Creative Education
2012. Vol.3, Special Issue, 996-1005
Published Online October 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.326151
996
East Jerusalem Students’ Attitudes towards the Acquisition of
Hebrew as a Second or Foreign Language in the Arab Educational
System of East Jerusalem and Society’s Support
Salman Ilaiyan
Academic Arab College for Education in Israel, Haifa, Israel
Received August 14th, 2012; revised September 12th, 2012; accepted September 27th, 2012
This is a pioneering study examining the eighth grade students’ attitudes in the Arab Education System in
East Jerusalem towards learning Hebrew as a foreign/second language: their readiness to communicate in
it, and the extent of the community support to learning it. The study is based on Schuman’s (1978) social
theories regarding acquiring foreign/second language. The extent of the learner’s social integration in the
community of the foreign/second language determines the extent of his success in acquiring the language.
The study sample included 643 eighth grade students from East Jerusalem schools who are learning He-
brew as an elective subject. The study questionnaire included three parts: 1) Attitudes towards learning a
foreign/second language; 2) Readiness to communicate in a foreign/second language; 3) The social sup-
port. The study findings indicate statistically significant positive correlation between all the measures of
the following variables: 1) Attitudes towards a foreign/second language and readiness to communicate in
it; 2) Attitudes towards Hebrew as a school subject got a higher positive score than attitudes towards the
speakers of the language; 3) Family support (father/mother) got a higher positive score than the friends’
support, and this is following the instrumental issue. The main conclusion of the study is that there is a
need to formulate a systemic and unique work plan accompanied with an addition of suitable position and
budget to handle the problem of teaching Hebrew as a foreign/second language.
Keywords: Social Support; Language Acquisition; Foreign Language; Motivation; Family Support; Social
Support; Readiness to Communicate; Integration; Social Factors; Gender
East Jerusalem and the Status of Teaching
Hebrew
East Jerusalem has a population of about 863,900 inhabitants.
About 265,600 Palestinian Arabs with permanent residency
status comprising 1/3 of the city residents. This population is
characterized by life below the poverty line (over 50% of the
families), high unemployment rate, a high birthrate (4.5 chil-
dren in the family), a high divorce rate reaching 30% in some
neighborhoods, a high rate of illiteracy among parents, and
more (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2008).
The Arab population in the Palestinian East Jerusalem has a
unique legal status because, until 1967 they lived under the
Jordanian legal system. After the Six Day War, a change took
place: the civil society of the city was ruled by the Military
Directorate of the West Bank. Later, it was annexed and placed
under the municipal jurisdiction of the Jerusalem municipality.
Residents of East Jerusalem were awarded permanent residency
status and the Israeli law1 was applied on them (Vergen, 2006).
This situation affects the population in most aspects of life
and whenever a particular aspect was examined in the context
of the East Jerusalem Arab population, it demanded attention to
two areas:
1) The city’s position politically.
2) The status of the residents and how they see themselves.
The city of Jerusalem and the residency status of its popula-
tion was the focus of several studies. The city attracted so many
descriptions by the people who visited the Holy Land, the cen-
ter of attraction of the three religions. Many writers of travel
literature devoted to the Holy Land a considerable part of their
writing to describe the city and its population. Also spoken
Arabic in Jerusalem has been addressed and the Jerusalem dia-
lect of Arabic was covered in several studies2. In addition, in
Jerusalem Jews and Arabs lived for centuries, and it is natural
that the daily speech of the inhabitants was mutually influenced
by Arabic and Hebrew.
East Jerusalem education system includes about 100 schools,
half of which belong to the State Education System and the rest
are private schools. A small number of schools belong to the
Palestinian Authority (Eir Amim Association, 2005).
The dropout phenomenon is alarming and has reached 45%;
the percentage of eligible high school graduates for the Towjihi
(equivalent to the Bagrouth certificate in Israel) reaches only
20%. Construction of the separation wall in Jerusalem and
around it poses additional obstacles to access to education of
Palestinian children in Jerusalem (Eir Amim and the Associa-
tion for Civil Rights, 2010).
As a result of the Oslo agreements, the Jordanian law was
1The application of Israeli law on Jerusalem see Knesset Statements, 2006;
“B’Tselem”—The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the
Occupied Territories (Statistical Abstracts, 2003).
2The Spoken Arabic dialect of the city of Jerusalem was the focus of research;
see Levine, A. (1995). Grammar of Arab dialect of Jerusalem and bibliography
presented there, Jerusalem.

S. ILAIYAN
canceled, and Arab students in East Jerusalem adopted the Pal-
estinian plan (Vergen, Research and Information Center Report,
2006). This took place despite the enactment of a special law in
1969, which made these institutions subject to the Israeli super-
vision (Hassona, 1998).
Out of respect and understanding of the residents’ desire (and
perhaps the reality dictated this), the Israeli authorities and the
public schools of East Jerusalem from the Jordanian period
agreed to implement a learning method that would meet the
requirements of both parties—that is, government schools were
given the opportunity to continue to teach according to the Jor-
danian plan, and the students were allowed to take their exams
in it, but two subjects were added to the program without the
requirement of external examination: Hebrew Language and
Civics (Ilaiyan & Arayeda, 2008).
Following conversations with Soheila Abu Ghosh, Deputy
Director of the Arab sector and Municipal Commissioner of
Education in the education directorate of Jerusalem, we learned
that learning Hebrew in urban schools in the public school sys-
tem in East Jerusalem takes place from the third through the
eighth grades, but teaching Hebrew is negligible and is not
“equivalent in value and status” to the English language, and
therefore, Hebrew was not included in the Towjihi (Bagrouth)
examinations. Soheila noted that Hebrew is the second foreign
language, while English is the first.
Another aspect of reference that points out the not in-depth
treatment of Hebrew is that the subject teachers in the State
schools in East Jerusalem are mainly students lacking training
in teaching Hebrew. Most of them are graduates of different
subjects or students in higher education institutions in Jerusa-
lem. Most of these individuals come from the Arab sector in
Israel.
It is important to point out that Hebrew is an elective subject
in most public schools of East Jerusalem and the student is not
obligated to be tested in it. Private schools, which constitute
approximately 70% of all schools, hardly teach Hebrew (Has-
sona, 1998). In these schools, few students learn Hebrew. The
question is: Can we say that Hebrew is a foreign language for
the population of students? The answer is that due to the expo-
sure of the population and students to Hebrew in their daily life
(market, banks, post offices, municipality, and other official
institutions), Hebrew becomes the first foreign language for
them.
