Int. J. Intercultural Rel. Vol. 20. No. 314, pp.

323 -339, 1996

Copyright @ 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0147-1767/96 $15.00 + 0.00

SO147-1767(9@00022-3

EFFECTIVENESS OF SCHOOLS WITH A MIXED STUDENT

BODY OF NATIVES AND IMMIGRANTS

YISRAEL RICH, RACHEL BEN ARI, YEHUDA AMIR

and LIAT ELIASSY

Bar-Ilan University, Israel

ABSTRACT. Nine junior high and 29 elementary schools with significant

numbers of students who recently immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet
Union were investigated to determine the characteristics of schools that effectively
facilitate the social integration of immigrant children. Immigrant and native
students and their teachers responded to a series of questionnaires, and interviews
were conducted with school principals. Results indicated that, based on student
responses, effective and ineflective schools for immigrant students could be clearly
distinguished. However, most truditional indicators of school effectiveness did not
dtxer in the two types of schools. We found that the characteristics of effective
schools for immigrant children were: the elementary (grades 1-8) rather than
junior high (grades 779) structure; immediate rather than delayed integration in
the homeroom; and the appointment of an appropriate school oficial responsiblefor
the welfare of immigrant students. The importance of contextual factors in the
study of schooling for immigrant children is discussed. Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier
Science Ltd.

Observations of schools that educate mixed groups of native and

immigrant students indicate that, similar to their counterparts with more
homogeneous populations, some seem to be much more effective than
others. Although a great deal of research has been conducted over the last
two decades investigating characteristics of effective schools (e.g., Fuller
& Clark, 1994; Reynolds & Cuttance, 1992; Teddlie & Springfield, 1993)
very little of this work has related to schools with many immigrant
children or to those with large contingents of both culturally main-
stream and minority children. Indeed, a recent comprehensive chapter by
prominent school effectiveness researchers (Levin & Lezotte, 1995) in the
Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education, devotes very little
space to this topic. In this paper, we begin to investigate this issue by

Requests for reprints should be sent to Yisrael Rich, School of Education, Bar-Ilan Univer-
sity, Ramat Gan, Israel, or via Bitnet, F45432BBARILAN.

323
324 Y. Rich et al.

examining Israeli schools that have registered significant numbers of

children immigrating from the former Soviet Union alongside native
Israeli students.
Israel is a nation that has experienced several waves of immigration in
its almost 50 years of history, but the recent immigration from the former
Soviet Union is certainly one of the largest. From 1989 to 1994 over half a
million people arrived, increasing the nation’s population by about 10%.
School ranks have also swelled, and the large influx of new students has
caused budgetary and personnel strains in the school system.
More important, however, are the difficulties caused by immigration for
the school success of young people. Clearly, the quality of newcomers’
integration in school life has a major influence on their overall adjustment
to their new home as has been documented in a retrospective study of
veteran immigrants who arrived in Israel as children 40 years ago (Noy,
1993). Furthermore, immigrant students’ school adjustment has important
effects on the functioning of all family members and their evaluation of
their new situation.
Problems accompanying immigrant students’ entry into the Israeli
school system have been documented in recent years. Most children
emigrating from the Soviet Union, even if they attended good schools,
must cope with gaps in their education relative to native students. These
are caused by objective problems of discontinuity associated with immi-
gration, such as language problems, lack of curriculum articulation and
poor school attendance prior to and just after immigration. There are
also academic problems related to cultural incongruity (see Tharp &
Gallimore, 1989). Most young immigrants from Eastern Europe lack even
the most rudimentary knowledge of Israeli and Jewish facts and customs.
The contents of culturally saturated school topics such as literature,
history, geography and civics in their new country differ dramatically
from what they had previously learned. In most cases, however, the
academic gap in the major school subjects between natives and immi-
grants from the former Soviet Union narrows significantly so that, within
3 years of arrival, there is a relative parity between the two groups
(Ministry of Education, 1994).
Social problems of many immigrant students are not resolved so
quickly. This is not surprising since these children begin their Israeli
school career as outsiders and their culturally based social customs
including dress, language and friendship patterns differ greatly from those
of native Israeli children. Thus, we find, in a recent survey, that 40% of
students from the former Soviet Union still felt like outsiders even 3 years
after immigration (Ministry of Education, 1994). Several other studies
have independently confirmed a strong sense of social isolation among
these students (Amir, Ben Ari, Kedem & Rich, 1995; Tatar, Kfir, Sever,
Adler & Regev, 1994; Venger & Kozulin, 1993). The primacy of social
 Effectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 325

