Optional parental preparation:

1. Note 1 – While the effective-aiming range of the ancient bow was about 75 meters (or yards), ¾ of a football field, maximum range was about double that, around 150 meters or 1½ football fields. To be safe from arrows, the Israeli TzaꞋh"l would have remained about 200 meters (2 football fields) out from the walls as they marched around the city—distant enough to be safe, close enough to instill dread.

   It would seem that the walls of the city must have appeared old, in disrepair and crumbly. The idea seems to have been that the city's defenders would have had to follow the Israelis, ready for an attack at any point, crowding the rim of their city-wall as they marched around the city. Thus, the brunt of the combined weight of most of the city's defenders was concentrated on each point of the rim of the city's wall. As their combined weight bore down on the rim of the city-wall, any crumbling or damage might be discovered. Six days of such repeated weighing down and removing of weight could have exposed weaknesses (the most vulnerable point to attack) and observation of areas of crumbling or dislodged stones. After 6 days with the weight of many troops compressing and then releasing that section of the rim of the city-wall, plus another 7 times on the last day, might have been enough to cause that section of the city-wall to crumble, the stones falling from the rim and then tumbling down the slope all the way to the bottom, creating a natural ramp into the city, even without the use of a battering ram. And there's no implication in the text that the Israelis didn't, also, employ a battering ram to expedite the breach. 

2. Note 2 – Translating the word וַיַּחֲרִימוּ as "utterly destroyed" necessarily contradicts the next verse in which Râkh•âvꞋ ha-zōn•âhꞋ and those who were in her home remain alive. This is another indicator that וַיַּחֲרִימוּ, not a word that implies "kill" (in fact, in the case of a sacrifice, it distinguishes between separating as kheiꞋrëm in contrast to slaughtering), refers to making a separation, not slaughtering.

   Traditional commentators have ranged from outright misojudaics painting Israel as ancient war criminals to "arts degree" archeologists, blissfully unaware of a plethora of ingenious ancient artifacts, who remain under the misimpression that these ancient civilizations were cavemen only marginally more intelligent than bands of chimps. Apparently the beginning of time for many misojudaic historians and archeologists, desperate for scientific recognition, insisted in their misguided notion of "science" that Judaic Scripture predating Greece is mere fables to be ignored. Yet, it's clear that, for example, ballistas slinging ballista stones or balls of burning pitch date back far before Rome and Greece to the time of Sᵊdom and A•mor•âhꞋ. There is no compelling evidence in this verb to imply slaughter. While there were massacres, there were also many small populations, throughout the region, who were expelled from their homes in countless conflicts and by countless kings. In this case, it appears that the survivors of Yᵊri•khoꞋ were given the choice to purify themselves from idolatry, be circumcised and absorbed into Israel (which misojudaics must deny in order to maintain that Israel isn't the only remaining indigenous people native to this land) to live according to Tor•âhꞋ or, by force of sword, be expelled from the area to find new homes elsewhere. 

3. Note 3 – לְפִי (lᵊphiy) – popularly translated "according to," literally meaning "toward the mouth of…" i.e., by authority or force of…

   In other words, contrary to the great consensus of scholars, this does not describe a massacre. Rather, the inhabitants that survived the fighting were given the choice, by authority of the sword: purify from idolatry, circumcise males and convert and be absorbed into Israel or be forcibly expelled from the area to move elsewhere. 

4. Note 4 – וַיַּשְׁבַּע, niph•alꞋ verb from שֶׁבַע (shëvꞋa; 7) and meaning recite 7 times, constituting an oath; as contrasted with אָלָה (â•lâlꞋ; he cursed with an imprecation), אָרַר (â•rarꞋ; he damned) and קִלֵּל (qi•leilꞋ; slight, belittle, disregard, dismiss; regarded as a bit of a curse). 
5. Note 5 – !אָרוּר (â•rōrꞋ); imper. m.s. of אָרַר (â•rarꞋ; he damned); see also note for וַיַּשְׁבַּע. 

Questions you might anticipate that your child might raise and be prepared to discuss:

1. What does impending mean?
2. What is a battle cry (or war cry)?
3. What is tremolo?
4. What is monotonic?
5. What is fermata?