East Jerusalem Arab population speaks Arabic with the Je-
rusalem dialect and is exposed to Hebrew intensively in every-
day life due to the topographical situation of the city. Much of
the Hebrew language learning is done by daily contact and
involvement with the Jewish population. Therefore, Hebrew
has an instrumental role in the life of the Jerusalem population:
primarily because it is the language of the establishment,
academy, business and administrative life in the city.
Theoretical Background
In the socio-linguistic literature, a distinction is made be-
tween foreign language acquisition and second language acqui-
sition. According to Brosh (1988), a second language is taught
and used by the individual in its immediate vicinity, while a
foreign language is taught as a language that is used across the
national territorial borders. In other words, a second language is
used in the environment surrounding the individual, while in a
foreign language is not.
A second language is different from a foreign language be-
cause it is used intensively in the daily life; and the speaker is
exposed to it actively in terms of use. A foreign language,
however, is generally used on special occasions or at meetings
with its native speakers. A foreign language has great weight in
the issue of speech, while a second language is important in
both speech and writing. Teachers and educators emphasize the
significance of speech and hearing of a foreign language.
Ader (1965) emphasizes the point that when teaching another
language to children, there is special significance to a number
of factors such as: the age of the child, his level of cognitive
and emotional development, his attitudes towards language that
prevails in his immediate vicinity, the degree of control over
the first language and the nature of communication with him in
the target language. There is another language that is predomi-
nant in the learner's environment, to which he is also exposed
all the time, mostly in informal learning environment. This is
similar to the situation of learning Hebrew by the immigrants
living in Israel. A foreign language is taught in a formal setting
and, unlike a second language, it has no support for contextual
learner’s environment (Nevo, 2005).
According to Olstein (1997), the process of acquiring a sec-
ond language takes place from the place of the child in his na-
tive language. The child is aware that language has structures
which meet certain laws, and he is able to apply schemes from
his first language to the one being taught (even if the result is
sometimes incorrect). He does not need to find out what the
language is, but the essence of the new language (Olstein,
1998).
One of the important goals of learning a second or a foreign
language is to allow better communication, dialogue and under-
standing among people who come from differing cultural back-
grounds and speak different languages (Yashima, Zenuk-Ni-
shide, & Shimize, 2004).
It should be noted that bilingual education can be a tool to
empower minority’s language, creating equality between ma-
jorities and minorities, collaboration, contact and interaction,
and thus can help to resolve conflicts between groups and en-
courage a change of negative attitudes within the group (Beker-
man & Horenczyk, 2004).
Over the years, changes in curricula have taken place and
were adapted, in part, to the Arab learner’s needs. However,
there is no reference in these plans, as well as textbooks, to the
treatment of interruptions caused by interference of the mother
tongue, or with respect to increasing motivation for learning
Hebrew among Arab students.
Social Factors and Second Language Acquisition
Different variables affect the acquisition of a foreign/second
language such as social variables, due to their great importance
and influence on attitudes and motivation (Bassal, 2007).
Schumann (1978) argues that the degree of social and psycho-
logical integration of the learner in community of the foreign/
second language determines the degree of success in acquiring
the language. According to this argument, social variables may
affect learning in several ways: they can help or hinder the
creation of information between the two linguistic groups; they
affect the extent to which the learner is ready to integrate into
the target language, and willingness to integrate into society;
and they affect the language skills that the learner is capable of
reaching. Spolsky (1989) maintains a similar argument by stat-

S. ILAIYAN
ing that the social context dictates the quality of the conduct of
the learning process.
The gap between the target language population and the mi-
nority group (“social gap”) is particularly significant, because
the larger the social distance between two groups is, the lower
the degree of success in acquiring the target language is. Not
only the real social distance between the two groups affects the
study of language, but also the social distance as perceived by
the learner based on social, cultural and political experience
(Bechor, 1992; Schumann, 1978). Moreover, language acquisi-
tion is related to the existing relationship between the learner’s
social group and the social group of the target language. These
relationships may vary in different environments from political
and other viewpoints; and so is the preparedness for language
acquisition (Zeevi, 1995; Ellis, 1994; Giles & Byrne, 1982).
The findings of a study by Tahar (2005) reflect the impor-
tance of the impact of the living environment and society on the
social attitudes and willingness to communicate in a foreign/
second language, especially the friends’ support, which was
found to affect these variables more than the parents’ support.
Note that the group of friends in adolescence affects the ado-
lescent’s behavior more than the parents. The adolescent tries to
dissociate himself from his parents’ positions in order to em-
phasize his independence, and this is reflected in part in ado-
lescent attitudes toward foreign/second language.
Attitudes and Additional Language Acquisition
Attitudes, whether positive or negative, are emotions directed
towards the other and to various social situations: If the emo-
tion is positive, it will affect positively the learning situation,
and vice versa (Abu-Rabia, 1999).
According to Gardner (1980), the learner’s attitudes towards
the language are acquired as a result of experience in a
socio-cultural environment, from family and community atti-
tudes that are acceptable in the learners’ surrounding, which
form the interest in acquiring the target language.
Studies that examined the association between attitudes to-
wards a language and the willingness to communicate in it
found that a positive correlation between these variables and
positive attitudes towards the language and its native speakers
leads to communicative behavior in such foreign language
(Yashima et al., 2004).
Motivation for learning the language constitutes significant
factor in learning a foreign language; and it has a more signifi-
cant role in this context than the relationship of native language
acquisition (Clement, Dornyei, & Noels, 1994; McIntyre, Baker,
Clement, & Donovan, 2003).
High motivation to learn a foreign/second language and posi-
tive attitudes towards the language and its speakers are vari-
ables that affect the willingness to communicate in the language.
In studies conducted in different ethno-linguistic situations, the
willingness to communicate in a foreign/second language was
found to be a predictor of the frequency and amount of com-
munication. Motivation for learning a language was found to
predict the willingness to communicate and the frequency of
communication in such foreign/second language (Dornyei,
2003; McIntyre et al., 2001; Yashima et al., 2004).
