Conference Agenda

Relative to most European contexts, diversity is seen to be a recent phenomenon in Irish society. Traditionally, Ireland had higher outward than inward migration rates and the Catholic Church was culturally and socially dominant. Both these factors meant that Irish society was perceived (somewhat erroneously) to be culturally and ethnically homogeneous (Bryan, 2009). However, since migration rates and religious attitudes began to shift in the mid-1990s, the growth in both visible and less visible forms of diversity has been rapid (Ní Dhuinn & Keane, 2021; McGinnity et al., 2020). This swift growth in diversity means that, like its European neighbours, the Irish education system must ensure that young people are supported in developing the skills and dispositions necessary for living in diverse societies. These are often referred to under the umbrella term of intercultural competence, a longstanding priority of the Council of Europe (Barrett, 2020; Barrett et al., 2014).

One element of intercultural competence that has been attracting attention in recent years is empathy (as seen, for example, in the EU Digital Citizenship Education programme). Empathy is defined as the ability to understand and share others’ thoughts and emotions (Weisz & Cikara, 2021). However, it is not limited to intercultural competence alone. Regarded more broadly as a powerful predictor of adaptive intra- and inter-personal outcomes (Konrath & Grynberg, 2013), empathy can be positioned as a key element of social and individual wellbeing. Higher empathy has consistently been linked to enhanced social relationships (e.g., Dekovic & Gerris, 1994), increased prosocial behavour (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2010), reduced prejudice (e.g., Miklikowska, 2018), and increased civic responsibility (e.g., Hope & Jagers, 2014). These outcomes align well with the WHO’s Health Promoting Schools Framework (1991), which emphasises how healthy relationships are important for individual wellbeing and can, in turn, lead to healthier communities.

Research indicates that empathy is malleable and dynamic (e.g., Main et al., 2017). One of the putative pathways towards enhanced empathy is empathy education, often conducted as part of school-based social and emotional learning (SEL) programmes (Davis & Begovich, 2014). This paper introduces an empathy education programme called Activating Social Empathy (ASE), which was designed to be facilitated by second-level teachers, with the aims of increasing empathy, improving interpersonal skills, promoting prosocial behaviour, and increasing social responsibility among students aged between 12-15 years. The ASE programme previously underwent feasibility testing followed by more rigorous randomised control trial (RCT) testing. Findings from the RCT study were promising in that increases in empathy, social responsibility values, emotional self-confidence, and helping and defending behaviour were found among students who had engaged in the programme, compared to students on a wait-list.

However, it has been recognised that after RCT evaluation, monitoring of programme implementation in the real world is needed due to the effects of a variety of factors at the individual, school, and macro-educational system levels (Domotrovich et al., 2008). Thus, a study was developed with the aim of exploring how the ASE programme was being implemented in schools, to identify factors that may be influencing quality implementation and enactment, and to better understand teacher and student interpretations of and perspectives on the programme. The objectives of this study were to explore: 1) how the programme was being implemented; 2) how acceptable it was to teachers and students; and 3) teachers’ and students’ perceptions of how effective it is in terms of influencing both empathic motivations and skills, and prosocial intentions and behaviours.

This paper will present a brief overview of the study’s overall results before focusing in particular on the findings related to the participants’ perceptions of the programme’s effectiveness.

Social-emotional wellbeing at school is related to students’ connectedness to their cultural selves, their sense of ethnic group belonging and pride, and the ways they participate confidently as critical citizens who recognise and protect the rights, beliefs, values and identities of others. Using a Kaupapa Māori approach, this chapter discusses the social-psychological conditions for cultural connectedness and ethnic group belonging for primary school students (n = 2149) aged 5–12 years and secondary school students (n = 584) aged 13–18 years in Aotearoa, New Zealand.