problems for immigrant students is not surprising because schools, at least

at the secondary level, place much more emphasis on academic progress
than on social integration as a goal for these children (Ortolengi, 1992).
Research has shown that this adverse social situation weighs on the minds
of many immigrant children and has negative effects on their general well-
being (Venger & Kozulin, 1993).
As noted above, however, some schools with a mixed native-immi-
grant student body seem to be much more successful than others in their
treatment of immigrant children. What makes them more successful? Do
they have particular characteristics that can inform us regarding the
design of appropriate educational programs? Two points related to
research on effective schools are relevant here. First, there has been
virtually no research on correlates of effective schools for mixed native-
immigrant student populations (Levin & Lezotte, 1995; Reynolds &
Packer, 1992). Second, we know far more about components of effective
schools for academic goals than for social goals. Yet, it is clear that social
goals are of special importance when considering immigrant students.
Thus, it is an open question whether those factors generally characterizing
an effective school for the academic functioning of relatively homo-
geneous student groups are also valid for accomplishing social goals for
immigrant children in a school with a heterogeneous student body.
To investigate this question, we examined the recent school effectiveness
and school improvement literature to generate relevant topics that should
be capable of distinguishing between effective and ineffective schools for
the education of immigrant children in mixed schools. The following
topics were chosen from this literature and were included in this research.
(1) Research during the last 15 years, confirms that teachers’ peda-
gogical attitudes and beliefs have an enormous influence on their behavior
and ultimately on student success (e.g., Kagan, 1992; Pajares, 1992). Of
particular importance here were the value that teachers’ attribute to
immigration, their attitudes toward the education of immigrant children
and their sense of efficacy (e.g., Smylie, 1990) for teaching these students.
(2) Many studies of school effectiveness, starting with Brookover,
Beady, Flood, Schweitzer & Wisenbaker (1979) have highlighted the
importance of a school-wide sense of commitment to student success. This
should manifest itself in a variety of ways such as the feeling, among staff
members, that the school invests the necessary efforts and resources to
provide positive educational experiences for immigrant students and in
the appointment of a school official who bears the responsibility of
coordinating activities for them.
(3) Research has also demonstrated that principals of effective schools
make sure that their faculty has the necessary resources to accomplish the
primary goals that the school has established (e.g., Levin & Lezotte,
1995). This should be evident in teachers’ opinions that the school is
326 Y. Rich et al.

properly organized to deal with immigrant students and that they have the
necessary tools to adequately educate these children.
(4) Many writers (e.g., Banks, 1993) emphasize that the quality of the
relationship between school personnel and low income, minority or
immigrant parents is of crucial importance for the education of their
children. The nature of the school-parent relationship should also be
apparent in teachers’ evaluations and in their comments on the difficulties
of educating immigrant students.
(5) The support of district and central administration officials is critical
to the school’s effectiveness (e.g., Bullard & Taylor, 1993). Not only do
they provide resources; they mandate a policy that favors good educa-
tional practices for immigrant students or that hinders them.
(6) A safe and orderly school environment is a critical component of an
effective school (Levin & Lezotte, 1995). This is especially true in schools
that are prone to student violence that occurs on a personal or group level.
(7) A large body of literature demonstrates that various tracking and
pullout schemes generally accomplish very little academically or socially
for students and may well be detrimental (e.g., Oakes, 1992). We expect
that effective schools for immigrant children will minimize pullout
programs, except when absolutely necessary.
(8) Stedman (1987), for example, argues that effective schooling for
linguistic minority children requires a certain sensitivity to the special
needs of these children, a sense of empathy for their special concerns. This
sensitivity should be apparent in the ways that school officials talk about
the education of immigrant students.
Our research strategy was to distinguish between effective and ineffect-
ive schools based on the responses of immigrant students to a series of
questionnaires that focused primarily, but not exclusively, on the social
aspects of school life. Differences between effective and ineffective schools
for the above topics were then examined by means of questionnaires
administered to teachers of immigrant children in mixed schools and in
structured interviews conducted with the principals of these schools.

METHOD

Sample’

A list of all elementary (grades l-6 or l-8) and junior high schools
(grades 7-9) throughout the country that served immigrant students was

‘The sample in this study is largely the same as in the Schwarzwald, Kedem and Fischer
study (this issue, pp. 427-440). Differences in numbers of schools and students arise from
somewhat different decisions made by the two sets of researchers regarding the elimination of
school populations.
 Effectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 327