Findings in the study of Inbar, Donitsa-Schmidt & Shohamy
(2001) suggest that learning a foreign/second language in a
school context increases the motivation of students towards the
language being taught and the culture of the target language.
This finding stems from a comparison of two groups who stud-
ied Arabic with two groups who did not study Arabic: the best
predicting variables of the students’ motivation to learn Arabic
in the future were: learning the culture of native speakers, the
instrumental trend, environmental stimuli, expectations of par-
ents and politics.
The findings of Tahar’s study (2005) indicate a positive and
significant relationship between attitudes towards the foreign
language and the willingness to communicate in this language
inside and outside the classroom. Also, significant differences
were found between Jewish and Arab students: attitudes of the
Arab students were more positive than the Jewish counterparts
in all these dimensions. As for willingness to communicate in
the foreign language, the Arab students showed greater will-
ingness to communicate in Hebrew inside and outside the
classroom, compared to Jewish students, who are less willing to
communicate in Arabic.
Other studies found an association between attitudes and mo-
tivation and the process of acquisition of foreign/second lan-
guage relevant to the acquisition of the French language by
English-speakers in Canada (Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Gard-
ner, 1979; Gardner, 1980; Genesse, Rogers, & Holobow, 1983).
Similar findings were reached in the acquisition of English by
French speakers—a similar situation to that of the Arab resi-
dents of East Jerusalem. The main conclusion of the study of
Taylor and others (1977) was that the learner’s motivation and
attitudes towards the language and its speakers play a signifi-
cant role in the acquisition of such foreign/second language.
Some researchers consider the attitudes and motivation vari-
ables more important than other variables such as intelligence
and linguistic ability. They believe that attitudes and motivation
direct the orientation of the individual to invest efforts in learn-
ing the language in formal or informal contexts, and even affect
the degree of utilization of these relationships (Spolsky, 1969;
Gardner, 1979; Krashen, 1981).
In this context, Oller (1981)) argues that motivation and atti-
tudes of the learner to learn the foreign/second language may be
affected also by his perception of the attitudes and relation of
the language native speakers with him as a member of another
community and having a different culture. The study of
Genesse et al. (1982) supports this claim.
The attitudes of Arab students in Israel towards Hebrew as a
second language were the focus of several studies. In Bdair’s
study (1990), which was conducted during the first Intifada, he
reported a significant association between attitudes towards the
language and achievements in learning it. In her study in (1999),
Attili found a significant positive correlation between the sub-
jects’ general attitudes (Arab students) to the Hebrew language
and their achievements in that language. Another finding re-
garding the subjects’ attitudes toward the Hebrew language was
more positive than that towards the people who speak the lan-
guage—the Jews. That is, the learner’s attitudes towards the
language have more effect on his achievement than his attitudes
towards the speakers of the language being taught. In Ilaiyan
(2011), research which dealt with the attitudes of non-Jewish
Golan Heights pupils in the subject of acquisition of Hebrew as
a second language, findings indicate positive significant corre-
lations between the attitude of pupils and their willingness to
communicate in the target language.
Importantly, in addition to the social environment, there is
also an effect of the learning situation. Hebrew status among
the Arabs of East Jerusalem is similar to a great extent to the
998

S. ILAIYAN
status of Arabic in the Jewish sector, who learn Arabic as a
foreign language and as an elective. Hebrew has the same status
among Arabs in East Jerusalem; it is taught as an elective until
the eighth grade without the requirement of taking an exam
(Spolsky & Shohamy, 1999).
Gender and Second Language Acquisition
Influence of gender on language acquisition and attitudes of
the two sexes have been tested in several places around the
world for decades. First, differences were detected in spoken
languages in closed societies, where women’s status differs
from that of men; the differences were very pronounced leading
to the formation of a “language of women”. Following the es-
tablishment of feminist movements in the West, they began to
explore these differences in the early seventies, mainly in the
United States and Great Britain.
The first studies conducted in the English language assumed
that also in the West there is discrimination against women and
the woman’s social status is inferior to that of man. Because the
social differences should be expressed in language too, they
hypothesized that there may be language differences between
the sexes.
The studies of Lakoff (1972, 1975), Spender (1980), Kra-
marae, Schulz & O’Barr (1984), concentrated not only on the
speakers, but also the languages themselves, feeling that men
who created the languages and their grammars, and therefore,
they are not suitable for women. The tests revealed a stereo-
typical view of gender roles, which is also reflected in the lan-
guage.
Regarding Arabic and Hebrew, some studies focused on the
differences between women and men: Mutchnik (1992) studied
the differences in language between men and women in the
Hebrew press; Rosenhouse (1998) studied the speech of women
and linguistic diversity in the Arabic dialects; Dbiat (2004)
tested the use of the masculine rather than feminine by Ara-
bic-speaking women in the Galilee and the Triangle.
It is not clear whether the differences are physiological fac-
tors or socio-cultural reasons or both, but it is likely that the
reason for the difference lies in the social dependence.
The psycho-social approach that was dominant in the re-
search background in this field until the eighties pointed to the
prejudices about the power relations between men and women,
allegedly causing major linguistic differences. The claims
raised by this approach proved not to be always true, and they
led to disagreements among researchers. Later, the approach
changed, and instead of investigating stereotypes and the feel-
ing of discrimination, studies began to concentrate on the fac-
tors leading to lack of communication between the sexes (Maltz
& Borker, 1982; Tannen, 1990, 1993). This approach is called
cultural-anthropological or “the two cultures approach”; it con-
centrates on the various differences in the ways of thinking,
which are reflected in differences in linguistic behavior.
Bilingual studies show differences in the way men and
women relate to the language. Tannen (1990) notes that men
need to see language as an instrumental need, whereas women
see it as a communicative-social need. A major cause of pre-
serving the original language better in women is probably the
link between the generations; that is educating the younger
generation and conserving the links with the older generation.
This may also explain why among the second generation immi-
grants, women become bilingual, whereas men tend to adopt
the new language and to abandon their original language.
Coates (1986) indicates that out of many studies, the acquisi-
tion of language among girls is better and faster than that
among boys. Nevertheless, some studies point out the differ-
ences between men and women in the phonological perform-
ance of certain sounds.
