Studying Each Other's Historical Narrative -

Palestinians and Israelis

Evaluation of PRIME booklet in Israeli classrooms

2006-2008

By: Noga Einy

July, 2009

Table of Contents

  1. PRIME - Background …………………………………………………………..…..…… 3
  2. The importance of evaluation …………………………………………….…..... 4
  3. Evaluation - objectives
  4. Implementation process - objectives
  5. Methodology ……………………………..……………………………………….....…… 5-6
  6. Observations
  7. The Questionnaire
  8. Other evaluation data
  9. Challenges and limitation of evaluation process…….…….………. 6
  10. An analysis of the classes' observations …………………..….….… 7-19
  11. Teaching methodology …………………………………………….…..…….. 7-8
  12. The concept of two narratives ………………………………….…….... 8-12
  13. Understanding the concept
  14. Studying two narratives
  15. Teaching style as critical to the success of the Dual Narrative Approach
  16. Balanced teaching –Teacher's Subjectivity/Objectivity.... 12-14
  17. Presenting the project
  18. Teacher’s personal opinions
  19. Comparing the two narratives
  20. Difficulties and challenges encountered by pupils and teachers……………………………………………………………………………………….15-16
  21. General challenges and suggested ways to overcome…... 17-19
  22. Time limitations
  23. Process oriented teaching
  24. Class size
  25. Summary and Conclusions ……………………………………………………. 20-21
  26. Recommendations ………………………………………………………..……….. 22-23
  27. Appendix – the full evaluation form/questionnaire………. 24-29
  1. PRIME - Background

PRIME's purpose is to pursue mutual coexistence and peace building through joint research and outreach activities.

"Studying Each Other's Historical Narrative" - Project Goals[1]:

This project of the Peace Research Institute in the Middle East (PRIME) focuses on teachers and schools as the critical force over the long term for changing deeply entrenched and increasingly polarized attitudes on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The goal of the project was to "disarm" the teaching of Middle East history in Israeli and Palestinian classrooms.

Specifically, teams of Palestinian and Israeli teachers and historians have developed parallel historical narratives of the Israeli and Palestinian communities, translated them into Hebrew and Arabic, and have tested their use together in both Palestinian and Israeli classrooms. Unlike other projects that are limited to revising existing Israeli and Palestinian texts, the PRIME project aimed at engaging teachers on both sides in an entirely new collaborative process for teaching the history of the region.

At this stage in their polarized history there is not enough common ground for Israelis and Palestinians to create a single historical narrative. Rather, the project was designed to expose high school students in each community to the other's narrative of the same set of events. For the first time, students in each school system not only learned what shaped their own community's understanding of historical events, but were required to confront the historical perspectives and contexts that shape the other community's sense of reality.

  1. The importance of evaluation

The following evaluation is meant to serve as an overall assessment of the PRIME project’s implementation in Israeli classrooms, and to bring forth the main themes related to teaching and studying the Dual Narrative Approach (DNA).

2.1The evaluation objectives:

  • To answer the question whether the implementation process meets its prescribed goals.
  • To understand the strengths and weaknesses of teaching/studying the booklet.
  • To provide recommendations regarding future use of the PRIME booklet.
  • To enrich teachers' experiences with the DNA by observing and evaluating their colleagues, and by receiving external feedback.
  • To allow other stakeholders to examine the potential of the program, while exposing them to the educational field's particularities.

2.2Implementation process objectives:

  • To expose Israeli high school students to the Dual Narrative Approach
  • To expose Israeli high school students to the Palestinian narratives of various historical events, while encouraging them to compare them to their familiar narrative
  • To allow Israeli high school students who study the PRIME booklet to rethink the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
  • To encourage critical thinking as an educational tool in studying history
  1. Methodology

3.1Observations - Peer and external observations in history classes dealing with the two narratives-

  • 3 peer observations
  • 11 external observations (Two were videotaped).[2]

3.2The questionnaire –The main toolused to collect data was a questionnaire, which was written jointly by the Palestinian and Israeli evaluators and then sent to the teachers for feedback. Throughout the duration of the project, the questionnaire was updated (e.g., questions order was changed and one extra question was added regarding teacher objectivity). The questionnaire includes three main sections –teacher reactions, pupils’ reactions, and teacher-pupil interaction. See questionnaire in Appendix.

How this tool was used - The observers filled out the questionnaires based on their observations of classroom lessons using the PRIME booklet. The questions were clear and referred both to the teacher and pupils. The observers could either write freely during the class, and after class fill out the questionnaire, or fill out the questionnaire partly during class and complete it later at their convenience depending on each individual’s working habits and preference.

