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’.

In Finland, the teaching force is rather uniformly gendered, raced, and classed. Like other highly educated professionals, most teachers come from white, middle-class communities, sometimes with little or no experience in working with diversity. Furthermore, learning in Finnish schools is generally discussed as a neutral activity without a socially, historically, culturally or institutionally defined context (Simola, 2021), although many challenges in school are inevitably intertwined with wider societal challenges, such as racism, sexual inequality, gender inequality harassment, heteronormativity, economic or geographical inequalities (Väisänen & Lanas, 2021). Problems tend to be framed as individual deficiencies, thus psychologizing education (Ecclestone & Brunila, 2015). This paper discusses how Finnish educators talk about teaching refugee students, focusing on the issues they identify as problematic and the solutions they propose. The article draws on a questionnaire answered by 267 teachers, principals and teaching assistants in Finland, as well as thematic group interviews with 15 teachers. Critical discourse analysis of the data shows that educators draw from individualizing discourses as they talk about refugee students’ education. Many of the teachers perceived refugee students as subjects lacking skills. For instance, although Ukrainian refugees are often portrayed as “worthy” refugees in public discourse, many teachers discussed them as unmotivated, illiterate, and unwilling to learn the Finnish language, and were often unmotivated to teach them. Teachers framed racism as bullying and disturbing behavior, thus attaching a structural problem to the individual. As a solution, they proposed practices of positive pedagogy, stemming from individualistic positive psychology. This paper argues that supporting the educational paths of refugee students requires attention on the condition of possibility. Teachers do not create these conditions alone, but their role is crucial. Societal factors also matter, as sanctuary cannot be offered by a society that keeps portraying refugees as a disturbance, a problem, and keeps speaking and enacting refugees into existence through othering discourses. Living a safe life is not a trade, but a human right. The “worth” of the people arriving cannot be measured by how “fast integrators”, active learners of the Finnish language, or skilled in whatever is beneficial for Finnish society, they are. This paper calls for a continuous systematic effort of antiracist education as well as curricular structures that support teachers in understanding and challenging contexts, such as white normativity.

Ecclestone, K. & Brunila, K. (2015). Governing emotionally vulnerable subjects and ‘therapisation’ of social justice, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(4), 485-506, https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2015.1015152 Simola, H. (2022). Dekontekstualisaation lyhyt historia. Kasvatus, 52(4), 380–387. https://doi.org/10.33348/kvt.112371 Väisänen, A.-M., & Lanas, M. (2022). Dekontekstualisaatio kiusaamiskirjallisuudessa. Kasvatus, 52(4), 438–449. https://doi.org/10.33348/kvt.112377

Individual teachers, teaching assistants, and other school staff have been identified as key players who are able to positively influence the educational experiences of young refugees and asylum seekers, creating places of sanctuary within often hostile wider environments. More generally, it is widely recognised that educators’ affective states – such as their beliefs and attitudes – play a critical role in the actions they take, their expectations for pupils, and the experiences and outcomes of these pupils. Little is known, however, about educators’ attitudes specifically towards refugee pupils. This study aimed to address this gap by exploring the following questions: 1) What are educators’ attitudes towards refugee pupils, and 2) How are these attitudes formed? The study is part of a larger project that explored educators’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices with refugee pupils in one local authority in England. It employed a mixed-methods approach, including a survey (n=295) of educators across the county and case studies of 17 educators at two schools. Results of the study show that participant educators had relatively positive attitudes towards refugee pupils. Survey educators scored higher on measures of positive attitudes than participants in previous studies and case study educators tended to emphasise the strengths of refugee pupils and the benefits that they conferred on their schools. Positive attitudes towards refugee pupils were associated with previous experience teaching refugee pupils. While the direction of causality could not be established, intergroup contact theory – the proposition that contact between different groups reduces prejudice between them – provides a theoretical and empirical basis for experience contributing to positive attitudes. Furthermore, school-level factors – events, ethos, leadership – were found to be important in forming educators’ positive attitudes. Such factors were, in turn, the work of individual educators – creating a ‘virtuous circle’ effect that developed positivity towards refugee pupils at both the school and individual levels. These findings have important implications for policy and practice. The case study schools in this study had extensive experience with refugee pupils and pupils with similar characteristics, but many schools in England do not. In order to ensure that all refugee pupils encounter positive, welcoming school environments, coordinated training and support for educators should be made available. Given the ‘virtuous circle’ effect between individual attitudes and school-level ethos and actions, there should be multiple levels and formats in which to provide support.