Xin’s (2008) study of learning English as a Foreign Lan-
guage in China, she pointed out several factors that affect
learners in acquiring the language. Among the factors, she lists
the learner’s own personality from which the motivation for
language acquisition is derived. She notes that the effect of
gender on language acquisition has not attracted the interest of
researchers, especially the gender differences. Therefore, it was
not possible to understand the differences between men and
women in foreign language acquisition.
Findings indicated that girls like to learn English as a foreign
language more than boys, and they expressed interest in learn-
ing it. The girls explained that they learn English as a foreign
language as a hobby or just for acquiring knowledge; some of
them indicated that they liked the language; others explained
that it is an attempt to improve their abilities to communicate
with the second language speakers and to improve their social
status. In addition, most of the boys expressed their lack of
interest in acquiring English as a foreign language and only few
of them admitted that English is important for them and that
they liked it.
The analysis found that girls have higher motivation than
boys in acquiring English as a foreign language and they
showed interest in learning it.
Summary
Language acquisition from a socio-political view is a com-
plex issue. This study focuses on the question of relationship of
the Arab population in East Jerusalem to the Hebrew language.
In fact, it attempts to clarify the attitude of the Arab population
towards acquisitions of Hebrew as a foreign/second language.
On the one hand, Hebrew is seen as the language of the con-
queror and the language of confrontation; on the other hand, it
is the means through which the population can advance and
develop their everyday life.
In our opinion, it is important to examine the attitudes of the
Arab population in East Jerusalem towards the Hebrew lan-
guage acquisition because this issue has various political, social
and cultural implications and indications. This study focuses on
the student population of eighth graders who start studying
Hebrew from third grade to the eighth grade, who constitute an
important part of the young Arab population in Jerusalem and
they will form the future society.
The objective of this study is to examine the attitudes and
motivation (integrative and instrumental) of eighth grade Arab
students in East Jerusalem towards learning Hebrew as a for-
eign/second language, their willingness to communicate in this
language and the social support in learning the target language.
The study is based on Schumann’s social theories of foreign/
second language acquisition. The significance of this study lies
in its being a pioneer study that conducted among the Arab
students of East Jerusalem.
Research Questions
1) What are the attitudes of the Arab students of East Jerusa-

S. ILAIYAN
lem (boys and girls) toward the Hebrew language as a foreign/
second language?
2) What is the relationship between the students’ attitudes
towards Hebrew as a foreign language, and willingness to com-
municate in this language?
3) Does the community support affect the students’ attitudes
towards learning Hebrew as a foreign/second language and the
willingness to communicate in it?
Hypotheses
1) There is a positive correlation between students’ attitudes
towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language and willingness to
communicate in it.
2) There is gender variability between attitudes towards He-
brew as a foreign/second language.
3) There is a positive correlation between the community
support and the students’ attitudes toward learning Hebrew as a
foreign/second language and the willingness to communicate in
it.
Methodology
The Study Population and Sample
The study population includes the eighth graders at the State
Junior Highs Schools in East Jerusalem. It should be noted that
there are seven middle schools and 15 schools in the old format
from first to eighth grades (called preparatory schools) and 12
private schools in East Jerusalem, which teach Hebrew as a
foreign language to eighth grade. A random sample of 643
eighth grade students was selected from those who came to
school during the selection days: 257 boys and 359 girls (27
students did not respond).
Students of this age already have attitudes towards the acqui-
sition of Hebrew as a foreign\second language, following sev-
eral years of experience learning Hebrew.
Research Tools
The research tool is a questionnaire of attitude and willing-
ness to communicate in the foreign/second language, which
consists of four parts. The questionnaire was translated into
Arabic and has undergone a process of validation by experts;
the translation was verified by the Ministry of Education (Tahar,
2005).
Part I—Background information about the student, gender,
grade and school.
Part II—Attitudes Questionnaire: This questionnaire was
developed by the researchers inspired by a number of studies
that have examined the issues relevant to this study. The ques-
tionnaire underwent a process of review and editing by experts
(Brosh, 1988; Abu-Rabia, 1999).
Attitudes questionnaire includes 23 statements and students
were asked to address them and mark their agreement with each
statement within 5 degrees of agreement from 1 (completely
disagree) to 5 (completely agree) based on Likert scale.
Part III—Social Support Questionnaire: The items were
constructed by the researchers inspired by the research of
McIntyre et al. (2001). It included three Yes/No questions to
examine the student's perception of social support of family and
society, and the communication in the foreign/second language.
Statements were reviewed by the researchers of foreign/second
language and were adapted to the residents of East Jerusalem
and checked by experts.
Part IV—Willingness and desire to communicate in a for-
eign/second language (WTS): Questionnaire items were con-
structed by the researchers inspired by previous studies (Tahar,
2005; Yashima et al., 2004; McIntyre et al., 2001), processed
with relevance to the Arabs of East Jerusalem and checked by
experts.
This section included statements that test the degree of will-
ingness to communicate in a foreign/second language (Hebrew)
orally in and outside the classroom. Statements were rated from
1 (almost always do not want) to 5 (almost always want).
The questionnaire addressed two factors to communicate in a
foreign/second language (Hebrew):
1) Willingness to communicate in Hebrew in the classroom:
during the lesson, with the teacher, requesting an explanation in
class, answer a question in class and more.
2) Willingness to communicate in Hebrew outside of class-
room: at the market, by phone, with friends after school and
others.
3) Attitudes that reflect motivation for learning a language.
As stated, the scale of responses ranged from 1 to 5. Vari-
ables were constructed by calculating the weighted average of
the statements relating to each factor. The higher score suggests
that the cause is perceived more positively.
Research Procedure
Data were collected in late January 2008, after getting a per-
mit from the education directorate of the Jerusalem Municipal-
ity (JED). Meetings were held between the researchers and the
State school administrators of East Jerusalem that teach the
Hebrew language to explain the research goals. In a meeting
with students in the classroom, the researchers explained the
research goals, anonymity of the questionnaire, as well as the
lack of effect on grades in the subject. Completing the ques-
tionnaire in each class lasts about 45 minutes (duration of les-
son). In some cases it took about 10 additional minutes to fill
the questionnaire.
Findings
The First Research Hypothesis
In careful examination of Table 1 there is a positive correla-
tion between students’ attitudes toward Hebrew as a foreign/
second language and willingness to communicate in it.