solicited from the Ministry of Education. Two criteria for inclusion in the
sample were established: (1) to insure a significant number of immigrant
children in the school, at least 13% of the students in the relevant grade
levels (5 and 8) had to be newcomers from the former Soviet Union; and
(2) to eliminate very small schools, at least 50 children had to be registered
in relevant grade levels in elementary classes and at least 90 students in the
eighth grade of the junior high school. Sixty schools from the list met
these criteria; 50 were randomly chosen to serve in the sample and 10 were
set aside for a reserve group in case problems arose with the schools in the
sample. The number of schools participating in the final sample was
significantly reduced because, in some schools that met the criteria, a
major decline occurred in the percentage of immigrant children from the
time the sample was chosen (spring) until the research was executed
(fall and winter). In most cases, the decline was due to the relocation of
immigrant families during the summer months to more permanent hous-
ing arrangements. In the final analysis, there were 29 elementary schools
and nine junior high schools that met the criteria for inclusion.
Questionnaires were administered to all children in two randomly
chosen classes at each grade level (in one elementary school, only one class
participated). In addition, all other immigrant children from the former
Soviet Union in the fifth and eighth grades responded to the questionnaire.
In total, students in 57 fifth grade classes and 48 eighth grade classes
participated in the study. Thirty eighth grade classes were from elementary
schools, and 18 were from junior high schools. A group of 119 children
was eliminated from the analyses because they emigrated to Israel from the
Soviet Union at a very young age or because they immigrated from other
countries. The final tally of children taking part in the study was 2,290
natives (fifth grade = 1,277; eighth grade = 1,013) and 838 immigrants
(fifth grade = 374; eighth grade = 464) for a total of 3,128 students.
Teacher questionnaires were administered in each school to the teachers
of the participating classes who responded to them immediately. Approxi-
mately 15 other questionnaires were left in the school for distribution to
other teachers of immigrant students. Each form was placed in a stamped
envelope addressed to the university to assure anonymity. A total of 363
teachers from 38 schools (no forms were received from one school)
returned the questionnaires, about a 60% return rate. On average they
were 38 years old, had 13 years of teaching experience and 4 years of
educational experience with immigrant students. Their academic creden-
tials were similar to those of Israeli teachers in general; approximately
one-third completed a BA or graduate degree and most of the remainder
were certified by the Ministry of Education.
A structured interview was conducted in each of the schools. Inter-
viewees were 36 principals, one assistant principal and two school
coordinators for immigrant students.
328 Y. Rich et al.

Instrumentation
Questionnaires were adapted from self-esteem and climate inventories
that have been employed in earlier Israeli research (e.g., Ben Ari, 1982;
Eitan, Amir & Rich, 1992). In addition, several measures, drawn from
pilot interviews with educators of immigrant students, were developed
especially for this research.

Student Measures
(1) Self perceptions:
(a) In the social domain (five items; alpha immigrants = .77,
natives = .84; range = 1~ 4; sample item - “This child plays with
friends during recess”).
(b) In the academic domain (seven items; alpha immigrants = .8 1,
natives = .86; range = I- 4; sample item - “This child is capable in
his studies”).
(2) Feelings toward:
(a) Class (two items; alpha immigrants = .79, natives = .80;
range = 1- 4; sample item - “This child enjoys being in the class”).
(b) School (two items; alpha immigrants = .80, natives = .83;
range = 1- 4; sample item - “This child likes to come to school”).
(3) School motivation (three items; alpha immigrants = .70, natives =
.73; range = 1- 4; sample item - “This child wants very much to
succeed in his studies”).
(4) Perceptions of class climate:
(a) Social unity (three items; alpha immigrants = .60, natives =
.68; range = l-6; sample item - “You can depend on the children
in class to help one another when necessary”).
(b) Social belongingness to the class (five items; alpha immi-
grants = .84, natives = .88; range = 1- 6; sample item - “Children
in my class care how I feel”).
(5) Perceptions of teacher support:
(a) In the academic domain (six items, alpha immigrants = .84,
natives = .86; range = I- 6; sample item- “I think that my
teachers are always willing to help me in my studies”).
(b) In the social domain (three items; alpha immigrants = .74,
natives = .75; range = 1- 6; sample item - “My teachers encour-
age me to participate in class social activities”).
(6) Perceptions of teacher concern for immigrant student’s school
success (three items; alpha immigrants = .77, natives = .78;
range = l- 6; sample item- “My teachers care that newcomers
from the Soviet Union feel good in class over time”).
(7) Three additional social items that did not form an adequate factor
were included (“Children in our class like the newcomers from the
 Eflectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 329

Soviet Union”, range = 1- 6; “How well have the newcomers from

the Soviet Union become part of the class?“, range = 1- 5; “To
what extent do newcomers from the Soviet Union participate in
class social activities [hikes, parties, ceremonies, performances]?“,
range = 1- 5).

