The 2024-2025 School Year Opens Amidst the War
The start of the school year serves as a timely reminder that confronting the challenges of tomorrow—whether civil, social, or security-related—begin today. The education system is one of the primary arenas for addressing these challenges. However, given that Israel's education system has children from different backgrounds going to different schools—state schools, state-religious schools, ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) schools, and Arab schools—addressing these challenges is especially difficult. It cannot be confined to slogans and declarations about solidarity and unity; it must be translated into knowledge and skills rooted in the values of the Declaration of Independence and the goals of the State Education Law. This is not just an aspiration for the future but an urgent call to act before it’s too late.
As the new school year approached, the Israel Democracy Institute's Education Policy Program, in collaboration with the IDI's Viterbi Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research, conducted an online survey from August 21 to 27, 2024. The survey was based on a representative sample of the Israeli population aged 18 and above, including 500 Jewish and 100 Arab respondents. Given the ongoing war, we aimed to identify the key issues and themes the education system should focus on.
The survey results invite the Israeli public to think beyond familiar perceptions. They call on us to broaden our capacity for choice and decision-making within an education system that embraces all societal groups—not just one’s sector; a system that is pluralistic in practice, not just in theory.
Key topics explored in the survey:
- Central themes the education system should address in light of the ongoing war.
- Classroom discussions led by teachers on the issue of returning hostages.
- Adjusting the curriculum during wartime.
- Promoting common ground in Israeli society through the education system (a comparison between two different measurement years).
Ultra-Orthodox children studying in the new school year. Photo by: Chaim Goldberg/Flash90
Given the ongoing war, this question focuses on the educational and value-driven themes the education system should emphasize in the upcoming school year. The list of themes presented for selection includes those highlighted in the Ministry of Education's curriculum that was conveyed and emphasized throughout the past year (“Unity and Cohesion,” “Awareness of the Dangers of Using Social Networks”), alongside themes currently at the forefront of public discourse in Israel related to the war, which is also reflected, albeit less prominently, in the Ministry of Education’s curriculum (“The Value of Sacrifice,” “The Importance of Victory Over the Enemy,” “Protecting Human and Civil Rights During War,” “The Willingness to Make Concessions for the Sake of Ending the War”).
Figure 1.1: In your opinion, among the following themes related to the war, what is the most crucial theme the education system should convey in the upcoming school year (2024-2025)? (%, total sample, Jews and Arabs)
The analysis presents a clear picture of the theme perceived as the most important for the education system across the total sample, significantly surpassing other themes: "The special importance of maintaining national unity and cohesion during the war." This theme was chosen by 40% of the total sample and 45% of Jewish respondents. In contrast, among Arab Israelis, two other themes stand out far more prominently: "Willingness to make concessions to end the war or for the sake of peace" (27%) and "The special importance of protecting human and civil rights even during wartime" (22.5%). These are universal themes by nature, and it is unsurprising that respondents from the Arab community particularly value them. However, even in this case, less than a third of respondents prioritized them. This highlights even more the low percentage of Jewish respondents who chose these two themes (10% or less). A breakdown of responses among the Jewish population based on religious affiliation and political orientation further emphasizes the marginality of these themes.
Figure 1.2: In your opinion, among the following themes related to the war, what is the most important theme the education system should convey in the upcoming school year (2024-2025)? (% according to position on the Haredi to secular spectrum, Jews)
The data among Jewish respondents, categorized by religious affiliation, reveals a range of attitudes towards the different themes, with the notable exception of the theme emphasizing unity and cohesion, which is seen as the most important by all Jewish respondents. The response from Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) participants stands out particularly in this context (60%), especially given that not a single ultra-Orthodox respondent favored the more universal themes. Conversely, the percentage of secular respondents who prioritized the central theme is relatively lower than other Jewish groups (38%), yet it remains the most prominent theme even among this group.
An analysis of the responses to the other themes reveals trends that reflect the educational sectors in which most respondents in the Jewish community have studied. For instance, among religious respondents whose children often attend state-religious schools, the value of sacrifice for the people and the state is relatively prominent (23%) compared to other themes (after the theme of unity and cohesion). Additionally, a notably low percentage of respondents favored the universal themes concerning concessions for ending the war or achieving peace (3%) and protecting human and civil rights during the war (5%). In contrast, secular respondents were more likely than other groups to prioritize these themes (17% and 13%, respectively).
Overall, the gap between the central theme of unity and cohesion and the other themes is interesting in two respects. First, a low percentage of Jewish respondents view the pursuit of peace, human rights, and civil rights as worthy and essential themes during the war. The second aspect is the focus on themes of unity and cohesion. As previously noted, there are separate schools for children from different sectors of society. While the desire for social unity is understandable, the differing (and sometimes opposing) emphases that each educational sector places on fundamental societal questions—and the degree of autonomy each group has to address these emphases—raises questions about the feasibility of achieving true social cohesion. This aspect is particularly evident when examining the important themes divided by political camps.
