ARTICLE IN PRESS

0742-051X/$ - s

doi:10.1016/j.ta

�Tel.: +30 6

E-mail addr1A teacher a

education.

Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

The contribution of action-research to training teachers inintercultural education: A research in the field of Greek

minority education

Kostas Magos�,1

Arahovis 20, 10680 Athens, Greece

Received 2 November 2005; received in revised form 5 July 2006; accepted 19 September 2006

Abstract

The article describes the framework, the methodology and the results of an educational research in the field of Greek

minority education. The aim of the research was to explore whether action-research can help educators from the majority

develop empathy for their minority pupils. The schools where the research took place are placed in Thrace, an area of

North-Eastern Greece, which borders with Turkey.The research showed that the teachers’ training brought changes in

their perceptions and attitudes related to their general ideological beliefs concerning otherness, their professional role and

their educational work.

r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Teacher training; Action-research; Intercultural education; Minority education; Teachers’ beliefs

1. The need for the teachers’ intercultural training

Significant research (Bender-Szymanski, 2000;Grougeon & Woods, 1990; Wright, 1992) pointsout that the teachers’ views and attitudes towardsethnically and culturally different students areinfluenced by prejudices and stereotypical represen-tations, which may result in discriminations. Thesediscriminations in most cases filter out ethnicallyand culturally different students on the grounds oftheir ethnic and cultural background. Moreover,even the presence of ethnically and culturally

ee front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

te.2006.09.001

973050052; fax: +30 3688506.

ess: kmago@tee.gr.

nd a teacher trainer in the field of intercultural

different students at school is considered by manyteachers as ‘‘an additional problem which entailsanxiety, a feeling of professional insufficiency andthe wish to transfer the problem to the neighbouringschools’’ (Sedano, 2002, p. 264).

It has been proved (Banks, 2002; Boyle-Baise,2002; De Valk, 2003) that teachers’ poor insight intointercultural issues impedes, to a great extent, thedevelopment of cultural pluralism at school. Ac-cording to Le Roux (2001, p. 19) ‘‘the interculturalexperiences and stimuli for the teachers’ primaryand in-service training tend to be occasional, limitedand are peripherally added to an over-loadedcurriculum’’. As a result, when teachers are dueto deal with ethnic, cultural and other kind ofdifferences in class, they either deal with them in acompletely inappropriate way or they frequently

.

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112 1103

ignore them. Thus, an in-service training in ways ofdealing with ethnic, cultural and other kinds ofotherness in a school class seems essential forworking teachers in order to be actively engagedin intercultural education.

2. Action-research in teachers’ training

The action-research is an invaluable tool for theteachers’ training for two main reasons. The firstreason takes into account the active and initial rolea teacher should have in his/her training. Thesecond reason derives from the need to bridge thedaily educational practice with the broad academictheory and the teaching with the research.

Many researchers maintain that the teachers’training should take advantage of action-research(Altrichter, Posch, & Somekh, 1993; Avramovic,2001; McNiff, 2001) since the linkage betweenresearch and action and their spiral interaction inthe action-research framework benefits the teachers’training significantly. In addition, teachers canenhance their own practice with the help of theaction-research twofold; by applying the theory tothe daily pedagogical practice and by using self-observation and other-observation in their work.Thus, the various theories that the teachershave studied, both in their basic education andtheir in-service training, are not any longer ‘‘some-one else’s firm ideological views for what shouldbe a successful practice’’ (Penny & Harley,1995, p. 175), but, in contrast, they are creativelyincorporated into the daily educational practice.Taking advantage of action-research in the trainingprocess the teachers are motivated to reflect on theirteaching practices and on their communication withtheir students, to work out possible problems innon-functional relationships and to seek alternativeteaching approaches and ways of communication inorder to improve the educational practice.

The educators’ participation in action-research inan intercultural framework can weaken formerstereotypical beliefs towards otherness, while newways of communication and attitude towards the‘different others’ can be developed. Foldy (2005)analytically describes how she used action-researchin her dissertation impacted significantly on herbeliefs and attitudes towards racial otherness andshe underlines how the researcher’s identities hadreverberated through the research process. Anotherresearcher (Ball, 1993) investigated differencesbetween teachers who had only participated in

discussion sessions during their training and thosewho apart from the discussions had implementedthe theory in some intercultural classes. Out of atotal of 100 teachers who participated in thetraining and in active learning activities, theresearcher selected four as case studies. The two ofthem, who were the experimental group, designedactivities in class with the help of their theoreticalbackground and of action-research. The other twoteachers, who were the control group, attended thetraining seminars without planning and implement-ing any type of action-research in their classes. Theresearch pointed out that the most permanentchanges occurred in the beliefs of the two teacherswho conducted action-research. The theoreticalknowledge in connection with the reflective thinkingactivities of the action-research were catalytic forthese teachers in order to overcome their fearsand reservations and change their past views andattitudes.