Teacher Measures

(1) Attitudes of staff toward schooling of immigrants (four items;

alpha = .75; range = I- 5; sample item on Likert scale-“high
level of caring” to “indifference “).
(2) Attitudes toward immigration (six items; alpha = .72; range = 1- 6;
sample item ~ “The wave of immigration from the former Soviet
Union is very important to the State of Israel”).
(3) Sense of efficacy in heterogeneous native-immigrant classes (seven
items, alpha = .67; range= 1- 6; sample item- “When an immi-
grant child has difficulty with an academic task, I can usually adapt
it to his needs”).
(4) Evaluation of school efforts for newcomers (two items;
alpha = .72; range = 1- 5; sample item- “To what extent does
your school invest efforts in the social absorption of immigrant
students?“).
(5) Teacher relations with immigrant parents (two items; alpha = .76;
range = 1- 5; sample item-“How well do immigrant parents
cooperate with the school?“).
(6) Satisfaction with school treatment of immigrants (two items;
alpha = .77; range = 1- 5; sample item -“How satisfied are you
with the way your school treats immigrant children in the academic
domain?“).
(7) Quality of school organization for newcomers (three items;
alpha = .86; range = 1- 5; sample item on Likert scale-from
“very well organized” to “poorly organized”).
(8) Evaluation of social integration of newcomers to class (one item;
range = l- 5; “How well have the immigrant children been inte-
grated with other students in the school?“).

Interview

A structured interview schedule was developed to obtain objective

information from the school and to understand how senior school officials
view the problems related to educating immigrant children. We also
aimed to uncover the organizational and pedagogical steps they have
taken or that they believe are needed to overcome these problems. Issues
raised in the interview were based on information gathered during the
330 Y. Rich et al.

pilot interviews and from earlier Israeli research with immigrant students.
Objective information included items such as the percent of immigrant
students in the school, whether there is a school official responsible for
them, the number of hours of special tutoring, etc. Qualitative informa-
tion comprised issues such as school policy regarding the class placement
and pullout of newcomers, characteristic problems related to immigrant
students that teachers must cope with, the nature of support from
central administration, social relations between native children and
newcomers, etc.

Procedure

Pilot interviews were conducted with several school principals and

other educators. These served as the basis for the final interview schedule
and for developing special teacher and student measures related to the
education of immigrant children. Student questionnaires were translated
to Russian by a psychologist and backtranslated. The Hebrew and
Russian versions were initially administered to pupils in four elementary
schools. Based on responses received, several content and format changes
were made. After being granted permission by the Ministry of Education
to enter the schools, a research team of four to six persons visited each
school. One or two members interviewed the principal for 60-90 min and
wrote a protocol according to the questions on the schedule. The other
members administered the questionnaire in the preselected classrooms.
One researcher in contact with the students was fluent in Russian.
Immigrant children were given the option of responding to a Russian or a
Hebrew version of the questionnaire. While the students answered their
questionnaire, their teachers responded to the teacher measures. Addi-
tional teacher forms, each placed in an envelope addressed to the
university, were left with the school administration for distribution to
other teachers of immigrant students.

RESULTS

Our first task was to distinguish between effective and ineffective

schools according to the responses of immigrant students. Observation of
the cell means of student respondents indicated that scores of fifth-grade
children were considerably higher than those of eighth-graders on 12 of
the 13 measures (minimum F = 16.55, df = 1, 1909; p < .OOOl). Accord-
ingly, we decided to classify schools as effective and as ineffective for fifth
and eighth grades separately.
At each grade level, student scores were classified into four categories:
according to native or immigrant respondents and whether the items in
the measure referred directly to immigrants (student measures nos 6 and 7
 Effectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 331

above) or they requested personal opinions or information not directly

related to immigration (student measures nos l-5 above). Responses to
the measures were transformed into standard scores and averaged
yielding four indices of student reactions at each grade level: newcomers
and natives for general questions and for those related directly to
immigrants. Since this study focused primarily on the perceptions of
immigrant students, effective and ineffective schools were determined by
their responses only.
Examination of the scores led us to define the six most positive schools
as effective and the six most negative as ineffective. This was accomplished
separately for fifth- and eighth graders. The total number of fifth-grade
schools was 29, and there were 24 schools of eighth-graders. The cut-off
point was determined at six schools for each grade level, because within
this group, all immigrant indices were positive for the six effective schools,
whereas they were all negative for the ineffective schools.
Table 1 presents the simple means and standard deviations for immi-
grant student responses for each of the student measures at the fifth and
eighth grades. These scores were subjected to separate MANOVAs for
fifth- and eighth-graders. Using the Wilks criterion, the MANOVA,
yielded significant results for fifth-graders, Wilks = .69, F( 13, 139) = 4.72!
p < .OOl. Univariate analyses (df = 1,151), following the MANOVA
indicated significant differences favoring effective schools for all but one
of the student measures. F-values ranged from 5.11 (p < .03) to 40.81
(p < .OOl).
Results for eighth-graders were similar. The MANOVA yielded
significant results [Wilks = .83, F( 13,220) = 3.49, p < .OOl] favoring
students in effective schools as did eight of the 13 univariate analyses
that followed. F-values ranged from 9.06 (p < .Ol) to 24.21 (p < ,001).
Student measures that did not reach significance for eigth-graders were:
self perceptions in the academic and the social domains, school motiva-
tion, and two social items, one of which favored ineffective schools.
These results allow us to affirm that, overall, immigrant students in
schools defined as effective indeed perceived their classes and their schools
more positively as compared to their counterparts in schools character-
ized as ineffective.
Scores on the teacher measures were then examined to determine
whether their views on school life for immigrant students differed in
effective and ineffective schools. Table 2 presents the simple means and
standard deviations for teacher scores at each grade level for effective and
ineffective schools.
Two separate MANOVA tests were conducted on the teacher scores for
fifth- and for eighth grades yielding non-significant results. The Wilks
criterion for fifth-grade teachers was .93 (p = .40) and for eighth grade
teachers it was .84 (p = .15). Teacher scores in effective and ineffective
332 Y. Rich et al.