3.3Other evaluation data

  • 2 videotaped lessons, which have been evaluated by Noga, who watched the tapes and filled out the questionnaire.
  • Self reflection reports, which were written by some of the teachers regarding several classes they taught.
  • Feedback questionnaires filled by the pupils in one of the sessions. (During the 2005 and 2007 school years).
  1. Challenges and limitations of evaluation process -

Collecting the data for evaluation - challenges in implementation in Israeli classes-

  • The Israeli Ministry of Education has not yet approved the use of the PRIME booklet in schools. On the contrary, teaching the Palestinian narrative in Israeli classrooms is considered revolutionary within the echelons of the Israeli education system. At early stages of the project, some of the Israeli teachers received letters of warning from the Ministry of Education. To say the least, these circumstances did not encourage the use of the booklet in classrooms.
  • Tight timetables in schools, mostly regarding the Bagrut (matriculation) exam, has narrowed teachers' possibilities fitting in PRIME booklet material into their already strictly dictated curriculum.
  • Integrating the dual narrative program into the existing curriculum, especially when also taking into consideration the specific learning level of a given class, proved to be challenging.
  • Unexpected strikes within the educational system in Israel, which necessitated that teachers refrain from holding class for a period of time, created an even tighter schedule for the teachers upon returning from strike, exacerbating any difficulties inherent in introducing new material into a curriculum.
  1. An analysis of the observations

This section will present and explore five main themes that arose from an analysis of the data, which were found to be relevant for the evaluation objectives.

The main themes are: teaching methodology; referring to the concept of two narratives; difficulties and challenges encountered by the pupils and the teachers; balanced teaching; general challenges and suggested ways to overcome them.

The historical topics studied in the classes were as follows:

  • Roots of Zionism
  • Balfour Declaration
  • 1948 War
  • The 20's
  • The 70's – 80's

5.1 Teaching Methodology –

Teaching techniques used by the teachers:

  • Distributing print-outs photographed from selected sections of the narratives to the pupils, but not using the whole booklet. (Some of the teachers showed the booklet at a certain point during the lesson, but refrained from using it while teaching; one exception was a teacher who read out loud himself without handing out print-outs).
  • Reading the two narratives –
  • The teacher asks the pupils to read out loud or (s)he reads her/himself. In most classes the pupils volunteered to read.
  • The teacher asks pupils to read quietly in pairs and answer questions.
  • One teacher taught each narrative as a separate lesson.
  • One teacher taught only one narrative (the Palestinian) because of time limitations.
  • Asking knowledge questions regarding each narrative – how many were killed according to this narrative, what caused the fight according to…, who is to blame according to…, etc.
  • Asking comparative questions regarding the two narratives, and demonstrating critical historical thinking and understanding the subjectivity of historical interpretation. This included explanations of different approaches and terms to the same concept and discussing a critical reading of the text, analyzing what is "behind" the words, what is the tone of the text/word, etc.
  • Most of the teachers maintained the interest of their pupils by asking questions, relating the historical events to current reality, and by encouraging the pupils' participation. In two lessons it was observed that the teacher tried but did not succeed in encouraging the pupils actively to participate in the lesson.
  • Using the board - writing on the board the important central concepts or phrases of each narrative, mainly for the purpose of comparison.
  • Relating the concept of perspective to other life experiences.

Examples used: experiencing a soccer game, a fight between kids, Assad's intentions towards peace, media coverage, terms used in news reports, the narrative of the movie on Munich athletes, showing a variety of history text books, etc.

5.2 The concept of two narratives –

5.2.1 Understanding the concept of two narratives -

The pupils don’t seem to have a problem understanding the concept of two historical narratives (those who were familiar with it from past lessons, and also those who were exposed to it for the first time). On the contrary, they regularly used terms central to the dual narrative approach – when discussing the different perspectives in class, they spoke about contradictions, subjectivity, point of view, context and varying or contradicting interests. Here are some of the ways they typically described the concept in class: there are a lot of contradictions; each side has its own interests so they write according to them; there are a lot of perspectives; its related to context; each side presents itself as better than the other; it’s one big story – each side sees it differently (defense/offence); there is no such thing as objectivity; each side has its own truth, etc.

These expressions do not imply that all the pupils accept the concept of dual narratives, or that they are free from doubts and confusing thoughts, but it indicates that they have the capacity for understanding and relating to history in a new way.

It should also be noted that specific reactions to the content of historical events implied understanding of the dual narrative concept - for example: For them (Palestinians) it was "Intifadot" (uprisings), for us (Israelis) it was "Praot" (disturbances); They (Palestinians) also want a country of their own and to prove their power.

5.2.2 Studying the two narratives –

Some of the lessons included reactions of the pupils regarding the idea of studying the two narratives in school. These lessons exposed a variety of opinions, though the general impression is more positive than negative. Here are the specific reactions of the pupils:

Claims against a dual-narrative curriculum –

  • It’s confusing.
  • It’s not preparing the pupils for the Bagrut (matriculation) exam. (Another student said that while it will not help him in the exam, it’s a more interesting way of learning)
  • Each narrative poisons the respective side; they are both wrong.
  • I already believe in one narrative, and also this new teaching could not influence the Palestinians.