The teachers’ reservations about accommodatingnew teaching practices account for the conflictbetween the changes observed in their theoreticalviews after their participation in interculturaltraining programmes and the ones observed in theirteaching practices. This was deduced in a Greek in-service training programme in intercultural educa-tion that carried out action-research (Dragonas,Androussou, Petroyiannis, & Inglessi, 1999). Re-search showed that positive changes in the ways ofdealing with Otherness in class were enacted withthe implementation of action-research. However,the teachers needed additional time and also todevelop systematic insight in order to apply theabove changes in their daily educational practice.Many other researchers (Hebel, 1998; Midgley,1992) underline the difficulties which teachers meet,when their action-research project is linked withhuman values.

3. Aim, sample and research framework

The primary aim of the research presented was toexplore whether the teachers’ treatment of othernessin classroom could be improved with the use ofaction-research in an intercultural context. In orderto achieve this, nine case studies were used. All nineteachers who comprised the case studies shared thecommon characteristics of the Greek nationalidentity and of working at schools where allstudents had non-Greek identity. These specificschools are called minority schools.

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–11121104

There are 230 minority schools in Greece and allof them are located in Thrace, an area in NorthGreece that borders with Turkey. According toofficial data (Academy of Athens, 1995) almost35% of the population living in the above area isTurks, Pomaks and Roma but all Muslims. Thispopulation group is officially acknowledged as‘‘Thrace Muslim Minority’’ and originates fromthe population excepted from the populationexchange between Greece and Turkey in 1922. Thestudents who are part of this population attend theabove-mentioned minority schools whose operationwas defined in the Treaty of Lausanne signed byGreece and Turkey in 1923. In minority education,a bilingual, Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking,curriculum is followed, where teachers from themajority teach the Greek-speaking programme andteachers-members from the minority teach theTurkish-speaking programme.

The Turkish identity, which is the identity of animportant part of these students, is regarded as a‘‘hostile’’ identity by many Greek teachers whowork at the minority schools and hence a series ofnegative beliefs and attitudes towards their studentsand their family and social environment areadopted. Very characteristic features of the tea-chers’ beliefs and attitudes are (Frangoudaki &Askouni, 1999; Sfyroera, 1998) the tendency toassimilate the minority students’ identity to theofficial Greek identity, the reproduction of discri-minations against students using the criterion ofmother tongue and ethnic origin, the fear and thesuspicion towards minority students, the transfer ofresponsibility for the students’ low school perfor-mance to the students’ family and the socialenvironment, the use of ineffective teaching ap-proaches and the feeling of insufficiency anddissatisfaction from their work.

4. Research methodology

The case-study method was used in order for theresearch aim to be achieved, namely to discover andassess the extent of the changes in the teachers’traditional beliefs and attitudes with the contribu-tion of action-research. This method was selectedfor the advantage it provides to the researcher todeeply study a typical case of the phenomenon he/she is concerned with and also to generalize his/herresults (Cohen & Manion, 1994).

The sample of the nine teachers-case studies wasdivided into three different groups: an experimental

group and two control groups. The experimentalgroup consisted of three teachers who attended a2-year in-service training in intercultural educationand was performing a 1-year action-research duringthe same time. The first control group consisted ofthree teachers who attended the in-service trainingwithout being engaged in action-research or in-volved in any other type of research in their classes.Finally, the second control group was comprised ofthree teachers who neither participated in the 2-yeartraining nor were involved in any action-research.

More precisely 78 teachers had participated in theabove-mentioned in-service training. None of themhad ever been engaged in action-research in thepast. After a theoretical introduction and presenta-tion of action-research examples by the researcher,some of the 78 teachers asked further details andinstructions in order to conduct action-research intheir classes. Thus, the sample for the experimentaland the first control group was selected from theseinterested teachers using their common professionalcharacteristics as a criterion. The teachers of thesecond control group were randomly selected fromall the local teachers in Thrace using as a criteriontheir non-participation in the training programmeand their respective professional characteristics withthe other two groups. Therefore, all nine teachers ofthe sample belonged to the Greek Orthodoxmajority and were teaching exclusively to pupils ofthe Muslim minority. Four of them were womenand five were men. The age ranged between 40 and50 years old. They were all graduates of TeacherColleges and they were all working as teachers20 to 25 years. Finally, all of them were working inlocal schools in the city or in central villagesand they were teaching respective classes. It isworth mentioning that the teachers of all samplegroups participated voluntarily. The voluntary,in contrast to compulsory participation in theaction-research, has been highlighted as a basicparameter that impacts on the teachers’ personaland professional development positively (Judah &Richardson, 2006).