This hypothesis deals with the attitudes of Arab students in
East Jerusalem towards the Hebrew language as a foreign/sec-
ond language, its speakers and their culture, and willingness to
communicate in it. First, the calculated averages and standard
deviations for these variables, and means range from 2.63 to
3.73 on a five-degree scale. To examine the existence of a posi-
tive relationship between students’ attitudes towards Hebrew as
a foreign/second language and willingness to communicate in it,
Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated and found
significant positive correlation (P < 0.01). The more positive
students’ attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign language is the
higher their willingness to communicate in this language is.
Table 2 indicates significant positive correlations between
the dimensions of attitudes and dimensions of willingness to
communicate in and outside the classroom. We found that as
attitudes towards the language as a school subject, attitudes
1000

S. ILAIYAN
Table 1.
Means and standard deviations of the study variables.
Factor N Mean*S.D.
Attitudes towards Hebrew as a
foreign/second language 637 3.08 .82
Attitudes towards the language as a
school subject 637 3.73 .79
Attitudes towards speakers of the
language 637 2.63 1.16
Attitudes that reflect motivation for
learning the language 637 3.71 .712
General attitudes 637 3.39 .58
Willingness to communicate in class 634 2.78 .85
Willingness to communicate outside
of class 634 2.74 .96
General willingness 634 2.76 .81
Note: *Means on 1 - 5 degree scale.
Table 2.
Pearson correlation: the relationship between attitudes towards Hebrew
and willingness to communicate in it (N = 616).
Factors
Willingness to
communicate
in class
Willingness to
communicate
outside
General
willingness
Attitudes towards
Hebrew as a
foreign/second language
0.07 −0.10 −0.1
Attitudes towards the
language as a school subject 0.45** 0.36** 0.45**
Attitudes towards speakers
of the language 0.32** 0.53** 0.46**
Attitudes that reflect
motivation for learning
the language
0.44** 0.41** 0.47**
General attitudes 0.48** 0.45** 0.51**
Note: **P < 0.01.
towards its speakers and attitudes that reflect motivation to
language are more positive, the willingness of students to
communicate in and outside the classroom will be higher. But
neither positive nor significant correlations were found between
attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language and the
willingness to communicate in or outside the classroom.
The Second Research Hypothesis
There is gender variability between attitudes towards Hebrew
as a foreign/second language.
To examine the difference in the attitudes towards Hebrew as
a foreign/second language by gender, t test of independent sam-
ples was used (Table 3).
Table 3 indicates significant differences between boys and
girls in the attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second lan-
guage, attitudes reflecting the language learning motivation,
and general attitudes. The girls’ attitudes were more positive
than the boys’.
Table 3.
Results of t test of independent samples to examine the difference be-
tween attitudes towards the Hebrew language by gender.
Attitude dimensions
Mean and (S.D.)
Males Females
(N = 257) (N = 359)
S.D.
Attitudes towards Hebrew as a
foreign/second language
2.99
)0.76(
3.16
)0.86(
**
2.57−
Attitudes towards the language as
a school subject
3.67
)0.81(
3.76
)0.74( 1.42−
Attitudes towards speakers of the
language
2.55
)1.21(
2.67
)1.12( 1.213−
Attitudes that reflect motivation
for learning the language
3.63
)0.76(
3.76
)0.68(
*
2.124−
General Attitudes 3.31
)0.58(
3.44
)0.58(
**
2.643−
Note: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
The Third Research Hypothesis
There is a positive correlation between the community sup-
port and the students’ attitudes towards learning Hebrew as a
foreign/second language and the willingness to communicate in
it.
An examination of Tables 4 and 5 shows average support of
the community and family (mother, father and friends) to learn
the foreign/second language, as perceived by the students in
this study (Table 4).
To examine the correlation between the community support
as perceived by the respondents, their attitudes towards the
foreign language and their willingness to communicate in it,
Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated and positive
correlations were detected between community support and the
attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language and
willingness to communicate in it (Table 5).
Regression analysis in Table 6 indicates that the attitudes
towards the Hebrew language can be explained by the dimen-
sions of the mothers’ and friends support (F (3609) = 54.23, P
< 0.001); the predicting variables explained 21% of the vari-
ance of attitudes towards Hebrew language.
Regression analysis also indicates that it is possible to explain
attitudes towards Hebrew as a school subject by the support of
friends (F (3609) = 2.80, P < 0.05). The predicting variable
explains 0.09% of the variance of attitudes towards Hebrew as
a school subject (Table 5).
Discussion
First, we stress that in relation to the Arab residents of East
Jerusalem, the Hebrew language has two dimensions:
The first refers to communication with the Jewish residents,
making contact with government and municipal institutions and
commercial practices and employment of residents. In this re-
spect, Hebrew can be defined as a second language for all pur-
poses.
The second dimension refers to Arab students of East Jeru-
salem studying Hebrew as a foreign language, because it is not
included in the Towjihi examinations (Bagrouth). Moreover,
Hebrew is considered as a second foreign language, for the first
foreign language is English (from conversations with Ms. So-
heila Abu-Ghosh, Deputy Director of the Arab sector in the

S. ILAIYAN
Table 4.
Breakdown of social support as perceived by students.
Support
Social support
Yes No
Father 298 (46.5%) 318 (49.6%)
Mother 315 (49.0%) 303 (47.1%)
Friends 270 (42.0%) 345 (53.7%)
Table 5.
Spearman correlation coefficients between community support and the
attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language and willingness
to communicate in it.
Factor\Support Father
N = 616
Mother
N = 616 Friends
Attitudes towards Hebrew as a
foreign/second language
**
0.40− ** 0.45− ** 0.35−
Attitudes towards the language as
a school subject −0.03 −0.05 0.04
Attitudes towards speakers of the
language
*
0.16 ** 0.17 ** 0.11
Attitudes that reflect motivation
for learning the language
*
0.19− ** 0.23− ** 0.14−
General attitudes ** 0.16− ** 0.19− ** 0.11−
Willingness to communicate
in class 0.02− 0.07− 0.02
Willingness to communicate
outside of class
*
0.12 ** 0.11 0.08
Note: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
Education Directorate of Jerusalem: since before the Oslo
agreement in East Jerusalem, Arab students learned according
to the Jordanian education law; and after the agreement, they
adopted studying according to the plan of the Palestinian Au-
thority (Hassona, 1998). Therefore, in our discussion we shall
refer to Hebrew as a foreign/second language.
