Want to Support Learners With Refugee Backgrounds? Start With Recognition

  By Ai Ling Sim

In a world riddled with violence and insecurity, an increasing number of young humanitarian arrivals are resettling in Victoria. They are referred to as students from refugee backgrounds (SfRB). This diverse and often resilient learner population can encounter complex academic learning, social, and wellbeing challenges. It also appears that SfRB generally attain lower academic outcomes than their non-refugee background peers. Amidst continuous policy changes and a national teacher workforce shortage, how are teachers in Australia currently supporting SfRB? Teachers’ professional responsiveness to SfRB is a growing area of concern. But there is seemingly limited information about these students as a cohort. As a result, teachers could be left without the tools they need to help them.

What appears to be troubling is that schools and teachers can experience difficulty recognising SfRB in the first place. Some teachers may not even know if there are SfRB in their classes. Teachers could lack important information about these learners such as their age, grade level, and educational background. This is potentially due to issues surrounding privacy and miscommunication between points of contact upon these learners’ arrival to Australia.

Troubling

It is also apparent that SfRB might not only include learners who are refugees themselves. According to a report published by Refugee Education Australia and the Multicultural Youth Advocacy Network (MYAN), SfRB could also include:

–       Asylum seekers

–       Stateless persons

–       People with refugee-like backgrounds.

‘People with refugee-like backgrounds’ may refer to refugees who have been granted citizenship. This label could also include people who fled insecurity but have arrived through non-standard refugee visa streams such as skilled or family reunion pathways.

A generation gap

To add to the confusion, many sources generally identify SfRB to be first generation while other resources include second-generation refugees. Referring to multiple generations of SfRB can aide in highlighting the lasting impact of the refugee experience. However, this generational influence can be overlooked. For example, funding for English as an Additional Language (EAL) support is provided to schools that have officially identified first generation SfRB with limited English proficiency according to criteria. Recognising SfRB as a distinct population can be a grey area. That can limit the support that these learners and their teachers receive.

Another contributing factor to the lack of clarity surrounding SfRB is the terminology used to refer to them. Throughout Australia’s history providing migrant education, students who do not speak Standard Australian English as a first language are homogenised. These learners are generally labelled with othering acronyms that overlook their unique backgrounds, experiences, and knowledge. The following list is not exhaustive but contains common acronyms used to refer to learners such as SfRB:

–       Language(s) other than English (LOTE)

–       Language background other than English (LBOTE)

–       Non-English speaking background (NESB)

–       Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)

–       English as an additional language (EAL)

A large umbrella

n addition to humanitarian migrants such as refugees and asylum seekers, the above acronyms could refer to a plethora of other learners. These may include economic migrants, foreign exchange students, Indigenous students, students who are returning to Australia, and students with hearing impairments. As a result, the above acronyms are sources of continuous critique. Each student group is unique. But they are often bundled together under large umbrellas that reduce targeted assistance for all learners.

In response to this lack of clarity, the State of Refugee Education in Australia report outlines that a national framework for SfRB education is needed. The report highlights that inconsistencies in terminology and a lack of recognition of SfRB as a distinct learner population is harmful. Failing to formally recognise SfRB as a significant learner population has led to a lack of consistent and longitudinal data about SfRB. As a result, this can affect how researchers and educators build upon prior knowledge and develop effective strategies. An overarching framework could facilitate targeted assistance for these learners and their educators by embedding SfRB as a learner demographic in school, state, and national policies.

These learners need to be visible

Increasing humanitarian migration and resettlement has highlighted the significant role of educators in shaping brighter futures for young people who have experienced humanity in its darkest moments. However, understanding teachers’ abilities to address the complex challenges of the growing SfRB population in Victorian schools has emphasised the need for these learners to be distinctively visible in policy. A potential long-term solution involves the implementation of a national education framework that recognises SfRB with unified clarity. This could ensure that SfRB are researched and supported while endowing educators with the resources to help SfRB become thriving community members across Australia. Meanwhile, contributing to such a framework may involve gaining insight into teachers’ current practices and supports to assist these learners.

The header image is AI-generated.

This article was originally published on EduResearch Matters. Read the original article.

The world is changing fast. We help you keep up.

We’ll send you 1 post, 3x per week.