The in-service training for the experimental andthe first control group was mainly seminars, whereissues related to the treatment of otherness, thediscriminations, the racism and the xenophobiawere debated. Also, teaching approaches andeducational material promoting the interculturaleducation were studied in the seminars.

In order to investigate the sample’s changes ofbeliefs and attitudes towards their treatment of

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112 1105

ethnic and cultural differences as well as theirgeneral intercultural sensitivity, qualitative researchtechniques such as semi-structured interviews andparticipant observation were used. Many research-ers (Mishler, 1991; Woods, 1995) have pointed upthe advantages of the semi-structured interview andits potential for deep approach to the teachers’beliefs. Accordingly, the participant observationallows the researcher to understand the context ofthe teachers’ actions. The combination of theinterviews with the participant observation is awell-known triangulation with a twofold advantage:the observation allows the researcher to associatewhat she/he observes with the interviews, while theinterview allows him/her to go beyond the externalbehavior and to explore the inner thoughts of theobserved research subject (Patton, 1990).

In the research presented in this article the semi-structured interviews with the nine teachers tookplace at the beginning and the end of the 2-yeartraining and the action-research. The participantobservation took place at the same period andlasted 12 h for each teacher.

5. The content of teachers’ action-research

The action-research for the teachers who be-longed to the experimental group involved thedesign and the implementation to class of a projectwith intercultural content. The experimental groupdecided, after a discussion between them and withthe researcher, to focus their action-research on theproject teaching approach. Their aim was to explorethe extent of change in the pupils’ school perfor-mance and in their communication with their pupilsif this method was applied. It is worth noting thatno one of the group had as yet experimented withthe project approach, since the teaching methodthey were applying was the traditional teacher-centered approach. According to Cummins (1997),the learning difficulties that the minority studentsexperience are due to the teaching approachfollowed at school. He recommends the replacementof the traditional teaching approaches with teachingmodels that focus on empirical-communicativelearning and on the mutual interaction betweenteachers and students.

In order to implement the action-research theteachers followed Kemmis (1993) spiral modelwith the stages of planning, action and reflectivethinking. The same stages are suggested by otherresearchers such as Maruyama (in Dash, 1999,

p. 467) in the so-called practitioner-centered action-research model and McNiff, Lomax, and White-head (2004). Basic axes in the discussion and thereflective thinking for the experimental groupduring action-research was the comparison of theproject method with the earlier teaching approachesand seeing the possible changes in their beliefs andattitudes but also in their pupils’. The most populartopics for discussion were the pupils’ participationin the project and their keen interest for the topicand for the improvement of their school perfor-mance, the team work in the classroom, thecommunication between the pupils and themselves,the obstacles and the difficulties they encounteredwhile applying the project method.

Each of the three teachers of the experimentalgroup planned, organized and completed, oneintercultural project with the researcher’s support.One teacher chose to start up a project with firstgraders, while the other two with third graders. Allthree projects had as their main topic the place,either the city or the village where pupils were living.Some basic dimensions the projects touched are thehistory of the place, the local residents, the houses,the jobs and the different local cultural traditions.

The experiential learning was used in the project.Most of the activities focused on the experiencesand the cultural representations of both pupils andteachers. The interdisciplinary dimension was alsoused, as the project accommodated and combineddifferent learning objectives from a range ofsubjects, such as Greek language, history, geogra-phy and social studies. During the project the pupilswere involved in research field and in bibliographi-cal research. Moreover, they interviewed people notonly from their family but also their social environ-ment, such as residents and local culture represen-tatives. People with different mother tongues,religions and cultural identities were invited in classand discussed with the pupils. This communicationoffered the opportunity to both pupils and teachersto familiarize themselves with the local culturaltreasure and develop relationships of interactionand interchange.

The experimental group implemented the projectsin the classes they were teaching within the schoolhours, while they also adapted the curriculumto the needs of the project. In contrast, the teachersof the two control groups followed an inflexiblecurriculum-based teaching with traditional teacher-centered methods. The cooperation between theexperimental and the two control groups was not

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–11121106

encouraged for all the duration of the action-research with the aim to keep the initial researchcontent firm and avoid any kind of parameters thatwould have an impact on the validity and theaccuracy of the research. After the completion ofthe action-research and the collection of researchdata, the teachers of the experimental grouppresented the action-research that they had imple-mented in the teachers of the two control groupsand in the total of the 78 teachers, who attended thein-service training. The presentation and the discus-sion that followed had a great impact on all theteachers and some of them requested to be involvedin action-research the following school year too.

