The presentation looks at anti-Semitism in schools. Specifically, the focus is on educational practices of teachers when they meet anti-Semitism in school.

Anti-Semitism is interpreted as a phenomenon of exclusion. It is thus diametrically opposed to the claim of recognising diversity. Anti-Semitism is a complex phenomenon, which is addressed in different forms and by different groups of actors (Koerrenz, 2021). Anti-Semitism can be explicated as a permanent and latent structure of hostility towards Jews. On the individual level, it can manifest itself as a form of emotional beliefs, on the cultural level in the form of myths, (conspiracy-) ideologies, stereotypes, and so on. On the practical level, these manifestations can lead to discrimination and political mobilisation against Jews, among other things (Benz, 2015). Contemporary anti-Semitic phenomena relate to the national state of Israel: these phenomena are constituted in certain political and religious collectivities (Taguief, 2004). Recent empirical research shows that there has been a Europe-wide increase in anti-Semitic incidents since 2001 (EUMC, 2004). These have their origins in developments in a globalised world (Holz, 2010): For example, the global financial crisis of 2008 is used to reactivate the image of so-called "Jewish financial elites" (Bergmann, 2016).

Anti-Semitism and its various manifestations also affect the learning venue school (Bevelander & Hjerm, 2015; Vogtländer & Voth, 2015; Greene & Kingsbury, 2017). Studies focus on Jewish young people affected by anti-Semitism. In addition, the extent to which anti-Semitism is represented among non-Jewish young people is taken into account (Mansel & Spaiser, 2013). In the context of "Holocaust education", adolescents are explicitly sensitised to anti-Semitism and its manifestations (Wetzel, 2019). In this context, analyses of textbooks and curricula (Kößler, 2006) also provide recommendations for schools that should lead to attitudes that promote democracy.

In addition, a discourse on the professionalism of educators in the context of anti-Semitism has been established (Gläser, Hentges & Meier, 2021). In particular, there are studies on how open youth work educators deal with anti-Semitism (Radvan, 2010 & 2011). In the context of schools, studies have been conducted that explore anti-Semitism among students and the relationship of teachers to anti-Semitism (Haynes, 2003; Fechler, 2006; Moulin, 2016; Thomas, 2016; Bernstein, 2020). Recently, Rüb was able to show that teachers at German schools attribute a high relevance to anti-Semitism. In this context, teachers show very different orientations of action by means of which they counter anti-Semitic statements by pupils: These orientations of actions range from trivialisation and externalisation to a historicising perspective of the anti-Semitic incident (2023, i.E.).

A desideratum exists with regard to the question of what educational practices teachers display when they encounter anti-Semitism at school. This study addresses this desideratum. It explores the educational practices of teachers in the context of anti-Semitism. Specifically, it focuses on the following questions: How do teachers exert educational influence on the development and behaviour of pupils in order to counteract anti-Semitism? How do teachers shape these educational processes? What concrete values do they try to instil in students to counter anti-Semitism? In which situations where anti-Semitism occurs do teachers take educational action?

The research design of this study is based on a qualitative-reconstructive approach. To date, there are only a few research findings on teacher professionalism and teacher action in the context of anti-Semitism. Given this deficient research situation, this study is based on a hypothesis-generating, qualitative-reconstructive paradigm: Methodologically and methodologically, the study specifically connects to teachers' everyday educational practices when they come into contact with students' anti-Semitic remarks. For this research approach, it is important that interviewees are treated with openness so that they can set their own themes that are relevant to them. This requirement was met by using the narrative interview as a data collection method (Nohl, 2010). During an open-ended narrative interview, teachers were able to tell about their educational experiences and practices in the context of anti-Semitism. The data were analyzed using the documentary method (Bohnsack 2014, 2017): This method succeeded in providing empirical access to teachers' educational practices. The combination of data collection method "Interview" and data analysis method "Documentary Method" is based on the basic methodological assumptions of Mannheim (1964, 1980). Within the framework of his sociology of knowledge, Mannheim distinguishes between communicative, explicit knowledge and conjunctive, implicit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is theoretical. It contains normative statements about educational self-concept. Teachers can make this knowledge explicit. For example, "What do teachers say about their educational approach in the context of anti-Semitism?". Tacit knowledge is experiential. It influences teachers' habitualized, educational actions; this knowledge is not reflexively accessible to teachers. For example, "How do teachers educate in the context of anti-Semitism?". Implicit knowledge is actualized during the interview via narratives on the part of teachers and can be reconstructed using the Documentary Method (Bohnsack, 2022; Bohnsack et al., 2010). The sample of the study consists of 17 interviews with German teachers: According to different "theoretical sampling" strategies (Glaser & Strauß, 1998), the interviews were compiled (e.g., gender, age, teaching position in large city or small town, different school types, professional experience, Jewish and non-Jewish origin). The findings of the study were consensually validated in monthly meetings in the context of a research workshop. The findings were generalized into a typology. This typology maps teachers' educational practices in the context of anti-Semitism.