TABLE 1

Means and SDS (in brackets) for Student Measures in Fifth- and Eighth-Grades of
“Successful” and “Unsuccessful” Schools

Fifth grade Eighth grade

Successful Unsuccessful Successful Unsuccessful

Measures (N = 76- 79) (N = 84-87) (N = 81-82) (N = 158- 159)

Self-perception 3.26, 2.93b 2.78, 2.72,

-social (58) (.71) (.64) (60)
Self-perception 3.25, 3.OOb 2.92, 2.88,
-academic (54) (63) (.56) (54)
Feelings towards class 3.53, 3.02b 2.84, 2.38r,
(62) (66) (.87) (91)
Feelings towards 3.28, 2.99b 2.84, 2.42,
school (.82) (80) (.91) (92)
School motivation 3.70, 3.34b 3.49, 3.39,
(.47) (.73) (.59) (64)
School unity 4.79, 3.98b 4.13, 3.66b
(90) (.98) (1.06) (1.14)
Social belongingness 4.63, 3.80b 3.50, 3.05b
(1.11) (1.20) (1.07) (1.13)
Teacher support 5.18, 4.32b 4.44, 3.811,
-academic (.73) (1.01) (83) (1.07)
Teacher support 5.04, 4.07b 4.31, 3.601,
-social (.99) (1.14) (97) (1.20)
Teacher concern 5.39, 4.43b 4.61, 3.92b
-immigrant success (.81) (1.22) (.98) (1.20)
Children like 4.00, 2.89b 3.20, 2.49b
newcomers (1.58) (1.57) (1.37) (1.20)
Participate in social 3.79, 3.20b 3.26, 3.13,
activities (.85) (1.12) (96) (1.06)
Social part of class 2.39, 2.84,, 3.05, 3.42,
(92) (1.04) (93) (88)

Means in the same row, in the fifth and eighth grades, respectively, that do not share the
same subscripts differ at p < .05.

schools were also subjected to t-tests for each variable in the fifth- and
eighth-grades respectively. Of the eight fifth grade comparisons, only one
reached significance 0, < .Ol) as was the case for the eighth-grade
comparisons. These results indicate that the teachers in the effective and
ineffective schools do not differ significantly, at least with regard to their
reports on the topics examined here.
In the search for characteristics differentiating between effective and
ineffective schools in the eyes of immigrant students, we analyzed the
protocols of the interviews conducted with the principals of the effective
and ineffective schools. These were examined for distinctive patterns that
 Effectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 333

TABLE 2

Means and SDS (In Brackets) for leacher Measures in Fifth- and Eighth-Grades of
“Successful” and “Unsuccessful” Schools

Fifth grade Eighth grade

Successful Unsuccessful Successful Unsuccessful

Measures (N = 55-58) (N = 77-79) (N = 36-37) (N = 43-46)

Staff attitudes to 4.00, 3.75b 3.86, 3.79,

educating immigrants (73) (66) (81) (.78)
Staff attitudes towards 4.70, 4.80, 4.63, 4.57,
immigration (61) (64) (66) (86)
Efficacy in heterogeneous 4.45, 4.35, 4.42, 4.03b
class (.56) (.61) (63) (59)
School efforts for 3.67, 3.72, 3.78, 3.51,
newcomers (.84) (.99) (95) (77)
Relation with parents 3.66, 3.22, 3.18, 2.79,
(.95) (.91) (96) (1.04)
Satisfaction with school 3.66, 3.61, 3.55, 3.32,
treatment of newcomers (.65) (.93) (64) (72)
Quality of school 3.82, 3.67, 3.80, 3.53,
organization for (.79) (96) (71) (.72)
immigrant students
Evaluation of social 3.55, 3.35, 3.19, 2.91,
integration (77) (.72) (67) VW

Means in the same row, in the fifth- and eighth grades, respectively, that do not share the
same subscripts differ at p < .05.