6. The cycles of teachers’ action research

With regard to the teachers’ interest and theirinvolvement in action-research, three differentcycles were formed. The first cycle, which lasted 2months, was characterized by intense impatience forthe application of the new methodology and, asexpected, ensuing anxiety and fear for the success orthe failure of the action-research. This cycle wasalso the key-cycle in the transition from the oldfamiliar and, consequently, safe, regardless itseffectiveness, traditional methodology to the projectapproach. During this cycle it was observed thatall three teachers, when meeting difficulties inapplying the new teaching method, sheltered them-selves in the traditional teaching, after a discussionwith the researcher, they returned to the projectapproach. During this cycle the teachers followedthe three basic stages of the action-research: theplanning, the action and the evaluation. Theyplanned the intercultural project and designed arange of activities relevant to its content. Theactivities included educational visits and classdiscussion, as well as effective use of educationalmaterial relevant to the topic of the project. At theend of the first cycle and at the end of the nextcycles, the researcher had a separate meeting witheach teacher of the experimental group in order toevaluate the process. The evaluation had the form ofa discussion between the researcher and the teacher,while the researcher was keeping record of theteachers’ critical comments and of their reflectivethinking.

In the evaluation at the end of the first cycle theteachers focused on the difficulties they met apply-ing the project method. These difficulties weremainly because of the lack of previous experience

in the techniques of the experiential learning and ofthe interdisciplinary approach. Furthermore, theparameters that the teachers realized that weredecisive in the success of the project were high-lighted in the teachers’ evaluation. All three teachersof the experimental group agreed that the mostsignificant of all the parameters was the goodpreparation of the project-activities, taking advan-tage of the suitable educational material and thegood cooperation with the school principal. Theyalso distinguished the weak points that their planhad and concerned the time management and theorganization of the activities.

The second cycle of the teachers’ action-researchincluded three parts for the intercultural project;planning—action—evaluation of the new activities.This second cycle, which lasted 5 months, was themost productive phase of the action-research sinceenthusiasm and creativity had replaced insecurityand anxiety, dominant feelings in the previousphase. During this second cycle teachers and pupilsworked as actual researchers. The teachers keptanalytical record and commented critically on theactions they had been involved during the inter-cultural project, systematically observed thechanges in their communication with their pupilsand in the ways of cooperation between the pupils.In this cycle a significant interaction betweenteachers, parents and members of the local societywas created. The teachers expressed their satisfac-tion from the cooperation with the parents, high-lighting that ‘‘it was the first time that thecommunication with the parents was not typical,but furthered a substantial meeting and coopera-tion’’. Pupils, on the other side, worked asresearchers in the project framework, since duringthis cycle they participated in field research, theyinterviewed parents and other people, created groupwork, observed and derived conclusions relevant tothe cultural similarities and differences of thelocal place. The classes during this phase lookedlike a lively workshop with all the features of theexperiential, communicative and collaborativeteaching. Also very characteristic of this periodwas the collaboration between the teachers and theresearcher-facilitator, which was very much creativeand fruitful, with frequent and substantial meetings,taking place within and outside the school time-table. During the evaluation at the end of thesecond cycle of action-research the teachersseemed more familiar with the project methodology.All three stated that they were more satisfied—in

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112 1107

relation with the former cycle—from the timemanagement and the organization of the activitiesand that they had overcome the difficulties theyencountered. They also emphasized on the improve-ment of their relationship with their pupils andparents and on the positive perspectives of thisimprovement.

The third and final cycle lasted for the final 2months of the research. During this cycle a declinein the performance of the action-research, especiallyin the two of the three teachers, was observed. Inthis cycle the teachers continued to work on thetwo first stages of the action-research, the planningand the action, but they had left the stage of thereflective thinking atrophy. The basic activity inthis stage was the composition by the pupils forthe final conclusions of the intercultural projectand the organization of an event in order for theirwork to be presented in their classmates, parentsand other guests. In the evaluation at the endof the third cycle the teachers stressed that thetiredness from all the school year and the anxiety tocover the curriculum requirements had a negativeimpact on their performance. However, they high-lighted the general benefits from the completion ofthe intercultural project and from their participa-tion in the action-research. They mentioned thatthey observed an enhancement of their practice andof their personal development. The completion ofthe third cycle of the action-research coincidedwith the completion of the in-service training inintercultural education wherein the teachers hadparticipated.

During the action-research the experimentalgroup shared their experiences and thoughts be-tween them and also with the researcher inscheduled meetings. In these discussions eachteacher was presenting his/her work s/he had doneand was developing his/her reflective thinking.A valuable means to the reflective thinking andthe evaluation at the end of each cycle was thediaries that the teachers were keeping updated.Keeping regular record of the action-research inpersonal diaries was a part of the initial ‘agreement’between the researcher and the experimental group,which the teachers abided by during the first twocycles of the action-research. In the last cycle two ofthe three teachers kept some sparse notes from theireducational actions and their thoughts in theirdiaries. They attributed this neglect to tirednessand to the increased teaching responsibilities thatthe end of the school year entailed.