Aleghfeli, Y. K., & Hunt, L. (2022). Education of unaccompanied refugee minors in high-income countries: Risk and resilience factors. Educational Research Review, 35, 100433. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EDUREV.2022.100433 Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley. Baak, M. (2019). Schooling Displaced Syrian Students in Glasgow: Agents of Inclusion. In J. L. McBrien (Ed.), Educational Policies and Practices of English-Speaking Refugee Resettlement Countries. Brill Sense. Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188960380104 Jussim, L., & Harber, K. D. (2005). Teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies: knowns and unknowns, resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review : An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 9(2), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_3 Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, L. R., Wagner, U., & Christ, O. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.001

In Finland, practices related to refugee education have been developed for decades in the biggest cities, but the smaller municipalities have started to receive refugee students only recently. Thus, in order to develop refugee education, it is important to analyse the existing good practices and the needs of further development. For this article, we interviewed of four experts working in school offices in municipalities with a long tradition of organising refugee education. The data were analysed with a thematic content analysis, and the categories that arose from the data were: 1) linguistically responsive practices in supporting refugee students, 2) practices that support teachers’ pedagogy and wellbeing at work, and 3) the needs to develop refugee education in Finland. The results show that in all four municipalities, school offices have practices acknowledging linguistic diversity and students’ backgrounds, as well as identifying learning challenges and needs for special support. The principles of second language learning and the methods that support learning were also reflected in the interviews. The practices related to supporting teachers' work with refugee students included written guidelines and mentoring given by the school office, and collegial peer support. The interviewees also reflected on the expertise that teachers developed over time when working with the refugee students, and how this expertise supported teachers’ pedagogical practice and wellbeing. The need to develop refugee education included concerns related to insufficient socio-emotional or linguistic support for refugee students, especially regarding the transition from preparatory classes to basic education. Additionally, there was a need to get better resources, guidelines and professional development trainings for teachers, as well as the need to develop school communities to better support the refugee students and respond to their needs. There was also a concern regarding the lack of national guidelines for organising refugee education in Finland, putting refugee students in an unequal position in different municipalities. The results indicate that in the bigger Finnish municipalities, there are well-established practices in organising refugee education that should be spread to other municipalities. However, concerns related to the lack of national guidelines should be taken seriously when further developing refugee education in Finland. This study is also significant outside of Finland: good practices could be implemented and further developed in many countries that are organising education for refugee students in order to support educational equality for refugee students.

Dovigo, F. (2021). Beyond the vulnerability paradigm: fostering inter-professional and multi-agency cooperation in refugee education in Italy. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(2), 166-181. McIntyre, J., & Abrams, F. (2020). Refugee Education: Theorising Practice in Schools. Taylor & Francis.

The 2022 UNHCR Refugee Education Report tells us that children forcefully displaced from their homes are significantly more likely than their non-refugee peers to be excluded from schooling. Indeed, 48 per cent of refugee children at school-age are excluded from education (UNHCR, 2022). Something of the consequence of this exclusion is captured by Dina Nayeri (2022), in her account of the lives of children in Katsikas, a refugee camp outside Ioannina, Greece, entitled The Waiting Place. Nayeri (2022) – herself a former refugee from Iran forced to endure months of her childhood in a refugee camp in Italy - characterises this place as ‘a beasty limbo’, that ‘wants children to … forget the hours, the days’, and ‘doesn’t want them to go to school’. This paper advances the argument that, living in this limbo, endlessly waiting to be educated, children are excluded not simply from meaningful educational activities but from opportunities to become the creators of their own narratives about what their lives mean now and what they might come to mean to the future. Ultimately, this exclusion constitutes a twofold failure of welcoming – it is to fail to welcome young people into meaning educational experiences and a failure to welcome refugee children to become creators of their own, unique, and meaningful lives. Using the case of contrasting educational measures taken to accommodate children and youth arriving between around 2015 and now, this paper will explore differences in education provision. The xenophobic and anti-migrant rhetoric used by country leaders and media in Europe, the violent acts against refugees, under-served reception centres or unlawful detentions at the European borders are only some of the challenges, refugees from countries such as Syria, Afghanistan or Somalia have been experiencing in Europe (Esposito, 2022). The flexibility to access schools, the possibility of bilingual education, and the recruitment of Ukrainian teachers were some of the regulations put into practice at a remarkable speed for the students arriving from Ukraine. Contrasting these two approaches, the authors aim to question the exceptionality of Refugee Education from an inclusive perspective.

Esposito, A. (2022). The limitations of humanity: differential refugee treatment in the EU. Retrieved from https://hir.harvard.edu/the-limitations-of-humanity-differential-refugee-treatment-in-the-eu/ Nayeri, D. (2022) The Waiting Place. Somerville, Massachusetts: Candlewick Press. UNHCR (2022) All Inclusive: The Campaign for Refugee Education. Available: https://www.unhcr.org/uk/education.html#:~:text=Close%20to%20half%20of%20all,countries%20was%2068%20per%20cent. UNHCR 2022 UNHCR Refugee Education Report. Available at https://www.unhcr.org/uk/publications/education/631ef5a84/unhcr-education-report-2022-inclusive-campaign-refugee-education.html