This action research is based on an interpretive qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews (4 Muslim and 4 Jewish students), participants’ written reflections (16 Jewish and 4 Muslim students), and the reflections of the course instructors. The study arose from two issues that troubled the course instructors. The first was the fact that their students (who are themselves teachers) had difficulty understanding the interactions in socio-ecological systems. Secondly, the instructors were troubled because the Jewish and Muslim students in the culturally heterogeneous group they were teaching had not, in the previous academic year, had any interactions conducive to meaningful learning. The basic assumption underlying the course was therefore that creating a good, supportive group environment would promote meaningful learning, which would make the students more open to understanding socio-ecological systems. Our study showed that the students from each cultural group tended to focus on different aspects of the socio-ecological system, with Muslim students focusing on the social aspect and Jewish ones on the ecological. As one Muslim student said, “Arabs must contend with meeting the needs of day-to-day due to their low socio-economic status, which influences the attention they can spare to think about ecological issues.” Most of the Jewish students, in contrast, spent their childhoods in rural environments, which fostered their attachment to ecological issues. As one said, “…we would go hiking in nature every Sunday.” Students from both groups were equally concerned with dilemmas associated with security. For instance, everyone was concerned about going on a field trip on the day after a riot, or walking through Arab village viewed by many as dangerous. Another example is that of a Jewish student who was worried about spending the night in an Arab town. She told us, “...Were you out of your minds to sleep in Arab village?” The group work, which was designed to generate shared learning and multicultural familiarity, was cited by all of the students as a central point of difficulty. Difficulties arose from two primary issues: technical difficulties and cultural difference. While the technical difficulties of meeting for group work did not generate cultural tensions, those arising from cultural differences did, primarily because the final paper for the course needed to be submitted in Hebrew, and was marked in part for the quality of the academic writing. This generated a lot of tension, and some unpleasant encounters between Jewish and Muslim students.

The course we examined successfully helped all of its students understand that social and ecological systems are inextricably interconnected. It also succeeded in bringing some of the Muslim and Jewish students closer on a personal level, but not on a national one, since the ideological gaps between Arabs and Jews were not diminished. The insights from this action research will be applied to next year’s course, inspiring changes to its tasks and emphases.