characterized one group of schools, but not the other. The following
features distinguished between effective and ineffective schools:
(1) All effective schools for eighth-graders followed the elementary
school structure of grades 1-8; five of the six ineffective schools were
junior high schools (grades 7-9).
(2) In the eighth grade, five of six effective schools integrated new-
comers immediately into the heterogeneous homeroom; five of six ineffec-
tive schools did so only after a few months of residence in Israel. The sixth
ineffective school practised individualized learning, so immediate
integration was not a critical issue because immigrants could continue
to be socially isolated from classmates, even while “fully integrated”.
Immediate integration was the norm for eighth-grade classes of
elementary schools whereas delayed integration was the norm for
eighth-grade classes in junior high schools.
(3) There was a tendency to provide more special tutorial work for
immigrant children in addition to the regular school program in effective
schools as compared to ineffective schools, especially for eighth-graders.
334 Y. Rich et al.

(4) Principals’ recommendations for improving the situation differed

somewhat in effective and ineffective schools. In the former, they were
frequently framed in personal, emotional tones (e.g., “You have to treat
them with your heart and soul”). In the latter, this rarely occurred.
(5) In most effective schools (nine out of 12), there was a staff member
appointed as “coordinator of newcomers” who was responsible for the
academic, social and personal welfare of immigrant students. This was an
individual with seniority in the school who did not have a heavy
administrative load. In most ineffective schools (eight out of 12), either no
one was appointed to this position, or the job was given to someone who
already had major administrative responsibilities.
Analysis of the interview protocols indicated no differences between
effective and ineffective schools for the following topics:
(1) The number and the percentage of immigrant students in the school
did not play a role in distinguishing between effective and ineffective
schools. In both categories, some schools had many newcomers, both
absolutely and relative to native children, while others had relatively few.
(2) The policy regarding the class placement of immigrant children was
similar in all schools. Care was taken to place small groups of newcomers
(three to six usually) in a class and to consider factors such as prior
friendships and gender.
(3) In the fifth grade of all effective and ineffective schools, immigrant
children were immediately integrated into the heterogeneous homeroom
class, and there was relatively little pullout for special programs or
tutoring (maximum of 3 hr weekly).
(4) Principals reported that teachers at both grade levels in all schools
faced very similar problems regarding educating immigrant children.
Chief among these were: lack of human and material resources; language
difficulties; little contact with parents; discipline problems; social isola-
tion; and spotty school attendance.
(5) Principals also reported that native children had to cope with a set of
common problems in light of having a number of immigrant children in
their class. These included jealousy, language difficulties, slowdown of
pace of learning in class, and reduced teacher attention.
In brief, the present results indicate that effective and ineffective schools
for immigrants were not distinguished by teacher attitudes or by the other
traditional indicators of effectiveness examined here. However, a sharp
difference was apparent for eighth-graders favoring children attending an
elementary school vs. those in a junior high school. Overlapping this
result was the finding that effective schools were characterized by imme-
diate integration in the homeroom rather than the delayed integration
practised in ineffective schools. Also, the appointment of a school official
with the time and authority necessary to attend to the welfare of
immigrant students characterized effective schools only.
 &f^ectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 335

DISCUSSION

Two issues raised by this research deserve special attention. First, how
shall we explain the striking differences in effectiveness between the
elementary and the junior high schools? Second, why were most well
documented indicators of effective schools incapable of distinguishing
between effective and ineffective schools for immigrant students?
Before examining the large and consistent differences in effectiveness
between elementary and junior high schools, we note that fifth-graders in
general provided more positive responses than did eighth-graders. These
differences are not surprising. A long line of research in Israel and
elsewhere has documented that the school-related attitudes of early teens
are more negative than are those of pre-teens (e.g., Darom & Rich, 1980;
Eccles & Midgley, 1989). Furthermore, recent research on young immi-
grants to Israel has also found more favorable school attitudes among
fifth- as compared to eighth-graders (Tatar et al., 1994). Thus, the finding
here and elsewhere, that student attitudes toward school decline with age
until high school, appears to be a robust developmental phenomenon for
both native and immigrant students.
Particularly intriguing is the unequivocal result that, among eighth-
grade classes, junior high schools disproportionately appeared in the
ineffective category for immigrant children, and none demonstrated
effectiveness. This important finding can be explained persuasively by the
“stage-environment fit” theory raised by Eccles and Midgley (1989). They
contend that, to foster optimal development, different educational
environments are needed for students at different stages of schooling.
They argue further that children at certain developmental stages,
including the pre-teen period, are exceptionally vulnerable to poor school
adjustment, especially when they experience unusual stress, such as a
significant transition in the life of the child (see Simmons & Blyth, 1987).
Undoubtedly, migration from one country to another represents a
significant transition and a stressful situation. Thus, immigrant students
whose transition leads them to a school with an appropriate environment
might ultimately benefit from the change. However, immigrant children
who arrive in a school with an inappropriate environment, will likely
develop negative attitudes and maladaptive behavior.
There is much evidence that the Israeli elementary school provides
a more appropriate educational environment for the socially and
emotionally vulnerable immigrant student than does the junior high
school. In most cases, the junior high school is linked physically and
administratively to the senior high school where a strong academic
orientation holds and influences the junior high school in a similar direc-
tion (Rich, Amir & Ben Ari, 1981). Matriculation exams are the primary
concern in the senior high school and proper academic preparation for the
336 Y. Rich et al.