The first hypothesis discusses the relationship between atti-
tudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language and the
willingness to communicate in it.
The study findings indicate statistically significant positive
correlations between the dimensions of attitudes towards He-
brew and the dimensions of willingness to communicate in it,
except the dimension “attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/
second language”. This seems to be reasonable, that students
are ready, apparently, to learn the language and communicate in
it due to instrumental and necessary thing to learn that language
in order to communicate on a commercial basis, but at the same
time they express less positive attitude towards the Hebrew
language. Positive correlations between the attitudes and will-
ingness dimensions indicate that the higher students’ attitudes
towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language are—the higher
the level of willingness to communicate in this language.
Attitudes towards Hebrew as a school subject scored more
positive than attitudes towards speakers of the language. This
finding may be explained by the conflict situation between the
Palestinian people and the State of Israel; thus students’ hostil-
ity is directed more towards the people of Israel than for the
language. In fact, there are minorities who study the language
only for useful purposes. For example, Arabs in Israel acquire
the language, generally, in non-formal education, for work or to
communicate with Israeli in everyday life. Unlike the immi-
grants, they do not identify with the Jewish people, but they are
loyal to the Palestinian people and feel complete solidarity with
the Arabic language; and they are not interested in the language,
Jewish and Israeli culture, but because they see learning He-
brew as a practical value (Spolsky & Cooper, 1991).
The findings confirm the work of the Brosh (1988) and re-
sults of other studies that show that attitudes towards language
acquisition have an effect on willingness to communicate in a
foreign language (McIntyre et al., 2003; Yashima et al., 2004).
It is likely that the context of the socio-political and social
situation in which foreign/second language is taught (which is
actually the language of conflict—Abu Rabia, 1999) has an
effect on attitudes of acquiring and use of a foreign/second
language. It also reflected in the image of the conflict in which
the State of Israel is involved with the Arab countries, in gen-
eral, and Palestinians in particular.
The positive score of general attitudes towards the Hebrew as
a foreign/second language is due to the fact that the student was
exposed to the Hebrew language on daily basis when he comes
into contact with the Jewish population. In employment, gain-
ing control of the target language has an instrumental signifi-
cance. Avoiding acquisition of the target language or settling
for a little control may reduce the employment opportunities of
the individual (Menachem & Geist, 1999). Element of exposure
is found in the study of Bdair (1990) as a dominant variable in
learning Hebrew, and is associated with informal situations of
interaction with speakers of foreign/second language.
The relatively high score of the attitudes dimension reflects
motivation to learn Hebrew as a foreign/second language. Such
attitudes towards a language and its speakers constitute an im-
portant role in language acquisition, and have a direct impact
on the achievement scores in the foreign/second language.
Motivation is a significant component of learning a foreign/
second language and positive attitudes towards the target lan-
guage have a positive effect on motivation to acquire the for-
eign/second language. This is consistent with the findings of
Clement, Dornyei, & Noels (1994); McIntyre, Baker, Clement,
& Donovan (2003) who indicate that the motivation for learn-
ing the language is an important factor in learning a foreign/
second language. It has more pronounced effect in this context
than in the context of mother tongue acquisition. This points to
the instrumental motive for language acquisition, and supports
the work of Bdair (1990), Abu-Rabia (1999), Ilaiyan & Ara-
yeda (2008) and Ilaiyan (2011).
The findings contradict those of Bchor (1992), Brosh & Ben
Rafael (1994) and Dunitz-Schmidt (2004), and they indicate
that the attitudes of the Arab students in East Jerusalem towards
Hebrew as a foreign/second language are more positive than
their willingness to communicate in Hebrew, whether inside or
outside the classroom.
The findings reinforce the findings of Tahar (2005) about
Jewish students’ attitudes towards Arabic as a foreign language.
At the same time, the findings of this study contradict other
findings in her study that reported a statistically significant
positive correlation between the attitudes of the Arab students
within the State of Israel and their willingness to communicate
in Hebrew. This is due to their different sociopolitical status of
the East Jerusalem Arabs (who efuse to recognize Israel as a r
1002

S. ILAIYAN
Table 6.
Multiple regression to predict attitudes and willingness to communicate on social support (N = 616).
Dependent variable Predicting support variable B β t R2
Father 0.09− 0.06− 0.83−
Mother 0.53− 0.33− ** 4.74−
Attitudes towards Hebrew as a
foreign/second language
Friends 0.19− 0.11− * 2.42−
0.211
Father 0.004− 0.002− 0.03−
Mother 0.21− 0.14− 1.76−
Attitudes towards the language as a
school subject
Friends 0.20 0.13 * 2.47
0.014
Father 0.15 0.07 0.87
Mother 0.28 0.12 1.59
Attitudes towards speakers of the
language
Friends 0.01− 0.006− 0.11−
0.032
Father 0.003− 0.09 0.04−
Mother 0.23− 0.09 2.59−
Attitudes that reflect motivation for
learning the language
Friends 0.01 0.06 0.22
0.052
Father 0.20 0.12 1.55
Mother 0.31− 0.19− 2.40−
Willingness to communicate in
class
Friends 0.04 0.02 0.43
0.01
Father 0.15 0.08 1.02
Mother 0.09 0.05 0.61
Willingness to communicate outside
of class
Friends 0.003− 0.002− 0.03−
0.004
*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.
sovereign state) and the Arabs in Israel (who accept and recog-
nize their Israeli citizenship).
These findings contradict the findings of Ilaiyan & Arayeda
(2008) for the non-Jewish residents of the Golan Heights, who
have a higher willingness to communicate in Hebrew as a for-
eign/second language, although their sociopolitical situation is
similar to that of the Arabs of East Jerusalem.
The Second Research Hypothesis
Relationship between the language and its speakers’ gender
gained consideration around the world. In recent decades, sev-
eral studies that have examined this relationship in different
languages appeared in the literature. Researchers are trying to
determine “Is there a relationship between gender and lan-
guage?” Or “Is there a connection between gender and lan-
guage acquisition?” In other words, does gender affect lan-
guage acquisition, or create different attitudes toward the ac-
quisition?
