Conference Agenda

In December 2021, the Guardian newspaper ran an article about the huge costs national governments were spending on ‘the rising numbers of high-tech surveillance and deterrent systems facing asylum seekers’ across ‘Fortress Europe’. Such hostile uses of technology have been accompanied by equally hostile discourses in political and mass media responses to the plight of those arriving at the borders of so-called places of ‘sanctuary’, after being forcibly displaced from their homes. The historian Andreas Kossert writes that movement has been a feature of human existence throughout time but that recent forced migration is ‘seen in apocalyptic terms and metaphors’ (2022), echoing Arendt’s (1951) depiction of refugees from World War 2 as ‘pariahs’. According to Bauman’s (2004) analysis, these uprooted humans are dispensable ‘human waste’, in the border politics of securitization and globalisation. What is the role of state education provision in such hostile public environments? Can sites of education provide sanctuary for those who have been forcibly uprooted?

In this symposia we bring together an exploration of the ways in which refugees navigate obstacles and barriers to resuming or starting education in their new context. We explore how the human experiences of education impact those supporting forced migrants in their new contexts as they endeavour to create educational sites of inclusion and diversity in their hopes to foster a sense of sanctuary for newcomers in societies far distant from original homelands. These educational acts of welcome and inclusion are a counter to the dominant political narratives that shape public life in many European contexts. The symposia unearths tensions and paradoxes as uncomfortable realities of ‘preferred’ and ‘unwelcome’ sanctuary seekers are navigated and experienced.

The presenters are all part of the newly formed Hub for European Education (HERE) Network (www.hubhere.org). HERE was established as a base for knowledge transfer about children and adult learners’ post migration experiences in Europe, focusing on their right to an ‘inclusive and equitable quality education’ in their resettlement context (UNESCO, 2015). The Hub collates research, advisory and advocacy activity across Europe. It brings together academic and stakeholder expertise of policies and practices for integrating children and young people with refugee backgrounds through education in order to help them to be able to live lives of dignity and value in their new societies.

Drawing upon cases from several international contexts, each presentation focuses on the tensions and dilemmas of refugee education in current times where the right to education (SDG4) for refugees and asylum seekers is not a given. Part one of the symposium has a focus on the construction of refugees, refugee education and implications of explicit and implicit framing, labelling, and repercussions of epistemic justice in practice in shifting political times. The papers are drawn from Sweden, Finland, Austria, Ireland, England and Australia. Part two moves the emphasis to educators’ responses and the ways in which they respond to diversity in these times of mass migration, closing with an exploration of differences in education provision in Europe which questions the ‘exceptionality’ of Refugee Education. The second part features papers from Finland and England and Austria.

Each part of the symposia will close with reflections from a discussant who will provide a commentary foregrounding the tensions and convergences within the educational research presented here. The audience will be invited to reflect on the presentations and to consider Kossert’s (2002) provocation that we should not be complacent, ‘Because there is a refugee in all of us’, and therefore finding ways to create places of diversity and sanctuary through education should be an imperative for us all, especially those of us living within ‘Fortress Europe’.

Critiques of “good” and “bad” refugees and immigrants are well established in the literature (Etzel, 2022; Andrews, 2018) and explore phenomena such as (un)documentation, legal compliance, acting white, learning dominant languages and economic contributions. Conditional inclusion and belonging is available to particular immigrant minorities, contingent on certain competences, characteristics and efforts (Hackl, 2022). This issue has brought into sharp relief in recent times following the mass forced migration of people from Ukraine. Governments throughout Europe and beyond have responded to this human tragedy in ways that contrast pointedly with their previous responses to immigration (Esposito, 2022). This paper interrogates the educational consequences of the construction of worthy and unworthy refugees. It starts with an exploration of the enduring double standard that sees some displaced people conceived as tragic victims and others as unworthy of compassion and inclusion. Drawing on an analysis of sixteen oral contributions to series of online workshops held in late 2022 and early 2023, the paper proceeds to elucidate the ways in which displaced Ukrainian citizens have been rendered as worthy of social support and educational provision in ways that are denied to refugees across many European and wider circumstances. This, is evident, for example, in relation to a relaxation of regulations on compulsory attendance at school or the freedom for Ukrainian mothers to excuse their children from mandatory education in Austria, or the accelerated registration of Ukrainian teachers with the Irish Teaching Council. The paper argues that such differentiation is rooted, in the first instance, in racist ideology of successful access to performance of white, European identities. Furthermore, however, it is argued that there is a temporality to some of these exceptions, rooted in a deeper racialized understanding that war in Europe is time bound, while war and instability is inherent in non-European sites of refugee origin. In taking this viewpoint, we argue that the double standard viewed with a geographic lens seems stark but from a temporal perspective, the treatment of Ukrainian refugees, is the same old conditionality but paused, founded on a conditional hospitality, which will be eroded over time. The paper concludes that the current situation demonstrates possibilities towards more appropriate support for all refugees and asylum seekers but promises little by way of sustaining these approaches.

