FACULTY OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PEDAGOGICAL CURRICULAR AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES PEACE EDUCATION FOR CONFLICT PREVENTION AN ANALYSIS OF THE PALESTINIAN SCHOOL BOOKS Diana Krasnova Master’s thesis: 30 credits Programme/course: S2ESD ESD700 Level: Second cycle Term/year: Spring 2025 Supervisor: Inger Berndtsson Examiner: Ebba Lisberg Jensen Abstract Master’s thesis: 30 credits Programme/Course: S2ESD ESD700 Level: Second cycle Term/year: Spring 2025 Supervisor: Inger Berndtsson Examiner: Ebba Lisberg Jensen Palestinian school books; Zionism; Peace education; Conflict Keywords: transformation Aim: This thesis investigates how the Palestinian school books reflect and reproduce narratives related to identity, conflict, and peace. By focusing on themes such as patriotism, nationalism, suffering, exile, refugees, tolerance, and hope for the future, the study aims to assess whether the textbooks foster reconciliation and peace education or perpetuates conflictual worldviews. The research is situated within the broader debate on the role of education in protracted conflicts and its contribution to sustainable peace. Theory: The analysis draws on three main theoretical frameworks: Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner), Collective Memory and Historical Narratives (Bar-Tal), and Postcolonial Theory (Said, Bhabha, Fanon). These perspectives are further complemented by Conflict Transformation Theory (Lederach), which highlights how education may contribute to transforming structures and relationships that sustain violence. Together, these theories provide tools to analyse how narratives are constructed, how the “Other” is represented, and whether the textbooks open possibilities for coexistence. Method: Author has analysed 35 Palestinian textbooks (grades 1–12) using content and discourse analysis. Narratives were identified and categorized thematically, then interpreted through the selected theoretical frameworks. The research did not include Israeli curricula or textbooks, which limits comparative conclusions, though previous scholarship indicates that both Palestinian and Israeli textbooks require improvements in terms of peace education. Results: Palestinian textbooks emphasizes narratives of patriotism, resistance, and collective suffering, while strongly framing national identity in opposition to Zionism and occupation. Elements of tolerance and hope for the future are present but limited, often overshadowed by narratives of victimhood and displacement. While the textbooks strengthens collective identity under conditions of occupation and international law violations, it simultaneously risks reinforcing divisions and sustaining conflict memory. For peace education to advance, the textbooks would need to balance recognition of historical injustices with reconciliation-oriented narratives that acknowledge mutual humanity and open pathways to coexistence. 2 Table of contents List of Abbreviations................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction – peace education and Palestinian school books .................................................... 5 Literature review - ESD and peace in social sustainability ........................................................ 8 From peace education to conflict transformation ................................................................. 10 The Israeli – Palestinian conflict ........................................................................................... 18 Summary of reports and secondary data ............................................................................... 21 Theoretical framework – context, narratives and improvement analysis ................................. 30 Methodology- content and discourse analysis .......................................................................... 39 Content analysis as a method ................................................................................................ 40 Discourse analysis as a method............................................................................................. 41 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 48 Content analysis .................................................................................................................... 48 Discourse analysis ................................................................................................................. 52 Discussion – narratives of hate, hope, and positive transformation ......................................... 58 Palestinian school book recommendations ............................................................................... 64 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 67 References: ................................................................................................................................ 70 3 List of Abbreviations CDA - Critical Discourse Analysis CM - Collective Memory CT - Conflict Transformation ESD - Education for Sustainable Development NGO - Non-Governmental Organization PA - Palestinian Authority PC - Postcolonial Critique / Postcolonial Theory PLO - Palestine Liberation Organization SIT - Social Identity Theory UN - United Nations UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNRWA - United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East 4 Introduction – peace education and Palestinian school books Education plays a decisive role in societies affected by protracted conflict. It functions not only as a means of transmitting knowledge but also as a powerful instrument for shaping identity, sustaining collective memory, and defining the boundaries between “us” and “them”. In such contexts, curricula and textbooks inevitably carry political and ideological weight, embedding contested histories and visions for the future into everyday learning. This thesis examines the Palestinian textbooks, analyzing how narratives of nationhood, occupation, heritage and peace are articulated and how they shape students’ understanding of identity, belonging and peaceful coexistence. The relevance of this study lies in the lived realities of Palestinians, whose daily experiences of displacement, restrictions, and violations of international law form the backdrop against which education is produced and consumed. These conditions are reflected in the textbooks, which not only provides formal instruction but also serves as a mirror of national struggle, collective trauma, and aspirations for sovereignty. To ignore these realities would be to detach the curriculum from the social and political environment in which it operates. At the same time, an educational system that reflects suffering and resistance also holds the potential to either entrench conflict or contribute to peacebuilding. The purpose of this thesis is to explore how Palestinian textbooks construct conflict-fueling discourses of topics such as nationalism, victimhood, resistance, or tolerance, and hope for the future, and how these discourses function within the broader framework of peace education and conflict transformation. The study thus contributes to ongoing debates about the dual role of education in conflict-affected societies: on the one hand, as a vehicle for reproducing divisions, and on the other, as a potential instrument for reconciliation and sustainable peace. The research is guided by three main questions: - What narratives and discourses emerge from the Palestinian school textbooks regarding nationhood, conflict, and peace? - How do these narratives reflect broader theoretical concepts such as social identity, collective memory, and postcolonial critique? 5 - To what extent do these narratives sustain conflict or provide openings for conflict transformation and peace education? The theoretical framework combines several perspectives. Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner,) explains how group belonging is constructed in opposition to out-groups. Collective Memory theory (Bar-Tal) clarifies how historical trauma and narratives of victimhood are transmitted across generations. Postcolonial Theory (Said, Spivak, Bhabha) highlights how asymmetrical power relations shape discourses of land, heritage, and sovereignty. Finally, Peace education theories with a focus on Conflict Transformation Theory (Lederach) is applied to evaluate how educational practices might shift from reproducing hostility toward fostering reconciliation. Methodologically, the author applies Discourse Analysis to a selection of Palestinian textbooks, with 35 books analyzed, enabling a comprehensive overview of recurring patterns and discursive strategies. While the study provides detailed analysis of textual and visual materials, it does not attempt to examine classroom practices or teachers’ interpretations. Several limitations must be acknowledged. Most importantly, the analysis is confined to Palestinian school textbooks and does not include Israeli textbooks. This does not imply that only Palestinians need to revise their educational materials. On the contrary, scholarly literature has shown that Israeli curricula and textbooks also require substantial improvements in terms of promoting mutual recognition and peace education (e.g. Bar-Tal, 2007). A comparative analysis would have provided a more balanced perspective but lies beyond the scope of this thesis due to availability, linguistic and thesis volume limitations. Another limitation relates to my own positionality as a researcher. I come from a mixed cultural background that includes Levantine roots but was raised in Europe, in a family open to different religions and perspectives. This upbringing has shaped my worldview in complex ways: on the one hand, I have personally experienced racism and exclusion; on the other hand, I have also benefited from forms of white privilege within European contexts. These experiences influence how I understand identity, conflict, and justice. In this thesis I have worked exclusively with Palestinian textbooks and secondary literature, and I have sought to remain as objective as possible. However, my interpretation of concepts and narratives is inevitably subjective. This is especially relevant because I conducted the discourse and content analysis alone, without intercoder verification. 6 While I have aimed for transparency and methodological rigor, the absence of collaborative coding means that the findings also reflect my individual interpretive lens. Acknowledging these aspects does not weaken the analysis but highlights that all research on contested political and cultural issues is situated and shaped by the researcher’s standpoint. The thesis is structured as follows - The Literature Review situates the research within the broader debates on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), peace education, and the Israeli– Palestinian conflict, while also drawing on secondary reports and academic studies. The Theoretical Framework chapter introduces the concepts and theories underpinning the study, including discourse analysis, and frameworks for textbook improvement. The Methodology chapter outlines the chosen research design, with particular focus on content analysis and discourse analysis as methods. The Results chapter presents the empirical findings, distinguishing between content analysis and discourse analysis outcomes. The Discussion chapter provides a theoretical interpretation of the identified discourses, examining their ideological and pedagogical functions and linking them to the broader academic debate. The Recommendations chapter develops proposals for textbook improvement, informed by Conflict Transformation Theory and peace education perspectives. Finally, the Conclusions chapter summarizes the main findings, reflects on the implications for education in conflict-affected societies, and suggests directions for further research. 7 Literature review - ESD and peace in social sustainability Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is a transformative approach that equips learners with the knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes to advance sustainability across environmental, social, and economic dimensions. It embeds issues such as climate change, biodiversity, poverty reduction, and responsible/ethical consumption into teaching and learning, strengthening capacities to address global challenges, including conflict management (UNESCO, 2020). Aligned with SDG 4 - especially target 4.7 - ESD is promoted by UNESCO and other bodies to build inclusive, equitable, and environmentally conscious societies (UNESCO, 2019), and the Council of the EU calls for its integration across all levels and modalities of learning, including non-formal and informal contexts (CEU, 2010). At its core, ESD seeks to transform how individuals and societies think and act so they can “learn to live together” and sustain peaceful, just, and prosperous futures (UNESCO, 2020). For the past few decades, the social dimension (or “human dimension”) has often been ignored or overlooked. Instead, the term “sustainability” has been used in a much narrower way, mainly to talk about environmental issues (like pollution, biodiversity, climate change), while leaving out the social side (Vallance et al., 2011, p. 342; Woodcraft, 2015; McKenzie, 2004, p. 6, 7, 11). Additionally, there was and still is “a lack of theoretical and empirical studies regarding social sustainability” (Eizenberg & Jabareen, 2017, p. 1). Until recently, there has been little effort to make society itself a central focus of sustainability research. As a result, genuine inquiry into what sustains a fair and just society has been limited. Simply adding social sciences into models dominated by physical sciences is not enough. For social sustainability to contribute meaningfully, it must be clearly defined as distinct from environmental and economic sustainability, with its own frameworks and methods for measuring impact - only then can a truly interdisciplinary approach to sustainability be achieved (McKenzie, 2004, p. 11 - 12). Notably, the sustainability debate shifted to include social concerns - such as inequality and vulnerability - thanks to the influence of social ecology and related movements. It became clear that environmental harms are not only unequal but also contribute to growing risks like urban conflict, violence, and terrorism, especially in socially polarized and impoverished areas. These forms of violence highlight the need to rethink planning approaches to address the deeper social roots of today’s crises (Eizenberg & Jabareen, 2017, p. 2). 8 Eizenberg and Jabareen (2017) emphasize that diversity - meaning the inclusion and coexistence of different social, cultural, or demographic groups - is central to achieving social sustainability. It is seen as the core process that sustains vibrant, adaptable communities (p. 3). Dempsey and colleagues, as cited by Eizenberg & Jabareen have compiled a wide-ranging list of social conditions and values that support sustainable communities, especially highlighting education and training as a tool foundational for individual and collective empowerment (p. 3). Other factors include social justice (inter- and intra-generational), community and safety, social inclusion, social order and cohesion (stability and harmony within and among groups) and cultural traditions (p. 3). The concept of safety is a fundamental element of social sustainability, grounded in the right of all individuals and communities to be protected (p. 7). All the characteristics that Palestinians commonly face a lack of. Even if Jabareen and Eizenberg (2017) explain that vulnerable groups everywhere not only are disproportionately affected by the issues of sustainable development but also lack recognition and representation in policies. “Significantly, social sustainability endorses politics of recognition, which encompass policies aiming “to revalue unjustly devalued identities””, meaning that equity policies (in the framework of social sustainability) have to be effective to wide range of social and ethnic groups (p. 7). Jabareen and Eizenberg (2017) introduce a concept “parity of participation”, which in a simplistic manner means giving voice to everyone equally, and is essential for achieving social sustainability. Drawing on Nancy Fraser’s concept of “parity of participation”, it argues that two key conditions must be met: fair distribution of material resources – to ensure individuals have independence and a voice, avoiding economic inequalities that hinder equal participation; cultural recognition and respect – institutionalized cultural norms must reflect equal respect for all and avoid devaluing certain groups (p. 7). Ultimately, justice is not just about distributing resources fairly but also about recognizing people as full members of society and promoting their ability to thrive. Such perspective is very important regarding Palestinian, as they do not fully enjoy rights at the same scope as Israelis. Peace Education can be considered a subfield or integral component of Education for Sustainable Development and peace- a crucial element of a sustainable society. ESD is a broader framework that includes various educational approaches aimed at achieving sustainable societies, and peace education fits within it as a critical element. Peace is a prerequisite for sustainable development. 