Introduction

The inclusion of minority teachers in schools that serve, for the most part, the majority population has been, for some time now, appreciated as a potentially positive step towards helping narrow the achievement gap between minority and majority students while helping develop a more culturally sensitive school environment which will benefit both minority and majority students. The first by being allowed to find in the educational setting potential positive figures for identification and the second by coming in contact with minority teachers who would hopefully help them better understand and thus embrace diversity.

Though existing research is not conclusive there seem to be signs that the inclusion of minority teachers in majority schools is helpful in soothing potential conflicts arising from linguistic and cultural barriers between both minority students and the school’s teachers and administration and these and minority parents (Atkins et al., 2014; Bekerman, 2016; Cherng & Halpin, 2016; Luke, 2017).

In Israel, we have been involved in trying to understand the role of the Palestinian-Israeli teachers’ motivations and experiences while teaching at so-called national Hebrew schools and the rather recently created bilingual integrated schools (Bekerman, 2012, 2016; Jayusi & Bekerman, 2019a, b). More specifically we have tried to better comprehend how their participation in such educational contexts helps shape their sense of ethnocultural belonging and their sense of self-efficacy. Both these educational contexts include Palestinian Israeli teachers in their faculty; the first, as we will soon describe, mostly because of instrumental reasons while the second because of their stated ideology. In this paper, we approach our findings comparatively hoping to offer some insights on the context-specific conditions which might help support or undermine minority teachers’ inclusion.

Before drawing this comparison, we will introduce in short the present structure of the Israeli school system and the events which brought about the inclusion of Palestinian Israeli teachers in their faculty. We will then review some of the relevant literature on minority teachers serving in majority schools and following the comparison, and will then draw some conclusions regarding what might be learned from each of the educational contexts compared to better the professional impact of minority teachers.

Israel and the Israeli School System

Space limitations preclude us from doing justice to the conflicting narratives that crowd Israeli historiography. Not only those of Jews and Palestinians, but also the different narratives within groups (for some alternative historical perspectives, see, for example (Golani & Manna, 2011; Heydemann, 1991; Khalidi, 2010, 2020; Khalidi et al., 1992; Masalha, 2012; Morris, 1987; Said, 2001; Shafir, 1996; Shlaim, 1998; Teveth, 1989).

In 1947, the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, UNSCOP, proposed the creation of two separate and independent states, one Arab and one Jewish (Mock et al., 2014). The plan was voted up by the General Assembly on November 29, 1947 (UN General Assembly Resolution 181) and passed by 33 votes to 13, with 10 abstentions. Immediately afterward, fighting erupted between the Jewish and Palestinian populations, and the State of Israel was declared on May 14, 1948, upon the withdrawal of Britain from Palestine.

The Israeli army prevailed, and at the end of hostilities in 1949, Israel had conquered almost 80% of the territory that had been allotted in the partition plan. The remaining 20%, Gaza and the West Bank were attached to Egypt and Jordan respectively. An even more devastating effect of the war for the Palestinians was that by its end, the great majority of them had been expelled by the Israeli army or had fled their homes and villages, creating what later became known as the refugee ‘problem’ (Forman & Kedar, 2004).

The 1948 war, called the War of Independence by the Israelis and the Nakba (the Catastrophe) by the Palestinians, was the first open military clash between the Zionist and Arab nationalist movements. This conflict remains the most explosive in Israel, placing the Jewish majority and the Palestinian (primarily Muslim) minority at perpetual odds. Though there is a sharp asymmetry between the communities with regard to the distribution of resources, beliefs on both sides reflect their respective claims to a monopoly on objective truth about the conflict and who instigated it, thereby undermining possibilities for resolution (Bar-Tal, 1998).

According to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS, 2019), at the end of December 2019, Israel’s total population was estimated at 9,136,000. Jews amounted for 74.1% (6,772,000), Arabs for 21% (1,916,000), and Others for 4.9% (448,000). It is worth noting that these figures reflect political and ideological decisions about which populations should be counted and in what territories. At present, the CBS count includes Jewish settlers living in Area C of the West Bank, as well as the annexed areas of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem but does not include Palestinians living in the same areas.

The Jewish population represents not only a variety of ethnic-national groups but is also divided along lines of religious sentiment and affiliation. In 2016 8% were Haredi Ultra-orthodox, 10% National Religious, 23% Masorti (traditionalists, mostly Jews, descended from Mizrachi/Sephardic families), and 40% ‘secular’ (Malach et al., 2018).

The present Arab Palestinian Muslim population, mostly Sunni, totals 1,636,000 (including Bedouin and Druze Arabs). A smaller, non-Arab Muslim population is represented by the approximately 5000 Circassians. About 2% of the total population is Christian, 77.5% of which are Arab Christians (7.2% of the total Arab population in Israel) (Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), 2017).

Israel’s educational system is composed of five types of schools: (1) state Hebrew-language schools, attended by the majority of Jewish school-age children; (2) state religious Hebrew-language schools, attended by the majority of the religious Jewish population; (3) state Arab-language schools, attended by the majority of the Arab Palestinian population; these three sectors are fully funded by the state; (4) state-recognized schools, which are unofficial and only partially state-funded (55% and up), that serve both Arab and Jewish populations and have a greater measure of freedom in all education policy matters. These schools serve mostly the Ultra-orthodox Jewish population and those parts of the Arab population that attend denominational, mostly Christian schools (Israeli Education System, 2015). This segregated reality suggests that children belonging to different ethnic, religious, national sectors of the society do not meet each other. This is mostly true for the Ultra-orthodox, Arab and Jewish populations (Shwed et al., 2014).