Andrews, A.L. (2018) Moralizing regulation: The implications of policing “good” versus “bad” immigrants, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(14), 2485-2503, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2017.137513 Esposito, A. (2022) The limitations of humanity: Differential refugee treatment in the EU, Harvard International Review online at https://hir.harvard.edu/the-limitations-of-humanity-differential-refugee-treatment-in-the-eu/ Etzel, M. (2022) New models of the “good refugee” – bureaucratic expectations of Syrian refugees in Germany, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(6), 1115-1134, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2021.1954679 Hackl, A. (2022) Good immigrants, permitted outsiders: conditional inclusion and citizenship in comparison, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 45(6), 989-1010, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2021.2011938

Refugee education refers to educational practices that take into consideration the needs of students who come from areas of crisis and conflict with different types of refugee- and asylum-seeking backgrounds. The term is mostly used in a holistic manner that is sensitive to the diversity of experiences connected to forced migration, encompassing the academic, social and emotional needs of the student. Researching refugee education requires terms that are as specific and clear as possible. Yet no labelling, including that of refugees, is without contention. Roger Zetter (2007) argues that labels are discourse markers which underpin bureaucratic practices and convey a set of values and judgements. The danger of labelling is one of the reasons why the term refugee is avoided in much research. In Finland and in Sweden the term refugee can rarely be found in educational research or policy. However, formal legal terminology is central to an individual’s access to educational provision. What is important is that any categories, such as ‘refugee’, ‘migrant’ or ‘asylum seeker’ are not used as ‘empty vessels’ but instead, to illuminate the conditions that are needed to support the persons in question. This presentation conceptualises refugee education and provides short examples of its development in Finland and Sweden. We argue refugee education is honouring the rights of individuals as well as ensuring the best interest of society. This has been especially timely since 2015 when Europe saw 1.3 million individuals, including children, requesting asylum. As Essomba (2017, 207) argued, the events of 2015 made it clear that the right to education of refugee children is “currently being threatened and even violated in Europe”, in part due to disjuncture between rhetoric and policies on the one hand and practice on the other. Since 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has forced millions more individuals to move within European borders. Some European countries believe that the crisis is temporary and thus, have organised temporary education provision for Ukrainian refugees, even as segregated schools in Ukrainian language. Others have made efforts to fully integrate Ukrainian children and youth into their national school systems. The practices of refugee education differ even in neighbouring countries, such as Finland and Sweden. We argue that high-quality education would allow refugees to be part of building sustainable futures globally, regardless of if the building takes place in countries of origin (when possible) or in transit or host countries.

Essomba, M. À. (2017). The right to education of children and youngsters from refugee families in Europe. Intercultural Education, 28 (2), 206-218. DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2017.1308659 Zetter, R. (2007). More Labels, Fewer Refugees: Remaking the Refugee Label in an Era of Globalization. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), 172–192. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fem011

This paper presents the findings of a three-year longitudinal study exploring the experiences of asylum-seeking higher education students in Australia. Universities serve an important role in promoting the socio-economic and political prosperity of individuals and nations. They are also sites that – ideally – promote democracy, equity, inclusion, and belonging (Brink, 2018). However, globally only six percent of refugees attend university compared to 37% of the population in general. Such figures are striking when considered in the context of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4 to ‘‘ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote lifelong learning’’ (UNHCR, 2015, p. 6). Much work is needed to realise the global philosophy of education for all, including supporting access to higher education for refugee and asylum-seeking students. A growing body of literature in Europe and internationally explores refugee and asylum-seeking students’ experiences of accessing and attending higher education, as well as their life beyond higher education (Marcu, 2018; Naidoo et al., 2019; Sontag, 2019; Webb et al., 2021). This study contributes to this body of literature by highlighting how universities can contribute to epistemic justice for all (Walker, 2020). Unlike in most European countries, asylum seekers in Australia are considered international students in higher education (Dunwoodie, et al., 2020). Therefore, access to higher education is usually dependent on two options: (1) to pay international student fees or (2) to receive a highly competitive scholarship – where available. For many, it is the latter which is the only option. Although these conditions differ in Europe, challenges discussed by our participants (e.g., money, language, cultural dissonance), apply in European universities, too (Marcu, 2018; Sontag, 2019). Findings from this study demonstrate that when students’ unique challenges are acknowledged and when their strengths are nurtured, these students can thrive. The analysis of the student experiences is framed through the concept of epistemic justice which explores how university practices can create spaces for different forms of knowledge and knowing and foster the conditions in which students can grow in confidence. Practices supporting epistemic justice enabled a sense of belonging so that our participants, who were underrepresented in higher education and had previously been underserved by many universities, were more able to share their knowings with others and succeed. These findings were drawn from interviews with 22 asylum-seeking students from seven Australian universities, conducted approximately once a year throughout the participants’ university studies from 2018-2020.

Brink, C. (2018). The soul of a university: Why excellence is not enough. Bristol University Press. Dunwoodie, K., Kaukko, M., Wilkinson, J., Reimer, K., & Webb, S. (2020). Widening university access for students of asylum-seeking backgrounds: (Mis)recognition in an Australian context. Higher Education Policy, 33(2), 243-264. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-019-00176-8 Marcu, S. (2018). Refugee students in Spain: The role of universities as sustainable actors in institutional integration. Sustainability, 10(6), 2082. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062082 Naidoo, L., Wilkinson, J., Adoniou, M., & Langat, K. (2019). Navigating Complex Spaces: Refugee Background Students Transitioning into Higher Education. Springer. Sontag, K. (2019). Refugee students' access to three European universities: An ethnographic study. Social Inclusion, 7(1), 71-79. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v7i1.1622 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2015). Missing out: Refugee education in crisis. https://www.unhcr.org/missing-out-state-of-education-for-the-worlds-refugees.pdf United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2019). Refugee education 2030: A strategy for refugee inclusion. https://www.unhcr.org/5d651da88d7.pdf Walker, M. Failures and possibilities of epistemic justice, with some implications for higher education. Critical Studies in Education, 61(3), 263-278 Webb, S., Dunwoodie, K., Wilkinson, J., Macaulay, L., Reimer, K., & Kaukko, M. (2021). Recognition and precarious mobilities: The experiences of university students from a refugee background. International Review of Education, 67(6), 871-894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-021-09919-5