The challenges for Arab lecturer in Hebrew academic institutions, and how his presence impacts the Arab students

Abstract

This study addresses the status and conduct of the Arab lecturer in Jewish-Hebrew academia in Israel, and how this impacts Arab students. The study is conducted through the self-research of a case study, in light of my having served as an Arab lecturer in Hebrew academia for more than two decades. The case study is based on my students’ written reports submitted over the past three years, from two different courses. The findings indicate that an Arab lecturer who is proud of being an Arab and is confident in himself can increase the self-confidence of Arab students, encouraging them to speak and participate in class. One main factor that enhances Arab students is legitimizing the use of the Arab language in lessons, enabling them to participate and speak in Arabic. Combined, this leads to the legitimization of the Arab students’ identity, enabling them to sound their voice.

Keywords:

• Arab lecturer
• Hebrew academia
• Arab students

Introduction

The Palestinian-Arab population accounts for 20% of Israel’s citizens, constituting the country’s largest minority group (2.037 million people according to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 2022). The Arabs are not a part of the Jewish collective, they do not feel a sense of belonging to the Jewish state and they do not identify with its symbols and goals (Abu-Saad, 2004; Ghanem, 1998). They are not officially recognized as a national minority group, but rather as a linguistic and cultural minority group. The State regards them as a collection of religious or language groups bearing unique characteristics, while ignoring their common identity and interests as a single national group (Al-Haj, 1996; Smooha, 1999).

Much has been written about the Palestinian-Arab minority in Israel, its status in the country, its identity and the attitude of the Jewish majority toward it. Most of the research reaches the conclusion that the state, in its definition as Jewish, cannot include the Arabs as regular citizens. The state excludes them and discriminates against them on the basis of their national belonging (Manaa’, 2017). Despite this discriminatory policy, the aspiration of the Palestinian-Arabs is on one hand to maintain their Palestinian identity, and on the other hand to fulfill their roles as citizens of Israel (Ghanem & Khatib, 2017).

One of the mechanisms that the state uses in order to exclude the Arabs is education. The education system serves as a mechanism to obscure the students’ Palestinian identity, attempting instead to shape an Arab-Israeli identity that has little connection to the experience of the Palestinian people in Israel (Abu-Saad, 2004; Arar & Keynan, 2015).

The discrimination regarding Arab students in the public school system also applies to their experience when they enter Israel’s higher education institutions. Over recent years research projects have been examining relations between Jewish and Arab students on Israeli campuses, raising questions about the integration of Arab students in these "bastions" of democracy. The findings reflect Arab students’ partial or total lack of integration in the institutions in which they study. To one degree or another they feel alienated (Halabi, 2016; Lazarowitz et al., 2008; Lev Ari & Mula, 2016). The language and structure of Israeli campuses present difficulties for Arab students, leading to a disproportionately low rate of Arabs to Jews in the academy. In the 2016–2017 academic year, Arabs accounted for 16% of the B.A. students, 13.1% of the M.A. students and 6.3% of the doctoral candidates (Lior, 2018). The situation is more severe when looking at the faculty, where 1.75% of the senior faculty members are Arab (Ali & Da’as, 2018).

In this study, I will attempt to examine if and how the Arab lecturer can alter this situation, serve as a role model, and ease these students’ entry into the university walls. I will also attempt to identify the optimal behavior and teaching methods that could provide an anchor of stability for Arab students in Hebrew academia.

I will also share the challenges faced by Arab lecturers in Hebrew academia, based on my own personal experience, especially when teaching mixed Jewish-Arab classes. To do so, I will examine my own personal case as an Arab lecturer in one of the Hebrew universities in Israel, based on two main sources: papers submitted by the Arab students in my courses over the past three years, and my own personal experiences and impressions, acquired over two decades at the same university, teaching mixed Jewish and Arab courses. The study was conducted based on the self-research methodology, a type of action research that examines my experiences as both an Arab student and as a lecturer.