next school stage is the primary concern in the junior high school. Social
goals of education are not central. As Ortolengi (1992) found in her
survey of responses of senior high school officials to the entry of
immigrant students, social goals of schooling are at the bottom of the
list.
The emphasis on academic aspects of schooling and the deemphasis of
social goals was a common feature of all ineffective junior high schools in
our sample. The relative emphases on academic as compared to social
goals in the junior high school also probably explains the finding that
junior high schools practised delayed integration of immigrant students in
the homeroom. This is likely the result of school officials’ desire to provide
immigrant students with some language proficiency as soon as possible to
enable them to cope with curricular demands, even at a minimal level. The
negative social implications of this practice were apparently not carefully
considered.
In contrast, the Israeli elementary school places much more emphasis
on social and emotional aspects of schooling in addition to the academic
domain. It is more child-centered, flexible and responsive to the needs of
individual students as compared to the junior high school (Ben Ari &
Shafir, 1988). Furthermore, the elementary school homeroom teacher
spends much more time with her class and gets to know her students far
better than does her counterpart in the junior high school. Accordingly,
the immigrant student who enters the eighth- (or seventh) grade of the
elementary school as compared to the junior high school, is likely to
experience a significantly more favorable fit between the educational and
socio-emotional environment and his or her personal needs. Thus, the
elementary school appears to be a far more effective environment for
immigrant students than is the junior high school.
We now turn to the second issue- why did relevant traditional
characteristics of effectiveness fail to distinguish between the two groups
of schools. A tentative answer to this question will be offered by focusing
on the contextual differences between this and most other studies of
school effectiveness. As several researchers (e.g., Reynolds & Packer,
1992; Wimpelberg, Teddlie & Stringfield, 1989) have noted, there may
not be a general set of characteristics that renders schools effective or
ineffective under all conditions. Rather, certain characteristics serve to
predispose schools toward or away from effectiveness, but the contextual
factors have a decisive impact on the quality of school functioning. Thus,
contextual issues ultimately determine levels of effectiveness.
This study differs contextually in at least two important ways from
most other research on school effectiveness. The first is the interest here in
social aspects of schooling rather than the usual emphasis on academic
achievement. Effectiveness for social outcomes very likely requires
different school characteristics than for academic progress (Rich, 1993).
 LTfectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 337

For example, school-parent partnerships have been shown to be very

important for children’s academic achievement (Banks, 1993) but there is
little reason to believe that they are important for developing positive
social relations between native and immigrant students unless the school
emphasizes the social domain of education. On the other hand, the quality
of the extracurricular program may be important for creating social
opportunities, especially for immigrant and minority children, but it is not
as critical for producing academic excellence (see Berk, 1992).
The second contextual issue that is different from most research on
school effectiveness relates to our focus on immigrant, rather than native
children. One might argue that the characteristics of effectiveness differ
for the two populations. However, examination of the topics drawn from
research on native students that were investigated here suggests that they
are important for immigrant students as well. Indeed, it is likely that
characteristics, such as “availability of resources” and “commitment to
student success”, are at least as important for immigrant as for native
students. This argument receives indirect support from the finding in this
study that schools defined as most effective or most ineffective for immi-
grant students were also relatively effective or ineffective for native
children. Thus, of the two contextual factors examined here, it is more
likely that the social-academic difference rather than the native-
immigrant issue accounts for the differing results in this and other school
effectiveness research.
It is noteworthy that some other studies using certain traditional
indicators of effectiveness have also failed to distinguish between effective
and ineffective schools (Brousseau, 1988; Levin & Lezotte, 1995). This is
due to the possibility that some characteristics investigated are facilitative
factors rather than decisive determinants directly responsible for effective-
ness. For example, a safe and orderly environment facilitates but cannot
insure effectiveness, because additional steps must be taken to realize
student progress. The same is true for the availability of resources. With-
out adequate resources, school effectiveness is unlikely, but a wealth of
school resources does not guarantee that they will be distributed properly
or used effectively.
Following the argument that contextual factors play a major role in
determining school effectiveness, it is prudent to be cautious in general-
izing the results found here to other immigrant populations in different
countries. Accordingly, we urge researchers in other cultural settings to
address the questions raised here due to their important implications. If
there is a convergence of results across cultural settings, further general-
ization may be warranted.
338 Y. Rich et al.