9 Armed conflicts, social unrest, and violence undermine efforts toward environmental conservation, economic stability, and human well-being. Without peace, communities struggle to implement sustainable policies, leading to resource exploitation, displacement, and deepened inequalities. ESD incorporates peace education to ensure that sustainable development efforts do not exacerbate conflicts and instead promote social cohesion. Peace is an integral quality of sustainable development and, citing UNESCO (2023): “Peace in the 21st century is not just the absence of violence and conflicts. It is also a positive, participatory, and dynamic process that nurtures our ability to value human dignity and take care of ourselves, each other, and the planet we share”. UNESCO and other global institutions recognize peace education as a core element of ESD. According to UNESCO’s (2023) framework for Global Citizenship Education (GCED) and ESD, peace education is essential in teaching non-violent conflict resolution, intercultural understanding and tolerance, as well as human rights and democracy. Peace education, therefore, serves as a tool to build the social conditions necessary for sustainability. Peace education provides the skills and frameworks needed to address conflicts non-violently, ensuring sustainable solutions. Citing the UN (2024), “in times of war, protecting education becomes even more critical”, the changing profile of threats to human rights and international understanding requires new modes of education, while the legal architecture has similarly evolved (UNESCO, 2023). Global citizenship education is closely related to peace education. If the first one focuses on fostering awareness of global issues and their interconnectedness, it encourages responsibility, human rights advocacy and participation in global governance, then the latter focuses on conflictology. Global citizenship education researches themes like global justice, sustainable development on an intraregional scale and cultural diversity, while peace education focuses on promoting nonviolence, conflict resolution and reconciliation (UNESCO, 2023), which is the focus of this thesis. From conflict transformation to peace education In 2018, particularly interesting research has been conducted on perception of conflicts and possible solutions. The Peace Perceptions Poll surveyed over 100,000 people across 15 countries - from active conflict zones to peaceful contexts - to understand how they experience violence, 10 how they respond, and how they believe governments should act. Across settings, respondents strongly favored government investment in peace education as key to sustainable peace. “More specifically, there was an almost universal support for “teaching peace, tolerance and conflict resolution in schools” (International Alert & The British Council, 2020, p. 7). Contemporary conflicts - often rooted in political, economic, and psychosocial factors - are a defining feature of our time. These dimensions are deeply interconnected, as political struggles are driven by emotional forces like fear and hatred, while psychological tensions are shaped by historical and political realities. While political leaders focus on resolving structural aspects of conflict, educators, psychologists, and others work on the human side through Peace education, using dialogue, art, and shared experiences to promote understanding, reconciliation, and healing. Although peace education is widely practiced globally, especially in conflict zones, the field still lacks sufficient scholarly research to match the breadth of its real-world applications (Salomon, 2005, p. xi). Why and how is peace education different? Peace education explicitly aims to prevent violence, promote reconciliation, and build cultures of peace. Its central goals are social justice, conflict transformation, nonviolence, and fostering empathy. Traditional education focuses primarily on knowledge transmission, skill-building, and preparation for employment. Critical Pedagogy (e.g. Freirean approach) seeks liberation through critical consciousness but does not explicitly center peace as its primary goal. While “multicultural education” aims primarily at respect and inclusion of diversity but may not explicitly focus on conflict resolution or peacebuilding (see e.g. Harris, 2004; UNESCO, 2023; UN, 2024). Peace Education sees conflict as an opportunity for growth and learning, actively teaching strategies for conflict resolution, mediation, and reconciliation, while traditional education often avoids or suppresses conflict. Conflictology is a science of conflicts, as it encompasses all the related areas of the phenomenon of conflict – conflict development and anthropology, management, resolution, prevention and mitigation, as well as strategies of post – conflict management (see e.g. Vinyamata, 2010, p. 1). Conflict Transformation Theory (Lederach, 1996) focuses on transforming the relationships, structures, and cultures that contribute to conflict. It is particularly relevant to ESD because it emphasizes long-term, sustainable approaches to resolving conflict, which align with the goals of sustainability education. Even if this is not a “purely” education theory, nevertheless it is directly 11 linked to social sustainability. Key idea: Sustainable peace requires changing the deep-rooted narratives and psychological structures that sustain conflict. Application: Examine if textbooks offer: A pathway to peace (e.g., coexistence, shared history); Reconciliation-oriented language or perpetuation of hostility. Conflict management means handling differences in a positive, constructive way. It does not try to eliminate conflict; it focuses on how to deal with it, bring sides together, and set up practical, cooperative arrangements for managing disagreement (Bloomfield & Reilly, 1998, p. 18). Conflict transformation requires both identifying drivers of peaceful change and understanding those who fuel violence - often seen not as obstacles, but as individuals needing inclusion and understanding. According to the explanation by Paffenholz (2012) CT peacebuilding treats conflict as ordinary and focuses on changing harmful, violent patterns into peaceful relationships. This differs from conflict management or resolution, which mainly control or settle disputes (p. 13), such as political tensions which are inseparable from psychosocial forces - collective hatred, distrust, fear, and hope - entwined with historical, economic, and political drivers such as independence, land claims, self- determination, and equality (Salomon, 2005, p. xi) - elements that all are directly related to the narratives that I identified and will describe in the results and discussion chapter. Conflict-management theorists view violent conflict as an enduring by-product of divergent values and interests within and between communities, with its likelihood shaped by existing institutions, historical legacies, and entrenched power distributions (Miall, 2004, p. 3). For example, heritage, among many other factors, plays a complex and often ambivalent role in ethnic conflicts. On one hand, it serves as a cornerstone of identity, pride, and cultural continuity, enabling communities to preserve their uniqueness and maintain ties to their historical roots. On the other hand, heritage can intensify ethnic tensions when it becomes a contested space for rival narratives or a symbol of exclusion and division. Conflicts over sacred sites, historical injustices related to colonization, or the marginalization of minority histories frequently deepen such divides. In these instances, heritage is instrumentalized to assert dominance, legitimize territorial or resource claims, and reinforce “us versus them” dynamics (Graham et al., 2016; Fouseki et al., 2022; Timothy, 2011). On the other hand, the political manipulation of heritage can escalate conflicts. Policies or curricula that privilege the heritage of one group while sidelining others, or state-endorsed distortions of historical narratives, can entrench divisions and fuel resentment. Likewise, the intentional 12 destruction of cultural landmarks in times of conflict is often a strategic move to erase collective identities and impose dominance. Peace education plays a vital role in transforming these dynamics. By fostering empathy, critical thinking, and intercultural dialogue, it encourages individuals and communities to view heritage as a shared asset rather than a source of division. Through inclusive curricula that integrate multiple perspectives, peace education challenges exclusionary narratives, promotes mutual understanding, and invites critical engagement with the past. For instance, educational initiatives that explore the interconnected histories of opposing groups - such as joint Israeli-Palestinian programs - can help dismantle prejudice and nurture solidarity (Graham et al., 2016; Fouseki et al., 2022; Timothy, 2011). Such “tools” are extensively used in Conflict Transformation Theory. Per Harris’ (2004) explanation peace education can encompass five main postulates: it explains the roots of violence; it teaches alternatives to violence; it adjusts to cover different forms of violence; peace itself is a process that varies according to context; and conflict is omnipresent (p. 6). Education suitable for the challenges of 21st century should include focus on lasting peace, reaffirm human rights and promote sustainable development. Education, in and outside of school settings, is a powerful tool to constructing lasting peace (UNESCO, 2023). Peace and violence are complex concepts with multiple meanings. Johan Galtung, as explained by Salomon (2004) and Haji et al. (2016), distinguished positive peace - which involves cooperation and social harmony - from negative peace, defined as merely the absence of direct violence. He also introduced the idea of structural violence, referring to systemic inequalities and injustices embedded in society. These theoretical distinctions are highly relevant for peace education varies depending on context: it may take place in areas of ongoing conflict, regions with underlying tensions, or peaceful societies. It also aims at different levels of change: microlevel changes like improving interpersonal conflict resolution, and macrolevel changes such as transforming collective perceptions, stereotypes, and prejudices. Moreover, the status of participants affects how peace education is experienced - whether they belong to majority or minority groups, are part of the dominant or oppressed, or are seen as perpetrators or victims. Peace education is therefore not one-size-fits-all but must be tailored to social, political, and historical contexts (Salomon, 2004, p. 5; Haji et al., 2016, p. xv). These theories propose solutions for teaching and are very important in 13 peace education, however, they are not specific enough for book narrative improvement, therefore I will not focus on them further. While various distinctions in peace education are important, the sociopolitical context in which it occurs is the most critical factor. The context shapes the challenges, goals, and approach of peace education, especially in how it addresses different participant groups. In peaceful regions, peace education often focuses on promoting positive peace - cooperation, harmony, and a general culture of peace. In contrast, in conflict-affected areas, it emphasizes negative peace - preventing violence, promoting equality, and encouraging coexistence between adversaries (Salomon, 2004, p. 6). The context is very important for discourse analysis in this thesis. Based on these differences, peace education can be broadly categorized into three types: In regions of intractable conflict; in regions of interethnic tension; or in regions of experienced tranquility (Salomon, 2004, p. 6). Following this typology, different recommendations for education can be offered. Peace education in intractable regions programs operate in areas experiencing ongoing violent conflict between opposing groups, often fueled by competing national, ethnic, religious, or tribal narratives. The aim is to change collective mindsets, challenge group narratives, and foster recognition of the “other’s” suffering. Examples include Israel-Palestine, Northern Ireland, Cyprus, and Rwanda (see also Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal, 2014). Peace education in regions of interethnic tension involve racial or ethnic tensions between majority and minority groups, but usually without active violence or deep historical trauma. The focus is on promoting tolerance and equality. Examples include minority groups in the U.S., and guest workers in Germany. In peaceful regions without a defined adversary, peace education focuses on teaching about peace rather than resolving active conflict. The goal is to cultivate global awareness and empathy, preventing indifference to violence in other parts of the world, such as past inaction during the Rwandan genocide. Each type addresses different challenges and goals, tailored to its unique societal context (Salomon, 2004, p. 6 - 7). For the purposes of this thesis, the most relevant is peace education in 14 intractable regions, as it directly relates to the protracted conflict setting of the Palestinian context and recommendations will be adjusted accordingly. Peace education in regions of intractable conflict represents a unique and complex form of peace education that goes beyond standard approaches like antiracism, multiculturalism, or interpersonal conflict resolution. While it may incorporate elements of these, it faces deeper, collective-level challenges that give it a distinct character. This type of peace education addresses violent, ongoing conflicts between groups defined by ethnic, national, religious, or tribal identities, often shaped by long histories of suffering and narratives that portray one’s own group as morally superior and victimized, while vilifying the other. Three main challenges distinguish peace education in these settings – collective level conflictivity, existence of deeply rooted narratives and historical memories, as well as structural inequalities (Salomon, 2004, p. 7 - 9). Collective-Level Conflicts. The conflict exists not between individuals but between entire groups. Even if individuals live peacefully side-by-side or do not interact, the conflict remains alive through collective identities and perceptions. As such, interpersonal conflict resolution strategies are insufficient - the focus must be on addressing the collective narratives and dynamics (Salomon, 2004, p. 7 - 9). Collective suffering, struggle and fight are the some of the narratives identified in the Palestinian school books. Deeply Rooted Narratives and Historical Memories. Each side holds a powerful narrative that justifies its own position and blames the other. These narratives are transmitted through education, media, politics, and socialization, shaping how individuals understand the conflict and the “other”. Peace education must challenge and reframe these collective stories, which is a deeply sensitive and emotionally charged task (Salomon, 2004, p. 7 - 9). Also such narratives are very common and intensively promoted in the Palestinian books. Structural Inequalities. Conflicts often involve stark power imbalances - between conquerors and conquered, majority and minority, or dominant and marginalized groups. These inequalities affect how peace education should be designed. Each group may have different needs and goals in the peace process. For example, while one side may seek justice and recognition of past wrongs, 15 the other may prioritize security or reducing violence (Salomon, 2004, p. 7 - 9). In case of Palestinians, very often restriction of rights by the occupier is highlighted. These challenges make peace education in intractable conflicts significantly different from programs in more peaceful or less polarized contexts. The work is more complex, less studied, and harder to implement successfully. Still, in any setting where deep collective identities and inequalities are involved - even in less severe contexts - these principles of intractable conflict peace education may still be relevant (Salomon, 2004, p. 7 - 9). Peace education in such contexts is not just about stopping violence; it is about transforming how people understand and relate to “the other”. The central goal is to change perceptions of the other group’s collective narrative, which includes their history, identity, pain, and perspective: 1. Figure. Peace education in the context of Intractable Conflicts – changing the perception of the others’ collective narrative (Source: Salomon, 2004, p. 9) The diagram presents four interrelated dispositional outcomes that peace education seeks to cultivate by transforming perceptions: first, the legitimization of the other group’s collective narrative, which encourages participants to recognize the validity of the other’s story - even when it challenges their own - without requiring agreement, only acceptance that it is a genuine and meaningful perspective for the other; second, the critical examination of one’s own contribution to the conflict, inviting individuals to reflect honestly on their group’s role, including 16 acknowledging harm, complicity, or the perpetuation of injustices, thereby challenging self- righteous or one-sided views; third, empathy for the other’s suffering, fostering emotional connection and humanization by recognizing and feeling the other group’s pain and losses, which lays the affective groundwork for trust and reconciliation; and fourth, engagement in nonviolent activities, promoting active participation in peaceful efforts so that transformed attitudes translate into constructive behavior. This approach is deeply transformational - not merely informative - as it aims to reshape core beliefs, emotions, and practices that sustain conflict, and it addresses conditions specific to conflict-affected settings, including historical trauma, group-based identity and victimhood narratives, structural inequalities, and mutual distrust or demonization. It is grounded in the conviction that sustainable peace requires understanding the “enemy” as a human community with its own suffering, re-examining one’s biases, history, and moral positioning, and beginning to build trust through nonviolent, empathetic action. It should also be stressed that the idea of peace education and its associated goals assumes a degree of symmetry between the parties, with the expectation that both sides, through such education, can develop empathetic understanding of the other’s narrative. However, we have to answer such questions: “Would this apply equally to both perpetrator and victim, ruling majority and discriminated minority? Would it be reasonable to expect Black slaves, exiled Palestinians, or persecuted Armenians to accept as legitimate the narratives of slave owners, Israel, or past Turkish governments, respectively?” (Salomon, 2004, p.11). Such conflict transformation techniques in practice have been researched in depth by Lederach (1996) and will be used for the improvements chapter in this thesis to complete the theoretical and conflictology focused insights by, for example, Salomon that have been previously discussed. Severe inequalities can create overwhelming obstacles to developing a more positive view of the oppressor or perpetrator. The more unequal the two sides are - socially, economically, politically, or militarily - the less peace education, as envisioned here, can rely on a balanced or symmetrical approach. In situations of extreme imbalance, the focus of the oppressed, marginalized, or disadvantaged often centers on the injustices they endure and the urgent need to address them. Inequality can fuel powerful emotions like anger, resistance, and frustration, which hinder the ability or willingness to engage with the adversary’s narrative in a constructive way. In such contexts, peace education inevitably merges with political struggle (Salomon, 2004, p. 11). 17 The Israeli – Palestinian conflict To create sustainable solutions to a conflict, first, it is necessary to understand the root causes. Importance of the context analysis has been stressed in several ways in this thesis, for example, for narrative and discourse analysis. In summary, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a long-standing and deeply rooted struggle over land, identity, and political sovereignty between Israelis and Palestinians. It began in the early 20th century with the rise of Jewish and Arab nationalism and intensified with the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, which led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians - a key event known as the Nakba (catastrophe) by Palestinians. The conflict centers on competing claims to the same territory, particularly the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. Key issues include the status of Jerusalem, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements in occupied territories, security concerns, and mutual recognition. Despite numerous peace efforts, the conflict remains unresolved and continues to fuel violence, displacement, and humanitarian crises, deeply affecting both societies and the broader Middle East region. Long before the establishment of Israel and Palestine, the region between Mesopotamia and Egypt was inhabited by various indigenous peoples, most notably the Canaanites, who began developing settlements around 4,500 years ago. While the Israelites are believed to have originated from Ur in Mesopotamia, they later migrated to Canaan, returning from Egypt during times of conflict and drought. By around 1250 BCE, during the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age, the Israelites began entering Canaan. Their presence met resistance from the Canaanites, who still controlled major cities. Philistines, possibly from Crete, also invaded the region during this time. According to biblical tradition, King David eventually conquered the Canaanites in the 10th century BCE, making Canaan the core of the Land of Israel. However, modern archaeological research offers a more nuanced view. While biblical texts claim that Yahweh granted the land to the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt, there is no clear evidence of widespread destruction of Canaanite communities. Instead, the transition appears to have been gradual, involving a mix of cultural assimilation and later invasions by groups such as the Philistines, Greeks, and Romans (Lawler, 2020; Encyclopedia Britannica, 2023; Genesis 12:5; Genesis 46:27). This aspect is very important to keep in mind when analyzing the conflict. 