This case study covers my 25-year journey in academia and includes feedback received from students over the years. More specifically, this study attempts to analyze written feedback submitted by Arab students after participating in two of my courses at the university. These courses are entitled: “The Jewish Arab Encounter as an educational site: Goals and outcomes” and “Education of minorities in a multicultural society: Education for Arabs”. In both courses, the Jewish-Arab conflict is permanently and prominently present, with the students’ personal experiences adding to the main body of knowledge taught in these courses – especially as I teach these courses based on Freire’s Dialog Method (Freire, 1970; Freire & Macedo, 1995). Finally, this study addresses my experiences and the impact of my conduct as an Arab lecturer on the Arab students, through the Theory of Multicultural Education and The Critical Pedagogical Theory.

Theoretical background

Multicultural education

Today, most countries and cultures are multicultural, as they are comprised of a number of groups that differ in ethnicity, religion, and culture (Kymlicka, 2020). However, the term multiculture has a range of definitions and interpretations. Some relate to pluralism in terms of demographics and to cultural aspects (Appiah, 1998). Other approaches refer to power relations between the different groups and to reallocation of resources between them – striving for justice and equality (Kymlicka, 2007; Mclaren, 1997). Yet the most widespread definition for the term multicultural is based on a foundation of values and ideologies that relate to the accepting of different groups, while providing opportunities for each cultural group to strengthen and even maintain its identity. The underlying assumption of this approach is that acknowledging the different groups will instill in its members a stronger sense of belonging to the state and improved integration (Berry, 1998; Merola et al., 2019).

The multicultural approach is broadly accepted, often playing a key role in current education institutions. Studies show that educating towards multiculturalism in schools, colleges, and universities helps strengthen and empower students from disadvantage groups. A multicultural on-campus environment helps students feel more comfortable and more engaged in activities, which in turn could motivate them to bring about social changes in the future (Dahms, 1994; Milem, 2001). As such, the institution’s attitude on this topic is of the utmost importance. Integration and an ambiance of acceptance take place when the campus strives towards multiculturalism, encourages it, and even creates conditions in which it can take place (Gilani et al., 2020).

One necessary condition for educating students towards multiculturalism, and enabling students from different groups to become a successful integral part of the campus, entails lecturers who are culturally sensitive, diverse, and representative of the different cultures. Moreover, to enhance students from disadvantage groups, programs are needed for assisting these students, by the teaching staff and other personnel. Representatives of these groups within the teaching staff is also important, as with African Americans in the US (Allen, 1987; Gilani et al., 2020). The presence of lecturers from minority groups, such as African Americans, on White campuses conveys an ambiance of tolerance and acceptance of students from minority groups, and sets an example for these students regarding ambition and success (Edwards & Ross, 2017).

In an early study conducted in the US, correlations were found between the representation of African American lecturers in white universities and the percent of African American students who apply to that university, as well as their degree of persistence and success (Darden et al., 1998). A later study shows that Black students are better integrated and more successful when they have Black teachers – since these educators understand these students and their culture, and they serve as a successful role model (Milner, 2006).

The critical pedagogical approach

Critical education strives to achieve social justice and equality, placing humans and respect at the center. Paulo Freire (1970) claimed that the issue of humanization has always been a central problem for humans everywhere. As such, critical pedagogy continuously works to expose dehumanization and the oppressive state in which humans live. Critical pedagogy also strives to expose the imminent relationship between education and politics, and even claims that the political system uses education to preserve the status quo and to direct students towards the existing social classes and statuses. To promote a more just and equal study program in a democratic society, educators must pay attention to the socio-political standing in which their students live and learn (Pennycook, 2001). A central goal of the critical pedagogy is bringing the life experiences of students from the margins into the classroom, fighting against their silence, making sure their voices are heard in class, promoting them, and contributing to their empowerment (Giroux, 1991).

Students from disadvantage groups often find it difficult to speak in class due to the power differences between themselves and students from the elite group, including language differences. In the US, for example, this can be seen among speakers of Spanish and other ethnic languages, stemming in part from the superiority of the English language in academic institutions and referring to English as the neutral standard (Leeman, 2005; Potowski & Carreira, 2008).

