Simulation-based learning to promote conflict resolution and empathy among students in regular and special education teacher training programs (Hebrew)

The public discourse on improving the quality of education emphasizes training teachers for classroom practice (Kaufman & Ireland, 2016), given the centrality of teachers’ roles in the education system (Goldenberg et al., 2012; Milic & Simeunovic, 2024). The quality of teacher preparation may decisively affect their work (Avisar, 2023).

Teachers’ work is rife with conflict (Steinberger & Magen-Nager, 2016). In education generally, and in special education in particular, conflicts can be frequent and especially complex. Managing them effectively can enhance professionalism, job satisfaction, and retention in the profession (Chong et al., 2011).

Simulation-based learning (SBL) is a powerful way to address conflicts effectively because it can approximate real-world conditions and enable participants to develop substantial practical knowledge (Kaufman & Ireland, 2016). Simulations, combined with support and guidance strategies tailored to different learning stages, are particularly effective for cultivating complex skills during professional training (Chernikova et al., 2020). Simulation helps teaching professionals develop communication, collaboration, and leadership skills; strengthen the connection between theory and practice; better prepare graduates for future challenges (Lewin, 2021); and support their success as professionals (Steinberger & Magen-Nager, 2020).

During the teacher-training phase, simulations reproduce authentic situations from educators’ daily work in a protected and safe learning environment. They encourage participants to step outside their comfort zones and take risks in realistic scenarios under the guidance of professional facilitators and actors (Digami, 2022).

This study employed a mixed-methods design (observations and open and closed ended questionnaires). It examined the contribution of the simulation experience and its distinct impact on students in regular education and students in special education, from the students’ perspectives.

Main findings: The simulation workshop significantly contributed to the development of conflict-management skills and empathy among all participants. For the conflict indices, a significant increase was observed in identifying and resolving conflicts in the domains of organizational culture and didactics, but not in the domain of discipline. For empathy, complex changes emerged: increases in fantasy and personal stress and a decrease in empathic concern. No significant between-group differences were found, except for empathic concern, for which a differential effect between the groups was observed. Qualitative analysis yielded five central themes: balancing assertiveness and empathy (39%), planning communication goals (34%), understanding the complexity of conflict (20%), self-reflection (17%), and strengthening a sense of competence (5%).

Contribution of the study: Theoretically, the results advance understanding of the importance of social-emotional discourse in professional development and of increasing the sense of competence in addressing conflicts. Pedagogically, the study supports the professionalization, enrichment, and development of interpersonal and intrapersonal communication skills among future teachers across diverse situations they are likely to encounter in the education system.

Overall, the study deepens understanding of the impact of simulation on conflict management and empathy among students facing complex conflict situations. It is also the first study in educational simulation to compare students in special education with those in regular education.