The yield of the study lies in the empirical exploration of teacher professionalism. Education - understood as the intentional influencing of psychological dispositions through social interactions (Brezinka, 1978) - is seen as a significant task and competence within the framework of teacher professionalism (Baumert & Kunter, 2006; Terhart, 2011). By exploring teachers' educational practices in the context of anti-Semitism, a contribution is made to diversity-sensitive teacher practices in schools. Empirical analysis of the data reveals, among other things, the following: Teachers delegate the task of education to educands. Teachers ask students, for example, to leave the classroom and think about their own anti-Semitic statements. This shows that teachers do not make the intentional content of the educational activity explicit to the students. The goals of the educational activity are thus likely to remain largely undefined for the educand. Furthermore, teachers' practices are oriented by different regulative principles. One of these is the construction of a causal relationship. Teachers assume that certain actions will inevitably lead to their intended educational goal. The subjectivity of students, which can perturb educational actions, is hardly taken into account. Moreover, teachers become educationally active particularly when students express anti-Semitic views. Thus, the educational potential of anti-Semitism for raising awareness about diversity remains largely untapped: Anti-Semitism is addressed on a situational basis and hardly finds its way into teachers' educational activities as a cross-cutting issue. At the same time, the findings show that teachers see themselves as part of a team of educators. They involve other school stakeholders (e.g., principals, school social workers, etc.). At the level of the individual school, concepts are developed to enable a consistent approach to dealing with anti-Semitism among students. Educational practices of teachers in dealing with anti-Semitism show up here as a facet of cooperation in multiprofessional, school-based teams.

Bernstein, J. (2020). Antisemitismus an Schulen in Deutschland, Befunde – Analysen Handlungsoptionen. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz. Bevelander, P., & Hjerm, M. (2015). The religious affiliation and anti-Semitism of secondary school-age Swedish youths: an analysis of survey data from 2003 and 2009. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38 (15), 2705-2721. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2015.1042893 Bohnsack, R., Pfaff, N. & Weller, W. (2010). Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff & W. Weller (Hrsg.), Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research (p. 7–40). Opladen u. Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.3224/86649236 European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) (2004). Manifestations of Antisemitism in the EU 2002–2003. Based on information by the National Focal Points of the RAXEN Information Network. Wien. Gläser, G., Hentges, G. & Meier, M. (2021). Implementing Antisemitism Studies in German Teacher Education. Journal of Social Science Education, 20(3), 75–101. Greene, J. P. & Kingsbury, I. (2017). The Relationship Between Public and Private Schooling and Anti-Semitism. Journal of School Choice, 11(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2016.1270143 Haynes, M. (2003). „Vive la Differance“: Jewish Women Teachers' Constructions of Ethnicity and Identity and Their Experiences of Anti-Semitism in Secondary Schools. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 6(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332032000044585 Koerrenz, R. (2021). Semitismus und Antisemitismus. Über aktives und passives Othering. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik und Theologie, 73(2), 130–150. https://doi.org/10.1515/zpt-2021-0018 Moulin, D. (2016). Reported schooling experiences of adolescent Jews attending non-Jewish secondary schools in England. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(4), 683–705. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2015.1013459 Nohl, A.‑M. (2010). The Documentary Interpretation of Narrative Interviews. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff & W. Weller (Hrsg.), Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research (p. 195–218). Opladen u. Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich. Radvan, H. (2010). Pädagogisches Handeln und Antisemitismus. Eine empirische Studie zu Beobachtungs- und Interventionsformen in der offenen Jugendarbeit. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Rüb, P. (2023, i.E.). Der Umgang mit Antisemitismus im Unterricht. Eine qualitativ-rekonstruktive Studie zu Orientierungen von Lehrkräften. Bad Heilbrunn: Julius Klinkhardt. Taguieff, P.-A. (2004). Rising from the Muck: The New Anti-Semitism in Europe. Chicago, IL: Ivan R. Dee. Thomas, P. (2016). Exploring Anti-Semitism in the Classroom: A Case Study Among Norwegian Adolescents from Minority Backgrounds. Journal of Jewish Education, 82(3), 182–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2016.1191255 Vogtländer, N., & Voth, H.–J. (2015). Nazi indoctrination and anti-Semitic beliefs in Germany. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences oft he United States of America, 112(26), 7931–7936. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414822112