Quiroz (2001) claims that having a voice is a power tool that enables people to convey their reality and experiences to others. In this study, I differentiate between one’s individual voice that is sounded among friends within the person sphere, and the voice that is sounded in the social sphere. Moreover, although a voice is sounded through language, it then also needs to be heard in order for it hold any power. Fine (1991) claims that within the education system the discourse is controlled, determining who can speak, what can be spoken about, and even which narratives are superior.

In this context, Freire (1970) perceives the education system as oppressive, a framework that preserves and serves the elite ruling group. To help students sound their voices, schools must encourage pedagogical dialog, aimed at making students aware of the circumstances and reality in which they live. They must realize the oppressive reality of which they are part, why this reality has occurred, and how they can be free of it. Awareness is key to working towards change, equality, and justice in the world. Only through praxis (i.e., awareness and striving for change) can people realize their calling – one of humanization.

Dialog is not simply the mechanical act of speaking in turn in the classroom, nor is it a psychological discourse in which students experience positive emotions without attempting to change reality. Dialog is an interaction between the students and the teacher, and between the students themselves – one that leads to new knowledge that is created with everyone’s help. This dialog starts with the participants sharing their personal experiences and is then backed and generalized by theories and study materials. Both stages of dialog are important and should not be omitted, resulting in a group process that acknowledges, challenges, and changes reality (Freire & Macedo, 2000).

Methodology

The methodology applied in this study is “self-research”, whereby teachers investigate their work. This method is especially applied in teacher training programs (Zellermayer, 2008). This type of research is reflective, to enable teachers to be critical of their work, while identifying or attempting to overcome difficulties (Kozminski, 2007). The goals of self-research are twofold, as it could be beneficial for the teacher-researcher on the personal/individual learner and may add to the literature in general. Moreover, exposing the research to the public could enable a critical review of the work, even making it available to others (Whitehead et al., 2009). The aim of this article is exactly that – to conduct a critical review of my work as an Arab lecturer in Israeli-Hebrew academia and share the findings, in the hope of contributing to the literature.

This study is based on two BA courses that I have been teaching at one of the Hebrew universities for the past two decades. “The Jewish Arab Encounter as an educational site: Goals and outcomes” combines both frontal teaching and dialog, with each session ending with a discussion about the Jewish-Arab conflict. The second course, “Education of minorities in a multicultural society: Education for Arabs” is frontal. This research study is conducted in relation to these two courses over the past three years, after I stopped giving students written exams at the end of the courses, requiring instead a written paper following specific guidelines. During these three academic years, 2018-2022, of the 133 students in my courses, 114 were Arab students, including 107 females and seven males (which is the general ratio on these programs), aged 19-25.

The following findings are based on the end-of-course papers that these students submitted. In these papers, they were asked to summarize their learning experiences throughout the course, as well as insights, awareness, new topics, and what they had learned about themselves through their conduct throughout the course. The findings are also based on my personal impressions as a teacher of these courses over twenty years. Analyzing feedback for conducting critical learning among teachers is a known methodology in self-research (Soslau, 2015).

For the purpose of writing this article, I repeatedly reviewed all the written material gathered, making note of issues that arose and insights that I gained, and refining these notes with each reading. The issues that I chose to discuss here are those expressed by the students in the various summary frameworks. They reflect the majority opinion that appeared in the data.

It is important to note that the issues depicted in this study express the students’ mindset, as conveyed in their summaries. They also reflect the opinions of the vast majority of the students. It is important to note that in the end-of-course paper guidelines, the students were not asked to write about me as a lecturer, yet most Arab students did so, compared to few Jewish students. As such, this study focuses on the input of the Arab students alone.