According to the CBS (2019), nearly three quarters of the Israeli state education system is devoted to Jewish education, divided into state secular (45.1%) and religious (28.8%) systems, and the Arab education system serves the rest of the children in Israel.

Blass (2014) has shown how Israel’s centralized education system effectively controls, unifies, and critiques activity in schools, maintaining unequal education opportunities for the Arab minority through a ‘concentration of disadvantages,’ meaning that Arab education and Jewish education are unequal in both inputs and outputs. Yet, when schools in a similar socioeconomic segment are compared, the achievements of the Arabic-language schools surpass those of Hebrew-language schools, indicating that the achievement gaps between the two derive primarily from their socioeconomic differences (Ayalon et al., 2019). The PISA exam scores of Israeli students are lower than the overall OECD country average and the gaps between the strongest and the weakest students are the greatest. Closer investigation of these scores reveals a similar pattern to the one just described: while Hebrew-speaking students scored higher than the OECD average in 2018 (506 vs. 487), Arab speakers scored much lower (362 vs. 487) (Blass, 2020).

Added to the achievement gaps mentioned, other researchers (Abu-Saad, 2006; Arar & Abu-Asbah, 2013; Jabareen & Agbaria, 2010), point to multiple challenges that Arab Palestinians face, including, among others, structural and content-related subordination to the Jewish education system (Abu-Saad, 2006); the absence of Arab representatives at policymaking levels including in decisions concerning curriculum; its economic dependence on the Jewish education system; and the constant demand for ‘loyalty’ in exchange for financial and other support. [Dialogic directions: Conflicts in Israeli/Palestinian education for peace (Bekerman, 2000)].

Palestinian Israeli Teachers in Hebrew Speaking and in Bilingual Integrated Schools

The phenomenon of integrating minority/migrant/international teachers in majority schools is not exclusive to Israel. In the United States, for instance, the issue of integrating people of color has been addressed since the 1970s (King, 1993). Researchers unanimously agree that teachers from diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds contribute extensively to American education (Easton-Brooks et al., 2010; Irvine & Fenwick, 2011).

In Germany, hiring more minority teachers is considered a promising means of dealing with existing difficulties in diverse schools. Minority teachers draw on specific personal experiences that may be useful in overcoming cultural and/or language barriers (Irvine, 1989; Strasser & Waburg, 2015). Their sociocultural experiences, as well as their potential multilingual competencies (Nieto, 1998), facilitate more deliberate dealings with cultural diversity at schools (Lengyel & Rosen, 2015).

McNamara and Basit (2004), examined the induction experiences of British teachers of Asian and African Caribbean origin and showed that the majority of the teachers find their schools supportive and the induction process valuable and that they feel successful in building bridges between antagonistic communities and feel that they counter prejudice and racism both within schools and the wider community.

Santoro (2007) investigated the experiences of indigenous teachers and ethnic minority teachers in Australian schools. She suggested that the teachers’ “knowledge of self” in regard to ethnicity and/or indigeneity and social class enables them to empathize with diverse students from perspectives not available to teachers from the dominant cultural majority.

The inclusion of Palestinian Israeli teachers in schools as a matter of policy is a rather new phenomenon in Israel. As stated Palestinian Israelis suffer from multiple structural obstacles regarding their professional development given the limitations imposed on them by Israel’s Jewish centered policies. Palestinians with academic credentials in multiple fields of knowledge cannot occupy positions related in one way or another to the army or security areas (Abu Asba, 2006; Hadad Haj-Yahya & Assaf, 2017). Given the existing constraints, thousands of Palestinian Israeli teachers submit employment requests to the State’s Arab-sector schools each year, but because of market limitations, many of them remain unemployed. For the left unemployed the State’s Hebrew secular schools and the Bilingual integrated schools constitute a chance to teach out of the Arab education system.

Until 1973 Palestinian-Israeli teachers worked only in schools affiliated with their own sector. In 1973, a government committee recommended, for the first time, that Palestinian-Israeli teachers be incorporated into the Hebrew-speaking educational network (Shohat, 1973). By 1980, some 80 Palestinian-Israeli teachers were teaching Arabic in Jewish schools, a full 10% of the total number of Arabic teachers in the country (Yonai, 1992). In 2013, the Ministry of Education decided to step up the process and incorporated an additional 500 Palestinian-Israeli teachers into Jewish schools.

Since then, the numbers have steadily risen and today Palestinians teach not only Arabic but a variety of other subjects for which the system suffers from a shortage of teachers, such as English, science, special education, and other subjects, at Israeli State secular schools (Merchavim, 2016). Recent indicators show that out of a total of 170,238 teachers in Israel, almost 24% of them are Palestinian-Israeli (Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, 2017), of which only 0.015% teach in the Jewish secular sector budgeted and supervised by the State and Local Authorities.

All in all, the Israeli Ministry of Education primary aim for the integration of Palestinian-Israeli teachers in Jewish schools relates to the potential this step has to add to today’s shortage of highly qualified teaching staff, thus saving the government large sums of money by eliminating the need to train or retrain new teachers; only in second place does it mention the potential to encourage tolerance for diversity among students (Ministry of Education, 2015).

The work of Palestinian Israeli teachers in the bilingual integrated schools is to be seen as a rather unrelated event to the ones related above. These schools are a fairly new development in Israel with the first one being created in 1984. The bilingual integrated schools’ area bold and innovative initiative by a relatively small group of people who seek to “make a difference” in the education of children living in the current Middle East conflict through collaboration between Jewish and Palestinian teachers, pupils, and parents. Today eight such schools function in Israel (Meshulam, 2019) all of which are state-recognized and supervised by the Ministry of Education most of them under the auspices of the state Hebrew language schools’ section of the Ministry. The student corps of all schools reach 1200 students a small fraction of all Israeli students. These schools are also supported by independent Non-Government Organizations interested in implementing peace initiatives in the context of Israeli society.