18 Researchers compared ancient DNA with that of modern populations and discovered that “the genetic legacy of the Canaanites survives in many contemporary Jews and Arabs” (Lawler, 2020), underlining connectivity of these ethnicities. Archaeological and genetic evidence supports the idea that both Jews and Palestinians originate from the ancient Canaanites. As a result, the Israeli – Palestinian rivalry is rooted in cultural and religious differences, but not in genetics (Arnaiz- Villena et al., 2001). In the years leading up to the creation of the State of Israel, a complex interplay of historical, political, and humanitarian factors reshaped the future of Palestine and the wider Middle East. The Holocaust and broader persecution across Europe prompted a large wave of Jewish migration to Palestine, particularly during the British Mandate period (1922 - 1947). During this time, the Jewish population in Palestine grew from under 10% in 1917 to over 30% by 1947, causing increasing Arab concerns about displacement and demographic shifts (USHMM, 2023; United Nations, n.d.). Following World War II, international pressure mounted - especially from the U.S. - to allow more Jewish refugees into Palestine. In 1947, the UN Partition Plan proposed the division of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem under international control. Although accepted by the Zionist leadership, the plan was rejected by Arab leaders, leading to escalating violence (United Nations, n.d., Goldschmidt, 2018, p. 287). As tensions rose, Zionist groups began executing Plan Dalet, which aimed to secure Jewish territory and often involved the displacement of Arab populations. This contributed to the Nakba (“catastrophe”), during which over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced. On May 14, 1948, as British forces withdrew, the Jewish leadership declared the independence of the State of Israel, nullifying previous restrictions on immigration and land ownership (Goldschmidt, 2018, p. 289 - 291). The ensuing conflict laid the foundation for decades of Israeli – Palestinian tensions, the unresolved refugee crisis, and deepened regional divisions, many of which remain at the heart of the conflict today. The 1948 Arab - Israeli War marked the beginning of the most protracted and destabilizing conflict in the Middle East. Following Israel’s declaration of independence, five Arab nations - Egypt, 19 Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon - invaded, sparking a war that ended in a 1949 armistice. As a result, the West Bank was annexed by Jordan and the Gaza Strip came under Egyptian control. Over the next decades, several key conflicts shaped the region's political and legal frameworks. These included the Suez Crisis (1956), the Six-Day War (1967) - during which Israel occupied Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Golan Heights - and the Yom Kippur War (1973) (see e.g. History, 2017). Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories, particularly since 1967, has been a central issue in the ongoing conflict. The Israeli settlement enterprise began soon after the Six-Day War and expanded over the decades. Settlements have been established for strategic, ideological, or economic reasons, including reclaiming land lost in 1948, enhancing security along the Jordan Valley, or asserting control over biblically significant areas. While some early settlers were motivated by ideology, more recent settlers have often been drawn by state incentives and affordable housing. By 2019, the settler population had grown to approximately 630,000, including 413,000 in the West Bank (excluding East Jerusalem) (e.g. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). The rise of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1964 and the First Intifada in 1987 signaled increasing resistance to the occupation. The Oslo Accords (1993 - 1995) marked a turning point, leading to the creation of the Palestinian Authority and partial self-governance in some areas. However, peace efforts were disrupted by continued violence, including multiple wars between Israel and Hamas, which gained control of Gaza in 2006. Major flare-ups occurred in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2021, and 2023 (e.g. History, 2013). Israeli settlements in occupied territories remain one of the most contentious aspects of the conflict. They are widely considered illegal under international law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, though Israel disputes this interpretation. The evolving settlement landscape has contributed to a fragmented territorial reality and a complex legal structure (see e.g. United Nations, 1949). Archaeology in the Holy Land has often been politicized and used to support nationalist, colonialist, and Zionist narratives. For example, Israeli excavations in the City of David have become flashpoints in the sovereignty conflict over East Jerusalem. In this region, archaeology is deeply intertwined with religion and politics, making objective interpretation difficult. Israeli state ideology has historically drawn upon biblical narratives, particularly from the Iron Age, to claim 20 continuity with the ancient Israelites, using the survival of Hebrew language and religion as supporting evidence. This perspective often ignores the multicultural history of the land and marginalizes Arab and Islamic heritage sites (Gannon, 2019; Pollock & Reinhard, 2009, p. 67). The revival of Hebrew as a spoken language, largely credited to Eliezer Ben-Yehuda in the late 19th century, is often cited to argue for Jewish continuity in the land. However, the link between language preservation and territorial entitlement is debated. Meanwhile, Palestinians argue for their own historical connection to the land, highlighting Islamic presence over the last 1,400 years, and in some cases claiming descent from the ancient Canaanites. They also point to cultural and settlement continuity from the Bronze and Iron Ages through the modern era (Yang, 2023; Pollock & Reinhard, 2009, p. 67 - 68). Israeli archaeological efforts have largely focused on biblical sites, often neglecting or erasing Islamic or pre-Israelite contexts. Cities with Islamic history such as Jaffa, Ramla, and Akko have been overlooked, while extensive resources have been devoted to sites like Masada or Qumran. This selective approach has alienated Palestinians from their own cultural heritage. Since 1967, Israeli control over Palestinian cultural sites has deepened this sense of dispossession (Pollock & Reinhard, 2009, p. 68). In essence, the Israeli narrative emphasizes ancient religious and linguistic continuity to justify modern territorial claims, while the Palestinian counter-narrative focuses on historical presence, cultural continuity, and ancestral ties to the land - especially through identification with the Canaanites. Summary of reports and secondary data In the case of Palestine and Israel, education systems serve not only as tools for knowledge dissemination but also potentially as mechanisms for the transmission of deeply entrenched ideological beliefs. The textbooks of both nations reflect and reinforce their respective historical narratives, perspectives on the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the broader regional political landscape. As in many other conflict zones, these books also serve as key instruments in sustaining the conflict (Yemini, Bar-Nissan & Yardeni, 2014). For example, “The Israeli government has long argued that incitement in Palestinian textbooks is a main contributor to terrorism against Israelis” (Lieber, 2017). 21 This chapter explores the educational materials used in Palestinian and Israeli schools, focusing on how each curriculum portrays history, identity, and the “other” within the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It examines how both the Palestinian Authority and various Israeli educational streams reflect the political and ideological goals of their respective governments and considers the implications of these strategies for the prospects of peace and reconciliation in the region. By analyzing key texts and highlighting differences in how each side educates its youth about the conflict, the chapter aims to shed light on the role of education in reinforcing or challenging dominant narratives of occupation, resistance, and identity. The analysis will draw primarily on academic studies and reports from organizations and researchers, supplemented by media sources that offer additional context and perspectives. In Palestine, textbooks are designed to foster national pride, resistance, and a sense of unity in the face of occupation. However, analyses of Palestinian educational materials have raised concerns about the perpetuation of violent rhetoric, glorification of martyrdom, and a one-sided historical narrative that often omits or distorts the Israeli perspective. Conversely, in Israel, educational content has been critiqued for presenting Palestinians in a negative light, often focusing on security concerns and national identity while downplaying Palestinian suffering, displacement, and resistance. It is important to highlight that the Palestinian territories are politically and administratively divided between the West Bank, governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA or, usually in older sources - PNA), and Gaza, controlled by Hamas (The Islamic Resistance Movement) since 2007. This political division has led to differences not only in governance structures but also in educational approaches (Milton-Edwards & Farrell, 2010, p. 162, 157; Albhaisi, 2022, p. 147). While both regions broadly use the curriculum developed by the PA’s Ministry of Education, Gaza, under Hamas, has increasingly adapted and supplemented textbooks to emphasize religious identity, resistance, and a more militant narrative compared to the PA’s somewhat moderate framework, according to an article published by the Times of Israel ane other sources(Miller, 2013; Albhaisi, 2022, p. 147, 160). There are UNRWA schools and Palestinian Authority schools in Palestine due to the distinct needs of Palestinian refugees and the governance structure of the Palestinian territories. UNRWA is a UN agency established in 1949 to provide assistance and protection to over 5.7 million Palestinian 22 refugees across five regions, offering services in protection, health, education, relief, and more, with funding mainly from voluntary contributions (UNRWA, 2025; Nuseibeh, 2024, p. 455, 460). UNRWA Schools serve Palestinian refugees, primarily those displaced during the 1948 Arab- Israeli war. They operate in refugee camps in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria. The curriculum follows the host country’s system, but with added materials on human rights and tolerance. These schools are run by the United Nations to support refugees under international responsibility. PA Schools are managed by the Palestinian Authority and serve all Palestinian children, including both refugees and non-refugees. These schools focus on Palestinian identity, culture, and history, with a curriculum developed by the Palestinian Ministry of Education. The presence of both systems ensures all Palestinian children have access to education, particularly in areas with high refugee populations, and reflects the separation of responsibilities between the international community (UNRWA) and the local Palestinian government (PA) (UNRWA, 2025; Nuseibeh, 2024, p. 455, 460). In Israel, the educational system is separate and reflects the country’s diverse and often segmented society. Different curricula exist for Jewish secular, Jewish religious, Arab, Druze, and other minority groups (Agbaria, 2016, p. 1, 3, 5; Nuseibeh, 2024; Alayan, 2016, p. 81). Each stream emphasizes its own cultural and historical narratives, although all are anchored by a strong focus on Jewish identity and Zionist history in the mainstream Jewish Israeli system (Agbaria, 2016, p. 10). The public education system is centralized with standardized curricula, yet religious Jewish groups retain significant organizational and curricular independence. In contrast, Arab state schools lack the same level of autonomy (Feniger et al., 2021; Dahan & Yonah, 2007, p. 146 - 147). After 1948, the West Bank used the Jordanian curriculum and Gaza used the Egyptian one. Following Israel’s 1967 occupation, these curricula remained, though Israel censored content it found problematic and unsuccessfully tried to introduce its own curriculum in Jerusalem. In 1994, control of education shifted to the Palestinian National Authority, which temporarily reinstated the Jordanian and Egyptian systems while creating new National Education textbooks for younger students. By 1996, a critical report on the existing system led to reforms. In 1996 - 1997, the PNA approved a plan to develop a new Palestinian curriculum, gradually rolling it out from the 2000/2001 school year, starting with specific grades and continuing progressively. Debates 23 consistently reiterated and still reiterate the allegation that Palestinian textbooks promote hostility toward Jews and Israel. More noteworthy, however, is the relative silence surrounding the fact that textbooks produced by the Palestinian National Authority often deliberately avoid addressing contentious issues related to contemporary Palestinian national identity, resulting in significant omissions and conceptual gaps (Brown, 2001, p. 1; Spielhaus, 2021, p. 16 – 17; Wahbeh, 2003, p. 137). Worth mentioning that “In the 1990s, calls came from leading Palestinian educators to include aspects like democracy, citizenship, multiculturalism, and the right to difference in the new Palestinian curriculum” (Wahbeh, 2003, p. 141). Alongside its focus on democratic education and critical thinking, the curriculum plan recommended fostering a more culturally open identity, strengthening ethics education (p. 141). The implementation of the new Palestinian curriculum began in 2000. By the start of the 2006 - 2007 academic year a new, universal curriculum for grades 1 – 12 was used in all Palestinian schools. A significant change was introduction of Christian education and English language (Razeq, 2020, p. 61; Abuhussein, 2024, p.4 - 5). However, critics underlined that newer textbooks (at the time - year. 2004) emphasized Palestinian identity more strongly than earlier versions, highlighting cultural details and a sense of victimhood under Israeli occupation. While these texts focused on non-violent resistance, they did not include openly negative stereotypes of Jews or Israelis. The researchers also noted efforts toward peace education, though acknowledged it could be further improved (Spielhaus, 2021, p. 16; Firer et al., 2004). An independent review conducted by the US State Department found that the textbooks from the old curriculum (pre-years 2016 – 2017) were free of content promoting terrorism or violence, directly contradicting the allegations (Gunness, 2017). “Then where do persistent reports of incitement in Palestinian textbooks come from? Virtually all can be traced back to the work of a single organization, the “Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace” [IMPACT – se]” (Brown, 2001, p. 2 – 3). Brown in 2001 underlined that it is necessary to explain some misconceptions: “the Palestinian curriculum is not a war curriculum; while highly nationalistic, it does not incite hatred, violence, and anti-Semitism. It cannot be described as a “peace curriculum” either, but the charges against it are often wildly exaggerated or inaccurate” (p. 1). 24 However, critics argue that IMPACT-se is not a fully neutral or academic body. It is often perceived as having a pro-Israel political orientation, which, they argue, affects its assessments of Palestinian curricula. Scholars like Nathan Brown from George Washington University, and others have pointed out that IMPACT-se selectively highlights content that portrays Palestinians negatively while minimizing positive educational developments. Some researchers have criticized IMPACT- se for taking quotes out of context from Palestinian textbooks. Their reports sometimes isolate violent or nationalist statements without fully considering the overall message of a textbook unit, lesson, or the broader socio-political environment under occupation. Critics argue that conflict- affected education systems inevitably have nationalistic elements, and similar types of narratives exist in Israeli textbooks too - something IMPACT-se is accused of ignoring (Spielhaus, 2021, p. 14 – 15; Brown, 2021). The Center’s reports reveal a clear bias: while it quickly produced alarmist and often misleading critiques of Palestinian textbooks, highlighting accusations of delegitimization, defamation, and militarism with little contextual analysis, its assessment of Israeli textbooks was far more measured, nuanced, and slow-paced. In short, the Center treated Israeli materials with understanding and balance, while approaching Palestinian textbooks in a tendentious and critical manner. Generally, Brown (2001) and others have mentioned that there is a deeply harmful double standard in requirements in which Palestinians are held to expectations and obligations that are not imposed on the opposing side (e.g. see also Naser – Najjab, 2020, p. 324). Nevertheless, Brown notes that the reports have gained widespread circulation internationally, reaching both the United States and the European Union (Brown, 2001, p. 3). The Center’s 1998 report omits crucial historical context, leading to misleading claims. It cited incendiary anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish statements from Palestinian textbooks, but these quotes actually came from Egyptian and Jordanian books used in Palestinian schools before the PNA’s establishment. While the Center holds the PNA accountable for distributing these books, it overlooks the fact that Israel also distributed the same textbooks in East Jerusalem, only rejecting PNA-authored materials. This inconsistency suggests that Israel’s concerns were more about Palestinian sovereignty in Jerusalem than the content of the textbooks (Brown, 2001, p. 4). In 2016 - 2017, the Palestinian Authority (PA) introduced a major overhaul of the curriculum, which led to the publication of new textbooks for the 2017/2018 academic year. These reforms 25 aimed to “modernize” education and improve the quality of teaching across the West Bank and Gaza. The new curriculum was designed to foster Palestinian national identity and resistance to the Israeli occupation, while also aligning with international standards on education and human rights (Elyan & Al-Doulat, 2021, p. 6 – 7; Abuhussein, 2024, p. 4 – 5). In this period Palestinian curriculum again faced criticism for allegedly demonizing Israel, denying its existence, promoting martyrdom, and emphasizing an exclusive right of return, prompting the European Parliament to tie future funding to the promotion of peace, tolerance, and European values. (Nasser – Najjab, 2020, p. 320). Interestingly to note, that some argue that “the Europeans’ colonial mentality that still dominates their attitudes and practices towards other nations and countries in the Middle East. The European Union has given itself a licence to interfere in the Palestinian curriculum” (Abuhussein, 2024, p. 25). These reforms sparked international debate and scrutiny, particularly from Israel and pro-Israel organizations. Reports from institutions such as IMPACT-se and the Georg Eckert Institute raised concerns that the Palestinian textbooks contained content that could be considered inciteful. Textbooks were criticized for emphasizing themes of martyrdom and resistance, sometimes glorifying violence, and presenting a one-sided view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Naser- Najjab, 2020, p. 320; Spielhaus, 2021, p. 15). For example, figures such as Dalal Mughrabi, a Palestinian, considered a terrorist by several sources, involved in the 1978 Coastal Road hijacking, were, allegedly, depicted as heroes in some textbooks, sparking controversy internationally (Spielhaus, 2021, e.g. p. 110). Experts have concluded that textbooks released in 2020 have been significantly “improved”, increasing female and Christian representations, as well as a “a reduction in the text and images that have escalatory potential” (Spielhaus, 2020, p. 5). Notably, “anti - Semitic material” in one unit was significantly revised, some mentions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were removed from science and math textbooks, and references to armed Palestinian resistance figures were altered or eliminated in some cases (p. 5). However, Impact – SE (2021) has kept a critical stance and comments that the new Palestinian curriculum appears to be more radical than previous versions, systematically promoting violence, martyrdom, and jihad while omitting peace education, rejecting coexistence with Israel, and removing all references to past peace negotiations and agreements (p. 2). 