Figure 1.3: In your opinion, among the following themes related to the war, what is the most important theme the education system should convey in the upcoming school year (2024-2025)? (% by political affiliation, Jews)
When broken down by political orientation, the gap between the themes prioritized by those who identify as Right versus those who identify as Left is significant. The Right and Left present a mirror image - “The importance of defeating the enemy”: Right, 16% compared to the Left, 0%; “The special importance of protecting human and civil rights during wartime”: on the Right, 2% compared to the Left, 29.5%. This is also evident regarding the value of sacrifice and the willingness to make concessions to end the war. Those who identify as the Center are closer in their responses to the positions of the right than those of the left.
This topic provides a concrete example of the gaps between different groups in general and within the Jewish community in particular, both in terms of religious definitions and political affiliation, regarding the painful issue of hostage return.
Figure 2.1: Agree or disagree that teachers should engage students in a discussion on the return of hostages and examine the moral significance of the demand to bring them back at any cost (% total sample, Jews and Arabs).
The level of agreement in the overall sample is similar to the agreement rates among Jewish and Arab respondents. About half of the respondents agree that teachers should engage students in discussions about the return of hostages and explore the moral significance of the demand to secure their return at any cost. This question does not assess the morality of this claim but examines respondents’ views on whether teachers in the classroom should initiate such discussions. The breakdown of responses among Jewish Israelis, according to levels of religiosity, highlights the challenge that this question poses for the respondents.
Figure 2.2: Agree or disagree that teachers should hold discussions with students about the return of hostages and evaluate the moral significance of the demand to bring them back at any cost (% based on position on the religious spectrum from ultra-Orthodox to secular Jews).
While the percentage of those who agree (strongly agree and somewhat agree) among secular respondents (57%), traditional non-religious respondents (56%), and religious respondents (50%) is close to the average of the overall sample, ultra-Orthodox respondents (25%) and traditional-religious respondents (26%) stand out for their low agreement rates. In these two groups, about 70% of respondents disagree with the statement that teachers should hold discussions with students about the return of hostages and examine the moral significance of the demand to bring them back at any cost. This disparity requires an explanation. For the ultra-Orthodox respondents, the gap can be attributed, in part, to the fact that ultra-Orthodox schools (generally speaking) are not spaces where current events or current issues are typically addressed. Additionally, in the ultra-Orthodox community, the issue is not perceived as moral or not, but rather as a halachic (Jewish legal) matter, leading to rejection of the statement as phrased a priori.
Regarding traditional-religious respondents, the explanation for this gap compared to other groups is more complex, especially when compared to responses from religious respondents. From an educational standpoint, the differences between school systems may provide insight. Students from families identifying as traditional-religious attend state secular and state-religious schools. Traditional students make up about 40% of the student population in state schools (Jews). In many State schools, there is a deliberate avoidance of topics perceived as controversial or political, whether due to self-censorship of teachers or, often, at the request of parents—this is particularly notable in more conservative areas within social and geographical peripheries. This could explain the responses observed in this group.
This characteristic is less prevalent among traditional non-religious and secular respondents, despite students from these groups also attending state schools, as these populations generally identify as more liberal, which was somewhat reflected in the previous question and this question when analyzed by political affiliation.
Figure 2.3: Agree or disagree that teachers should hold discussions with students about the return of hostages and evaluate the moral significance of the demand to bring them back at any cost (% by political camps, Jews).
Breaking the sample down by political orientation further illustrates this. Among respondents who identify as Right, the level of agreement (strongly agree and somewhat agree) with the statement is significantly lower (40%) compared to those who identify with the Center (67%) and the Left (77%). This question, which addresses the specific topic of classroom discussions about the return of hostages, exemplifies the educational challenges arising from the current public discourse surrounding the war in general and the negotiations for the hostages' return in particular. For example, the July Israeli Voice Index, conducted by IDI's Viterbi Center, found that within the Jewish population, there was a slight decline in support for two types of hostage-related deals (releasing all hostages in exchange for ending the war; releasing some of the hostages in exchange for a temporary ceasefire), alongside an increase in the proportion of "don't know" responses compared to data from the previous month[1]. The gaps observed in the current survey between the Right and Left regarding classroom discussions reflect similar trends and reflect the broader public controversy over this issue.
Figure 3.1: Level of agreement that the education system should adjust the curriculum due to the ongoing war, even if it means reducing study material and altering content. (%, total sample, Jews and Arabs)
The responses to this question were broadly consistent across the overall sample. This agreement also holds when examining respondents based on self-defined religiosity within the Jewish community. There is a broad understanding among the public that the education system must adapt to the current reality, even if it comes at the expense of existing study materials and curricula.
In the opening remarks of the Education Minister and the Director-General of the Ministry of Education for the work plan for the 2024-2025 school year, it was stated that "adjustments and updates are required given the complex reality," while also emphasizing the importance of continuity and stability in the education system to "ensure growth from the crisis" so that "we can emerge stronger and more resilient"[2]. However, a closer look at the plan reveals that its strategic focus continues with the same objectives set before the war—objectives that remain relevant, of course. Still, they are primarily directed toward rehabilitating displaced populations, addressing emotional and academic achievements, and nurturing educational leadership to help students return to normalcy[3]. The work plan does not address a significant change in the themes and issues the system deals with in light of the war. According to the survey data, there seems to be support for more far-reaching adjustments across all groups.