7. The researcher’s reflective thinking

During all the stages of the action-research, theresearcher held a facilitating and consulting role,supporting the process, offering information fromhis own knowledge and experience and helpingonly on demand. His overall role was thought-provoking.

Additionally, the researcher was benefited fromthe planning process and from teachers’ reflectivethinking for his own reflective thinking. Focalpoint of his reflective thinking was to explorewhether the changes observed in the teachers’views, teaching approaches and attitudes wouldbe permanent and firm and would affect theirgeneral personal and professional development. Inother words, she/he aimed to discover to whatextent the action-research would not only be atechnical tool of an experimental teaching method,but would help the teachers to gain insight andinterpret their previous teaching experiences and,consequently, stand critically towards their roleand the ways to deal with otherness in a schoolclassroom.

The reflective thinking helped the researcher toidentify and meet his/her own stereotypical beliefstowards the participants in the action-research.His/her participation in educational trainings forthe accommodation of Otherness is an experience,which may result in decisive changes in his/her priorbeliefs and attitudes (Inglessi, 2004). The researcher-facilitator was encouraged to identify his/her pre-judices for the teachers’ motives, abilities and theirideology following systematically the developmentof the action-research and of the experimentalgroup’s reflective thinking. This insight combinedwith the communication and the exchange of viewswhile implementing the action-research created anatmosphere of mutual trust and substantial com-munication between the teachers and the researcher-facilitator.

8. The difficulties in the teachers’ action-research

The experimental group during the action-re-search had to face their general doubts for theeffectiveness of the action-research as an educa-tional process and also some specific difficultiesrelated to their working place and their workingfield. Their reservations for the implementation ofthe action-research mainly derived from the tradi-tional educational model and the hierarchical school

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–11121108

structure, which reacts against the implementationof innovations regardless of their content. Theteacher’s traditional role as an arbiter of knowledgeand a class leader conflicts with the democraticphilosophy of the action-research. The educationalsystem with its bureaucratic, exam-centered struc-ture and its inflexibility in strictly covering thecurriculum requirements, the limited school time,the lack of appropriate equipment and of pedago-gical means and, finally, the traditional andineffective training methods are the most frequentexternal deterrents that teachers meet when they areto conduct action-research.

Apart from the external deterrents, the teachers’inhibitions play a major role these usually derivefrom inertia caused by the creeping teachinghabit (Day, 1999), and from the fear for anyoneto doubt their work and their professional author-ity. Another additional factor that significantlyaffects the teachers’ performance and impedesthe implementation of educational innovations,such as action-research, is the policy followed atthe school they work (Van den Berg, 2002).Especially when this policy is opposite, or at leastindifferent, to the teachers’ taking initiatives, thenegative atmosphere and the emotional conflictscreated to the teachers cannot but impoverish theirefforts.

The experimental group in the present researchapart from the above general difficulties in theimplementation of the action-research had toconfront a series of additional difficulties relatedto the special features of the minority education andthe way the latter is accommodated in the Greekeducational system. These special features are thedouble curriculum (Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking) in the minority schools, the differentmother tongue between the teacher and his/herpupils, the curriculum content, the lack of equip-ment standards and, finally, the prejudices andstereotypes stemming from the beliefs of both themajority and the minority population. In additionto these problems, there are also some obstacles thatthe teachers in minority schools meet specifically inThrace. These obstacles stem from the frequentlytensed relationships between the Greek majorityand the Turkish minority, which influences therelationships between the teachers from the major-ity and the students, parents and teachers from theminority.

All the above obstacles impeded to an extentthe process of the action-research of the experi-

mental group. However, despite the difficulties,the group did not stop performing the action-research but also benefited from the obstaclesdetected both in the observations and the reflectivethinking and developed new strategies in order toovercome them.

9. Analyzing the findings of the research

Judging from the content analysis in the inter-views and from the participant observation in theclasses of the nine teachers, significant changes bothin the ways teachers perceive their role in theminority education and in the ways they are dealingwith ethnic and cultural differences in their classesoccurred. Thus, prior feelings of frustration anddisappointment from their work in the minorityschools, that were dominant in the first interviews ofthe experimental group, were not expressed in thefinal interviews. In these interviews the teachersexpressed positive feelings for their job in theminority education and for their responsibilityfor their pupils’ school progress and for theirminority pupils’ social inclusion. A member of theexperimental group said in her final interview: ‘‘I

wanted to leave this school. I was disappointed. I was

saying to myself that I am not a teacher any more, I

was thinking that whatever I was offering I had to

take it back, but it does not go like this. Soon after I

realized that in this school I am a teacher more than

anywhere else’’. One of her colleagues of the samegroup underlines: ‘‘My relationship with the kids is

now very good. It is a warm relationship’’. Thesame teacher in the interview before the action-research was placing emphasis on the difficultiesshe was encountering with the minority pupils inunderstanding and in cooperation. Finally, thethird teacher of the experimental group, whowas very much disappointed in her first interviewby her job due to her pupils’ learning difficulties,claimed in her final interview: ‘‘Despite the big

problems, the very big problems that some kids have,

their mind does not differ at all from the other kids’ in

the world [y] I do whatever I can to help them go

on to high shcool, to help them study and find a

good job’’.