Claims in support of a dual-narrative curriculum –

  • Although it’s confusing we should learn it and understand that interpretations relate to context.
  • We are mature. We should know more, not only what we get from the media.
  • Each side distorts the facts and presents itself as miserable … because of the hatred no one makes contact. Maybe studying two points of view could show us that we are also wrong, and that's important.
  • We are getting angry when we hear what they think of us, but at the same time they are angry with what we think of them.
  • It’s good to learn a different point of view; I didn’t even know there is a thing called “narrative”; it's much more interesting hearing two opinions; learning two narratives allows us to formulate our own attitude.
  • We shouldn’t let some old way of thinking (200 hundred years ago) control our way of thinking. Maybe in the future something could happen, so we should know the enemy. (Other student answers: “maybe he wouldn’t be an enemy).
  • It strengthens Zionism.
  • Now (after we learned it), we finally know why they hate us and feel sorry for themselves.

It should be noted here that data from a research thesis[3] and from questionnaires filled bypupils who studied the narratives shows that most of the pupils positively support teaching the two narratives in schools since they think it’s important to know the other.

5.2.3 –Teaching style as critical to the success of the Dual Narrative Approach

It appears that this kind of teaching necessitates a new manner of teacher-student interaction, lead by the teacher’s way of speaking to and addressing the pupils and handling the class. This is not only a new way of teaching history, but a whole new "language" used in the class -

The DNA (Dual Narrative Approach) relates to the pupils' emotions as it exposes the pupils to the core of the conflict, sometimes leading them to confront injustices perpetrated by their own nation. It also may compel them to realize for the first time that history is not necessarily a matter of right or wrong, but a matter of perspective and interpretation, and, as such, that their teacher is a person who has an opinion, and yet can still teach both sides. (For more details refer to the next section – Balanced Teaching)

It seems that most of the pupils understand this new approach or new way of thinking about history, but they do not seem to handle it in a deep and complex way. Therefore, the teacher's role in such circumstances becomes altered and includes not only to teaching history, but also to engaging more personal aspects of the pupils’ inner world. Their job becomes more complex, and should involve a combination of teaching, identifying the pupils' needs, and encouraging them to express their feelings and opinions as they grapple with the new perspective being exposed to them.

The data from the observations shows that most of the teachers use a dual narrative approach throughout the lessons, not only in explaining the two historical texts, but also in their attitude. By naturally matching their "language" to the core essence of the history booklet, they actually make it easier for the pupils to understand this new way of teaching and thinking. They embody the DNA in their own classroom comportment-

  • They do not tend to give black and white answers to the pupils' questions, but rather they tend to provide complex answers. Furthermore, even when teaching about the Israeli narrative, they seem to locate the general lesson that could be learned, allowing the pupils to adopt these lessons/values when thinking of the "other" in general, not only within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such was the case in one of the teachers' classes, when a lesson on anti-Semitism provided a segway into teaching that fear tends to arise when people encounter someone/a group who is different from them.
  • They explain the meanings of unfamiliar terms while taking into consideration both the Israeli and the Palestinian perspective.
  • They write on the board throughout the lesson, in such a manner that includes both the Israeli and Palestinian narrative (different names or concepts, numbers, different interpretations of the events, etc.).
  • This attitude is also salient in the lesson structure, which in nearly every instance (excepting two lessons) enabled a short discussion and encouraged the pupils' involvement in the class material. A frequent question asked by the teacher was - "How does the other narrative present/name/see/interpret it?" which led to questions, thoughts, expressions of empathy, confusion, anger, frustration etc. These reactions are not characteristic of a normative history lesson, and therefore are new and intriguing for the pupils, and challenging for the teacher.

5.3 Balanced teaching – teacher's objectivity/subjectivity

One of the evaluation objectives was to explore the teachers' ability to maintain a balanced perspective while teaching the narratives. By balanced teaching we refer to the teacher's place in the class as an Israeli who teaches both narratives – the Israeli and the Palestinian. Naturally, the concept of the DNA allows each teacher to keep his own thoughts about the historical development of events, as long as the idea of two legitimate points of view is emphasized and provides the driving force behind class discussions.

5.3.1 Presenting the project - Most teachers explained the pupils about PRIME – they presented the booklet as a joint Israeli-Palestinian project, in which they themselves took part in. By describing a joint project, with equal parties, the teacher creates a balanced ground for studying the narratives. Discussing the project allowed a window into the pupils’ thoughts, opinions, and willingness to adopt this new approach to learning history. For example, one of the pupils asked why there were empty lines between the narratives in the booklet, and before the teacher got the chance to answer, another pupil said: “So each of us could ad his own narrative”.