Few empirical studies have examined the affective and social-psychological drivers of cultural connectedness and ethnic group belonging to the social-emotional wellbeing of diverse students. In this paper, I contribute to this the discussion by focusing on how self-perceptions about the value of cultural identity (as it relates to ethnic group membership) affects the social-emotional wellbeing of students in schools in New Zealand. This paper explores the ways diverse students “act and make choices, are acted upon, and relate to each other in a variety of ways” based on their understandings of cultural identity and sense of cultural connectedness. Using a Kaupapa Māori approach, this study examined the social-psychological conditions for cultural connectedness and ethnic group belonging for primary school students (n = 2149) aged 5–12 years, and secondary school students (n = 584) aged 13–18 years, from one regional cluster of schools (n = 16) in the northern region of Aotearoa, New Zealand. This paper evidences the ways social-emotional wellbeing at school is related to students’ connectedness to their cultural selves, their sense of ethnic group belonging and pride, and the ways they participate confidently as critical citizens who recognise and protect the rights, beliefs, values and identities of culturally-diverse ‘others’ in a rapidly changing national context.

A critical consideration in the New Zealand's progressive curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2015), which stipulates that schools should provide all students with opportunities to “create an Aotearoa New Zealand in which Māori and Pākehā recognise each other as full Treaty partners, and in which all cultures are valued for the contributions they bring” (p.10). The New Zealand Curriculum puts students’ culture at the center of teaching and learning, asserting that: a) students should experience a curriculum that acknowledges the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and the bicultural foundations of Aotearoa New Zealand, and b) that the curriculum should reflect New Zealand’s cultural diversity and values the histories and traditions of all its people. The New Zealand curriculum asserts that all children should feel proud of who they are, where they come from, and what their culture has to offer the world. As the world around us diversifies, it will become more important to be aware of the values and practices of our own culture/s, in order to have an appreciation and willingness to learn about other cultures.

Not only are schools’ central places for forming ethnic identities, but the way teachers and students talk, interact and act in school, both reflects and helps shape developing understandings about ethnic hierarchies. Evidently, students’ experiences at school can influence how they choose to culturally or ethnically self-categorise, how boundaries between their ethnic groups are formed, negotiated and interpreted, and how the processes of racialisation and boundary-forming affect students’ interactions and opportunities.

Massive migration flows are less and less “temporary” crises that may be readily solved, and more so an ongoing reality that is here to stay for a long time, with an enormous impact on the education, health and wellbeing of children and youth around the world. Prior to the war between Ukraine and Russia, which pushed around 8 million Ukrainians out of their country, there was a similar movement of people in South America. In 2015, more than 7 million Venezuelans began leaving their country, largely remaining in neighboring countries as undocumented migrants (a majority) and refugees (a small share) (R4V, 2023).

About 5.4 million children, mostly from Venezuela and Colombia, remain displaced across South America. Ecuador, a country of 17 million people, hosts the highest number of recognized refugees in Latin America (72,229) (Integral Human Development, 2023) and has given about 200,000 migrants permission to stay (if only temporarily). Out of more than 4.3 million school students in the country, almost 2% (80,074) are not Ecuadorian nationals. The high number of Venezuelan students indicates that at least 70% have recently arrived.

While the Ecuadorian legal framework guarantees equal rights before the law for all inhabitants, both migrants and locals (Ecuadorian Government, 2008), some legal loopholes were used to prioritize citizens during the pandemic. For instance, migrants were originally relegated to the end of the Covid vaccination queue (phase three) and were left out of government cash transfers to the most impoverished people. Concurrently, regardless of migration status, children have maintained their right to be enrolled at school. After the pandemic, further provisions were made so children could be enrolled at any moment during the school year, which was not previously allowed.

In Ecuador, the “best interest of the child” (UNHCR, 2006; Kalverboer et al, 2017) has been used to advocate for the nationalization of children regardless of foreign or local nationality, privileging the right to national identity. Similarly, family reunification is a priority for refugees in the country. At the same time, United Nations guidelines (UNHCR, 2021) on the “best interest of the child”, for example, privilege completion of the school year over child reunification. A human rights approach demands to explicitly include children's rights in policy, regulations and decision making. This paper examines the concept of the “best interest of the child” in policies and perspectives of decision makers regarding migrant children’s access to schooling in Ecuador, as means to their wellbeing.