The schools use the standard curriculum of the secular State school system, which is supplemented to reflect the schools’ ideological commitment to equality and coexistence. A team of in-house teachers, aided by professionals, has drawn up additional programs for bicultural issues such as historical narratives and religious/cultural studies. Most of each group’s religious festivals are recognized, together with the groups’ respective national narratives. In addition, cultural activities representing all the groups are included in the schools’ curricula. Sustaining these commitments such as studying the Palestinian-Arab historical narrative is complex for it might be restricted by the Ministry of Education. The schools have had to seek out creative solutions such as instituting extracurricular activities for the school community in cases where there was concern about the possible reaction of the Ministry of Education (Bekerman, 2004).

The funds from the Ministry of Education are inadequate to provide for the supplementary materials and staff that the integrated bilingual schools require. Accordingly, the schools must charge fees to families who enroll their children. This may account for the fact that the families attracted to the bilingual schools, both Jewish and Palestinian-Arab, are mainly from the middle to upper-middle classes. The children’s parents tend to be highly educated (Bekerman & Tatar, 2009).

The co-principal arrangement which characterized the schools from their inception was in recent years abandoned because of budgetary pressures, and now each school has a principal and assistant principal, each from a different ethnic group. One of the central features of bilingual schools, co-teaching (i.e. classes taught simultaneously in two languages by teachers representing each group), is also subject to a variety of contextual factors. The schools’ decision to implement co-teaching stemmed from the goal of promoting bilingualism, and the presence of two teachers-one Jewish, one Palestinian--in each class, was expected to further this goal. However, given the current Israeli reality wherein most Palestinian-Arab teachers are, of necessity, fluent in both Arabic and Hebrew but most Jewish teachers speak only Hebrew, it would have been difficult to find enough bilingual Jewish teachers for every class. This, coupled with the high cost of employing two teachers for every disciplinary subject, resulted in the decision to terminate the co-teaching arrangements. Today, the schools have one homeroom teacher per class while trying to ensure that Palestinian-Arab and Jewish teachers are represented equally among the teaching staff (Bekerman, 2016).

Research on Palestinian-Israeli teachers working in State Hebrew-speaking schools is scant. Jayusi and Bekerman (2019a, b) found that Palestinian-Israeli teachers experience a strong sense of self-efficacy, satisfaction, and positive relationships with students, parents, and colleagues. Palestinian-Israeli teachers believe that their work helps reduce prejudice and increases mutual understanding among the groups in conflict. Fragman (2008) shows them having a strong desire to be “ambassadors of good will,” offering them an opportunity to break down stereotypes and misconceptions about the Palestinian-Israeli minority. Brosh’s (2013) findings indicate that the teachers were unsuccessful in integrating because of a lack of cultural understanding and that it was difficult, even impossible, for them to effectively communicate their knowledge to students. Sion (2014) examined how Palestinian-Israeli teachers appropriated performative identity strategies passing as cultural hybrids to gain acceptance in the schools. She found that despite their efforts, the teachers, for the most part, felt lonely, isolated, and vulnerable.

Our present research is more aligned with research inquiring into the teachers’ perspectives and concerns when entering majority schools (Maylor et al., 2006; Strasser, 2013; Wilkins & Lall, 2011). More specifically our concern is with the teachers’ experiences regarding stereotypical attitudes of peers, social isolation, their experiences in the faculty room, how they judge their potential contribution to school and students, their need to acculturate or not to the hegemonic culture, their sense of having or not having an opportunity for promotion and progression in the school hierarchy, etc.

Teacher Self-efficacy & Effectiveness

We take teacher efficacy to be the belief that one has capabilities in the areas of student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). Sachs (2004) suggests that teachers in order to be more effective should exercise attributes related to socio-cultural awareness, interpersonal skills, self-understanding, and risk-taking. For Campbell et al. (2003) teacher effectiveness depends on cognitive outcomes and also on teachers’ moral and social well-being, as well as on the establishment of positive relationships with colleagues and parents. Furthermore, Gay (1995) and Sachs (2004) underline that effective teachers tend to demonstrate an enhanced self-understanding, which facilitates the development of a positive ethnic self-identity and self-inquiry into the relationships between fundamental values, attitudes, beliefs, and teaching practices.

Effective teachers afford the creation of trusting educational contexts in which communication and collaboration are enhanced and constructive critiques flourish (Gay, 1995; Guyton & Hidalgo, 1995).

Job satisfaction is conceptualized as the positive or negative evaluative judgment that people make about their job (Weiss, 2002). Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2010) have suggested that the impact of the school context on teachers’ satisfaction is mediated through teachers’ sense of belonging, indicating that teachers’ sense of being accepted by the school leadership and their colleagues plays an important role in their motivation to continue to be affiliated with the teaching profession. Within this context, of no less importance is the research that has shown that a positive and supportive social climate in which teachers maintain positive relations with parents, students, and colleagues is positively related to teachers’ satisfaction (Kokkinos, 2007; Scheopner, 2010). Teachers with a strong sense of self-efficacy would have a high level of job satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2006).

Last we should consider that teaching is a profession in which ideologies are of central concern. Kelchtermans and Ballet (2002) argue that understanding teachers’ micro-political experiences in the school and the external environment is crucial to understanding how teachers take actions to further their interests through power and influence. Pachler et al. (2008) show how teachers views of professionalism are influenced by both that surpass strictly didactic practices. These ideological aspects are central in our own work for the personal position of the teachers concerning the Israeli Palestinian conflict has consequences for how Palestinian Israeli teachers in Hebrew speaking and bilingual integrated schools attempt to address issues of a socio-political nature.

