School Choice and Conflict Narratives: Representative Bureaucracy at the Street Level in East Jerusalem

• DOI: 10.1177/0095399719850102
• Published date: 01 April 2020
• Date: 01 April 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399719850102

Administration & Society

2020, Vol. 52(4) 528 –565

© The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0095399719850102

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

School Choice and

Conflict Narratives:

Representative

Bureaucracy at the

Street Level in East

Jerusalem

Karl O’Connor1, Craig Larkin2,

Mansour Nasasra3, and Kelsey Shanks4

Abstract

In representative bureaucracy research, the dominant view holds that passive

representation leads to active representation. Much of the research to date

has focused on the conditions that influence this process. In this research,

we argue that more attention needs to be paid to the manifestation of active

representation, rather than simply its presence. We find that although passive

representation may indeed lead to active representation, the nature of this

active representation is interpreted differently by those sharing a primary

identity. We use the lens of representative bureaucracy theory, and Q

Methodology, to understand how street-level bureaucrats in East Jerusalem

use their discretion within the education system of a contested society.

Keywords

representative bureaucracy, national identity, education, ethos, active

representation, role perception, street level bureaucracy, Palestine/Israel,

East Jerusalem, divided society

1Ulster University, UK

2King’s College London, UK

3Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel

4Ulster University, UK

Corresponding Author:

Karl O’Connor, Ulster University, Jordanstown, Newtownabbey, Antrim BT37 0QB, UK.

Email: k.oconnor@ulster.ac.uk

850102AASXXX10.1177/0095399719850102Administration & SocietyO’Connor et al.

research-article2019

O’Connor et al. 529

Introduction

Education systems provide an obvious vehicle through which to pass on cul-

tural practices to the next generation of a community. Education therefore has

long been used as a lens to measure active representation (Meier & Bohte,

2001; Meier & O’Toole, 2001; Pitts, 2007). The bureaucracy, too, “plays a

major role in determining citizen’s political attitudes and behaviours”

(Vigoda-Gadot et al, 2008, p. 79), particularly within contested societies.

Within a vociferously contested society, we would expect street-level bureau-

crats (SLBs) to demonstrate high levels of active representation on behalf of

their primary identities, an environment, Eckstein (1975, p. 118) would have

described as a case of the most likely variety.

Drawing on 20 in-depth Q Methodological interviews with SLBs (Palestinian

school principals within East Jerusalem), and seven interviews with local educa-

tional experts and Palestinian policy-makers, this article explores the link between

the primary identities of SLBs, within two publicly run school systems, and the

conflict narratives delivered to Palestinian children between the ages of 12 and

16. Specifically, we investigate the narratives and discourses that school princi-

pals and deputy head teachers perpetuate within their schools to explore how

active representation on behalf of a primary ethno-political identity is defined.

We draw on a representative sample from two Palestinian school types in East

Jerusalem: Israeli run Municipal schools (12 interviews) and Palestinian run

Awqaf schools (eight interviews), to examine the recurrent tensions surrounding

funding, power, resistance, and identity to shed some light on the nature of active

representation. The next section introduces our conceptual framework for mea-

suring ethos at the street level and is followed by an introduction to our research

methodology and a background to the case study. The findings emerging from

the Q-sort are then presented, followed by a short discussion.

Reviewing Representative Bureaucracy

Discretion exists wherever the effective limits on power leave one free to

make a choice among possible courses of action and inaction (Davis, 1969, p.

4). Discretion exists at all levels of the public service and can vary by policy

typology (O’Connor, 2013), or by core task or function (Jensen, 2018).

Lipsky (2010) reminds us that

street-level bureaucracies are places where citizens experience directly the

government they have implicitly constructed . . . [therefore,] citizen encounters

with street level bureaucracies are not straightforward; instead they involve

complex interactions with public workers that may deeply affect the benefits

and sanctions they receive. (p. xi)

530 Administration & Society 52(4)

Hand (2018) goes further, describing an environment where SLBs actually

co-produce policy with clients while Nisbet (2018) looks at the influence

employers of agricultural workers have on SLB discretion. School principals

are a prime example of SLBs working in this co-production environment, as

they “work in situations that often require responses to the human dimension

of situations . . . the accepted definitions of their tasks call for sensitive obser-

vation and judgment” (Lipsky, 2010, p. 15). What then does this discretion at

the street level look like in our case study?

Although discretion exists among SLBs in East Jerusalem (Yair &

Alayan, 2009), it is less certain how it manifests. In the absence of a

dominant state narrative, it is expected that a bureaucrat’s latent narra-

tives will come to the fore (Callahan & Olshfski, 2006). In our case, there

is not one dominant narrative but rather two competing state and ethno-

national narratives, and various iterations of these narratives. Research by

Yair and Alayan (2009) has demonstrated that school principals in East

Jerusalem have long been able to massage figures and employ a high level

of discretion in how they interpret the demands of both competing author-

ities. This is a consequence of the political limbo that exists in East

Jerusalem since Israel’s occupation and attempted assimilation of the city

in 1967. Israel, as the occupying authority, is required to regulate and

manage education through the municipal system yet the Palestinian

Authority remains responsible for the school curriculum and examina-

tions process. SLB discretion, in terms of how the curriculum is taught

and how schools are effectively run, is a consequence of both Israeli

underfunding and gross neglect (Maimon & Tatarsky, 2017) and the

forced retreat of the Palestinian Authority from East Jerusalem. Principals

therefore are left to navigate between the two political authorities with

relative ease: the Palestinian Authority’s remit restricted and receding and

Israel’s dominant but recalcitrant.

Conflict management and public administration literature therefore

lead us to believe that a certain level of discretion is available to princi-

pals within East Jerusalem and that latent narratives will be used to guide

decision making in these circumstances. What are these latent narratives

that guide decision making? In other words, what type of school ethos

(the contextual characteristics specific to the school that distinguish it

from other schools; Gittelsohn, Haberle, Vastine, Dyckman, & Palafox,

2003; Rutter, Maughan, Mortimore, & Ouston, 1979) do these SLBs wish

to instill within their pupils? Does passive representation translate to

active representation uniformly across Palestinian head teachers?1 To

answer this question, we turn to three strands within the representative

bureaucracy literature.