26 A comprehensive analysis by the Georg Eckert Institute for International Textbook Research (GEI) examined 172 textbooks across various subjects. The study aimed to assess adherence to UNESCO-defined criteria of peace, tolerance, and non-violence in education. Findings indicated a complex portrayal: while there was an emphasis on human rights, diversity, and religious coexistence, the textbooks also reflected a narrative of resistance within the context of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, displaying antagonism towards Israel (Spielhaus, 2021). Currently, Israel controls education in East Jerusalem, “Israeli authorities approve and amend textbooks for use in East-Jerusalem schools” (Spielhaus, 2020, p. 5). Israeli authorities amend textbooks used in East Jerusalem schools without disclosing the changes or the authors involved. A review of seven such textbooks reveal two main levels of alteration: first, the removal of violent depictions, Israeli territorial representations on maps, and symbolic maps of All - Palestine; second, an idealized portrayal of Israeli - Palestinian coexistence that omits current tensions. Additionally, references to Palestinian identity, national symbols, cultural commemorations, and entire chapters on Palestinian history are removed, significantly altering the national narrative (p. 5). IMPACT -se highlights that contemporary Israeli textbooks emphasize peace education from an early age by highlighting peace agreements, promoting coexistence, and including anti-war literature and critical reflections on Israeli policies, while also teaching multiple perspectives on contentious issues and acknowledging past violence against Palestinians to foster critical thinking and empathy (Impact, SE, 2022, p. 12). In Israel (excluding East Jerusalem education), curriculum reforms have reflected the complex nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the broader socio-political context. Over the past two decades, events such as the Oslo Accords, Rabin’s assassination, the failed 2000 Camp David talks, and repeated cycles of violence have shifted public sentiment away from peace efforts and toward nationalism. As a result, political pressures have shaped the curriculum to promote dominant, nationalistic narratives (Yemini, Bar-Nissan, & Yardeni, 2014; Peled-Elhanan, 2013, p. 69, 232). On the other hand, one of the most notable changes occurred in 2000, with the introduction of a revised history curriculum for Israeli schools. This revision aimed to provide a more balanced approach to teaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, incorporating Palestinian perspectives and historical narratives to some extent. However, the extent to which Palestinian history is taught in 27 Israeli schools remains a contentious issue, with critics arguing that the curriculum still marginalizes Palestinian narratives (Peled-Elhanan, 2013, p. 69, 232). Despite efforts to promote a more inclusive curriculum, the Israeli education system still has faced ongoing criticism for downplaying (or even erasing) the history of the Palestinian Nakba (the 1948 Palestinian exodus) and minimizing the experiences of Palestinian refugees. Further investigations revealed that Israeli textbooks frequently omit the Palestinian narrative of displacement and the historical context of the Nakba. This omission contributes to a one-sided understanding of the conflict, hindering efforts toward mutual recognition and peace (Alayan, 2016, p. 82). In addition to history, Israeli textbooks have also been critiqued for their portrayal of Palestinians, often depicting them as a threat to Israeli security rather than acknowledging their national identity and aspirations. In Israel, educational materials have been scrutinized for their portrayal not only of Palestinians but the broader Arab world. Research by Professor Nurit Peled-Elhanan (2012) from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem analyzed Israeli school textbooks and found biased representations of Palestinians, often depicting them as terrorists, primitive farmers, or refugees. Her study, documented in the book Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education, argues that such portrayals dehumanize Palestinians and prepare Israeli students for military service with an indifference to Palestinian suffering (Naser-Najjab, 2020, p. 320). Professor’s Daniel Bar-Tal’s 1998 study of 124 Israeli textbooks proved the same trend (p. 320). According to an article by Gertel (2020), a Knesset (Israel’s house of representatives) committee discussed concerns raised by a new study showing that Israeli textbooks do not ignore the occupation but instead normalize it, presenting it as an unremarkable reality to Israeli students (Gertel, 2020). The most recent curricular debates in Israel revolve around Holocaust education, national identity, and the integration of religious and secular values. In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on Jewish identity and Zionist values in Israeli textbooks, while the inclusion of diverse perspectives - especially those of Palestinian citizens of Israel - remains limited (Alayan, 2016, p. 80, 93 - 94). “Like many modern countries, Israel makes use of history curricula to promote a strong sense of belonging among its citizenry” (Yemini, Bar-Nissan, & Yardeni, 2014). 28 Furthermore, in 2018, the Israeli government enacted the “Nation-State Law”, which solidified Israel’s status as the nation-state of the Jewish people. This law had implications for Israeli education, as it reinforced a Jewish-nationalist narrative, which critics argued could marginalize Arab citizens of Israel and exacerbate divisions between Jewish and Palestinian citizens (Yemini, Bar-Nissan, & Yardeni, 2014). 29 Theoretical framework – context, narratives and improvement analysis Based on the findings from the peace education theory, history of the conflict, as well as summary of reports, some plausible theories could be Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner in the year 1979); Collective Memory & Historical Narratives (Bar-Tal, 2007); and Postcolonial Theory (Said in 1978; Spivak in 1988). For data collection systemic content analysis (e.g. Krippendorff, 2004) as well as discourse analysis (e.g. Fairclough) could be used. While for recommendations and improvements, it would be feasible to apply Peace Education Theories (e.g. Salomon, Lederach). Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner) is a social psychological framework that explains how self-conception, cognitive processes, and social beliefs influence group behavior and intergroup relations (Haji et al., 2016, abstract, p. xv; Stets & Burke, 2000, p. 225). Key Idea: Ethnic groups construct identities in opposition to the “other”, which leads to in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination. Application: textbooks often frame national or ethnic groups in ways that reinforce group identity while portraying the “other” as an outsider, enemy, or inferior. It is possible to analyze: How Israeli textbooks present Palestinians and vice versa; Whether group differentiation is emphasized or if commonalities are highlighted. Tajfel and his collaborators, who developed social identity theory, believed that prejudice and intergroup conflict are best understood as group – based phenomena. These arise from fundamental human motivations and cognitive processes, shaped by individuals’ beliefs about themselves, their society, the broader social context, and the specific situations they and their groups experience (Haji et al., 2016, p. 4; Brown, 2001, p. 747). “A positive view of our own group depends in part on comparisons to other groups” (Haji et al., 2016, p. xv). Intergroup differentiation is the process of distinguishing one’s own group (the in-group) from others (out-groups), often leading to intergroup discrimination, where people favor their own group - even when group divisions are arbitrary. This tendency helps explain how social identities can contribute to conflict. However, social identity is not only a source of division; it can also be a tool for promoting peace. Using Social Identity Theory, Haji and colleagues explore how group attachment can play a role in both conflict and peacebuilding in the modern world (Haji et al., 2016, p. xv – xvi; Stets & Burke, 2000, p. 226; Brown, 2001, p. 747). “Feeling uncertain about important aspects of the self, holding a fragile view of oneself and one’s social connections, or 30 struggling with a feeling of lacking control can pose a threat to one’s identity” (Haji et al., 2016, p.39). Research shows that affirming one’s in-group can help reduce the negative emotions linked to identity threats and anxious uncertainty. However, this sense of belonging can easily slip into closed-mindedness toward those with different perspectives. As a result, many studies have explored how identity threats can increase people’s willingness to support radical or extreme actions against out-groups (p. 41). However, social identity can also be a powerful tool for positive coping. A strong sense of belonging can support psychological well-being, foster resilience, and encourage prosocial behaviors like empathy, cooperation, and solidarity. Research has shown that intergroup contact, the promotion of inclusive (or superordinate) identities, and shared narratives can reduce prejudice and help transform conflict into peaceful coexistence. Constructive coping strategies, according to SIT, depend on several key factors. Promoting equality and recognizing the complexity of multiple identities is essential. It is also important to address historical narratives and structural injustices that contribute to conflict. Effective interventions must be tailored to the specific historical and sociopolitical context of each conflict. In addition, fostering collective action and ethical, inclusive leadership can help mobilize communities toward peace and justice (Haji et al., 2016, Brown, 2000, Salomon, 2005). Collective Memory & Historical Narratives (Bar-Tal). In conflict zones, collective memory often highlights victimhood, heroism, and moral superiority of the in-group while dehumanizing or delegitimizing the out-group – something very common in Palestinian school books. These narratives are selective, politically motivated, and intergenerationally transmitted, often via school curricula, holidays, monuments, and media. Key Idea: Societies in conflict create a collective memory that sustains their national identity, often reinforcing victimhood or heroism. Application: Analyze how textbooks present historical events: Is there a one-sided account of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict?; Are conflicting historical perspectives acknowledged?; How is the past used to justify the present conflict?. Collective Memory is the shared pool of knowledge and information held by a group about its past. It helps construct and maintain national identity. Daniel Bar-Tal’s theory is particularly relevant for understanding how educational curricula and textbooks in conflict settings serve not only as instruments of knowledge transmission but also as tools for identity formation and political 31 socialization. Bar-Tal argues that societies engaged in prolonged conflict often develop shared collective memories that emphasize in-group victimhood, heroism, and moral justification, while portraying the out-group as aggressors or delegitimized actors. These narratives are deeply embedded in school textbooks, which become key mediums for the intergenerational transmission of conflict-sustaining ideologies. Within the Palestinian-Israeli context, such narratives may present historical events through a unilateral lens, omitting or marginalizing the perspectives of the “other” side (Nets – Zehngut & Bar - Tal, 2014, p. 67; Bar – Tal, 2007, p. 1436). This framework will be used to assess whether the analyzed textbooks foster one-sided national identities or whether they provide space for critical engagement with contested histories, thus contributing either to conflict perpetuation or transformation. Intractable conflicts (like the Israeli-Palestinian one) last for decades and become deeply embedded in national identity. “Typically biased, it de-legitimizes the rival and glorifies the in- group, thereby inhibiting peaceful resolution of the conflict and reconciliation of the parties” (Nets – Zehngut & Bar - Tal, 2014, p. 67). These memories are not neutral or objective. They are selective: “In-group” is portrayed as innocent, moral, and heroic and “Out-group” (the enemy) is framed as aggressive, evil, or illegitimate. This “us vs. them” mindset reinforces fear, hate, and mistrust. As a result, people become less willing to compromise or empathize, making peace harder to achieve (Nets – Zehngut & Bar - Tal, 2014, p. 67; Bar – Tal, 2007, p. 1436 - 1438). Peacebuilding requires a shift from glorified, one-sided narratives to more balanced, inclusive memories. This does not mean erasing history - but acknowledging complexity, mutual suffering, and shared humanity. Changing collective memory helps people see the “other” not just as enemies, but as fellow humans (Nets – Zehngut & Bar - Tal, 2014, p. 67). Postcolonial Theory (main thinkers: Said, Spivak, Bhabha), when applied to education, explores how colonial histories and power dynamics continue to shape knowledge systems, curricula, teaching methods, and institutional structures - often privileging Western norms and marginalizing indigenous and non-Western epistemologies; or, from the other side – using colonization to promote victimhood narratives. Key Idea: Colonial and neo-colonial structures shape knowledge and determine which voices are heard. Application: Check for: Power asymmetries in how history is narrated; Victimhood vs. agency (Do textbooks present one side as the perpetual victim or hero?). 32 By examining the enduring impact of colonial legacies, this theory highlights how historical power dynamics shape contemporary ethnic conflicts and educational systems. In regions like the Middle East, post-colonial theory can inform the analysis of how curricula and political instruments perpetuate or resist systemic inequalities (Grunwald, 2011). However, we have to look at post-colonial theory from a different perspective, regarding Palestinian curriculum and text books. If the theory generally highlights that existing curricula and educational materials portray colonial viewpoints, in case of Palestine, colonial past is clearly acknowledged, taught about and condemned. Palestinians are portrayed as victims of colonial past and occupied present. However, this will further be analyzed in the results section of this thesis. Homi Bhabha is a prominent thinker of post-colonial theory. Especially relevant is his “Third Space Theory” - “an in-between … where ‘cultural boundaries meet and blur’ … allowing people to synthesize elements of different identities and create new, hybrid identities and knowledge (Tatham, 2023, p. 2) which stems from the idea of “hybridity”. Bhabha argues that culture is not fixed or pure, but something that is shaped by time, change, and human action. He rejects the idea that cultures are stable, unchanging, or clearly separated from each other. Instead, Bhabha sees culture as being created in in-between, shifting spaces where different cultural influences meet and mix. He calls this “hybridity”, meaning that cultures always form through blending and interaction, rather than existing as isolated or original entities. “Bhabha calls this in-between, hybrid space the Third Space, full of tensions, struggles and contestations between different cultural discourses” (p. 4). Concisely (p. 4): “the Third Space is a space of transformative potential where people are not restricted to adhering to one or other set of dominant values and traditions. Instead, the Third Space is inherently productive, and people, individually or collectively, can create their own identities, drawing on elements of different discourses that are ‘appropriated, translated, historicized (sic) and read anew’” (p. 4). The concept of the Third Space, as described by Bhabha, highlights how people challenge dominant ideologies by continuously negotiating and reshaping meaning. From this perspective it has a potential of conflict transformation. This negotiation is not just about finding middle ground - it is a political act that can involve resistance, defiance, and subversion. It is an ongoing process, with each new context requiring new forms of negotiation. For Bhabha, the Third Space represents 33 a space where new, transformative, and even revolutionary meanings can emerge by disrupting established power structures and cultural narratives (p. 4). For example, Christina Tatham (2023) explains that as communities worldwide become increasingly diverse, a paradox emerges in education policy: while diversity is growing, curricula are often standardized, which reduces complexity and may fail to reflect or accommodate that diversity (p. 1 - 2). Her research is very relevant because it looks at educational setting that involves diverse cultures and communities and might be used for improvements in conflict impacted classrooms. She focuses on grades 4 – 12, different schools and countries. She brings together several studies that explore how Third Space theory is applied in educational settings, particularly with young children. Tatham-Fashanu found that child-led play in diverse classrooms often creates spontaneous Third Spaces where children blend different cultural knowledges, while teacher interference can inhibit this. Yahya and Wood, as explained by Tatham (2023), similarly show how play can serve as a bridge between home and school cultures for immigrant children, allowing them to form new cultural identities. Piipponen and Karlsson highlight how intercultural storytelling and drawing between Finnish and Belgian students enabled children to co-create a shared cultural narrative, emphasizing children as active cultural producers. Lastly, Valdez-Gainer and Gainer used drama and storytelling to help second graders engage critically with social justice themes, encouraging a shared sense of agency and challenging dominant social norms. Across these examples, the Third Space is seen as a transformative environment where children can negotiate identity, resist dominant narratives, and create new, hybrid forms of knowledge (p. 8 - 9). Moje et al., as explained by Tatham (2023) advanced the use of Third Space theory in education by applying it to scientific literacy in a bilingual immersion school. While building on earlier work like Gutiérrez’s, they distinguish their approach by focusing less on conflict and more on mutual understanding between different cultural and linguistic discourses. In their version of the Third Space, both school knowledge and students’ everyday knowledge are valued equally. They highlight how teachers can use students’ existing skills - such as classifying music genres - to teach scientific concepts. Unlike earlier approaches, Moje et al. emphasize that teachers should actively create Third Space environments by listening to students’ diverse backgrounds and intentionally planning lessons that integrate those experiences (p. 4). 