Obviously, the papers submitted may be impacted by the power relations between us and were written with the aim of being graded on my courses – and as such, they may have been written in a pleasing manner. That being said, most themes were shared by many of the Arab students. Moreover, qualitative research does not claim to be objective, unlike positivist research; the outcomes of the research are greatly dependent on the integrity and fairness of the researcher, who must stay true to the researched topic (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Finally, in relation to the topic of ethics, I must clarify the following. This research was written after years of teaching these courses; it was not planned in advance. After deciding to write this study, I contacted each of the students who had written relevant context and asked them for their permission to use their input in a research paper. Complete confidentiality was assured. All students provided their informed consent.

Findings

In the Findings Chapter, I will present the reasons why students felt safe in my courses, why they felt that they were able to express themselves more than in other courses. Some claimed that my being an Arab lecturer made all the differences, other mentioned my conduct as an Arab lecturer, one who does not conceal his being an Arab and even projects pride in his identity; some wrote of their being allowed to talk in Arabic; others talked of my different teaching style. I will, however, start with a topic that has been addressed in previous studies, including my own, whereby Arab students in Hebrew academia are afraid to talk up and express themselves. It is important to address this in order to emphasize the significant change that takes place in my courses. The following sections present the students’ input with as little interference as possible on my part; my interpretations will be presented later, in the Discussion Chapter.

Fear is paralyzing – I want to talk but I can’t

Some students wrote about their fear of speaking out loud and expressing themselves in other classes in the university – especially in relation to the topic of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even students who “broke the code of silence” in my classes described the difficult road they had to take until they were able to do so, which entailed great effort and even suffering.

As expressed by Lubna:

I remember myself being quiet, preferring not to present my authentic identity. I was afraid to talk about my religious identity, even though you can see that I’m Muslim from my hijab (الحجاب). Yet I still preferred not to express my religion in discussions. When I now look at the reasons for my silence, I can see multiple reasons. I was afraid of being judged, and being looked at as someone less. I was afraid that my beliefs would be harmed or that my religion and I would be criticized. I was afraid that I wouldn’t be able to answer and explain myself, especially as it was hard for me to express myself in Hebrew.

Nuzhaa explained that talking about national identity made things even harder:

I didn’t dare present or talk of my Palestinian and political identity. It was clear that I couldn’t talk of my being a Palestinian or of my opinions of the government. I couldn’t even talk about the rights that I don’t receive or the inequality. I was afraid of being judged, being seen as deviant, unpopular. I was even scared that I would be seen as a traitor and terrorist.

This fear, castration even, stems from the presence of Jews in the space, as stated by Nazima:

The presence of Jews in the room was intense and threatening. We were brought up to be afraid of Jews. Our parents taught us that in every struggle with Jews, we would always lose. Silence is an ideal solution in such cases.

just waiting to arrest an Arab who speaks about their rights.

The course challenged the students and their silence, yet this was not a simple process. As written by Huda:

At first, during the first three sessions, I was very worried. I was scared and I didn’t know if I was in the right course [for me], because dealing with conflict is difficult for me. It is hard for me to express my opinion about a conflict between two People, especially in a class filled with Jewish students. This difficulty stemmed from my fear of talking about conflict and from a lack of discussions on the topic in our day-to-day lives. At first, I was scared to talk up about my experiences and opinions in front of my Jewish colleagues.

Some students were able to free themselves of such fears during my course, enabling them to talk more openly. As seen by Maya:

The essence and type of course differed greatly from other courses. This was a course that asked me as a student to speak up and sound my opinion in front of the other side [the Jewish students]. Even though we studied via Zoom, I was always stressed. Should I share? Should I sound my voice? Should I express my opinion?… This was an internal battle.

In the following sub-chapters, I will present the reasons that helped the Arab students in my classes overcome their fear of speaking up, at least to a certain degree – enabling them to express themselves more than in other courses at the university.

Arab lecturer – A necessary but insufficient condition

In this paper, I address the impact of the Arab lecturer on Arab students, yet as some of the students stated, the lecturer’s ethnic/religious identity alone does not guarantee a positive influence. It depends how such lecturers behave and conduct themselves. As explained by Ziad:

I debated whether to take this course or not. Because the lecturer is Arab. Most Arab lecturers who had taught me so far were very strict and assertive. They didn’t make things easier for us and in some cases, they even made things harder for us. But this course was very different.