Method

The data upon which we will be building our arguments were gathered from independent studies the authors conducted in both Hebrew speaking schools and bilingual integrated ones. The studies conducted employed a qualitative method that enabled us to construct a richly detailed depiction of Palestinian-Israeli teachers’ varied and multidimensional worldviews, with the aim of trying to understand the teachers’ perspectives on the social and cultural contexts within which they evolved (Gay & Airasian, 2003). Most of the data upon which we build our appreciations is derived from interviews we conducted with the teachers. Yet, in both settings, we also conducted fieldwork based on traditional ethnographic methods. The in-depth interviews conducted allowed the interviewer to delve deeply into social and personal matters (Dicicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006). Teachers, after being asked to render some biographical background, were asked to talk about their decision to work in the majority-sector schools and to describe the reactions they encountered in response to their choice. They were also asked to describe their relationships with the principals, students, teachers, and parents and to give examples of important events or experiences that they had faced in the classrooms and in other school settings. Inquiries were also made regarding their feelings while working at the schools - what made them feel satisfied and proud and what made them feel sad and angry. With the exception of these few guiding questions, interviewees were encouraged to tell their stories without limiting themselves to any fixed agenda. Those interested in full details regarding the research conducted are encouraged to see (Bekerman, 2012; Jayusi & Bekerman, 2019a, b; Rajuan & Bekerman, 2011).

For the present study and so as to be able to compare the data gathered we analyzed all materials using the thematic analysis method based on that of Braun and Clarke (2006) and of Shkedi (2004). We then coded significant units that were perceived as relevant to the present comparative effort. Last we consolidated the codes and created significant themes, which were reviewed to ensure that the contents matched the themes and to ensure consistency.

The researchers are both from the field of education. The first one is a member of the Palestinian national minority an expert in peace education and minority-majority relations in the educational system. The second researcher is a member of the Jewish-Israeli majority group, intellectually anchored in critical perspectives in the field of education and an expert in minority studies. The interviews were analyzed by both authors together.

Findings

Job Satisfaction

In general Palestinian teachers teaching in the Hebrew speaking schools and in the bilingual integrated ones feel satisfied with their job in the schools.

Those working in the Hebrew-speaking schools reported feeling satisfied with their work. They liked teaching in the Hebrew speaking schools and emphasized their desire to continue working in them. The following excerpts point in this direction.

The school for me is like a warm home. I have faced a crisis (divorce) and I needed help and support. The school gave me the support that I needed. I don’t know if someday I’ll leave …

The school for me is like a warm home … The school gives me the support that I need.

The “home” metaphor used is also referred to when teachers working at the bilingual integrated schools express their feelings towards the institutions with which they work. For them, the school ‘is not just a place where we work but it is a home for us’; ‘the school satisfies our personal needs; it is not just a job it is a home’. They emphasize that the schools fulfill their expectations that ‘the place where we work should satisfy our personal needs’ and add that the school must have defined objectives for individual needs and that it should be an environment ‘where everyone can feel comfortable’. The expression, to ‘feel comfortable’ is repeated frequently. Being ‘comfortable’ with one another creates and sustains their aspiration for coexistence in a community build on trust and respect.

The idea of belonging to a club ‘an exclusive and prestigious club’ was also used by teachers teaching in both contexts. This metaphor seemed to illustrate the teachers’ sense of a strong and positive positioning within the school context given their sense of connection to all faculty members who provided them with support and encouragement.

Teachers in both groups felt that they were able to create good relationships with all stakeholders (parents, teachers, principals, and students). Their success in developing such good contacts contributed to their sense of job satisfaction and feeling of belonging to the school.

Principals play an important role in helping the Palestinian-Israeli teachers adjust to the Hebrew speaking schools by expressing their belief in a teacher’s potential to integrate into the school community and by treating the teacher as an equal among other staff members, by offering support and help, and by establishing and maintaining a trusting relationship.

This principal was [like] a second mother to me … The principal helped and supported me from the inside after accepting me from the outside. It is what makes me continue working here … She was accepting and supportive of me …

In the case of the bilingual integrated schools, a similar sense of comfort is expressed in all that relates to relationships with the principal. Yet this feeling is much less underlined given that the schools (during the first years of their activity) were directed by co-principals (a Palestinian and a Jew) who fully shared responsibilities in line with the school’s ideology of structural symmetry.

In both contexts teachers emphasized that achieving a strong sense of belonging to the school community was eased by their expressions of solidarity and empathy in school events and commemorations reflecting the Jewish group history (e.g. Holocaust Day; Independence Day). These expressions of solidarity and empathy, though never easy (especially in relation to Independence Day which mainly focuses on the Jewish historical narrative), seemed to be easier in the context of the bilingual integrated school where there was at least an effort to include in these events and commemorations/celebrations aspects of the Palestinian historical narrative too.

Last we want to mention the confidence the teachers expressed in their ability (as educators) to help change the stereotypes they felt are held by the Jewish stakeholders in the school context. A teacher working at a Hebrew speaking school stated:

I think that I succeeded in changing the prejudices of a lot of teachers. The strongest proof of that was from the teacher who had lost her son in the war. She used to give me a very piercing and hateful look at the beginning of my first year at the school. She hated all Arabs … she noticed that I expressed solidarity with my students and the other teachers by participating in the ceremony for Israel’s Memorial Day in my first year. This its effected her and made her rethink of me or of everything … we are friends now.