34 However, there are two main criticisms of how Third Space theory is used in education today. First, some scholars argue that when teachers are seen as the ones who “create” the Third Space, it puts too much control back in the hands of schools and teachers, rather than recognizing how students already bring valuable, mixed cultural knowledge into the classroom. Second, others say that newer versions of Third Space have become too safe and neutral, ignoring important issues like power, inequality, and resistance. As a result, these newer versions do not reflect the original idea, which was about challenging dominant systems and creating real change (p. 5 – 6). The theories and methods compared in the table all offer distinct yet overlapping contributions to peace promotion in educational settings, particularly within conflict-affected curricula and education materials. Despite their varied disciplinary origins, several common themes emerge across these frameworks. Comparison of Theories by Their Peace-Promoting Suggestions in Curriculum and Textbook Theory / Method Peace-Promoting Approach Implications for Curriculum/Matterial Design / Analysis Social Identity Theory Promote inclusive Encourage textbook (Tajfel & Turner) identities and intergroup content that highlights contact; reduce in-group commonalities across bias; emphasize shared groups, avoids enemy humanity imagery, and fosters intergroup empathy Collective Memory & Shift from exclusive, Promote critical Historical Narratives (Bar- glorified narratives to engagement with history; Tal) balanced, multi-perspective include multiple narratives; history; recognize mutual avoid portraying only one suffering side as moral or victimized 35 Postcolonial Theory (Said, Decolonize knowledge; Re-center local voices and Spivak, Bhabha, Fanon) encourage Third Space for multiple epistemologies; hybrid identities; resist include critical thinking on binary oppositions of 'us vs power, inequality, and them' identity Peace Education Theories, Promote critical thinking, Infuse curriculum/materials Conflict Transformation empathy, dialogue, human with coexistence models, Theory (Lederach, rights, and reconciliation tolerance education, and Salomon) through pedagogy. values of non-violence and cooperation. Engage all levels of society to transform relationships, Encourage reconciliation- structures, and narratives based content, shared over time. histories, and inclusive storytelling that supports sustainable peace 3.table. Comparison of theories by their peace-promoting suggestions in curriculum/education materials (Source: author’s compilation) Firstly, inclusion and shared humanity are emphasized across multiple theories. Social Identity Theory, Peace Education Theory, and Conflict Transformation Theory all advocate for fostering inclusive group identities and empathy. They aim to reduce in-group bias and encourage intergroup understanding, which is particularly important in contexts where education has historically reinforced divisions. These theories promote peace by shifting the focus from exclusivity to commonality. Similarly, critical engagement with historical narratives is a central concern for both Collective Memory Theory and Postcolonial Theory. These perspectives underline how selectively constructed histories - often found in textbooks - can sustain conflict by reinforcing national victimhood or moral superiority. Peace-promoting education, according to these theories, must 36 confront biased historical accounts and instead include multiple, conflicting narratives to foster more balanced and reflective understandings of the past. Moreover, resistance to binary oppositions, such as the dichotomy of “us” versus “them”, is a key tenet of Postcolonial Theory and Social Identity Theory, as well as Collective Memory. These frameworks argue that dominant discourses tend to reinforce power hierarchies by marginalizing certain voices. By challenging such discourses, they open up space for pluralism and inclusive dialogue. In doing so, they align closely with the goals of peace education and critical pedagogy. Another shared feature is the promotion of dialogue and reconciliation. Peace Education Theories and Conflict Transformation Theory both stress the importance of interpersonal and structural transformations, emphasizing long-term engagement and coexistence. These frameworks suggest that education should not only teach about peace but actively model and support the processes of reconciliation and coexistence. However, important differences also emerge in their approach and focus. For example, Social Identity Theory concentrates on psychological and cognitive mechanisms behind group behavior, whereas Postcolonial Theory foregrounds historical and epistemological power relations. Conflict Transformation Theory takes a broader view, focusing on deep structural and relational changes in society that go beyond the classroom, positioning education as part of a larger ecosystem of peacebuilding. Furthermore, the level of analysis varies: Social Identity Theory and Collective Memory operate mainly at the community or psychosocial level, whereas Postcolonial Theory and Conflict Transformation Theory expand to the structural and institutional level, addressing how systems of power and knowledge influence peace and conflict. Another significant distinction lies in the method of change. Social Identity Theory and Peace Education Theories emphasize interpersonal strategies such as contact, empathy-building, and identity reflection. In contrast, Conflict Transformation Theory seeks multi-level, long-term systemic transformation, involving grassroots, institutional, and political actors. Lastly, Postcolonial Theory stands out for its critique of Western epistemological dominance in education. It calls for the decolonization of knowledge systems, making it particularly relevant in contexts like Palestine, where education is deeply tied to national identity and resistance narratives. 37 38 Methodology- content and discourse analysis The author has conducted a systematic content analysis and discourse analysis of 35 Palestinian curriculum books covering grades 1 to 12, with a particular emphasis on subjects that are central to identity formation and historical consciousness, such as social studies, history, religion, as well as languages (due to constant usage of historic narratives as examples or excerpts from national poetry), and technology. These textbooks, at the time of completing this thesis (summer 2025), are freely and publicly accessible in PDF format through the Palestinian Educational Portal https://elearn.edu.ps/pc/. The books and respective chapters used were: - Grade 1 – Our Beautiful Language (Ch. 1), National and Life Education (Ch. 1–2), Mathematics (Ch. 1) - Grade 3 – National and Social Upbringing (Ch. 1–2), Arabic Language (Ch. 1–2) - Grade 5 – Social Studies (Ch. 1), Science and Life (Ch. 1), Technology (Ch. 1) - Grade 7 – Social Studies (Ch. 1–2), Arabic Language (Ch. 1–2), Science and Life (Ch. 1– 2), English (Ch. 1–2), Technology (Ch. 1), Islamic Education (Ch. 1–2) - Grade 8 – Social Studies (Ch. 1–2), Arabic Language (Ch. 1), Mathematics (Ch. 1–2), Science and Life (Ch. 1) - Grade 9 – Social Studies (Ch. 1) - Grade 11 – Reading and Grammar – Arabic (Ch. 1–2), English (Ch. 1–2) - Grade 12 – English (Ch. 1) The books have been analyzed using content analysis and discourse analysis. Discourse analysis and content analysis are both qualitative research methods used to examine texts, speech, or other forms of communication - but they differ significantly in their aims, assumptions, and techniques. Content analysis Focuses on what is said - the frequency, presence, or patterns of specific words, phrases, or themes in a text. For example - counting how many times the word “freedom” appears in political speeches. Aim: Language can be objectively coded and quantified to identify patterns. Discourse analysis focuses on how language is used in a social context. It is about meaning- making, power dynamics, ideologies, and how language constructs reality. For example, analyzing political speeches to see how they frame Palestinians or two-state solution. Aim: Language is not neutral - it shapes and reflects power, identity, norms, and ideology. 39 In the next sections I will analyze both methods more in depth. Content analysis as a method Content analysis is one of the dominant methods for textbook research (Spielhaus, 2021, p. 12). It constitutes a fundamental methodological approach within the social sciences, offering a systematic means of examining communicative material (Krippendorf, 2004, p. xiii). “Content analysis rests on the assumption that texts are a rich data source with great potential to reveal valuable information about particular phenomena” (Kleinheksel et al., 2020, p. 128). The method is used to understand “what is mediated between people-textual matter, symbols, messages, information…” (Krippendorff, 2004, p. xiii). This contextual sensitivity allows researchers to uncover patterns, meanings, and implications embedded within texts, thereby providing critical insights into the social, cultural, and political dimensions of communication. Therefore, it also has potential to uncover ideologies and narratives that are portrayed in, for example, education books. Nowadays it also has become an alternative to several other methods, such as public opinion and political leanings research (p. xiv). Alayan (2016), who has researched Palestinian and Israeli curricula and books, has underlined that textbooks must be analyzed in relation to their political context, as this reveals why certain content is included or excluded. When textbook content is viewed alongside the surrounding politics, it becomes clearer how education is used to shape national identity and serve specific interests (p. 83). In continental philosophy, especially within the Hermeneutic tradition, interpreting a text is not a neutral or purely objective process. According to thinkers like Schleiermacher, one cannot fully understand something (a text, idea, or phenomenon) without considering its context - like its cultural, historical, and social background. Kracauer builds on this by saying that the meaning of a text is co-created: it is not just what the author intended or what the reader thinks, but a mix of both. However, this co-creation is still influenced by each person’s background, meaning that if the reader and the author come from different contexts, they might interpret the text differently. This is why, in Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA), it is important to interpret texts within their specific contexts, recognizing that meaning is shaped by both the text and the reader’s perspective (Devi Prassad, 2019, p. [7]; Krippendorf, 2004, p. 33). 40 Reliability is crucial in content analysis, especially with human coders. It means that different coders should produce consistent results using the same coding scheme. content analysis must genuinely reflect what it claims to measure (validity is key) (Krippendorf, 2004, p. 38). As explained by Kleinkeksel and colleagues (2020): “Codes are the currency of content analysis. Researchers use codes to organize and understand their data” (p. 129). Code is a brief label (1 - 3 words) that captures the meaning of a unit or condensed unit(p. 128). The coding process begins with the researcher immersing themselves in the data, often through transcription or repeated reading, to identify units of meaning. Codes can be created a priori - based on existing theories - or can emerge inductively from the data during analysis. Researchers divide text based on how many distinct ideas are present, sometimes breaking down complex sentences into smaller fragments. Once units of meaning are identified, they are condensed - shortened while retaining their original meaning - to ease the analysis. Only after this step are codes assigned, which help researchers systematically interpret large amounts of text for educational or research purposes (p. 129; see also e.g. (Gheyle & Jacobs, 2017, p. [8 - 9]). Krippendorff (2004) argues that analyzing content cannot be separated from its social, cultural, and historical context. Researchers must consider why content was created, who created it, and for what purpose. This situates content analysis within broader societal processes and discourses (p. xviii - xix) Qualitative content analysis might appear very similar to discourse analysis (Gheyle & Jacobs, 2017, p. [5]), however if the first looks for (hidden) meanings in the content, the latter examines how language itself works to shape meaning, power, and identity. Therefore, both serve a different, but similar purpose, and can be used simultaneously for more complete results. I will compare both methods in the next section. Discourse analysis as a method Discourse analysis (DA or also CDA, in case of critical discourse analysis) is a frameworks that helps to analyze how power and ideology influence discourse. As Krippendorf (2004) explained, “discourse is defined as text above the level of sentences. Discourse analysts tend to focus on how particular phenomena are represented” (p. 16). He further gives examples from Van Dijk from his research on racism in press. Van Dijk examined how “minorities appear, how ethnic conflicts are 41 described, and how stereotypes permeate given accounts” (p. 16). Following Foucault, Said emphasizes that discourse is not merely a tool serving power but is intrinsically a form of power itself (Kohn & Reddy, 2024). Fairclough’s Three-Dimensional Model (1995) is a foundational framework in Critical Discourse Analysis developed by British linguist Norman Fairclough. It is designed to analyze how language (discourse) is shaped by and helps shape power relations, ideologies, and social change. Fairclough’s model examines discourse as a social practice, meaning language is not neutral but tied to social structures and power dynamics. The model breaks down discourse analysis into three interrelated levels: 2. figure. Three dimensional model of CDA (Source: Fairclough, 1995, p. 98) Each discursive event has three dimensions - text, discourse practice, and social practice - which together reveal how language functions within power relations; this analytical framework links Gramsci’s concept of hegemony with interdiscursivity to show how discourse practices both shape and reflect social structures through the processes of text production and interpretation (Fairclough, 2013, p. 94 - 95). 42 This framework is pertinent as it provides a foundational structure for linguistic analysis. It can be employed in conjunction with content analysis or serve as a preliminary step, establishing a conceptual basis for the development of content analysis code system. Another framework is Van Dijk’s Ideological Square (1998) is a key concept in critical discourse analysis (CDA) developed by Dutch linguist Teun A. van Dijk. The model helps analyze how ideological polarization is created and maintained in discourse - especially political, media, and institutional language. It is very relevant to social identity theories. This concept: a) Emphasizes positive in-group descriptions (self-promotion), i.e. discourse emphasizes our good properties/actions; b) Emphasizes negative out-group descriptions (othering), i.e. discourse emphasizes their bad properties/actions; c) Downplays in-group negative actions (mitigating own violence), i.e. discourse de-emphasize our bad properties/actions; d) Exaggerates out-group negative actions (justifying enemy stereotypes), i.e. discourse de- emphasize their good properties/actions. Van Dijk argued that ideologies are passed on through textbooks. A key goal of the hidden curriculum is to promote the values of a society’s own social systems while rejecting or minimizing those of outsiders. Van Dijk’s “ideological square” explains how this happens in language by emphasizing positive traits of one’s own group, highlighting negatives of others, and downplaying one’s own faults while ignoring positives of outsiders. Through such language strategies, texts can shape how meaning is emphasized or marginalized, reinforcing certain ideologies (Naseri, 2021, p. 1420). He describes how ideology shows up in texts through things like word choice (positive or negative tone), rhetorical tricks (like exaggeration), and how actions are framed (making insiders look good and outsiders bad). These techniques especially influence children and young people because of how they think and develop. That is why social systems are very interested in shaping young minds through textbooks and education, and many studies have confirmed this (p. 1421). Several studies in Iran have used Van Dijk’s method to analyze textbook content, revealing ideological influences. Taherzadeh, Abolhassani Chimeh, and Siamian Gorji found that history narratives in Iranian books emphasize national positives, while foreign authors focus on negatives. Rashidi and Saeedi analyzed “Persian Today for Foreign Students” and noted a focus on descriptive discourse. Kasaei and Rahimian, examining the compulsory textbook “Islamic 43 Thought”, found it limited by incomplete reasoning, irrelevant examples, biased argumentation, and a lack of alternative perspectives (p. 1422). The author has primarily used Fairclough’s model for general discourse analysis and Van Dijk’s theory for group relationships, when feasible. The methodological approach combined manual analysis with artificial intelligence tools to ensure both comprehensiveness and accuracy. Initially, when necessary, the author applied optical character recognition (OCR) in Arabic to convert scanned PDFs into machine-readable text. This step enabled more efficient digital processing. Following this, the texts were automatically translated into English using the professional AI translation tool DeepL, in order to accelerate the identification of relevant discourse. The translated texts were never used in isolation: analysis was always carried out in parallel with the Arabic originals, allowing for precision and cross- verification. The workflow was designed to minimize the risks of distortion. First, the author conducted a preliminary manual reading of each textbook in its entirety, flagging relevant passages. Extracts identified as significant were then compared in both Arabic original and English translation for semantic fidelity. Each selected excerpt was subsequently documented in the research corpus as a bilingual record, consisting of a screenshot of the original Arabic page, its corresponding English translation, and bibliographic reference to the exact page number (in total creating a document file of 245 pages, unedited). Translations were verified both by the author (a non-native Arabic speaker and learner) and by a native Arabic speaker with professional translation experience, ensuring accuracy and contextual adequacy. Whenever possible and feasible, literal translations have been preserved over contextual translations. According to Kleinkeksel and colleagues (2020) identifying a segment of a text (words, sentence or statement) is needed to identify a single idea or concept. For content analysis, a keyword search strategy was employed, focusing on terms directly related to the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, such as “war”, “occupation”, “Zionism/Zionist”, “refugee/refugees”, and others. However, also positive, peace inducing and promoting keywords/narratives have been identified using keywords such as “diversity”, “respect”, “unity”. A full inventory of the keywords, along with the coding framework, will be presented in the following sections. For critical discourse analysis, the 44 emphasis was placed on passages containing such keywords, which were then studied in depth for their narrative structure, ideological positioning, and discursive strategies. Based on this and other principes provided by Kleinkeksel et al., author has codified the texts the following way (as an example): Example of Coding (Content Analysis): “The Zionist occupation destroyed many Palestinian villages in 1948, forcing thousands of people to flee and become refugees”. Step 1 – Unit of Meaning: The whole sentence = one unit, because it conveys a single idea (the original text passage from the textbook) Step 2 – Condensation: “Occupation destroyed villages, people became refugees” (simplified meaning) Step 3 – Code (1 - 3 words): • Occupation violence • Refugees Step 4 – Category: • Consequences of occupation (broader grouping) Step 5 – Theme: • Displacement and loss of homeland (higher-level interpretation, CDA material) Following the coding procedure, the next step was to examine how particular topics and narratives recur across the textbooks. Although frequency counts were not the primary focus of this study, quantitative distribution offers a useful overview of the most salient ideas embedded in the textbooks and indicates which discursive elements are foregrounded in the construction of meaning. 