REFERENCES
AMIR, Y., BEN ARI, R., KEDEM, P., & RICH, Y. (1995). Absorption ofnew
studentsfrom theformer Soviet Union in the educational system. The Institute for
the Advancement of Social Integration in the Schools, Bar-Ban University,
Ramat Gan, Israel (Hebrew).
BANKS, C. (1993). Restructuring schools for equity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75,42-48.
BEN ARI, R. (1982). Satisfying interpersonal needs as a means to improve
interethnic relations in the mixed school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
BEN ARI, R., & SHAFIR, D. (1988). S ocial integration in elementary school.
Ramat Gan, Israel: Institute for the Advancement of Social Integration in the
Schools, Bar-Ban University.
BERK, L. (1992). The extracurriculum. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research
on curriculum (pp. 1002-1043). New York: Macmillan.
BROOKOVER, W., BEADY, C., FLOOD, P., SCHWEITZER, J., & WISEN-
BAKER, J. (1979). School social systems and student achievement: Schools can
make a dtjerence. New York: Praeger.
BROUSSEAU, B. (1988). A test ofjve correlates from eflective schools research
using hierarchical linear modeling. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, MI.
BULLARD, P., & TAYLOR, B. (1993). Making school reform happen. Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
DAROM, E., & RICH, Y. (1980). The development and validation of the Israeli
Quality of School Life scale. In J. Epstein (Ed.), The quality of school life
(pp. 179-195). New York: Lexington.
ECCLES, J., & MIDGLEY, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmentally
appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.),
Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 1399186). New York:
Academic Press.
EITAN, T., AMIR, Y., & RICH, Y. (1992). Social and academic treatments in
mixed-ethnic classes and change in student self-concept. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 62, 3644374.
FULLER, B., & CLARKE, P. (1994). Raising school effects while ignoring
culture? Local conditions and the influence of classroom tools, rules, and
pedagogy. Review of Educational Research, 64, 119- 157.
KAGAN, D. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational
Psychologist, 27, 65590.
LEVIN, D., & LEZOTTE, L. (1995). Effective schools research. In J. Banks &
C. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 5255547).
New York: Macmillan.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (1994). Immigrant students. Report to the
Pedagogical Secretariat, Jerusalem (Hebrew).
NOY, B. (1993). An effort to design the role of the school in absorbing new
students from Russia by means of memories from the European immigration in
the 50’s. The Educational Counselor, 3, 77- 103 (Hebrew).
OAKES, J. (1992). Can tracking research inform practice? Educational
Researcher, 21, 12-21.
 Effectiveness of Schools with Natives and Immigrants 339

ORTOLENGI, R. (1992). Absorption of immigrants in the upper level of secondary

schools. Unpublished manuscript (Hebrew).
PAJARES, M. (1992). Teacher beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a
messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307- 332.
REYNOLDS, D., & CUTTANCE, P. (Eds.) (1992). School efictiveness. London:
Cassell.
REYNOLDS, D., & PACKER, A. (1992). School effectiveness and school
improvement: The 1990’s. In D. Reynolds & P. Cuttance (Eds.), School
effectiveness (pp. 174- 187). London: Cassell.
RICH, Y. (1993). Education and instruction in the heterogeneous class. Springfield,
IL: Charles C. Thomas.
RICH, Y., AMIR, & BEN ARI, R. (1981). Social and emotional problems
associated with integration in the Israeli junior high school. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 5, 2599275.
SIMMONS, R., & BLYTH, D. (1987). Moving into adolescence: The impact of
pubertal change and school context. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
SMYLIE, M. (1990). Teacher efficacy at work. In P. Reyes (Ed.), Teachers and
their workplace (pp. 48.-66). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
STEDMAN, L. (1987). It’s time we changed the effective schools formula. Phi
Delta Kappan, 69, 2 155224.
TATAR, M., KFIR, D., SEVER, R., ADLER, C., & REGEV, C. (1994).
Integration of immigrant students into Israeli elementary and secondary schools.
School of Education, Hebrew University, Jerusalem (Hebrew).
TEDDLIE, C., & SPRINGFIELD, S. (1993). Schools make a dzfjterence. New
York: Teachers College Press.
THARP, R., & GALLIMORE, R. (1989). R ousing minds to life. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
VENGER, A., & KOZULIN, A. (1993). Educational and psychological problems
of children who recently immigrated to Israel from the USSR. The International
Center,for the Advancement of Learning Potential, 1, 6-7.
WIMPELBERG, R., TEDDLIE, C., & STRINGFIELD, S. (1989). Sensitivity to
context: The past and future of effective schools research. Educational Admin-
istration Quarterly, 25, 82- 107.