Opposite to the above, the teachers of the firstcontrol group, who participated in the trainingwithout being engaged in any action-research,continued to insist that parameters outside schooldetermine their pupils’ school progress. Accord-ingly, the second control group, that had not

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112 1109

participated in the training programme, expressed asimilar view considering their pupils’ school failurea natural consequence of their ethnic and culturalidentity. ‘‘These kids that are to go on to further

education will go on, these that are to stop, will stop’’

says a teacher from the first control group in his lastinterview, while one of his colleagues in the secondcontrol group underlines: ‘We have Turks and

Pomaks and Roma. The Pomaks and the Roma are

the cleverest and they will go on’’.

The minority identity remains for the teachers ofthe control groups a defective identity that is onlyaccepted when it is identified with the dominantidentity. Thus, a teacher of the second control groupexpresses positive comments for the minoritymembers that participated in the majority’s ethnicfestivals: ‘‘Even their way of thinking has changed.

When we had school festivals here eight or nine years

ago the parents did not even set their foot in them but

this year so many had come that we did not know

where to place them.’’

On the other hand, the teachers of the experi-mental group in their final interviews accepted theirpupils’ different ethnic and religious identity. ‘‘We

talk about religions often; about all religions. I want

them to realize how all religions look alike’’ says ateacher of the experimental group in her finalinterview. In the same interview another memberof the experimental group claims: ‘‘I do not care

whether they are Turks, Pomaks or Roma. I only care

about their learning.’’

The acceptance or disapproval of their pupils’different ethnic identity was reflected on theteachers’ attitude towards the use of their pupils’mother tongue in class. The interviews with theteachers and the observation of their teachingshowed that only the teachers who had not at allparticipated in the training, namely the secondcontrol group, remained inflexible in their attitudeto forbid the use of mother tongue in class. Thereasons they mentioned were mainly ethnic, whilethey falsely maintained (Cummins, 1997) that theprohibition of the use of mother tongue facilitatesstudents to learn the Greek language better. The restteachers in their final interviews described anattitude of embracing the use of mother tongueduring class, that was also evident in the classroomparticipant observation.

‘‘When they speak Turkish in class? No problem

[y] I am not bothered at all’’. This is an answerfrom a member of the experimental group in herfinal interview regarding the use of mother tongue

of her pupils in the classroom. In her first interviewthe same person had claimed: ‘‘They speak Turkish

to me but I do not reply. How will they learn Greek?

Sometimes I scold them. I do not allow them to speak

Turkish in class. They speak Turkish outside all the

time’’. The difference between her earlier and finalbelief is obvious and highlights the ideologicalchanges that have taken place. In contrast, theteachers of the second control group in bothinterviews insisted: ‘‘I do not allow Turkish in class.

Most kids speak Turkish at home and outside in the

street. They should speak Greek. This is the dominant

language they want to learn, isn’t it?’’

In their first interviews all nine teachers hadsystematically transited the responsibility for theirpupils’ school failure to their family environment.In the final interviews, though, both the experi-mental and the first control group seemed moresympathetic to the parents’ attitude especiallytaking into consideration of their difficult lifeconditions. Moreover, the experimental groupin their final interviews described some initialefforts to cooperate with their pupils’ parents, incontrast to the final interviews of the controlgroups. ‘‘I let the parents know about the project

we were doing and I also asked for their help, most of

them cooperated’’ says a teacher of the experimentalgroup in her final interview, while anotherone stresses: ‘‘The parents want to help, but they

have big problems, financial ones, which we cannot

ignore’’. In contrast, the teachers of the secondcontrol group blamed their pupils’ family environ-ment for the bad school performance and the lowlevel in the Greek language competence. One of theteachers of the control group said in his finalinterview: ‘‘The parents do not care. They only care

whether they will sell their tobacco. They go to the

fields and leave the older brothers to look after the

younger’’. As Frangoudaki and Askouni (1999)stated that, the teachers in minority schools sharethe belief that the minority parents have negativeattitude towards the Greek language and thisattitude accounts for the pupils’ low school perfor-mance.

The participant observation revealed a series ofchanges in the teachers’ teaching approach and intheir communication with their students. The maindifferences occurred to the experimental group onceagain. This group in the final observation tried andachieved to a great extent to make their teachingmore attractive and interesting for their pupils,taking advantage of the active learning techniques.