This research hypothesis dealt with differences in attitudes to
the Hebrew language as a foreign/second language on the basis
of gender. It should be noted that statistically significant dif-
ferences were found between boys and girls in the following
dimensions: 1) attitudes toward Hebrew as a Foreign Language,
2) attitudes that reflect motivation for learning the Hebrew
language, and 3) general attitudes—attitudes of the girls were
more positive than among boys.
This finding can be explained by the fact that the girls are
generally more conformist, more disciplined and at this age are
exposed less than boys to political identification, and less af-
fected by the street than boys, due to religious beliefs, and so-
cial-traditional-conservative mentality.
One may assume that girls do not link the situation to the
subject of conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, but con-
sider language acquisition as an act of learning another foreign
language alone. This is consistent with the findings of Xin
(2008), who indicates that girls like to learn English and have
expressed interest in learning English as a foreign language.
They argued that girls learn the foreign language as a hobby, or
acquisition of knowledge—some of them noted, “We love the
language.” Others explained it as an effort to improve their
abilities to communicate with the community of foreign lan-
guage or improve their social status. Whereas boys’ attitudes to
acquire a foreign language stem from other motives; Tannen
(1990) notes that men see the language as an instrumental need,
while women see it as a need for social communication.
Our research findings differ from those of Bdair (1990), who
pointed out the difference between the attitudes of boys and
girls in the Arab society in Israel toward Hebrew as a foreign/
second language and towards the people speaking the language.
More positive attitudes were found among boys than among
girls. The special status of East Jerusalem Arabs could explain
this difference.
Presumably, the argument of Coates (1986) that language

S. ILAIYAN
acquisition among girls better and faster than that of boys also
expressed positive attitudes of girls (compared with boys) to the
acquisition of Hebrew as a foreign language.
The third hypothesis is related to the correlation between the
community support and attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/
second language and willingness of students to communicate in
it. The results show moderate support of society and the family
(father, mother) to learn Hebrew as a foreign/second language,
as it is perceived by the students in this study.
Family support is stronger than the community support. This
can be explained by the family tendency to think for the long
term about the benefits of knowing foreign/second language,
which may contribute to the development of their children, and
open more opportunities for employment. This is consistent
with the findings of Spolsky & Cooper (1991). “Arabs in East
Jerusalem study the language for employment or for ‘knowl-
edge of the enemy’ to manage their daily life with the Jews.
They need only the spoken Hebrew on the labor market; and
that they gain usually without much difficulty” (Spolsky &
Cooper, 1991). Friends’ effect is especially evident among
members of the same age group, and plays a major role and
even more important in adolescence. After all, the socialization
processes direct the perceptions and behavior of teens and re-
quire them to adapt to the social structure of the family. This
process has an important element in to be learned.
Notably, the negative relationship between students' attitudes
towards Hebrew as a school subject and family and social sup-
port for their children to study Hebrew as a second language is
because the students perceive Hebrew as equivalent to the rest
of the other subjects; based on this, they deal with it.
Attitudes can be acquired by imitation and identification with
social attitudes; as over time, these attitudes become an integral
part of the children’s value systems (Shapira & Ben Eliezer,
1986). This finding is also reflected in the study of Easton &
Dennis (1973), which points out the considerable influence of
adolescent peers; teenagers adopt the common norms of the
group and act accordingly.
The findings show that the peers influence in adolescence is
significant and influence of parents, on the other hand, is re-
duced when the adolescent develops an independent identity
and looks for independent sociopolitical opinions in the family
and society.
Summary and Recommendations for Further
Research
The purpose of this study was to examine the attitudes of
eighth grade Arab students of East Jerusalem towards learning
Hebrew as a foreign/second language and their willingness to
communicate in this language, and the social support for learn-
ing the target language. The study was based on social theories
of Schumann (1978).
Our results show a positive relationship between the stu-
dents’ attitudes towards Hebrew as a foreign/second language
and the willingness to communicate in this language, which is
surprising. The findings found more positive attitudes among
girls than boys including the attitudes that reflect motivation to
learn the language. In addition, a positive average correlation
was detected between the community support as perceived by
the respondents and attitudes towards Hebrew and willingness
to communicate it.
Finally, it is recommended to examine the different strata of
the Arab population in East Jerusalem, such as: academics,
independent teachers, merchants and women and their relation
to Hebrew as a foreign/second language, with a comparison
between the different groups, since the uniqueness of the group
of students of this study limits somewhat the possibility of gen-
eralization of the findings to the entire Arab population in East
Jerusalem.
REFERENCES
Abu-Rabia, S. (1999). Towards a second-language model of learning in
problematic social contexts: The case of Arabs learning Hebrew in
Israel. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 2, 109-125.
doi:10.1080/1361332990020108
Ader, Z. (1965). Humanity subjects in secondary education. Or Yehuda:
Davir. [Hebrew]
Attili, L. (1999). Relationship between attitudes toward the Hebrew
language, its speakers their culture, and the Middle East peace
process and the achievements in Hebrew in Arab high schools in Is-
rael. Master Thesis, Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv.
Bassal, A. (2007). Teaching Hebrew as a second language among Arab
students: mother tongue involvement and contribution of compara-
tive grammar. In S. Ilaiyan, Y. Avishur, N. Kassem, & M. Hugirat
(Eds.), Attribution book for Dr. Najib Nabwani: Studies in philoso-
phy, education and science. Haifa: Arabic College for Education—
Haifa.
Bchor, D. (1992). Attitudes and achievement in written Arabic in sixth
graders attending mixed and unmixed classes. Master Thesis, Tel
Aviv: University of Tel Aviv.
Bdair, Z. (1990). Attitudes and exposure to target language and the
relation to success in learning a second language. Master Thesis, Tel
Aviv: University of Tel Aviv.
Bekerman, Z., & Horenczyk, G. (2004). Arab-Jewish bilingual coedu-
cation in Israel: A long-term approach to intergroup conflict resolu-
tion. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 389-403.
doi:10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00120.x
Brosh, H. (1988). Impact of learning spoken Arabic in elementary
school on achievements in literary Arabic in the seventh grade of the
middle school. Doctoral Dissertation, Tel Aviv: University of Tel
Aviv. [Hebrew]
Brosh, H., & Ben Rafael, A. (1994). Language policy against social
reality: Arabic in the Hebrew school. Eyonim Bahenokh, 59-60,
335-350.