45 Table 6 provides an example of the coding process applied to the Palestinian school books: Segment Condensed Code Category narrative/concept Grade 1 Arabic self sacrifice for sacrifice/devoti p. 89 I sacrifice for you, my homeland martyrdom patriotism/nationalism homeland on We plant the land with love from we plant from ancient rights to the heritage/history recognition of palestine ancient times times land And we protect Jerusalem with eyes recognition of territory protect Jerusalem recognition of palestine and determination the capital claim My homeland most p. 178 My homeland most sacred homeland values patriotism/nationalism sacred 6. Table. Excerpt from author’s content analysis data set (source: author’s own compilation) In this case, excerpts are taken from the Grade 1 Arabic textbook. The table shows how original text segments were progressively transformed into condensed meaning units, codes, categories, and themes. To further illustrate the qualitative structure of the data, the codes were organized into hierarchical concept trees. Image 1 below shows an example for the theme Patriotism/Nationalism: 1. Image. Example of concept tree. (source: author’s own compilation) Following the content analysis, The discourse analysis proceeded in four integrated stages. First, contextualization: coded fragments were situated within the broader textbooks (subject, grade, topic) and located by text type (literary passage, historical narrative, moral lesson). Second, lexical and semantic analysis: key terms (e.g., homeland, martyrdom, occupation) were examined for framing and for patterned oppositions (e.g., homeland/occupation, resistance/oppression). Third, an intertextual and ideological reading traced how textbook texts draw on wider historical, religious, or cultural discourses and interpreted the narratives’ ideological work (e.g., legitimizing resistance, strengthening identity, encouraging coexistence) in light of relevant theories. Finally, 46 the discursive function of each passage was specified within the textbook scope - such as promoting patriotism, constructing national identity, or legitimizing struggle. Both – trees and the table data have been in depth analyzed in the further sections of the thesis. Both trees and tables are available in their complete version as the annexes of the thesis, available upon request. 47 Results The results demonstrate that across the schoolbooks, recurrent narratives are present and emphasized consistently, regardless of student age or subject matter. For instance, in one textbook alone (Grade 9 Social Sciences), terms such as Zionism, Zionists, and occupation appeared more than 100 times within 62 pages. This pattern was not limited to the humanities; even in seemingly apolitical domains such as technology textbooks, exercises were embedded with real-life examples referencing the occupation regime. Thus, the same underlying narrative is traceable horizontally across subjects and vertically across grade levels. Taken together, these findings confirm that the schoolbooks are not only pedagogical but also ideological, functioning as a vehicle for collective memory, identity reinforcement, and resistance discourse. At the same time, several pedagogical improvements and alternative framings have been proposed based on the analysis, which will be presented in the concluding sections of this thesis. Content analysis In this study, quantitative content analysis was not the primary focus. While numerical coding can be useful to track how often particular themes or narratives appear across a dataset, which was used in this thesis, the aim of this research was not to establish exact frequencies. Instead, the analysis followed a qualitative orientation, emphasizing the structure, function, and meaning of narratives. Quantitative indicators were used in a limited way - mainly to observe whether certain themes recurred across subjects, courses, and grade levels - but without precise measurement. This approach aligns with Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis, which stresses that the significance of a text lies less in how often specific words or codes occur, and more in how discursive patterns are constructed, reproduced, and legitimized. Therefore, attention was directed to the ways in which narratives reappear, how they are framed, and what ideological or pedagogical functions they serve in the textbooks, rather than on their numerical frequency. Figure 3 illustrates the occurrence of topics (codes condensed from text units). The most prominent topics are struggle (37 occurrences) and fight (33), both of which strongly reflect the textbooks’ emphasis on resistance as a pedagogical and ideological principle. Other frequently coded topics include heritage (21), unity (19), and history (18), underscoring the significance of cultural continuity and collective identity. 48 Topic occurences in the textbooks (fragments (n = 160 ) from 35 books) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 3. figure. Topic occurrences in the textbooks (source: author’s compilation based on the content analysis results) Meanwhile, topics such as respect, hope, and sacrifice appear less frequently, suggesting that while values-oriented discourses are present, they are secondary to narratives of conflict and resistance. Figure 4 presents the distribution of higher-order narratives/themes. Here, Zionism (44 occurrences) and Resistance (30) dominate, indicating the centrality of external threat and national struggle to the textbook discourse. Tolerance (22) and Sufferance (19) are also well represented, providing evidence that the textbooks do not exclusively reproduce conflict-centered narratives but also incorporates discourses of coexistence and victimhood. 49 Narrative/theme occurences in the textbooks (fragments (n = 160 ) from 35 books) 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4. figure. Narrative/theme occurrences in the textbooks (source: author’s compilation based on the content analysis results) Less frequent, though still recurrent, are themes such as Recognition of Palestine, Fight for the Homeland, and War, all of which reinforce a broader frame of territoriality and identity. The compiled concept trees (see 1 image) demonstrate how codes, categories, and themes are interrelated across the dataset. A notable feature of these trees is that certain keywords reappear across multiple branches. This is not an error or inconsistency but rather reflects the polysemic character of language and the flexible role that specific terms play in different discursive contexts. For example, the word homeland is not confined to a single meaning. In some contexts, it functions as part of a value system (e.g., “my homeland most sacred” → category “values”), while in other instances it is mobilized as a territorial claim (“protect Jerusalem” → category “rights to the land”). Similarly, the theme of martyrdom can be discursively linked to resistance, patriotism/nationalism, or the fight for the homeland, depending on the surrounding narrative. This analytical decision rests on the assumption that keywords and sentences acquire meaning relationally. The same lexical item may support different ideological functions depending on its context, narrative framing, and combination with other codes. As such, the recurrence of identical 50 codes under different categories reflects the discursive versatility of certain key concepts in the curriculum. By allowing codes to appear in multiple trees, the analysis avoids artificially “fixing” their meaning to a single interpretation and instead foregrounds the fluidity and multiplicity of discourse. This is consistent with Fairclough’s understanding of discourse as both constitutive and contextual, where the meaning of a word or phrase shifts according to its use within broader patterns of representation. As a combination, these figures demonstrate how content analysis reveals both the manifest content emphasized in individual passages (topics) and the underlying narrative structures that organize them (themes, which can later be used for discourse analyses). While resistance-related codes (struggle, fight, sacrifice) dominate the textbooks, they are consistently situated within broader discursive frames of Zionism and national struggle. At the same time, the presence of tolerance-related codes highlights the coexistence of alternative discourses, even if they remain less prominent in comparison. A key limitation of this study concerns the positionality of the researcher and the inherent subjectivity of content analysis. Since coding was conducted exclusively by the author, the risk of reduced objectivity must be acknowledged, as well as risk of errors of manual sorting nature (errors in page numbers, formatting etc.). Content analysis, by its very nature, is shaped by the researcher’s interpretation, and thus findings may reflect individual perspectives as much as textual patterns. Nevertheless, in light of the primary objective of this research - namely, identifying areas for potential improvement in the Palestinian textbooks through the lens of peace education theories - the interpretive nature of the analysis is not necessarily a weakness. Rather than prioritizing quantitative categorization or frequency counts, the analysis sought to identify recurring narratives, their theoretical underpinnings, and their implications. In this sense, the results should be understood less as definitive measurements and more as indicators that “point toward the problem”, highlighting common trends across subjects and grade levels, leading toward structural tendencies in the curriculum and providing a foundation for the subsequent discourse analysis. 51 Discourse analysis While content analysis mapped the frequency and distribution of topics and narratives, critical discourse analysis provides a deeper understanding of how these narratives are constructed, reproduced, and legitimized in textbooks, and possibly - curriculum. Following Fairclough, discourse is understood here as a form of social practice, in which language both reflects and shapes social reality. Thus, the aim of this section is not only to describe the presence of certain themes, but to interrogate their ideological function and pedagogical implications. The following section moves from coding results to a deeper interpretation of the discursive patterns embedded in the textbooks. Author’s interpretations are based on theories previously examined in this thesis. Author has identified at least 9 themes/discourse narratives: resistance, Zionism, patriotism or nationalism, recognition of Palestine, war, sufferance, tolerance, hope for the future, occupation and refugees. Resistance. The discourse of resistance is structured through keywords such as struggle, sacrifice, endurance, unity, and fight. Phrases such as “We plant the land with love from ancient times” (Arabic, Grade 1, p. 89) and “We protect Jerusalem with eyes and determination” (ibid.) condense into codes like heritage/history and struggle/fight. These passages frame resistance not merely as armed confrontation, but as a comprehensive ethos encompassing cultural continuity, devotion, and unity. Ideologically, resistance legitimizes the Palestinian struggle as both defensive and heroic. It presents endurance as a collective duty, thereby fostering solidarity among students. Pedagogically, it socializes learners into a national identity rooted in perseverance and sacrifice, aligning with the broader goal of sustaining collective memory under occupation. The phrase “from ancient times” is particularly significant in this context: it not only strengthens the sense of heritage but also underscores a crucial aspect of the Palestinian struggle - namely, the right to the land of Palestine, whether fully or partially, in opposition to Jewish settlement and occupation. This discursive trend is also visible in the maps included in Palestinian curriculum books (e.g., Grade 3, Social Upbringing, Chapter 2, p. 83). Similar examples appear in the Grade 3 Arabic course book, which poses the question: “Where is the city of Jaffa located?”. Such wording likely motivates students to answer “in Palestine”, despite the fact that the city is part of 52 Tel Aviv - Yafo in Israel. An even more provocative example is the subsequent question: “When did the Arabs build the city of Jaffa?”- a formulation that emphasizes the role of “Arabs” in building the city, while omitting any reference to shared Israeli/Palestinian ancestral heritage (e.g., Grade 3, Arabic, Chapter 1, p. 109). 2.image. Map of Palestine (source: Grade 3, Social upbringing, chapter 2, p. 83). Zionism is consistently framed as an external threat and the source of displacement, suffering, and territorial exclusion. Codes such as recognition of the capital, territorial exclusion, and violations highlight the negative effects of Zionist actions, with narratives such as: “The occupation destroyed villages, people became refugees”. For example, “My daughter, our village was destroyed in the Palestinian Nakba, when the Zionist gangs occupied Palestine in 1948. They destroyed villages and communities, killed people, displaced the rest, and forced them to leave. We were among those expelled, and we left for Jordan. We carried our keys with us, hoping that the return would be near, but the absence has been long” (Grade 5, Social Studies, Chapter 1, p. 35). Ideologically, Zionism is positioned as the antagonist against which Palestinian identity is defined. Pedagogically, it reinforces a narrative of victimhood that simultaneously justifies resistance or even promotes revengeful visions. By externalizing threat, it strengthens in-group solidarity (unity) and legitimizes struggle as both necessary and righteous. 53 Patriotism/Nationalism (and focus on martyrdom). This discourse is constructed around notions of homeland, heritage, unity, and martyrdom, with the latter being particularly problematic from the perspective of peace education theories. For instance, “I sacrifice for you, my homeland” (Grade 1, Our Beautiful Language [Arabic], Chapter 1, p. 89) condenses into sacrifice/devotion and falls under the category of martyrdom. The concept of homeland emerges as a multi-layered signifier: it may function as a value (something sacred), a territorial claim (land to be defended), and a cultural marker (heritage to be preserved). Ideologically, patriotism unites diverse aspects of identity into a coherent narrative of belonging. Pedagogically, it encourages loyalty and collective pride, constructing the homeland as the ultimate point of reference for moral and civic duty. However, the analysis also identified more controversial elements within this discourse. For example, the Grade 3 Arabic textbook (Our Beautiful Language, Chapter 2, p. 52) provides a detailed account of the life, philosophy, and character of Dalal al-Mughrabi, who is commemorated as a Palestinian martyr but regarded as a terrorist in some international contexts. The text describes her as a role model, “for Palestinian girls, and indeed for every Palestinian who loves his homeland and defends its soil” (p. 52). This raises several concerns. First, the narrative implicitly encourages martyrdom by presenting al-Mughrabi as an aspirational figure, particularly for young girls. Second, while sacrifice for one’s homeland can be framed as a noble act, questions arise regarding the appropriateness of introducing such material at the Grade 3 level. Third, the selection of al-Mughrabi as a central role model is highly contentious given the political sensitivities surrounding her legacy. From a peace education perspective, one might ask whether more constructive approaches could be pursued - such as narratives emphasizing coexistence, reconciliation, or examples of role models who promote peace, dialogue, and social sustainability. Recognition of Palestine. This discourse highlights territory, heritage, and legitimacy, it is a very important issue for Palestinians daily and academically. Phrases like “We plant from ancient times” are coded as heritage/history, supporting the narrative that Palestinians are the rightful inheritors of the land. The category rights to the land is central here, linking cultural heritage to political legitimacy. 54 Ideologically, this discourse reinforces claims to sovereignty and territorial continuity. Pedagogically, it instills historical consciousness, ensuring that students internalize a sense of rightful belonging and political entitlement. Even if it is legally, historically and morally correct assumption and narrative, it, just like others, does not underline the importance of peaceful coexistence. It does not teach history where Jews (Israelis) and ancient Palestinians lived together and coexisted peacefully, as well as it does not teach the common Canaanite history, that would prove that peaceful coexistence is possible even nowadays and Israelis have more in common with Palestinians than what it seems at a first glance. War. The theme of war emerges through codes like fight, struggle, endurance, sacrifice. War is represented both as inevitable (an imposed reality) and as honorable (a space for sacrifice and victory). Ideologically, it normalizes conflict as part of national existence and survival. Pedagogically, it prepares students to perceive struggle as an enduring condition, framing personal sacrifice as part of collective destiny. Sufferance. This discourse foregrounds victimhood, exile, and endurance. Passages coded as refugees and camps, occupation, and prisons and imprisonment highlight experiences of loss: “The occupation forced thousands to flee and become refugees” (Grade 3, Arabic, Chapter 2, p. 53), this way reinforcing vengeance ideas. Ideologically, sufferance emphasizes Palestinian dispossession and injustice. Pedagogically, it fosters empathy and collective memory of trauma, anchoring identity in the narrative of loss while justifying ongoing claims to justice and return. Tolerance. On the other hand, tolerance narratives appears less frequently but provides a counter- narrative which is very important. Overall, Palestinian textbooks teaches tolerance, diversity, respect and other important human qualities, to students of all ages. It is a common topic throughout the books. Codes like unity/respect and heritage/respect frame coexistence as a moral value, such as narrative “We respect diversity and unity”. For example a beautiful example is given: “We may differ, but that does not mean we hate one another. The diversity of flowers and their differences make them more beautiful” (Grade 3, National and Social Upbringing, Chapter 2, p. 58). 55 Ideologically, tolerance suggests an alternative pathway, positioning respect as part of Palestinian heritage. Pedagogically, it introduces students to coexistence and peace values, though its marginal presence reflects the tension between nationalist struggle and peace education ideals. However, it is crucially to address the issue of Israeli/Jewish exclusion. Themes of tolerance cover Christian and Muslim coexistence, for example, “Jerusalem is a sacred city for both Muslims and Christians”, race, disability, social exclusions etc., however it openly excludes Jews and Israelis from the narrative (Grade 3, National and Social Upbringing, Chapter 2, p. 29). Hope for the Future. This discourse appears in references to victory, determination, and hope (e.g., “Homeland/victory/hope/determination”). It frames struggle as ultimately leading to redemption and freedom. For example, “As long as freedom lives within a people, Destiny shall never erase them” (Grade 3, Arabic, Chapter 2, p. 66). Ideologically, it prevents despair by embedding suffering within a redemptive narrative. Pedagogically, it sustains morale and directs students toward future-oriented optimism, even within conflict conditions. Occupation and Refugees. Another very important aspect of Palestinian lives. The discourse of occupation and refugees emphasizes displacement, injustice, and survival, and another time – sense of revenge and vengeance: “Palestine is my revenge, and the land of steadfastness” (Grade 1, National and Life Education, Chapter 1, p. 58). Codes such as prisons and imprisonment and exile construct occupation as a constant source of violation, while refugees embody the long-term consequence of dispossession. Ideologically, this discourse sustains the memory of injustice and legitimizes claims for return. Pedagogically, it embeds the refugee experience into the identity of younger generations, ensuring continuity of historical grievance, and ensures that the younger generation feels an obligation to “reconquest” the homeland. Overall, Palestinian textbooks weave together conflict-centered discourses (resistance, Zionism, war), identity-centered discourses (patriotism, recognition of Palestine, heritage), and alternative discourses (tolerance, hope - but notably excluding Jews/Israelis). The recurrence of the same keywords across multiple themes (e.g., homeland, martyrdom) illustrates their discursive 56 versatility: their meaning shifts depending on narrative context, serving distinct ideological and pedagogical functions. Perhaps the most significant concern, however, lies in the textbooks’ heavy emphasis on narratives of confrontation and erasure of the Jewish/Israeli presence. While tolerance and coexistence are promoted in relation to Christians, Muslims, and other social groups (e.g., disability, race), Jews and Israelis are systematically excluded from these discourses. This selective framing both reflects and reinforces the polarized nature of the conflict, raising critical questions for peace education: how can values of diversity and respect be genuinely cultivated if they deliberately exclude one of the central parties to the conflict?. 57 Discussion – narratives of hate, hope, and positive transformation The analysis of Palestinian textbooks reveals a constellation of recurring narratives - resistance, patriotism/nationalism, Zionism, recognition of Palestine, war, sufferance, tolerance, hope for the future, and occupation/refugees - that together shape students’ understanding of identity, history, and conflict. To critically interpret these narratives, this discussion draws on three complementary theoretical frameworks: Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner) (and complementary – Van Dijk’s theory), which explains how in-group/out-group distinctions and identity threats structure intergroup relations; Bar-Tal’s theory of collective memory, which highlights how societies in protracted conflicts sustain their identities through selective and intergenerational narratives of victimhood and heroism; and postcolonial theory (Said, Bhabha, Fanon), which interrogates how colonial legacies, power asymmetries, and “othering” continue to influence knowledge and identity formation. Applying these theories allows for a deeper understanding of how the Palestinian curriculum, and for this research specifically – school textbooks, both empowers identity and perpetuates conflict-centered worldviews, while also highlighting the pedagogical tensions between national socialization and the prospects for peace education. The author will discuss the most prominent narratives according to the theoretical framework. The discourse of patriotism and nationalism in Palestinian textbooks - articulated through references to homeland, unity, and sacrifice - can be interpreted through Social Identity Theory (SIT) and Collective Memory theory. According to SIT, ethnic groups often construct identity in opposition to an “other”, reinforcing in-group solidarity by demarcating clear boundaries with the out-group. Narratives such as “I sacrifice for you, my homeland” (Grade 1, Arabic, p. 89) exemplify this mechanism: the homeland becomes a sacred, multi-layered signifier that not only unifies the in-group but also implicitly excludes outsiders. From the perspective of Collective Memory (Bar-Tal, 2007), the patriotic discourse provides intergenerational transmission of moral superiority and heroic self-sacrifice. Dalal al-Mughrabi’s inclusion as a female martyr and national role model (Grade 3, Arabic, p. 52) exemplifies how textbooks memorialize individuals in ways that sustain collective identity and justify the struggle. Such representations are selective, politically motivated, and often one-sided, highlighting Palestinian heroism while omitting broader narratives of coexistence (Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal, 2014, p. 67). 58 However, from a peace education perspective, this selective framing is problematic: while patriotism can build cohesion and resilience, its coupling with martyrdom normalizes sacrifice and conflict as natural conditions of civic duty. Here, postcolonial theory also provides insight: Fanon conceptualized revolutionary violence as transformative, creating new identities and ruptures with colonial power. The glorification of martyrdom in textbooks echoes Fanon’s revolutionary ethos, but without offering alternative “third spaces” (Bhabha, 1994) where hybrid, peace-oriented identities might emerge. The discourse on Zionism in Palestinian textbooks is consistently framed as an antagonistic force: Zionist “gangs” are described as destroyers of villages, killers, and displacers of the Palestinian population (Grade 5, Social Studies, p. 35). This representation aligns most directly with Collective Memory theory. As Bar-Tal (2007, p. 1436) explains, collective memory in intractable conflicts typically portrays the in-group as innocent victims and the out-group as aggressors. The Palestinian textbooks transmit such memories intergenerationally by embedding them into lessons, thereby sustaining the narrative of displacement and moral superiority. The recurring image of “keys” carried by refugees, symbolizing the Nakba and the right of return, exemplifies the pedagogical embedding of trauma as a marker of collective identity. At the same time, this discourse can be analyzed through SIT. Zionism is constructed as the out- group responsible for existential threats, while Palestinians emerge as the resilient in-group. According to Tajfel & Turner (1979), identity threats intensify in-group cohesion and promote defensive reactions. Haji et al. (2016, p. 39, 41) note that affirming one’s group in the face of identity threats can reduce uncertainty but often leads to closed-mindedness toward the “other”. In the textbooks, Zionism is thus a constant “identity threat” that legitimizes resistance and fosters unity, but at the cost of excluding any recognition of Israeli perspectives. From a postcolonial perspective, Zionism is portrayed not just as a political rival but as a colonial force - an imposed settler project aligned with Western imperialism. Edward Said’s framework of Orientalism is inverted here: Palestinians are not depicted as backward by Israelis in this context, but rather Israelis (Zionists) are represented as illegitimate colonizers who violently disrupt indigenous continuity. Fanon’s thesis on revolutionary violence also resonates: the textbooks portrays Palestinian resistance as a necessary and justified response to colonial domination. Yet, 59 as critics of Fanon highlight, this narrative risks perpetuating a closed cycle of violence without envisioning a “third space” (see Bhabha) of coexistence. Pedagogically, Zionism is positioned as the “other” against which Palestinian identity is defined. This is effective in constructing unity and perseverance but dangerous in peace education terms: it sustains a narrative of permanent enmity. By omitting Israeli historical traumas or the complexity of Jewish identity, the textbooks reinforce one-sided memory, which - as Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal (2014, p. 67) note - obstructs reconciliation and prolongs intractability. Discourse about recognition of Palestine is built lexically around heritage/history, rights to the land, recognition of the capital, and mapping practices that erase or marginalize Israeli presence (e.g., “from ancient times”, “protect Jerusalem”, map/territorial exclusion). Through the lens of Social Identity Theory, such formulations enhance positive in-group distinctiveness by anchoring identity in antiquity and rightful inheritance while delimiting an out-group (Haji et al., 2016, p. xv; Stets & Burke, 2000, p. 225; Brown, 2000, p. 747). From the perspective of Collective Memory, these materials enact an intergenerational narrative that legitimizes present claims by selecting past events and symbols that foreground continuity, victimhood, and moral justification (Bar-Tal, 2007, p. 1436; Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal, 2014, p. 67). The textbook emphasis on deep historical rootedness and exclusive cartographies exemplifies how one-sided memories of intractable conflict tend to glorify the in-group and delegitimize the rival, thereby inhibiting reconciliation (Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal, 2014, p. 67; Bar-Tal, 2007, p. 1436 - 1438). A postcolonial reading clarifies the epistemic work of this discourse. Following Said, books representations operate as knowledge/power formations that classify and authorize particular histories, thereby producing legitimacy claims (Said, 1985, p. 126–130; Kohn & Reddy, 2024). Here, “recognition” functions as a counter-hegemonic narrative of indigeneity and anti-colonial sovereignty; yet its didactic realization tends to police boundaries rather than cultivate hybrid “third spaces” in which shared or entangled pasts might be negotiated (Bhabha, 1994; Tatham, 2023, p. 2 - 4). Pedagogically, the discourse effectively instills historical consciousness and a sense of rightful belonging, but - consistent with SIT and Collective Memory - risks solidifying exclusive identities 60 unless balanced by inclusive frames (Haji et al., 2016, p. 368–373). In sum, “Recognition of Palestine” operates as a legitimating discourse that reproduces identity and sovereignty claims through selective memory and territorial semantics, powerful for cohesion yet potentially constraining for peace-oriented pedagogy. The discourse of sufferance is strongly tied to victimhood, refugeehood, and loss. Narratives such as “The occupation forced thousands to flee and become refugees” (Grade 3, Arabic, Ch. 2, p. 53) function as collective memory anchors, highlighting dispossession and exile. According to Bar- Tal (2007, p. 1436), such memories are selective and one-sided, portraying the in-group as innocent victims and the out-group as aggressors. Within Social Identity Theory, this serves to reaffirm a threatened identity by emphasizing moral superiority and unjust suffering (Haji et al., 2016, p. xv; Brown, 2000, p. 747). While this strengthens cohesion, it also risks entrenching “us vs. them” binaries and foreclosing reconciliation. Postcolonially, Fanon reminds us that such victimhood narratives are not passive but can cultivate revolutionary potential, framing suffering as a prelude to resistance (Fanon, 1961; Drabinski, 2019). The discourse of tolerance is less frequent but pedagogically very significant. Texts such as “We may differ, but that does not mean we hate one another. The diversity of flowers and their differences make them more beautiful” (Grade 3, National and Social Upbringing, Ch. 2, p. 58) construct diversity as a positive moral value. From a SIT lens, this reflects an attempt to expand identity boundaries by recognizing intra-group plurality (Haji et al., 2016, pp. 368–373). However, as noted, tolerance is typically framed in terms of Muslim–Christian coexistence, while Jews/Israelis remain excluded, showing how even discourses of inclusion can reproduce exclusionary lines. Here Bhabha’s Third Space is instructive: tolerance could be a site of hybrid identity formation, where boundaries blur and shared cultural spaces emerge (Bhabha, 1994; Tatham, 2023, p. 4). Yet, in practice, the discourse remains partial, falling short of creating that transformative intercultural space. Occupation and refugeehood are central identity markers. Narratives like “Palestine is my revenge, and the land of steadfastness” (Grade 1, National and Life Education, Ch. 1, p. 58) code occupation as violation and refugees as embodied endurance. In Bar-Tal’s terms, these stories transmit a collective memory of displacement and injustice that legitimizes resistance while deepening mistrust of the out-group (Nets-Zehngut & Bar-Tal, 2014, p. 67). SIT suggests that such accounts 61 reinforce in-group solidarity by framing the out-group as the cause of suffering (Haji et al., 2016, p. 33–34). From a postcolonial perspective, refugee narratives echo Fanon’s reading of colonial violence, where displacement is both the mark of subjugation and the seed of revolutionary identity (Fanon, 1961). Pedagogically, while these themes preserve intergenerational memory, they risk normalizing vengeance as destiny rather than opening avenues for coexistence. SIT helps explain how the textbooks construct identity through in-group vs. out-group differentiation. The Palestinian collective is presented as cohesive, moral, and heroic, while the Israeli “other” appears mainly as an oppressor or aggressor. This aligns with Tajfel’s argument that positive self-identity often depends on negative comparison with out-groups (Haji et al., 2016, p. xv). Narratives of martyrdom, endurance under occupation, and defense of the homeland strengthen in-group solidarity but risk solidifying exclusionary categories that leave little space for coexistence. At the same time, SIT also suggests that identity threats (such as exile, refugeehood, or occupation) may provoke either defensive hostility or prosocial empathy, depending on contextual framing (Haji et al., 2016, p. 33 – 34). By emphasizing only resistance and victimhood, the education materials encourages defensive strategies, rather than fostering inclusive or superordinate identities that could promote reconciliation. Postcolonial perspectives situate the curriculum and textbooks within broader struggles against colonial legacies and neo-colonial domination. Palestinian textbooks explicitly challenge colonialism, casting the homeland as both sacred and occupied. In contrast to typical postcolonial critiques that curricula reproduce Western dominance, here education serves as a tool of resistance to colonial oppression. Following Said’s concept of Otherness, Palestinians are defined in opposition to Israelis, who are framed as settler-colonial aggressors (Said, 1985, p. 126). Yet Bhabha’s notion of the Third Space suggests alternative pedagogical possibilities: instead of binary oppositions, the curriculum could encourage hybrid identities and narratives of coexistence. For example, stories of shared cities, traditions, or linguistic hybridity could destabilize rigid categories of victim/oppressor, opening space for cultural negotiation. Similarly, Fanon’s emphasis on revolutionary struggle resonates strongly with martyrdom narratives, but his critique also reminds us that liberation must ultimately create new cultural and political identities, not remain trapped in perpetual opposition to colonial power (see Fanon). 62 While Social Identity Theory, collective memory, and postcolonial theory explain why these narratives reinforce identity, victimhood, and resistance, Lederach’s conflict transformation theory offers a roadmap for change, emphasizing not only managing conflict but transforming the relationships, structures, and narratives that sustain it (Miall, 2004, p. 4). In curricular and text book terms this entails context transformation - shifting from binary conflict stories to regional and global interdependence; structural transformation - balancing asymmetries by recognizing multiple perspectives and legitimizing coexistence; actor transformation - broadening role models beyond martyrs to include figures of peace, education, and resilience; issue transformation - reframing land, exile, and sovereignty as complex, layered questions rather than irreconcilable oppositions; and personal transformation - cultivating empathy across conflict lines through testimonies, stories, and encounters. Through this lens, the curriculum can pivot from reproducing hostility toward fostering the conditions for long-term peace and social sustainability. However, the author acknowledges that changing the narratives will not by themselves resolve the conflict, however, she stresses the importance of education in conflict mitigation – if the schoolbooks stay the same, there is a very little chance for the conflict sides to find a common ground. Therefore, suggestions might be theoretical, but, nevertheless, very important. 63 Palestinian school book recommendations The analysis of Palestinian textbooks has revealed how identity, resistance, and memory are discursively constructed through recurring narratives such as patriotism, martyrdom, occupation, and refugees. While these discourses reinforce national identity and cultural continuity, they also risk perpetuating exclusivist frames that limit the possibilities of coexistence and reconciliation. In this section, I apply the theoretical frameworks introduced earlier - Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner), Collective Memory (Bar-Tal), Postcolonial theory (Said, Bhabha, Spivak, Fanon), and Conflict Transformation (Lederach) - to suggest pedagogical improvements that could sustain Palestinian identity while opening pathways toward peace and social sustainability. Author proposes the following recommendations. Reframing Patriotism and Martyrdom. Patriotism is consistently linked with sacrifice and martyrdom, exemplified by phrases such as “I sacrifice for you, my homeland” (Grade 1, Our Beautiful Language, Ch. 1, p. 89) and by the glorification of figures such as Dalal al-Mughrabi (Grade 3, Arabic, Ch. 2, p. 52). While these representations provide students with strong role models of loyalty, they also normalize martyrdom as a desirable outcome, raising concerns from the perspective of peace education. According to Social Identity Theory, such framing risks hardening in-group identity through antagonism toward the out-group, while reducing the possibility of inclusive identities. An improvement would be to reframe patriotism around constructive figures - for instance, highlighting the work of poets like Mahmoud Darwish, or educators who defended culture through nonviolent means. These alternative role models preserve the ethos of devotion and endurance while offering pathways that celebrate life and creativity rather than sacrifice. Incorporating Shared and Multiple Histories. Historical narratives in the textbooks are often framed exclusively through Arab-Palestinian contributions. For example, Grade 3 textbooks ask: “When did the Arabs build the city of Jaffa?” (Arabic, Ch. 1, p. 109), thereby omitting the city’s Jewish and cosmopolitan past. Similarly, maps in Social Upbringing (Grade 3, Ch. 2, p. 83) portray all of historic Palestine as Arab territory, with no reference to Jewish historical presence. From the perspective of Collective Memory theory, this selectivity reinforces a one-sided narrative of belonging, which sustains intractable conflict by denying the legitimacy of the out-group. 64 Improvements would involve introducing multiple historical layers: acknowledging that Jaffa, Jerusalem, and other cities were home to Arabs, Jews, and others across centuries. This would not weaken Palestinian identity; rather, it would situate it within a broader, shared history, encouraging students to see coexistence as historically grounded. From Resistance to Resilience. Resistance is framed as both a duty and a heroic act, as in the phrase: “We protect Jerusalem with eyes and determination” (Grade 1, Arabic, p. 89). While such statements strengthen unity, they emphasize militarized or sacrificial modes of agency. Lederach’s Conflict Transformation framework suggests that for peace to be sustainable, resistance must be reinterpreted as resilience - preserving language, culture, education, and daily life in the face of adversity. A possible adjustment would be to include lessons on how Palestinians sustain their communities through education, environmental stewardship, and cultural continuity. For example, resistance could be represented through narratives of rebuilding schools after destruction, or cultivating traditional crops as acts of defiance and survival. This reframing maintains dignity and collective pride but directs it toward life-affirming practices. Strengthening Narratives of Tolerance. Tolerance appears sporadically, for instance: “We may differ, but that does not mean we hate one another. The diversity of flowers makes them more beautiful” (Grade 3, National and Social Upbringing, Ch. 2, p. 58). Such examples provide an important counter-narrative, yet their scope is limited: tolerance is promoted between Muslims and Christians, while Jews/Israelis are excluded from the moral framework. From a postcolonial perspective, this exclusion reproduces binary distinctions of colonizer/colonized, reinforcing antagonism rather than envisioning hybrid possibilities. Drawing on Bhabha’s “Third Space”, improvements could include stories that highlight shared traditions and cooperative practices, not only among Muslims and Christians but also with Jewish communities historically present in Palestine. Pedagogical strategies might include role-play activities that simulate problem-solving between different groups, fostering empathy and mutual recognition. Reframing Refugees and Occupation. The refugee discourse is central to Palestinian identity, as illustrated by passages such as: “The occupation destroyed villages, people became refugees” 65 (Grade 5, Social Studies, Ch. 1, p. 35). While this preserves memory and reinforces claims to return, it also risks perpetuating a narrative of victimhood and vengeance, as in: “Palestine is my revenge, and the land of steadfastness” (Grade 1, National and Life Education, Ch. 1, p. 58). Conflict Transformation theory highlights the need to move beyond victimhood by linking memory to constructive futures. Improvements could include framing refugee identity in terms of global solidarity: comparing Palestinian experiences with those of Syrians or Rohingya, for example, through imaginative classroom exercises like letter exchanges. This would maintain the authenticity of Palestinian suffering while expanding empathy toward displaced peoples worldwide, transforming victimhood into shared humanity. Pedagogical Innovations for Peacebuilding. Beyond content, pedagogy itself can support peace- oriented education. Three practices are especially relevant: - Critical literacy: Teaching students to identify bias and framing in texts, including their own textbooks, enabling them to reflect on how narratives are constructed. - Cooperative learning: Group projects addressing shared goals, such as designing “Peace Posters” that integrate Palestinian symbols with universal values. - Future orientation: Shifting focus from martyrdom to visions of a peaceful Palestine, where students imagine rebuilding communities or designing sustainable futures. These methods align with Lederach’s emphasis on grassroots transformation, empowering students as agents of peace rather than passive recipients of trauma narratives. Taken together, these improvements illustrate how Palestinian textbooks could preserve national identity while reframing it in ways that sustain coexistence and long-term peace. Resistance would remain central, but understood as resilience; patriotism would celebrate life-affirming role models; refugees would symbolize not only dispossession but also solidarity with other displaced peoples; and tolerance would extend to all groups, including those historically excluded. Such shifts would not erase collective memory but transform it into a foundation for reconciliation - enabling students to carry Palestinian identity into a future where justice and coexistence are possible. 66 Conclusions This thesis has examined the discursive construction of identity, resistance, and peace in Palestinian school textbooks through a combination of content analysis and discourse analysis. The study has shown that while the textbooks provide a strong foundation for national identity, cultural continuity, and resilience under occupation, it also contains narratives that risk perpetuating exclusivist worldviews, glorification of martyrdom, and antagonistic depictions of the out-group. The content analysis revealed dominant discourses of resistance, patriotism/nationalism, recognition of Palestine, war, sufferance, refugees, and Zionism, complemented by less frequent but significant counter-discourses of tolerance and hope for the future. The recurrence of keywords such as homeland, struggle, sacrifice, and martyrdom illustrates how the same symbols function across multiple contexts, shifting meaning depending on the narrative frame. This confirms that Palestinian identity, as reflected in textbooks, is deeply tied to collective memory, dispossession, and the ongoing conflict, while alternative peace-oriented discourses remain marginal. The subsequent discourse analysis showed how these narratives are ideologically and pedagogically framed. On one hand, they sustain a strong sense of belonging and duty, which is crucial for a community under prolonged occupation. On the other, they normalize conflict as an enduring condition, embed victimhood into national identity, and exclude certain groups - particularly Israelis and Jews - from the discourse of tolerance. By applying theoretical frameworks - Social Identity Theory, Collective Memory, Postcolonial perspectives, and Conflict Transformation Theory - this thesis demonstrated that the schoolbooks not only reproduce national narratives but also contributes to shaping intergroup perceptions and possible futures. For instance, Social Identity Theory helped to explain how exclusive in-group loyalty may harden boundaries against the out-group; Collective Memory theory highlighted how the Nakba and refugee narratives shape identity around trauma and dispossession; Postcolonial perspectives illuminated how binary constructions of colonizer/colonized sustain antagonism; and Conflict Transformation theory provided a pathway to imagine how education could move from resistance-as-struggle to resistance-as-resilience. 67 From a practical standpoint, the study suggests that Palestinian textbooks could be improved without undermining national identity. Several adjustments could be introduced: - Reframing martyrdom by emphasizing cultural, educational, and nonviolent forms of sacrifice. - Presenting shared and multiple histories that acknowledge the presence of Jews and other groups in Palestinian cities, thus situating Palestinian identity within a broader historical fabric. - Expanding tolerance narratives beyond intra-Muslim and Christian coexistence to include Jewish/Israeli perspectives. - Highlighting resilience and creativity as central to resistance, rather than focusing primarily on armed or sacrificial forms. - Connecting the refugee experience to global solidarities, transforming it from a narrative of victimhood into one of empathy and shared humanity. These improvements are not merely content adjustments but also pedagogical opportunities. Peace-oriented teaching methods such as critical literacy, cooperative learning, and future-oriented exercises could help transform conflict-centered narratives into openings for coexistence. At the same time, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this study. First, the analysis is based on textbooks available at the time of research and may not represent the full diversity of materials in use. Second, the coding and interpretation process is inevitably influenced by the researcher’s own positionality, which introduces a level of subjectivity. Finally, while textbooks are a powerful medium of socialization, they are not the only influence on young learners; family, community, media, and political realities also play decisive roles. Despite these limitations, the findings of this thesis contribute to ongoing debates about the role of education in conflict and peacebuilding. They highlight that schoolbooks in protracted conflicts cannot be neutral: they either reproduce hostility or offer openings toward reconciliation. By situating Palestinian textbooks within broader theoretical frameworks, this study demonstrates that education can serve as both a vehicle for sustaining conflict and a tool for transforming it. In conclusion, Palestinian textbooks, as currently structured, preserve national identity but do so at the cost of limiting peace-oriented imaginaries. The challenge ahead lies in balancing the 68 imperative of cultural survival with the equally urgent need for coexistence and reconciliation. Drawing on Lederach’s vision of conflict transformation, sustainable peace will require a gradual shift in narratives - from martyrdom to resilience, from exclusive histories to shared memories, and from antagonism to recognition of mutual humanity. If such transformations can be embedded in education, then textbooks may cease to be instruments of division and instead become seeds of a more peaceful and sustainable future for Palestinians and their neighbors alike. Further research could build on this thesis in several directions. A comparative analysis including both Palestinian and Israeli curricula and schoolbooks would provide a more balanced understanding of how narratives interact across contexts. Classroom-based research involving teachers and students would also enrich the findings by examining how textbooks are interpreted and used in practice. Finally, future studies could strengthen the reliability of discourse analysis through collaborative coding and intercoder verification. Such research would contribute to a more comprehensive picture of the role of education in conflict transformation and peacebuilding. 69 References: Abuhussein, H. F. (2024). The Palestinian curriculum and European foreign aid: The challenges to preserve national content. Education as Change, 28(1), 1-28. Agbaria, A. K. (2016). Ethno-national politics of citizenship education in Israel and the counter- knowledge of Palestinian teachers. Global migration, diversity, and civic education: Improving policy and practice, 156-176. Alayan, S. (2016). The Holocaust in Palestinian textbooks: Differences and similarities in Israel and Palestine. Comparative Education Review, 60(1), 80-104. Albhaisi, N. (2022). Towards a decolonial curriculum of human rights education in Palestine. Journal of Social Issues, 78(1), 146-162. Arnaiz-Villena, A., Elaiwa, N., Silvera, C., Rostom, A., Moscoso, J., Gómez-Casado, E., Allende, L., Varela, P., & Martínez-Laso, J. (2001). The origin of Palestinians and their genetic relatedness with other Mediterranean populations. Human Immunology, 62(9), 889–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0198-8859(01)00288-9 Bar-Tal, D. (2007). Sociopsychological foundations of intractable conflicts. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(11), 1430-1453. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Bloomfield, D., & Reilly, B. (1998). The changing nature of conflict and conflict management. In Democracy and deep-rooted conflict: Options for negotiators (pp. 7-28). International IDEA. Brown, R. (2000), Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 30: 745-778. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099- 0992(200011/12)30:6<745::AID-EJSP24>3.0.CO;2-O Central Intelligence Agency. (2022). The World Factbook: Israel. https://www.cia.gov/the-world- factbook/countries/israel/ CEU (Council of the European Union) (2010) Council conclusions on education for sustainable development 3046th Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council meeting Brussels, 18 and 19 November 2010 Dahan, Y., & Yonah, Y. (2007). Israel’s education system: equality of opportunity–from nation building to neo‐liberalism. Oxford studies in comparative education: Aspects of education in the Middle East and North Africa. Devi Prasad, B. (2019). Qualitative content analysis: Why is it still a path less taken?. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 20, No. 3). DEU. Drabinski, J. (2019). Frantz Fanon. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2019 Edition). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/frantz-fanon/ Eizenberg, E., & Jabareen, Y. (2017). Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework. Sustainability, 9(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010068 Elyan, R., & Al-Doulat, A. (2021). Evaluating the content of Palestinian Curricula in light of the sustainable development goals 2030. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 17(41), 1- 22. Encyclopedia Britannica. (2023). Canaan. https://www.britannica.com/place/Canaan-historical- region-Middle-East Encyclopedia Britannica. (2024). Israeli settlement. https://www.britannica.com/place/Israeli- settlement 70 Feniger, Y., Bar-Haim, E., & Blank, C. (2021). From social origin to selective high school courses: Ability grouping as a mechanism of securing social advantage in Israeli secondary education. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 76, 100627. Firer, R., Adwan, S., & Pingel, F. (2004). The Israeli-Palestinian conflict in history and civics textbooks of both nations. Fouseki, K., Cassar, M., Dreyfuss, G., & Ang, K. K. E. (Eds.). (2022). Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Heritage. London, UK: Routledge. Gannon, M. (2019, July 12). When ancient DNA gets politicized. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-ancient-dna-gets-politicized-180972639/ Genesis Gertel, G. (2020, August 9). Palestinians as ghosts: How Israel’s education system normalizes occupation. +972 Magazine. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.972mag.com/israel-education-textbooks-occupation/?utm Gheyle, N., & Jacobs, T. (2017). Content Analysis: a short overview. Internal research note, 10. Goldschmidt Jr., A. (2016). A concise history of the Middle East. Routledge. Graham, B., Ashworth, G., & Tunbridge, J. (2016). A geography of heritage. Routledge. Grunwald, A. (2011). Conflict-resolution in the Context of Sustainable Development. In O. Parodi, I. Ayestaran, & G. Banse (Eds.), Sustainable Development (1–). KIT Scientific Publishing. https://books.openedition.org/ksp/4308 Haji, R., McKeown, S., & Ferguson, N. (2016). Social identity and peace psychology: An introduction. Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory, 3-17. Harris, I. M. (2004). Peace education theory. Journal of peace education, 1(1), 5-20. History. (2017). Israel – Facts, history & conflicts. https://www.history.com/topics/middle- east/history-of-israel#section_1 IMPACT-se (2022). Arabs and Palestinians in Israeli Textbooks 2022‒23. https://www.impact- se.org/wp-content/uploads/Arabs-and-Palestinians-in-Israeli-Textbooks-2022–23-Special- Report.pdf Impact-se.org (2021). The 2020–21 Palestinian School Curriculum Grades 1–12. https://www.impact-se.org/wp-content/uploads/PA-Reports_-Updated-Selected- Examples_May-2021.pdf International Alert, the British Council (2020). Peace education in formal schools. Why is it important and how can it be done? Available at: https://www.international-alert.org/app/uploads/2021/07/Peace-Education-Schools- Formal-EN-2020.pdf Kleinheksel, A. J., Rockich-Winston, N., Tawfik, H., & Wyatt, T. R. (2020). Demystifying content analysis. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 84(1), 7113. Kohn, M., & Reddy, K. (2024). Colonialism. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2024 Edition). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/colonialism/ Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications. Lawler, A. (2020). DNA from the Bible’s Canaanites lives on in modern Arabs and Jews. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/dna-from-biblical- canaanites-lives-modern-arabs-jews Lederach, J. P. (1996). Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse University Press. 71 McKenzie, S. (2004). Social sustainability: towards some definitions. Hawke Research Institute. Available at: https://apo.org.au/node/565 Miall, H. (2004). Conflict transformation: A multi-dimensional task. In Transforming ethnopolitical conflict: The Berghof handbook (pp. 67-89). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Miller, C. (Ed.). (2013). War on terror': The Oxford Amnesty Lectures. Manchester University Press. Milton-Edwards, B., & Farrell, S. (2010). Hamas: the Islamic resistance movement. Polity. Naser-Najjab, N. (2020). Palestinian education and the ‘logic of elimination’. Settler Colonial Studies, 10(3), 311-330. Nets-Zehngut, R., & Bar-Tal, D. (2014). Transformation of the official memory of conflict: A tentative model and the Israeli memory of the 1948 Palestinian exodus. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 27(1), 67-91. Nuseibeh, R. A. (2024). Education in Palestine. In Routledge Handbook on Palestine (pp. 453- 470). Routledge. Paffenholz, T. (2014). International peacebuilding goes local: analysing Lederach's conflict transformation theory and its ambivalent encounter with 20 years of practice. Peacebuilding, 2(1), 11-27. Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics. (2022). Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) presents the conditions of Palestinian populations on the occasion of the International Population Day. https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/Press_En_InterPopDay2022E.pdf Peled-Elhanan, N. (2013). Palestine in Israeli school books: Ideology and propaganda in education. Bloomsbury Publishing. Pew Research Center. (2023). Israelis have grown more skeptical of a two-state solution. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/26/israelis-have-grown-more- skeptical-of-a-two-state-solution/ Pollock, S., & Bernbeck, R. (Eds.). (2009). Archaeologies of the Middle East: Critical perspectives. John Wiley & Sons. Razeq, A. H. A. (2020). Social and emotional learning in Palestinian K-12 schools. Brill. Said, E. (1985). Orientalism: Western concepts of the Orient. New York: Pantheon. Salomon, G. (2004). The Nature of Peace Education: Not All Programs Are Created Equal. In Salomon, G., & Nevo, B. (Eds.). Peace education: The concept, principles, and practices around the world. Psychology Press. Salomon, G. (2005). Preface. In G. Salomon & B. Nevo, Peace education: The concept, principles, and practices around the world. Psychology Press. Spielhaus, R. (2021). Report on Palestinian Textbooks. Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695870 Tatham, C. (2023). A systematic literature review of Third Space theory in research with children (aged 4-12) in multicultural educational settings. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1-20. Timothy, D. J. (2011). Cultural heritage and tourism: an introduction. Channel View Publications. UN (2024). Defending the right to learn: Education in the face of war. United Nations in Palestine. Available at: https://Palestine.un.org/en/278188-defending-right-learn-education-face-war 72 UNESCO (2019). Target 4.7: Sustainable development and global citizenship. Available at: https://gem-report-2019.unesco.org/chapter/monitoring-progress-in-sdg-4/sustainable- development-and-global-citizenship-target-4-7/ UNESCO (2020). Education for Sustainable Development – a Roadmap. Paris: UNESCO UNESCO (2023). What you need to know about UNESCO’s Recommendation on Education for Peace, Human Rights and Sustainable Development. Available at: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/what-you-need-know-about-unescos- recommendation-education-peace-human-rights-and-sustainable?utm United Nations. (1949, August 12). Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity- crimes/Doc.33_GC-IV-EN.pdf United Nations. (2023). The origins and evolution of the Palestine problem, Part II: 1947–1977. Question of Palestine. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-202927/ United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (2023). Christian persecution of Jews over the centuries. https://www.ushmm.org/research/about-the-mandel-center/initiatives/ethics- religion-holocaust/articles-and-resources/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the- centuries/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the-centuries UNRWA (2025). What we do: Education. UNRWA. Available at: https://www.unrwa.org/what-we- do/education Vallance, S., Perkins, H. C., & Dixon, J. E. (2011). What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts. Geoforum, 42(3), 342-348. Vinyamata, E. (2010). Conflictology: A multidisciplinary vision. Journal of Conflictology, 1(1), 1. Wahbeh, N. A. (2003). Teaching and learning science in Palestine: dealing with the new Palestinian science curriculum. Woodcraft, S. (2015). Understanding and measuring social sustainability. Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal, 8(2), 133-144. Yang, A. (2023). Hebrew wasn’t spoken for 2,000 years. Here’s how it was revived. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/hebrew-wasnt-spoken- for-2000-years-heres-how-it-was-revived Yemini, M., Bar-Nissan, H., & Yardeni, O. (2014). Between “us” and “them”: Teachers' perceptions of the national versus international composition of the Israeli history curriculum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 42, 11-22. 73