A multicultural view of the good teacher in Israel

Abstract

‘The good teacher’ is an archetypal concept; a topic of discussion in various philosophical and educational theories which expresses an ideal, while in reality is composed of many qualities and a variety of contents. This study is unique in its investigation of the similarities and differences in the perception of the good teacher among a wide population, focusing on two aspects – ethnicity and gender, as outlined by interviewees from four groups in Israeli society: Jewish men, Jewish women, Arab men, and Arab women. The research investigated whether the ethno‐cultural or the gender component better explains the differences in the perceptions of these qualities and whether interaction exists between the two components. Findings obtained from 377 adults born in Israel were analyzed after they had described the preferred characteristics of the good teacher in reply to open questions in a telephone survey which was conducted among a representative sample of the Israeli population. A content analysis of the replies revealed three super categories of qualities attributed to the good teacher: an individual with teaching knowledge, an educator and a person of values who maintains good teacher–pupil relations. The research indicated that perception of the qualities of a good teacher is culturally dependent. The ethno‐cultural origin of the group was dominant in explaining differences in attitudes towards the qualities of the good teacher and not the gender group. While Arab‐Israelis gave clear and quite uniform preference to the ethical character of the good teacher, the Israeli Jews preferred a more heterogeneous image of the qualities of a good teacher with the leading quality of positive interaction with the pupils. The research discusses the implications of the findings regarding the Israeli educational system and its ramifications for the process of teacher training in Israel, as in other multicultural societies in the world.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 50 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.