Looking at their side of the conflict? Effects of single versus multiple perspective history teaching on Jewish and Arab adolescents’ attitude to out-group narratives and in-group responsibility

Abstract

In the last decade, the issue of teaching the Palestinian perspective on the Jewish-Arab conflict in Israeli schools gave rise to considerable debate and competing curricula. A quasi-experimental study compared the effects of these competing approaches on learners' attitudes to out-group narratives and perceived in-group responsibility (IR). A total of 176 Israeli Jewish and Arab participants were randomly allocated into teaching approaches differing in method of engagement with historical narratives (single authoritative narrative, empathetic dual narrative, and critical analysis of conflicting sources). Results revealed effects for teaching approach and majority-minority status. Engagement with a single authoritative narrative decreased interest in out-group perspectives while empathetic engagement with out-group and in-group perspectives increased it, though the effect was more pronounced for members of the Arab minority than for those of the Jewish majority. Among Jewish participants, an empathetic teaching approach led to a decrease in perceived IR while the critical approach led to the opposite outcome. The trends were inverted for Arab participants. Engagement with historical perspectives also moderated the impact of interest in out-group perspectives on acceptance of IR. Educational implications point to the harmful effects of enforcing a single narrative in conflicted societies and to the beneficial outcomes of multiple perspective teaching.

Education in Emergencies: A Review of Theory and Research

“…Existing experimental and quasi-experimental evidence is promising. Comparison of the inquiry approach with conventional and other multiperspective approaches with history teaching showed that the former had a significantly positive impact on changing students’ attitudes and perceptions about the contested past and out-group members (Barton & McCully, 2010; Goldberg, 2014) and on improving intergroup relations (Goldberg & Ron, 2014).…”

Citizenship to (counter)terrorism: the need to de-securitise the Norwegian education system and create space for democratic resilience

“…In this process, they also invited residents in the local community to an 'open mosque' for dialogue. According to Goldberg (2014), critical and emphatic engagement with different others is more likely to decrease hostilities and increase interest between out-groups in society. The students had learned that immigrant youths lacked formal meeting places in the community.…”

"They Can't Expect to be Treated Like Normal Americans so Soon": Reconceptualizing Latinx Immigrants in Social Studies Education

“…A potential limit of these discussions, however, is that they often fail to draw on testimonios to examine racial injustice from a critical perspective (Goldberg, Porat, & Schwarz, 2006;Vasquez, Brown, & Brown, 2012). In short, controversial discussions in the classroom may not challenge students enough to interrogate master narratives effectively (Barton & McCully, 2012;Goldberg, 2014;Salinas, Blevins, & Sullivan, 2012).…”

“…Findings from related studies show that relying only on mainstream paradigms reduces engagement and empathy for other perspectives (Goldberg, 2017). For instance, in studies of students in Northern Ireland and Israel, researchers found that students have difficulty interrogating master narratives effectively even when presented with alternative historical explanations and perspectives (Barton & McCully, 2012;Goldberg, 2014). In order to disrupt master narratives effectively, students must have access to the counter-narratives found in the testimonios of people from historically oppressed groups (Salinas & Castro, 2010).…”