Though it could be assumed that in the bilingual integrated schools these such stereotypes would be absent given the presumed stakeholders’ belief in integration one of the teachers stated:

They are not all lefties here, you know, but they get to know us as humans and change the way they think of us …

In spite of these very positive feelings, we found in both groups’ expressions of ambivalence towards their school experiences pointing at the unique challenges they face. At the bilingual integrated schools, one of the teachers expressed herself as follows:

… it is full of ups and downs. The work in bilingual schools is much more dynamic, for better and for worse. This is one of the reasons why it’s so unique.

The following excerpt exemplifies the expressions we hear from teachers at the Hebrew speaking schools:

Generally, I keep a neutral stance with my colleagues and don’t argue with them. I think that I have good relations with them but sometimes surprises happen. I was shocked when I entered the teachers’ room hearing one colleague … Russian … speaking loudly with other colleagues about the right of Jews living in Israel with our us, the Palestinians. I was angry and couldn’t help my peace. I told her that we are on this land, tens of years before Jews came from all over the world.

It is also worth mentioning that while the teachers at the bilingual integrated schools were also parents of children studying in the same institution, an aspect that added to their sense of strong identification with the school community as well as an expression in their trust in the schools’ educational aims; teachers in the Hebrew speaking schools did not consider the option of having their children join the school in which they worked. From their perspective, it was clear that though the school is a ‘home’ this home was not homely enough to have their children included, the ideological gaps in the schools functioning (mostly related to a strong emphasis on a Zionist agenda as it expressed itself in school ceremonies and some of its curriculum) was not seen fit as a place where their children should be educated.

Professional Self-efficacy

Teachers in both contexts described their professional role predominantly as pedagogical experts. In the bilingual integrated schools, teachers reported that their pedagogical expertise has a deep involvement in a shared vision of multiculturalism and coexistence. Yet, multiculturalism and coexistence are seen as strongly connected to general educational issues.

Multiculturalism is concerned with learning about the “other,” as well as with providing for children to reach their own potential according to their unique abilities and interests, to give a place for everyone. Some students are better painters than others, some are better in math, etc.

For these teachers creating a multicultural school, environment means creating an environment in which pupils can find their unique space and pursue their individual learning goals.

schools should be liberal, let pupils express themselves, multicultural, enabling pupils to learn independently and (achieve) personal development.

Teachers at the Hebrew speaking schools reported using a variety of teaching methods, innovating new strategies, enabling genuine learning, and making the students’ learning meaningful. Multiculturalism is part of their agenda even when not officially part of the schools’ agenda.

You can’t imagine how successful I am at work. That is one of the reasons that keep me in school. I get a lot of compliments and thank-you letters from students and their parents. I teach in an interesting way. I teach them about the similarity between the three religions and that Islam is very tolerant. This is meaningful learning that helps them internalize and remember what they learned.

All teachers are proud of their pupils’ high achievements but at the same time, they emphasize their important role in reducing prejudice among students, parents, and colleagues.

The events they recall as having positive effects particularly in reducing prejudice and overcoming negative perceptions relate to both direct and indirect activities and to formal and informal events. At times, they directly intervened in situations to correct perceived prejudices, and at other times, prejudice reduction is perceived as the outcome of their routinely professional work. Teachers are aware that the wider social context of some of the children might be tainted by prejudice, yet they strongly believe that they are successful in changing students’ negative prejudiced perceptions, by explaining things that the children do not see in the media or hear in their immediate surroundings. They do this by offering students information that they believe their students lack, telling students about their society, culture, and religion. Yet, they realize change can only occur gradually.

I am not only teaching, I deliver all the good things from my culture. I present a nation, so it is important for the Arab teacher to be who he is really and to show the good things.

… Besides my educational contribution, my presence in the Jewish school makes a difference. My students learned that it is important to know about the “other,” not to judge, [but rather]to accept the “other.” It is not only in relation to Arabs, [but also] Ethiopians or Russians; there are students of many ethnic origins in the class. I’m sending a message to the students that being different doesn’t make the other worthless.

Teachers also consider their work as one which helps build bridges between the two societies and that their work not only succeeds in changing negative stereotypes about the Palestinian society in Israel but also strengthens tolerance and understanding toward alterity in general.

In the Hebrew-speaking schools, some of the teachers lead the “Shared lives” projects organizing mutual visits with Palestinian-Israeli schools.

I organized several activities, Arabic days, and another language day. I founded and managed an Arabic class. I was responsible for preparing everything in this class including books, stories, activities, and students could come and use them. I also had organized a “Shared lives” project with an Arab school from another town.

It is worth noting that some differences are revealed in the interviews. Differences follow from the declared goals of the bilingual integrated schools which are dedicated to bringing Jewish and Palestinian populations together while working towards coexistence and mutual recognition.

While the regular Hebrew speaking schools, according to the expectations of the parents’ body, focus mainly on school achievements; the bilingual schools focus on a dual agenda in which school achievements run parallel and equal to coexistence and multicultural one (at least at the declarative level). Some tensions are created by this double agenda which position pedagogical issues related to value education in opposition to academic achievement in disciplinary subjects that are required and tested by the Ministry of Education. Teachers are aware that the enrolment of children in their schools is dependent upon the school fulfilling the expectations of the parents that may be very different from their own.

The question wasn’t about our worldview; it was about the bourgeois class. We want to attract pupils. The parents are seen as bourgeois due to their aspirations for their children to succeed and become integrated into the dominant society through achievement-oriented goals of high grades on standardized tests that, ultimately, will allow for continuation in higher education and upward mobility.

