Thank you all for the thoughtful responses. My friends Rabbis Berman and Pariser took my comments to be saying that I advocate for teachers to be mechadesh on a daily basis. That was not what I was trying to say. If teachers use Rav Yoel or Rav Samet from the VBM as a primary source, much as I would a ramban or ibn ezra and then analyze it (as they both suggested) I am all for that. What bothers me is when teachers are teaching chumash, for example, and rather than read through the mepharshim themselves, theylet Nechama Leibowitz pick which ones to look at for them. Likewise, if they are teaching gemara, they do not learn the sugya themselves, they let a VBM shiur tell them which rishonim to look at and even how to analyze them. Certainly the lack of attribution is troubling (and I think more common in those cases, since the teacher is quoting many rishonim, just not how he/she found them), but even giving the source its due, I think that these resources ought to be a supplement for our own preparation, not a substitute.