Naju also spoke along these lines, saying:

This was the first time I met an Arab lecturer who didn’t ignore the Arab students. Up until now, none of the Arab lecturers even noticed our existence. They even tried to stay away from us and behaved worse than the Jewish lecturers.

Sawsan explained that being an Arab lecturer does not matter if they do not behave differently than the Jewish ones, as she wrote about another Arab lecturer:

We didn’t even feel that he was an Arab lecturer. He spoke in formal Hebrew, he only taught topics that are relevant to Jews, and he didn’t relate to us, not as a society and not as Arab students.

Attaf was very impressed by the course and even stated that up until my course, she had been very disappointed with the Arab teachers who had taught her beforehand, especially in relation to language:

This is the first time I met an Arab lecturer who was proud of his Arabic, who spoke in Arabic, and who answered in Arabic. All other Arab lecturers and tutors would communicate in Hebrew. Even if we spoke to them in Arabic, they would answer us in Hebrew.

Amani wrote that she felt that other Arab lecturers were just as afraid of the Jews as she was:

Although I had another course with an Arab lecturer, he was very cautious and I felt that he was afraid of the Jewish students, just like me. Sometimes I even felt sorry for him.

It is important, at this point, to state that while some Arab lecturers may behave in this manner, as expressed by Amani, I am not, and do not claim to be, the only Arab lecturer to teach and conduct myself as I do.

In the following sub-chapters I will attempt to examine what it is about my behavior and conduct that makes the students feel differently in my classes than with other Arab lecturers. What makes them feel safer, more confident, and willing to dare to express themselves.

The lecturer as a role model – You enabled us to express ourselves

The vast majority of Arab students on my courses wrote that my presence as an Arab lecturer who does not deny or hide his Arab-ness, a lecturer who sees his Arab students and relates to them, a lecturer who expresses his opinions without fear – led to a meaningful change in them. This enabled them to overcome their fears and motivated them to speak and express themselves in class – unlike in other classes. As expressed by Najlaa:

I’m so happy that I chose your course and I’m proud that there is an Arab lecturer like you, who has his own thoughts, and who knows how to teach, without denying his Arab identity. I attended every single lesson because this was a very interesting course.

The issue of being an Arab lecturer who is connected to his Arab identity was seen in a range of versions in many papers. Awataf, for example, wrote:

Having an Arab lecturer who did not run away from his Arab-ness contributed to the Arab side [in class], it gave me a feeling of empowerment – not in a negative way but regarding my feelings of safety and self-confidence. If someone makes a mistake, he corrects them; if we have trouble expressing ourselves [in Hebrew], we speak in Arabic and he translates.

The students’ input whereby my conduct as a lecturer contributed to the Arab students and to the class discourse, without harming the Jewish students, is very important, and will be addressed in the Discussion Chapter.

Different people perceived the Arab-ness of myself as a lecturer in different manners. For example, Feiroz wrote:

I was happy to be a student on this course as the lecturer was Arab. It was easier, he understood me and my Arab culture. He gave me a platform for sharing, without worrying that I might not be understood. That gave me the courage to share, to relate, and to sound my voice – because he understood my culture. This was hard for me in other courses and every time I tried to share something, I was misunderstood.

Aniam addressed the aspect of strength and courage:

Throughout the course you conveyed control and strength and courage, that strengthened my status not just in your course. This impacted all of my encounters with Jewish friends-colleagues-people, and I found myself speaking more bravely. I absorbed your words because they were in line with my own thoughts.

Others referred to how I taught, which they related to my being an Arab even

This insight is of the utmost importance, as it says that my openness and courage as perceived by the students served as a model, enabling them to speak more freely.

Almost all students addressed the issue of speech. Following are just some examples:

This course allowed us, the Arab students, to be stronger, to express ourselves more freely. It changed my personality. I had never spoken in front of the other group [Jews] about our difficulties as Arabs. I was always too afraid. This course helped me be stronger, less afraid. The way in which you taught the course surprised me – in a very good way. (Omri).