Central Bureau of Statistics (2008). Statistical Abstract of Israel, No. 59.
Jerusalem: CBS.
Clement, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noles, K. (1994). Motivation, self confi-
dence, and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Lan-
guage Learning, 44, 411-448.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01113.x
Coates, J. (1986). Women, men and language: A sociolinguistic account
of sex differences in language. London & New York: Longman.
Dbiat, N. (2004). Use of the masculine rather than feminine voice by
Arabic-speaking women in the Galilee and the Triangle. Master The-
sis, Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv.
Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (2004). If only I know English: Attitudes toward
English among Russian federation newcomers. Education and about,
26, 167-177. doi:10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00226.x
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientation, and motivations in language
learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language
Learning, 53, 3-32. doi:10.1111/1467-9922.53222
Easton, D., & Dennis, J. (1973). Apolitical theory of political socializa-
tion. In J. Debbesm (Ed.), Socialization to Politics (pp. 32-55). New
York: Wiley.
Eir Amim Association (2005). Shortage and a barrier: A report on
denial of right to education of Palestinians in East-Jerusalem. Jeru-
salem: Eir Amim.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Gardner, R. C. (1979). Social psychological aspects of second language
1004

S. ILAIYAN
acquisition. In H. Gillis, & S. T. Clair (Eds.), Language and social
psychology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Gardner, R. C. (1980). On the validity of affective variables in second
language acquisition. Conceptual, contextual and statistical consid-
eration. Language Learning, 30, 255-270.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1980.tb00318.x
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in
second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Genesse, F., Rogers, P., & Holobow, N. (1983). The social psychology
of second language learning: Another point of view. Language
Learning, 33, 224-309.
Genesse, F., Rogers, P., & Holobow, N. (1982). Psychology of second
language learning: Another point of view, Tesol paper (Abstract).
Montreal, PQ: McGill University.
Giles, H., & Byrne, J. L. (1982) An intergroup approach to second
language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural De-
velopment, 3, 17-40. doi:10.1080/01434632.1982.9994069
Hassona, Z. (1998). The Jordanian-Palestinian relations in the field of
education. Nablus: Palestinian Research Center.
Ilaiyan, S. (2011). Attitudes towards acquiring Hebrew as a second
language among the Golan Heights students following the Six Day
War in 1967 and the Golan annexation to Israel in 1981. IiCCOSEC,
18, 61-87.
Ilaiyan, S., & Arayeda, A. (2008). Attitudes towards the acquisition of
Hebrew as a second language among students of the Golan in the
shadow annexation. Madarat, 2, 489-526.
Inbar, O., Donitsa-Schmidt, S., & Shohamy, E. (2001). Students’ moti-
vation as a function of language learning: The teaching of Arabic in
Israel. In Z. Dornyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second
language acquistion. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Kramarae, C., Schulz, M., & O’Barr, W. M. (Eds.) (1984). Language
and Power. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second lan-
guage learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper
Colophon Books.
Lakoff, R. (1972). Language in context. Language, 48, 907-927.
doi:10.2307/411994
Maltz, D., & Borker, R. (1982). A Cultural approach to male-female
miscommunication. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social
identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
McIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clement, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Will-
ingness to communicate, social support and language learning orien-
tations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisi-
tion, 23, 369-388. doi:10.1017/S0272263101003035
McIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clement, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2003).
Talking in order to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive
language programs. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 589-
607. doi:10.3138/cmlr.59.4.589
Menachem, G., & Geist, A. (1999). Language, employment and con-
nection to Israel among immigrants from the Russian federation in
the ’90s. Magamot, 1, 131-148.
Mutchnik, M. (1992). Language differences between men and women
in the Hebrew press. Doctoral Dissertation, Tel Aviv: Bar Ilan Uni-
versity.
Nevo, N. (2005). Teaching Hebrew as a second language to children
and youth, teaching Hebrew as an additional language in preschool in
the Diaspora: Study program “Nitsanim”. Hed Haolpan Hahadash,
88, 1-16.
Oller, J. W. (1981). Research on the measurement of affective variables:
Some remaining questions. In Language Acquisition Research (pp.
14-27). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Olstein, A. (1997). Study of second language acquisition and teaching
of language—What have we learned so far? Hed Haolpan Hahadash,
73, 53-57.
Olstein, A. (1998). Additional language in early childhood. Hed Hagan,
62, 392-395.
Eir Amim and the Association for Civil Rights (2010). The Palestinian
Arab education system in East Jerusalem. Jerusalem: Eir Amim.
Rosenhouse, J. (1998). Women’s speech and language variation in
Arabic dialects. Al-‘Arabiyya, Journal of the American Association
of Teachers of Arabic, 31, 123-152.
Schumann, J. H. (1978). The pidginization process: A model for second
language acquisition. Rowley Mass: Newbury House.
Shapira, J., & Ben Eliezer, A. (1986). Foundations of sociology. Tel
Aviv: -‘Am Oved.
Spender, D. (1980). Man made language. London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language learning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Spolsky, B. (1969). Attitudinal aspects of second language. Language
Learning, 19, 271-283. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1969.tb00468.x
Spolsky, B., & Cooper, R. (1991). The language of Jerusalem. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Spolsky, B., & Shohamy, E. (1999). The languages of Israel: Policy,
ideology and practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Tahar, L. (2005). Attitudes towards foreign language (Arabic/ Hebrew)
and readiness to communicate in this language among Jewish and
Arab students in Israel, attending regular schools and the bilingual
school in Neve Shalom. Master Thesis, Tel Aviv: University of Tel
Aviv.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in
conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.
Tannen, D. (1993). Gender and conversational interaction. New York
& Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, O. M., Meynard, R., & Rhenolt, E. (1977). Thereat to ethnic
identity and second language learning. In H. Giles (Ed.), Language
ethnicity and intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
Vergen, Y. (2006). Education in East Jerusalem. Jerusalem: The
Knesset Research and Information Center.
Xin, X. (2008). On gender differences in language acquisition. Sino-US
English Teaching, 5, 6-10.
Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimize, K. (2004). The influence
of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second
language communication. Language Learning, 54, 119-152.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00250.x
Zeevi, A. (1995). Comparison of motivation and attitudes of students
toward school subjects: English, Arabic and French. Master Thesis,
Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv.