Beyond the Lines: Teaching Critical Map Literacy

We look at maps as unbiased, fact-based resources that can be used to study things like global conflicts, shifting borders, etc. But maps can also be constructed to include historical inaccuracies and frame a particular narrative, especially when used with a topic as nuanced as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 

• For example, a publicly released New York State Regents Exam in Global History and Geography from 2019 features two historical maps of the region which today contains Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank (pg. 8).
  • The first map, meant to portray the region from 1920-1948, does not clearly show the borders of the British Mandate and uses the ambiguous geographical term “Palestine” in the title rather than the more accurate “British Mandate for Palestine.” 
  • The maps, meant to portray the region from 1920-1948 lack basic factual information. They ignore the demographic reality of the region under the British Mandate which included Arabs, Jews, Christians and others. Further, the first map paints Jewish settlements as something new and nefarious, omitting the fact that Jews have lived continuously in the region for over 3,500 years.
  • The other map accurately shows the borders of the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan, but misleadingly implies that the plan proposed a Jewish state and not an Arab state.
  • The questions posed with the two maps do not acknowledge the historical and cultural ties that Jews have to the land, inadvertently reinforcing the idea that Jews are not indigenous to the region and erasing Jewish history in the land.
• Given that curriculum developers and teachers understandably trust maps used in a state test, those same maps appeared in instructional materials, thus perpetuating the spread of misleading and inaccurate historical information. This case underscores the importance of providing educators with accurate maps from trusted sources. 

The names that we read on maps are incredibly important—they ground conversations through shared language, anchor students in a sense of place and allow an accurate reference of locations students are discussing. Maps are snapshots in time, and the world is ever-changing. Therefore context is critical in exploring such snapshots of time and place. It is for this reason that utilizing incorrect and historically inaccurate names when referring to land related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can easily skew the perception of the conflict to communicate a specific narrative. 

• In some recent prominent cases, maps have left out the name of the State of Israel entirely, labeling the whole region “Palestine.” Beyond propagating a glaring inaccuracy, districts that use maps that erase the State of Israel risk being deemed discriminatory against Jewish students by state departments of education.
  • This was the case with the Oakland Unified School District, which shared maps of the Middle East that only labeled Palestine. The California Department of Education released a report finding that the curriculum approved by OUSD “constituted discrimination towards Jewish persons,” highlighting the consequences of materials that do not support an inclusive environment for all students.
  • Similarly, the National Education Association drew fierce criticism for sharing resources including a world map that also labeled only “Palestine.” In addition to the erasure of the State of Israel, the resources also included links to organizations that justified the October 7th Hamas attack against Israel.
• When selecting maps for classroom use, teachers need to critically consider the historical time period they are discussing—if they are discussing the British Mandate period or the time of the Ottoman rule, maps need to be labeled with correct terminology and presented with the necessary contextual information. So too should modern maps be selected that include the State of Israel alongside other internationally recognized states.

While maps are viewed as an objective and useful instructional resource, they do not exist in a void. Maps themselves are insufficient for understanding complex historical and current events without adequate, accurate context and explanation. Conversely, instructional materials often include maps that are ostensibly accurate, but that are presented within a biased or inaccurate context.

• For instance, the interactive map in this source from Al Jazeera¹ accurately depicts the borders for the proposed Jewish and Arab states under the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947. However, the accompanying description claims that the “Palestinians rejected the proposal because it stripped away much of the land that was under their control.” The resource does not include any background information explaining that, before 1947, the entire region was controlled by the Ottoman and then British empires, not by Palestinian Arabs.
  • The framing of the map implies that Jewish presence in the land began only in 1917, which is both misleading and historically inaccurate.
  • The cadence of this source tells an inaccurate narrative of Israel slowly taking over more and more land, presumably away from the Palestinians. It does not clearly indicate the governmental structure of the British Mandate of Palestine, which included Jews, Arabs, and others living there nor the topographical nature of much of this land as uninhabitable desert.
• When utilizing maps for classroom instruction, it is just as important that educators provide accurate and unbiased context for the historical information—taking the time to tell the full story of the history of land and issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 

1. See: Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, Al Jazeera–Feeding the Muslim Brotherhood’s Political Agenda to the Arab World, 2024