The 2024-2025 work plan of the Ministry of Education defines three main goals: strengthening and developing human capital, relevant and meaningful learning, and enhancing social solidarity. This last goal is "the foundation for life in Israel, reflecting the education system's responsibility for social repair”[4]. There is no dispute about the importance of themes dealing with social cohesion in Israeli society, and education is a critical component in advancing this goal. However, the question arises whether the Israeli education system, with its sectorial structure that reflects the divisions and central disagreements within society, can indeed lead to advancing a shared social foundation that unites all groups living within it.
We posed this question to the public in 2022 and again in 2024: To what extent do they agree or disagree with the statement that because the education system is divided into streams, it cannot help promote a shared narrative for all groups in Israeli society?
Figure 4.1: Do you agree or disagree with the statement that because the Israeli education system is divided into streams, it cannot help promote a shared narrative for all groups in Israeli society? (%, total sample, Jews and Arabs, 2024 and 2022).
We posed this question in December 2022, following the last election results and before Justice Minister Yariv Levin announced expected changes in the judicial system, that is, before the onset of protests on this issue. The comparison between the survey data then and now reflects a growing public recognition of the education system's limitations in promoting a common Israeli foundation, highlighting the need to reassess the education system’s role in today's context.
In 2022, 40.5% of respondents in the overall sample agreed with this statement, compared to 51% in the current survey. A significant difference also exists between Jewish and Arab respondents. In 2022, 39% of Jewish respondents agreed with the statement, compared to 48% in the current survey. Among Arab respondents, the gap is even more pronounced: in 2022, 47% agreed with the statement, compared to 65% in the current study. This gap may also reflect the loss of trust within the Arab community in the education system's ability to bring about change in this regard against the backdrop of the current war and the tensions between groups related to the war and government policies toward the Arab community.
These disparities are also reflected in the segmentation of Jewish society based on religious self-identification and political orientation.
Figure 4.2: Do you agree or disagree with the statement that because the Israeli education system is divided into streams, it cannot help promote a shared narrative for all groups in Israeli society? (% by position on the spectrum from ultra-Orthodox to secular, Jews, 2024; 2022).
In the 2022 survey, when analyzing the Jewish community based on religious self-identification, it was evident that respondents who identified as religious (ultra-Orthodox, Religious, and Traditional-Religious) disagreed with the statement to a greater extent than non-religious respondents, who were closer to the average of all Jewish respondents (45%) who disagreed with this statement.
This could be explained by ultra-Orthodox and religious individuals attending sectorial schools based on religious and halachic principles, shaping their perceptions of the potential common ground for broader society.
In the current survey, there was a shift in the levels of agreement and disagreement within the Jewish community across all groups. Overall, there was a significant decline in disagreement among ultra-Orthodox respondents (53% in the previous survey and 42% in the current study). Similarly, among Traditional-Religious respondents, there was a more moderate decrease in disagreement (51% in the previous survey; 46% in the current study). Among Traditional Non-Religious respondents, there was also a slight decline in dispute (49% in the last poll; 45% in the current study), but their level of agreement rose significantly from 34% in the previous study to 47% in the current survey (this gap is explained by a significant drop in the number of respondents who answered "Don't Know" to this question). Secular respondents agreed with the statement in 2022 at a relatively high rate (47%); now, the agreement percentage has risen significantly to 54%.
These changes indicate that even among groups whose level of agreement with the statement regarding the limitations of the education system in promoting a standard narrative was relatively low in 2022, there is now a broader recognition that, within the current structure, the ability to achieve common ground for all Israelis through the education system is limited.
Given the Ministry of Education's goals for the current school year, which emphasize "social solidarity," it raises the question of how this goal can be implemented without imposing a "common narrative" that does not encompass all identities within society and/or ignores existing tensions and conflicts. According to this survey, the answer could be more encouraging.
The survey data allows us to examine the value-driven aspects of the education system's role at this time and as the school year begins. The education system explicitly focuses on "unity" and "social cohesion." Still, over the years (as various reports and studies show), it has yet to create a shared social and civic value foundation for all Israeli students across all social groups, in order to safeguard Israel as Jewish and Democratic state [5]. This understanding is reflected in public attitudes and the changes in this context since 2022.
[1] Israeli Voice Index, Viterbi Center, Israel Democracy Institute https://www.idi.org.il/articles/55472
[2] From the introduction to the document: Education Building Society: The Strategic Focus of the Work Plan for the 2024-2025 School Year; Ministry of Education, April 2024; pp. 2-3.
[3] Ibid., p. 6.
[4] Ibid., p. 5.
[5] See the State Comptroller’s Reports on Shared Life and Prevention of Racism, 2016; 2021; the Committee Report on Shared Life and Prevention of Racism, 2022; and additional studies: Partnership Index (2024) Parts A and B, Accord Center; Hoffman, Zeidner, and Baron, 2023, Civic Education and Education for Democracy in Israel: Organizations, Programs, and Key Challenges, Israel Democracy Institute.