Thank you for giving us (the Arab students) a chance to sound our voices, our real voices…, to expose the other side to things they didn’t know. To raise issues that the Arab society [in Israel] suffers from and to discuss these issues (Ahlas).

Perhaps this is one of the major points – helping these students feel that they matter, that they are seen, that they are important. Akhram also wrote of the difficulty speaking in Hebrew, as discussed in the following sub-chapter.

The lecturer and language – Arabic as the key to change

In addition to the aspects addressed in the previous sub-chapters, providing Arab students with the option of speaking in Arabic if needed released a major barrier along their obstacle-filled path. Not all students took advantage of this option, having no need for it. Yet for those whose Hebrew was weak, this was critical. As stated by Majda: “I’m so grateful that you allowed us to speak in Arabic and then translated our words into Hebrew. At that moment, I felt free, and I began to express my opinions and even started conversing with Jewish students.

Nazima also spoke along these lines, saying: “The main reason that helped me feel comfortable was the Arab lecturer who gave us the option to speak in our own language. This helped us feel free to express ourselves… This helped me feel comfortable in class, to express myself and my positions.” Similar words were written by Anya: “The possibility that you gave us as Arabs to speak in our mother tongue was very meaningful… It was like giving us legitimacy as Arabs. Allowing us to sound our voices. We could express ourselves clearly in our own language, without struggling to find the right words.”

This was a type of cycle, whereby the students were allowed to speak in Arabic, which enhance their pride and confidence, which in turn increased their spoken contribution to the class. As explained by Amtiaz: “Being able to speak in Arabic during class made me feel proud, perceiving the Arabic language as part of my identity and essence. This made me feel equal and helped me better express myself, and encouraged me to speak about my thoughts and emotions.

Finally, it is important to state that it was not easy for these students to speak out in Arabic. Although they had permission, doing so still required courage. It required their stepping out of their comfort zone and taking a risk. That is why the more confident students are usually the first to speak in Arabic in my classes, paving the way for the other Arab students, as expressed by Fathiya: “Most challenging for me was my deciding to speak in Arabic in front of the Jewish students. I felt more confident, braver, and I didn’t care what they would say or how they would feel, as long as I felt safe and comfortable.”

This is a very important and significant point that requires clarification. Although I allowed Arab students to speak in Arabic, it still required courage and confidence on the part of the Arab students to actually do so; it also required the Jewish students in the class to be liberal and attentive enough to hear the Arabic language. Especially as Hebrew is the official written and spoken language at the university.

Discussion

As seen in the findings of this study, at the onset of my courses, the Arab students behaved as they did in other courses, usually taught by a Jewish lecturer yet sometimes also by an Arab one. The students were afraid to speak out and express themselves, and as such, refrained from doing so. This is in line with a previous study (Halabi, 2018). Yet as the course progressed, the Arab students in my class began to dare to speak, with their voice becoming increasingly more significant towards the end of the semester.

According to their reports, the students first “assessed” me, yet when they realized that they could trust me and that I could be a crutch for them to lean on – this opened the floodgates, and their voices were heard. The literature discusses the critical role of the lecturer, especially one from a minority group, in the safety and integration of minority group students on campus (Edwards & Ross, 2017; Milner, 2006).

When I asked about their delayed input in class, the Arab students explained that they had been assessing me; only after they were convinced by my sincerity and by my sound Arab identity, did they feel that they could trust me. And only then did they begin to speak out in class.

Discourse in academia is invaluable, as most teaching and learning is performed via speech. Yet for Arab students it has added value because of their minority status. Speaking enhances their presence and feelings of belonging (Halabi, 2023). One of the most important factors that enabled these students to talk, as seen in their writings, was my allowing them to speak in Arabic. This finding is in line with previous studies, whereby difficulty expressing themselves in the Hebrew language was a main obstacle for Arab students (Amara et al., 2016; Potowski & Carreira, 2008). The findings in this study indicate that the Arab language enables those who are not strong speakers of Hebrew to express themselves in their mother tongue, while empowering them and increasing their self-confidence, instilling in them a feeling of presence and pride in their identity.