Assessment criteria are directly influenced by the different worldviews that create a dichotomy between grades on standardized texts, as opposed to real-life behavior of the pupils to engage in inter-group relationships during play and recess activities.

Incompatibility between what we are measuring (achievements) and what we aim for. We measure areas of knowledge, but we wanted to reach a diverse society. I think in order to measure success we need to see how well we’ve done socially. It’s important to let each child think about his achievements, but we should measure whether we’re reaching our goal.

These teachers encounter difficulties balancing their goals for social integration, tolerance, and recognition and those of the parents, the funding institutions, and the Ministry of Education, who they perceive as more interested in academic success.

Teachers in Hebrew-speaking schools have for the most part one main agenda: to focus on alleviating the tensions just mentioned. The academic success of their pupils and their own success in contributing to their success is their main interest.

The teachers talked about using a variety of innovative teaching methods that enable genuine learning and contribute to making the students’ learning meaningful. The teachers made it clear that they believe they are recognized by the schools as excellent teachers and that their students’ grades have improved:

I feel that I am professionally growing. They respect my work. I am a person who likes receiving attention and I have that in school. I have also a lot of encouragement and praise and that encourages me to give more.

According to the teachers, self-efficacy is connected also with keeping an open mind, having a strong personality, being proficient in spoken Hebrew, exhibiting friendliness, demonstrating professional skills, creativity, a strong work ethic, and is very motivated to succeed. However, it seems that there is a price of fitting into the existing school culture. Despite the many accounts of collaboration and cohesiveness in the schools, there are also accounts in which personal and/or group affiliations interfere with the status quo and individuals do not feel comfortable expressing themselves as “different”. One of the teachers in a bilingual integrated school stated:

The cultural context is different, I was raised differently, and it has happened more than once that I came out of a classroom crying because of how someone spoke to me and was later told that I took it too much to heart and it’s not that significant.

Though at times a bit problematic these perceived cultural differences end up being reported as positive events. ‘Their mentality is completely different from ours in a positive way’ stated one of the teachers. Another teacher reported that:

It seems that I went with the flow. My husband tells me sometimes that I am forgetting that I am an Arab. Now I see more wrong habits in my society, I don’t like a lot of things and wish to change them.

Despite their positive attitude towards their own acculturation process, the teachers who have children and work at the Hebrew speaking schools explained that they do not enroll them in Jewish schools because they fear their children’s cultural identity and language skills would be jeopardized.

The Jews are very liberated; I don’t see this liberation or freedom as a positive thing. I see it as a mess, and I don’t like a mess. For example, a 5th-grade student was telling me that she has a boyfriend from another class and they are going to a movie together. This is not acceptable for me. I cannot imagine my daughter in this situation. Life is not only math and English; it is important to keep our culture and language and we have to uphold certain limits.

Finally, in general, all teachers were very positive about their experiences working in the schools. This becomes apparent in the fact that they strongly recommended that other Palestinian teachers work in Jewish State schools or the bilingual integrated ones. They were ready to encourage this participation not only to teachers lacking jobs in the Arab sector but also to new graduate teachers looking for a first job.

They all thought that teaching in a Jewish school was a good and learning experience for Palestinian-Israeli teachers, one that also affords them the opportunity to change Jews’ stereotypical beliefs.

I recommend it because we can make a difference in Jewish-Arab relations. An Arab teacher can learn a lot of things there like I did. She can adopt the good things and avoid the inappropriate. I began to understand life better thanks to my experience in school.

The positive relation between the Palestinian teachers and their Jewish colleagues strengthened by their shared perception of themselves as pedagogical experts and the added value of a sense of ideological commitment to multiculturalism and coexistence strengthens the teachers’ sense of belonging to a very exclusive and positive group. All together these appreciations allow for a strong sense of self-efficacy.

Political Positioning

Political conflict often forces its way into the classrooms, especially in times of social and political unrest, such as wars and national days, and other commemorative days. Subjects of tension and conflict from the outside world are brought into the classroom through an “adult” agenda.

Political Tension/War

Teachers at the bilingual integrated schools attempt to create a safe home for themselves and the children in isolation from the harsh reality “outside” the school. The teachers feel they have succeeded in creating a safe home in the school for the children based on friendship and similarity. The school’s official goals undoubtedly help in achieving these goals.

I asked them if they knew what was happening, and they knew very well, even though they are 2nd graders. They didn’t change their usual habits - they separated between what was happening outside and what was happening in the classroom.

We had an argument about who was suffering more - the Arab children or the Jewish children (children do not fear to speak about these issues).

Teachers at the Hebrew-speaking schools understand that students asked political questions because they viewed the Palestinian teacher as representing the whole of the Palestinian people, and especially those in the Palestinian territories and in the Gaza Strip.

Some students ask questions, like why do the Arabs in Gaza hate us? Why do they attack us? Why do they try to kill us? I answer their questions. I tell them that it happens because there is a struggle and a war between two groups that are in conflict. I explain that not all of Gaza’s citizens are terrorists and they have regular families and children, like people in Israel, and that these children have dreams and worlds of their own. I also tell them that there are children on the other side who live under occupation and shelling and some of them die … This [change] happens gradually; perceptions aren’t changed overnight.

In a sense, it could be said that the strategy adopted to cope with these conflicting issues is one that tries to create symmetry so as to emphasize similarities (children on both sides suffer) and allow for empathy. The attempt to emphasize the suffering of children from both sides appears also among teachers teaching at Hebrew speaking schools. In the following excerpt, a dilemma is presented in the classroom by one Palestinian teacher. In her role as teacher, she believes it is important to convey to the pupils that children on both sides underwent suffering during the war. She wants each side to understand the suffering of the other side.