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–11121110

Thus, in the final observation the teachers of theexperimental group used the techniques such asexperiential learning, group discussion and role playfrequently. These techniques had not been used atall during the first observation, where the teacher’smonologue occupied most of the time.

In contrast to the first observations where allteachers showed discriminations against pupils onthe grounds of their ethnic background and theirschool performance, the experimental group did nothold the same attitude in the final observation.These teachers used friendly and encouragingattitude for all their pupils calling them most ofthe times with their first name, while they alsocreated a much warmer and communicative atmo-sphere between themselves and their pupils than theone noticed in the first observation. Slight changeswere also observed in the first control group. Theseteachers appeared to be more democratic and open-minded than in the first observation. They used afriendlier verbal and non-verbal communication,they awarded their efforts more frequently, theyapproached each pupil individually and they usedless orders. However, their overall teaching ap-proach remained traditional and teacher-centered,something that weakened the pupils’ interest in thelesson.

Finally, when comparing the results from the firstand the final observation of the second controlgroup, one cannot identify any differences in any ofthe basic observation axes. All three teachers in thisgroup, who neither participated in the training norwere engaged in any type action-research, continuedto discriminate against their pupils on the groundsof their ethnic origin and their school performanceand continued to use a negative body language anda negative non-verbal communication code ingeneral. They also continued to attribute theresponsibility for the minority education problemsto the minority parents and teachers and, mainly,continued to use a teaching approach, where theteacher’s monolog, the rules and the orders for theirpupils and in general the preservation of mutualincomprehension and indifference were its mostcharacteristic features.

10. Conclusions

The changes in the beliefs and attitudes of theexperimental group that was engaged in action-research can be classified into two categories. Thefirst category includes changes related to the

teachers’ professional role and the effectiveness oftheir pedagogical work, such as the feelings ofinsufficiency from their work and dissatisfactionfrom their relationship with their minority pupilsand their parents and the adoption of mainlystudent-centered and collaborative teaching models.The second category includes the changes in theteachers’ ideological beliefs which are relatedto their general accommodation of otherness.Thus, the experimental group at the end of boththe training and the action-research emphasizedon the pedagogical and social benefit fromembracing the ethnically and culturally differentpupils, approved the use of their pupils’ mothertongue in the classroom, took advantage of activelearning and tried to create a trusting and colla-borative atmosphere for an effective educationalprocedure.

The present research and the study of theteachers’ changed attitude showed that among themajor factors that have influenced the abovechanges are: the general ideological attitude ateacher has, the tension that stems from theprevious negative feelings relevant to the effective-ness of his/her work on his/her students’ schoolperformance, the effective use of reflective thinkingas a general tool in their personal and professionaldecisions, the flexibility, the insistence and thestrong desire to be involved and improve theireducational role, the school atmosphere and thepositive or negative attitudes from their colleagues.As Lauriala (1998) contends, factors like the abovedetermine the extent of change in the beliefsand attitudes that the training courses bring to theteachers.

Apart from the different extent of changes theresearch showed that all three teachers of theexperimental group who benefited from the action-research methodology gradually developed a type of‘‘hermeneutical approach’’ (Carr & Kemmis, 1998)to their work in the classroom. Comparing theirprevious and their new teaching experience theywidened their teaching to include new ways oftreating the cultural differences and the other typesof Otherness in the school class where the values ofthe intercultural dimension in education would playa fundamental role. It is apparent that such anattitude for teachers, especially in the field ofintercultural and minority education, is a verydifficult task which necessitates long-lasting, well-supported and organized efforts (Dragonas, 2004;Inglessi, 1996).

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–1112 1111

These efforts should be concentrated, primarily,on the systematic analysis and the understanding ofthe phenomena of ethnocentrism and racism by theteachers. Secondly, the teachers should also becomefamiliar with the political and social processes whichproduce and preserve these phenomena in educationand generally. Successful analysis and comprehen-sion of these mechanisms can be achieved with theindividual or collective process and analysis of theteachers’ daily experiences. Action-research seemsto be the most appropriate mean for this. Theteachers, by learning to observe and analyze theirown dominant views, attitudes and practices, canbecome conscious of the discriminations and thestereotypical beliefs they frequently reproduce with-out realizing it. Gaining insight into their beliefs—this does not mean in any case that the beliefsare automatically weakened—will contribute sub-stantially to a broader attitude towards othernessand to the development of empathy as a principle intheir life.

References

Academy of Athens. (1995). The development of thrace. Athens:

Research Center of Greek Society.

Altrichter, H., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (1993). Teachers

investigate their work. An introduction to the methods of action

research. London: Routledge.

Avramovic, Z. (2001). The teacher who learns—reflections on

Serbian experience. In N. Terzis (Ed.), Teacher education in

the balkan countries (pp. 213–220). Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis

Bros.