It is important to emphasize that in many cases, the enhancing of one group is perceived as being at the expense of another group – especially in cases of a majority versus a majority, and even more so in relation to the Jewish-Arab conflict. In this instance, however, this is not the case. Strengthening the Arab group of students and encouraging them to speak out during class is beneficial for both groups – Arabs and Jews alike – as a larger, more comprehensive body of knowledge is created. As such, I teach in line with the Freiren dialog approach, whereby knowledge is created based on theory combined with personal knowledge and experience contributed by the students themselves (Freire & Macedo, 2000).

In this case, most of the knowledge is held by the Arab students, who are part of the minority and whose voices are rarely heard. This is especially true as my courses touch on the education system in the Arab sector of which these students were a part of during their schooling. As such, empowering the Arab students and helping them sound their voice contributes to their feeling of belonging on campus and to their self-confidence; yet it also contributes to the Jewish students, who are exposed to new first-hand knowledge, that they would not have achieved without the spoken contribution of the Arab students.

In this context, the findings in this study are completely in line with the multicultural claim, whereby strengthening the identity of minority groups contributes to their feeling of belonging, while improving relations between the minority and majority groups (Berry, 1998; Merola et al., 2019). This is also in line with Kymlicka’s (2007) approach, that strives to achieve a more equal and fairer re-allocation of resources – in this case, speaking, a key resource in classrooms.

Finally, it is important to emphasize and clarify that I do not apply a unique approach as an Arab lecturer. All Jewish lecturers behave in this manner, whether consciously or not. The Jewish lecturers also teach based on their background and culture. Their Jewish identity is very present in their lessons, even if they claim to be objective – as according to the Critical Pedagogical Approach, no educator can remain completely objective and neutral, as they either teach the hegemonic narrative or the defiant one (Freire & Macedo, 2000). In my opinion, Jewish lecturers tend to teach based on the Jewish hegemonic narrative, thereby strengthening the advantage students (i.e., the Jewish students) while weakening the disadvantage ones (i.e., the Arab students). The problem is that Jewish lecturers in Hebrew academia are perceived as objective and neutral, as they behave in line with the accepted norms and patterns of the Jewish hegemony.

In summary, if the representation of Arab lecturers in Hebrew academia was to increase, so would the multicultural on-campus ambiance. The Arab students’ confidence would increase, and their silenced voices would be sounded in the classroom. They would connect to their identity and language, thereby increasing their feeling of belonging within their place of study. In turn, this would simplify their integration while helping them to overcome some of the difficulties that they encounter as a minority. Providing, of course, that the Arab lecturers do not ignore their culture or deny their nationality, and do not attempt to behave like Jewish lecturers. This issue is especially critical in Israel, where the Arab population is a minority – one that suffers from being a minority and that suffers from the ongoing conflict between the Arab population and the country in which they live. Yet the most relevant issue for any minority in the West is academia, where the percentage of ethnic minority students continues to steadily increase. This could be relevant to many other countries, where students from minority groups study in hegemonic academic institutions. Having a representative from that same minority group on the teaching staff could significantly ease the integration of these students, while increasing the possibility of their expressing themselves and sounding their voices.

It is important to note that while this research presents voices from a specific case study, the findings are in line with previous studies, conducted in Israel and in other countries. However, to further generalize these findings, additional studies should be conducted in additional locations. Moreover, conducting a similar study that assesses the Jewish students’ point-of-view on this matter could also be beneficial.

Nevertheless, for now, the limitation of the study, being a single study on a specific population at one university, should be noted. However, it seems the results are important, as they shed light on an issue that has not been investigated sufficiently around the world. Moreover, the results presented here may be true for the influence of any lecturer from a minority group on students from the same group.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Rabah Halabi

Rabah Halabi, P.h.d on education, From the Hebrew university. Lecturer at the department of education, on the Hebrew University, and at Oranim College. His major areas of teaching and research are multicultural education, critical education and ethnic identity and minorities.