In the contemporary global educational landscape, diversifying the teaching workforce is recognized as a fundamental pillar for promoting social justice and equity (Mullen, 2021). Teacher diversity has been widely studied, yet a significant gap remains in understanding the “induction” phase—the critical transition from training to practice—when it unfolds within contexts of ethno-national conflict and structural power imbalances (Ingersoll & Strong, 2012; McNamara & Basit, 2004). This study examines the induction of Arab-Palestinian teachers into Hebrew-speaking Jewish-majority state schools in Israel. The central research question is: How do power relations shape the induction experiences of minority teachers in majority schools, and how do they influence their professional learning, sense of belonging, and pedagogical agency?

The research moves beyond traditional technical or psychological views of induction (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Ingersoll & Strong, 2012), conceptualizing it as a political and organizational process through a triple-layered analytical lens. At the macro level, we draw on “banal nationalism” (Billig, 1995) and work on language ideologies to examine how majority-dominated schools are framed as “neutral” spaces while minority teachers are marked as “others”; professional identity is constructed through negotiation with dominant ideologies that dictate linguistic and cultural legitimacy (Melo-Pfeifer, 2018). At the meso level, we utilize the framework of “inequality regimes” to analyze schools as workplaces characterized by intersectional hierarchies (Acker, 2006; Hanselman et al., 2022; Quinn & Ferree, 2019). Organizational belonging for minority teachers is often “conditional”, mediated by institutional silences regarding power dynamics in mentoring relationships (McNamara & Basit, 2004). At the micro level, we examine induction as an interactional process entailing intensive emotional labor and the management of micro-aggressions (Horner et al., 2020; Kariou et al., 2021). Conceptions of the “good teacher” are often linked to racialized professionalism, whereby educators must regulate their emotions and linguistic repertoires to align with majority norms.

This study proposes the Power-Aware Induction model, which foregrounds induction as a site where structural inequalities and professional learning intersect. It addresses a universal challenge faced by educational systems across Europe and globally: the integration of minority teachers into majority-led institutions. The model offers a comparative framework for analyzing how educational policies and school-level “inequality regimes” can either mitigate or exacerbate structural barriers during the early career stage (Hanselman et al., 2022; McNamara & Basit, 2004). It contributes to international discourse on Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies (Paris & Alim, 2017) by demonstrating how minority teachers can transform their cultural capital into a pedagogical asset and enact “quiet” or “everyday” agency within constrained spaces (Yosso, 2005).

The study adopts a qualitative-interpretative approach, viewing knowledge production as situated and context-dependent (Flick, 2024; Maxwell & Kiegelmann, 2023). The research group consisted of 30 Arab teachers (N=30) in their first three years of teaching within Jewish-majority state schools in Israel. Purposeful sampling was employed to target the "induction" phase, where organizational influence on professional identity is most intense. Data collection utilized a "bi-focal analytical configuration" consisting of two written narrative-reflective sources (Tracy, 2024): Open Narratives: Participants provided written descriptions of their induction experiences, focusing on recruitment, mentoring, and organizational belonging. These were collected anonymously to allow for safe reflection outside of institutional surveillance. "Success Story" Narratives: Participants detailed a significant pedagogical event, outlining their goals and classroom interactions (Kearney, 2021). The study adopts a qualitative-interpretative approach, viewing knowledge production as situated and context-dependent (Flick, 2018; Maxwell, 2013; Tracy, 2020). The research group consisted of 30 Arab teachers (N = 30) in their first three years of teaching within Jewish-majority state schools in Israel. Purposeful sampling was employed to focus on the induction phase, where organizational influence on professional identity is most intense. Data collection used a narrative and practice-oriented design. Participants produced two written narrative-reflective texts: (a) open narratives, where they described their induction experiences, focusing on recruitment, mentoring, and organizational belonging, submitted anonymously to allow safe reflection outside institutional surveillance; and (b) “success-story” narratives, where they detailed a significant pedagogical event, outlining their goals and classroom interactions (Kearney, 2011; Tracy, 2020). Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2023). The coding process progressed from open to more focused coding, with analytical memos documenting evolving insights (Saldaña, 2021). Patterns were iteratively cross-referenced with the macro–meso–micro framework. Research quality was supported through analytical generalization (Yin, 2018), prolonged engagement with the data, and sustained research reflexivity. The researchers maintained reflective journals to examine how their positions as Arab-Palestinian scholars within the Israeli educational field shaped data interpretation and theme construction (Maxwell, 2013; Tracy, 2010).

The findings indicate that, for minority teachers, induction is not a linear pedagogical progression but a complex negotiation of identity and power. Four central themes emerged. First, conditional belonging: teachers experience formal acceptance but operate within unspoken boundaries; belonging is a fragile resource that depends on avoiding topics perceived as challenging the school’s banal nationalism (Billig, 1995). Second, racialized professionalism: linguistic and emotional labor are preconditions for legitimacy (Horner et al., 2020; Kariou et al., 2021). Teachers monitor their accents, language choices, and emotional displays to align with majority norms, while this additional labor remains largely invisible in formal mentoring structures. Third, navigating risk: induction is characterized by constant vigilance and ongoing assessments of institutional risk. Ambiguity about acceptable limits of political and cultural expression leads many teachers to adopt self-censorship as a survival strategy. Fourth, conditional agency: despite constraints, teachers exercise quiet forms of agency, using the classroom as an “island of freedom” (Paris & Alim, 2017). They mobilize their identities and multilingual repertoires as pedagogical assets, acting as cultural brokers for majority students and re-signifying their marginalized positions as resources (Yosso, 2005). The study advances the Power-Aware Induction model as a framework for rethinking induction policies and practices in divided and inequitable societies. It advocates a shift from technical mentoring towards reflexive, dialogic induction that explicitly surfaces and interrogates power relations. The model calls for “safeguarding scaffolds” in schools—structures and routines that recognize minority identities, languages, and experiences as professional assets rather than variables to be managed or silenced (McNamara & Basit, 2004; Paris & Alim, 2017). By foregrounding power, the model offers conceptual and practical tools for educational systems in Europe and beyond to support minority teachers in ways that enhance their professional learning, sense of belonging, and pedagogical agency.

Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender & Society, 20(4), 441–464. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. SAGE Publications. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2023). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055. Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. Hanselman, P., Domina, T., & Hwang, N. (2022). Educational inequality regimes amid Algebra-for-All. Social Forces, 100(4), 1722–1751. Horner, C. G., Brown, E. L., Mehta, S., & Scanlon, C. L. (2020). Feeling and acting like a teacher: Reconceptualizing teachers' emotional labor. Teachers College Record, 122(5), 1–36. Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2012). What the research tells us about the impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers. Teachers College Record, 114(14), 466–490. Kariou, A., Koutsimani, P., Montgomery, A., & Lainidi, O. (2021). Emotional labor and burnout among teachers: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(23), Article 12760. Kearney, E. (2011). Culturally responsive teaching: A review of research. In K. E. Johnson & P. R. Golombek (Eds.), Ethnography and language education (pp. 79–96). Routledge. Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2018). Language and cultural mediation in teacher education. Language and Intercultural Communication, 18(3), 335–349. Mullen, C. A. (2021). Mentoring in school settings: Managing the realities, rethinking the options. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), Handbook of school-family partnerships (pp. 123–140). Routledge. Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press. Quinn, J. S., & Ferree, M. M. (2019). Schools as workplaces: Intersectional regimes of inequality. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(12), 1806–1815. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.