Ball, J. (1993). Self-doubt and soft data: Social and

technical trajectories in ethnographic fieldwork. In M.

Hammersley (Ed.), Educational research: Current issues (pp.

32–48). London: The Open University and Paul Chapman

Publishing.

Banks, J. (2002). An introduction to multicultural education.

Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bender-Szymanski, D. (2000). Learning through cultural conflict?

A longitudinal analysis of German teachers’ strategies for

coping with cultural diversity at school. European Journal of

Teachers Education, 23(3), 229–250.

Boyle-Baise, M. (2002). Multicultural service learning. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1998). Becoming critical. education,

knowledge and action research. London: Taylor & Francis.

Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education.

London: Routledge.

Cummins, J. (1997). Negotiating identities. Education for empow-

erment in a diverse society. Athens: Gutenberg.

Dash, D. (1999). Current debates in action research. Systemic

Practice and Action Research, 12(5), 457–492.

Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers. The challenges of lifelong

learning. London: Falmer Press.

De Valk, J. (2003). Teacher training from an intercultural

perspective. In C. Del, et al. (Eds.), Intercultural education:

A present day challenge for Europe (pp. 273–282). Madrid:

Comunidad de Madrid.

Dragonas, T. (2004). Negotiation of identities: The Muslim

minority in western thrace. New perspectives on Turkey, 30,

1–24.

Dragonas, Th., Androussou, A., Petroyiannis, K., & Inglessi, Ch.

(1999). Evaluation d’ une formation sur le terrain dans le

domaine de l’ education interculturelle. Carrefours de l’

education, 8, 56–83.

Foldy, E. G. (2005). Claiming a voice on race. Action Research,

3(1), 33–54.

Frangoudaki, A., & Askouni, N. (1999). The teachers of minority

schools. Unpublished report. Athens: The Project of Muslim

Minority Education.

Grougeon, E., & Woods, P. (1990). Educating all. Multiculture

perspectives in the primary school. London: Routledge.

Hebel, M. (1998). Value systems—A way to greater under-

standing. Systematic Practice and Action Research, 11(4),

381–402.

Inglessi, C. (1996). And then she sang a Turkish song: In-service

teachers’ training on intercultural education. In T. Dragonas,

A. Frangoudaki, & C. Inglessi (Eds.), Beyond one’s own

backyard: Intercultural teacher education in Europe (pp.

189–202). Athens: Nissos.

Inglessi, C. (2004). Doing work with immigrants: The implica-

tions of self-reflexivity on caring professionals. In C. Inglessi,

A. Lyberaki, H. Vermeulen, & G. Wijngaarden (Eds.),

Immigration and integration in Northern versus Southern

Europe (pp. 25–32). Athens: Netherlands Institute in

Athens.

Judah, M., & Richardson, G. (2006). Between a rock and a (very)

hard place. The ambiguous promise of action research in the

context of state mandated teacher professional development.

Action Research, 4(1), 65–80.

Kemmis, S. (1993). Action research. In M. Hammersley (Ed.),

Educational research. Current issues (pp. 177–190). London:

Paul Chapman and Open University.

Lauriala, A. (1998). Reformative in service education for teachers

as a collaborative action and learning enterprise: Experiences

from a finnish contex. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1),

53–66.

Le Roux, J. (2001). Effective teacher training for multicultural

teaching. Multicultural Teaching, 19(2), 18–22.

McNiff, J. (2001). Teaching as learning. An action research

approach. London: Routledge.

McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (2004). You and your

action research project (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.

Midgley, G. (1992). The sacred and profane in critical systems

thinking. Systematic Practice and Action Research, 5(1), 5–16.

Mishler, E. (1991). Research interviewing. London: Harvard

Uninversity Press.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods.

London: Sage.

Penny, A. J., & Harley, K. (1995). Broadening the experiences of

teachers-in-training: A South African study. Journal of

Education for Teaching, 20(2), 163–175.

Sedano, A. M. (2002). Towards intercultural education: Ap-

proaches and models. In C. Del, et al. (Eds.), Intercultural

education: A present day challenge for Europe (pp. 233–238).

Madrid: Comunidad de Madrid.

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Magos / Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (2007) 1102–11121112

Sfyroera, M. (1998). The everyday reality of minority schools.

Unpublished report. Athens: The Project of Muslim Minority

Education.

Van den Berg, R. (2002). Teachers’ meanings regarding educa-

tional practice. Review of Educational Research, 22(4),

577–625.

Woods, P. (1995). Inside schools. Ethnography in education

research. London: Routledge.

Wright, C. (1992). Early education: Multiracial primary school

classrooms. In D. Gill, B. Mayor, & M. Blair (Eds.), Racism

and education. Structures and strategies (pp. 5–41). London:

Sage.