However, according to her personal position in relation to the conflict, she believes that the two sides are not “equally” suffering. Unclear in her own mind, she is unsatisfied with the result of the class discussion that fails to make a strong statement of any kind.

It was hard for the children to accept the suffering of the other side. It was necessary to intervene and say that people on both sides were suffering - we wrote on the board the needs of both sides. It was very difficult … But as an educator, I wanted to emphasize the parity.

In both cases, the way suffering was experienced by both sides during the war is presented in the classroom according to the personal position of the teacher. It is also an attempt to bring the outside reality of chaos and violence into the classroom in a controlled and manageable way through the resolution of the conflict by way of presenting all the children similarly as victims. The teachers’ agenda is to help the children in the classroom feel that Palestinian and Jewish children are all similar to each other and not in conflict. However, in this example, personal and political national identifications conflict with the desire to reach symmetry (Bekerman & Zembylas, 2010).

Again on these issues, differences are to be found. While the teachers teaching at the bilingual integrated schools report that in spite of the difficulties a dialogue of conflictual issues is regularly sustained and supported by the school administration between Jewish and Palestinian faculty; in Hebrew speaking schools such an endorsement does not exist.

A teacher at the bilingual schools related to us the following:

The war horrified me. But from a professional standpoint, the school coped with the war, with the encounter of Jews and Arabs with murder and killing - very professionally. The teachers met in the morning and evening, for ventilation and to discuss the place of the school. Every day we checked what was done and where we stood. I think we took good care of ourselves, we didn’t conceal anything.

Offering a very different perspective a teacher at the Hebrew speaking school stated:

… When political issues are raised, as happened recently because of the situation, I am very careful and I try not to become emotional because I might say things that I’ll regret later. The policy of the school is not to discuss politics, but sometimes it happens, and I try not to intervene. Yet, at times, they felt they could not but react to political statements.

Still, these teachers do not feel they are totally abandoned; one of them shared with us the following:

It was a hard time for me [during the war in Gaza]: the principal came to me and told me that it is a hard time for all of us and that if I encountered any difficulties in my work, I should tell her. She also offered to come to my classes and to talk to the students, if I felt it would help.

When considering national commemoration days more differences are found.

At the bilingual integrated schools and as part of their declared goals, ways are found (in spite of the Ministry of Education guidelines) that allow for some equity in the presentation of the Jewish and the Palestinian historical narratives. One of the teachers told us the following:

… I have no problem with a common ceremony. I have a problem with Nakbah and Memorial Day together, where the only common thing is pain. It’s hard to say. … if I think of Memorial Day I think of soldiers, who are also people, but they went out and killed people who died in the Nakbah.

For teachers teaching at Hebrew-speaking schools, the situation is a bit more complex. Most of these teachers need to adhere to the traditional dress code adopted by Jewish schools for this day (white shirts), yet emotionally, it is a very difficult day for them. Although they abide by the custom of standing at attention during the sounding of the siren, a moment dedicated to the memory of those who died serving their country, they do so out of respect for their colleagues and students. Two of the interviewees explained that they were unable to hold back their tears during the ceremony because they were thinking about their own narrative at the same time.

Obviously, I don’t sing the “Hatikva” (the national anthem) with them; I even think about the spirits of our dead. They [the Jews present at the ceremony] know that I am standing because I respect them. I sing the Arabic song “Mawtiny e my homeland” in my heart. I cannot shake off my roots. I don’t forget who I am. It is too hard for me on Memorial Day. I used to stand with them, but it was very hard. I cried several times and other teachers hugged me, I explained to them that it hurts for me and for my people …

The teachers accepted my decision. However, on Holocaust Remembrance Day, I feel sad for the people who were killed and I want to express solidarity. I don’t have any problem attending – or even participating actively – in the ceremony.

Discussion

Two main interests guided our work. First, we wanted to add to the growing research which contributes to a better understanding of how minority teachers in majority schools experience their work and how their participation in such educational contexts helps shape their sense of ethno-cultural belonging and their sense of self-efficacy. Second, we wanted through our comparative work to gain insights into the context-specific conditions which might help support or undermine minority teachers’ inclusion. To do this we compared the reported experiences of Palestinian Israeli teachers working in two somewhat different educational contexts; the Hebrew speaking schools which serve the regular Israeli Jewish population and the bilingual integrated schools which offer the opportunity for the two populations to study under one roof in a society in which schools are mostly segregated. Both these educational contexts include Palestinian Israeli teachers in their faculty; the first mostly because of instrumental reasons while the second because of their ideology.

Our findings point mostly at similarities in the way these teachers experience their work at the schools but also some notable differences have been exposed.

Both groups of teachers express satisfaction regarding their work at the Hebrew speaking and the bilingual integrated schools. They feel at ‘home’ they say, indicating through this metaphor a strong identification with the institutions within which they work. They are not only satisfied with their work but they also feel they belong to a very special ‘club’ a metaphor that affords them a strong and positive positioning within the school context. Both groups of teachers sustain good relationships with all stakeholders – students, parents, and colleagues. Last both groups of teachers appreciate their exposure to the majority society and believe that for the most part, this exposure is beneficial to their own understanding of social realities and the need (or not) to help change them. All in all, these aspects together contribute to their sense of job satisfaction and feeling of belonging to the school.

