, separation from parents and familiar surroundings, decreased living space and privacy, exceedingly demanding schedule, standards of behavior that may be new to them and a slew of other issues. All this is in addition to the heart of the matter- a year of study. Some students arrive in Israel for the year without a clear idea of what they have signed up for. The year in Israel has become so popular that the question of  “am I able to dedicate a full year to a single endeavor- learning”? is rarely asked and the student in the first few weeks consciously or unconsciously must deal with it.

Heyno (p.33) identifies exam time as another potential crisis point. In the context of the seminaries that I interviewed this may or may not be relevant depending on whether or not exams are administered. However in most institutions there is a period of evaluation, even if it is not done in the formal sense of exams. This can be very stressful for the student. In this context, and in others, if one is approached by a student with complaints irrelevant to the test situation, one must be discerning as to what the true cause of the anxiety is, the complaint or the exam.
Heyno in his discussion of the university cycle also presents what he calls “January blues” which are where, in January, the students may develop anxiety and mild depression. It is interesting to note that in the Yeshivot and Midrashot that I am familiar with a phenomenon known as the “Choref Zman blues” was frequently discussed. According to Heyno the cause is the realization that the year is in its final stages and the warm cocoon environment of the university will soon be replaced by the “real world”. I am not sure that his explanation is accurate in his setting or in the setting that we are discussing but nevertheless we see again that it is critical to be aware of the elements in the student’s environment in order to effectively be of any assistance.
Leaving the educational framework can clearly be a stressful period. Specifically in our context where in many cases the message is presented to the students that they are “charging their batteries” in their year in Israel in order to enable them to take on the secular world in college. If this is the assumption, how is a student to feel near the end of the year who is still full of many questions concerning their own personal and religious development? It could be argued that in many of the cases that the students opt to spend an additional year in Israel the motive may not be purely to gain more learning but may include a significant element of escapism in avoidance of the world of academic and economic responsibility. 
Other significant times in the one-year programs include the parental visits. This can be significant both for the individual whose parents visit them, and for those whose parents do not visit them. Relationships that had a certain distance added to their dynamics, for a few days or weeks, return to the “pre Israel” state. This can play itself out in many different ways. As well the sociology of some of the “customs” of such trips must be noted. It is common for parents to host friends for a night out. How does this effect the relationships amongst the students and how do those who find themselves left out deal with the issue?
Along similar lines is the phenomenon of “Shabatot”-weekends on which the students are free to spend time with friends and relatives outside the Midrasha. Many of the students have neither friends nor relatives in the country and are on a weekly basis facing very uncomfortable situations of being “dragged along” as the friend with no where to go. This issue is all the more problematic when it comes to vacation times in which the students are forced to find lodging and activities for several weeks in a row.
It might be helpful in this area to do a survey of the student before the problem becomes real and prepare a list of adoptive families that would be provided to help out. 
Conclusion-
I strongly believe in the need for a systematic approach to the counseling of the students on the one- year programs. The issues at hand are of primary concern and for the most part the business is run in an ad hoc manner. I am fully aware of the fact that most of the schools do not see this as a primary function of the institution, however neither are many of the other elements that we spend much of our time dealing with such as logistics. If we were to have such an attitude toward the running of school trips or the school kitchen the results would be disastrous and be obvious to anyone looking in. When it comes to counseling I believe that the results of a haphazard approach can be even more destructive while not necessarily as clear to the untrained eye.
 I have tried to offer a model of a system and various points to incorporate in any given system. At the very least I would highly recommend the issue be discussed in each and every school and be treated with the utmost seriousness. A clear discussion involving all relevant parties should develop an approach that will best fit the particular school. Ignoring the need of the student body in this area does not serve the best interest of the students or the schools. As I mentioned earlier cooperation between the schools can make some of the more complicated and costly issues a reality.

Bibliography-
Goldmintz, Jay (1991). The Post High School Yeshiva Experience in Israel: Goals and Benefits. Ten Daat Vol. V, No. 2, pp. 32-36.

Hamblin, Douglas (1978). The Teacher and Counseling. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Heyno, Ann, E. (1999).In Lees, John and Vaspe, Alison (Eds.) Clinical Counseling in Further and Higher Education. London: Routledge.

Kenry, Maureen, A. and Donaldson, Gail A. (1992). Relationship of Parental Attachment and Psychological Separation to the Adjustment of First Year College Women. Journal of College Student Development September 1992, Volume 33. Pp.431-438.

Kotler, Jeffery A. (1993) Teacher as counselor: developing the helping skills you need. Newburry Park: Corwin Press.

Lambert, Royston (1975). The Chance of a Lifetime? London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

May, Robert (1999).In Lees, John and Vaspe, Alison (Eds.) Clinical Counseling in Further and Higher Education. London: Routledge.

Van Hoof, Thomas J. and Hansen, Holger (1999). Mental Health Services in Independent Secondary Boarding Schools: The Need For A Model. Psychology in the Schools, Vol.36(1) 69-78.

Afterward-
My study was limited in scope primarily due to time constraints. As I have pointed out the sample of schools that I chose to interview was not representative at all. There would be an interesting comparison with the more “charedi” schools for women, as well as comparing and contrasting men’s programs.
There are at least three more characters in the story that I did not interview, the students, the parents and the state of the high schools from which the students came. Each of these characters could shed light on the issues that were discussed.
I would hope that some of the issues that were raise would be able to be implemented in a practical way. I however do not provide a concrete plan of action in areas such as: staff training. Many avenues of putting things to work in the field could stem from some of the basic concepts that were discussed.