All teachers seem to have developed high professional positions with a strong sense of self-efficacy thanks to their positive experiences and to the school environment (Flores & Clark, 2004). Their professional abilities can promote students’ outcomes and success (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). The success in taking part in the promotion of students’ achievements adds to their sense of satisfaction. Teachers in both educational contexts described their professional role predominantly as pedagogical experts. Teachers also reported professional and social acceptance at work (Erlich et al., 2020). They reported using a variety of teaching methods, innovating new strategies, enabling genuine learning, and making the students’ learning meaningful. The strategies implemented, they believe, contribute not only to the students’ academic success but also have an important role in reducing prejudice among students, parents, and colleagues. These findings are in line with those of Jennett et al. (2003) and Scheopner (2010), who noted that a positive and supportive social climate helps teachers sustain constructive relationships with all school stakeholders, and it is instrumental for establishing and sustaining their sense of satisfaction and motivation (Scheopner, 2010). Reeves (2009) shows how teachers’ positioning of students as individuals who actively cope with relevant pedagogical issues on a daily basis could help teachers reposition themselves in relation to their role as guides, partners, and role models for their pupils.The differences found in the teachers’ approaches seem to relate to the educational ideologies sustained by the different educational contexts in which they teach.

While the regular Hebrew speaking schools focus mainly on academic achievements; the bilingual schools focus on a dual agenda in which academic achievements run parallel and equal to coexistence and multicultural one (at least at the declarative level). Moreover, the Hebrew-speaking schools have for the most part no representation of the Palestinian population (not at the administrative level or the students and parents body) while the bilingual integrated schools bring together Jewish and Palestinian populations and try to keep an ethnically balanced faculty.

In the case of teachers teaching at Hebrew-speaking schools, these differences seem to make no difference in terms of their general sense of satisfaction. Moreover, given that regular segregated state schools do not necessarily follow a multicultural policy they see themselves as the bearers of a multicultural agenda, a peculiarity that serves to strengthen their feeling of superiority and perceive their work as an ideological calling, rather than as a regular teaching job even if it began as a solution to not finding a job in the Arab schools.

The teachers at the bilingual schools, on the other hand, sense tensions which impinge on their sense of satisfaction and professionalism. They sense they are the only ones truly defending the double academic success/coexistence agenda. They believe parents for the most part look at the school as a pathway for their children to sustain or to better their present position in the social hierarchies and that they are the only ones who not disregarding the importance of academic success stay attached and struggle to advance the coexistence agenda.

The ideological and structural differences between the school contexts are also reflected in the way the teachers confront political issues. Teachers at the bilingual school seem to find it easier to cope with political questions regarding the Palestinian and Jewish historical narratives as well as to confront questions regarding national commemorative events such as Holocaust Memorial Day and the Day of Independence. The declared ideological foundation of the bilingual integrated schools come to their help and allow them to rather openly talk about very sensitive issues in Israel’s conflictual society.

Teachers at the Hebrew-speaking schools find this task much more difficult and many times have a sense that silence is the way to cope with the potential dilemmas created by the historical narratives of the groups in conflict. For the most part, the sense that with the help of their principals they can endure the tensions but the tensions and dilemmas are always present. The teachers easily admit that they try to avoid talking about political events or expressing their own opinion. They explain that, in general, they come to teach, to earn a living, and they do not wish to get involved in anything that might jeopardize their job.

Conclusions and Implications

All in all, it becomes apparent that even when considering the difficulties mentioned there is something positive about the presence of minority teachers in majority Hebrew speaking and bilingual schools. Other than their high professionalism they contribute to a more tolerant and diverse society.

Moreover, our research brings strong support to those theoreticians who have pointed at the utter importance of context-specific conditions (Easton-Brooks et al., 2010; Irvine & Fenwick, 2011; Irvine, 1989; Lengyel & Rosen, 2015; Strasser & Waburg, 2015) and their potential to support or undermine minority teachers’ inclusion. This point is also supported by Allport’s (1954) contact hypothesis that claims that extensive integration between members of an in-group and an out-group is the best means for achieving social stability and harmony. Yet Allport sets conditions without which contact will not do the expected job of prejudice reduction. The main prescriptions recommended in the contact literature include the following: contact should be regular and frequent; it should involve a balanced ratio of in-group to out-group members while allowing for a genuine “acquaintance potential;” it should occur between individuals who share equality of status; and while being institutionally sanctioned, it should be organized around cooperation towards the achievement of a super-ordinate goal.

At this point, these conditions are met with greater approximation in the bilingual integrated schools. Though it seems difficult, at this point in time, to expect the Ministry of Education in Israel to embrace a stronger multicultural agenda and to support the growth of bilingual integrates schools it becomes clear that the effectiveness of the contribution of Palestinian teachers in majority schools can be widened and better supported by securing stronger institutional support (one not only based on instrumental needs, e.g. lack of Jewish teachers) for multicultural approaches geared to the soothing of social and political conflicts. Teachers serve as role models to the children who feel comfortable with them. The inclusion of Palestinian teachers in regular state schools that strongly support the initiative can become a “real-life experiment” with tolerance and recognition helping all involved overcome the prejudices and conflicts of the present generation. Lived experience may be more significant than ideology. We see in our teachers a potential to be effective agents of social change, by helping their students and colleagues combat racism and prejudice.

In general, the research we conducted has the potential of widening and deepening our understanding of how teachers ideological, social, and political perspectives intersect with their pedagogical practices and believe such research efforts should be encouraged and increased. Moreover, we believe that comparative research on the participation of majority teachers in schools mainly populated by minority populations (e.g. Jewish teachers working in Arab schools in Israel) would be very productive. Similar comparative efforts should be conducted in other countries suffering from persistent conflicts; such research efforts would contribute to us on the context specific understanding of the effects of including minority teachers in majority schools. Finally, we suggest extending research on how different systemic reasons/needs to include minority teachers in majority schools (ideological and/or instrumental), influence the teachers’ involvement in these initiatives.