Accessing Quality Education: Local and Global Perspectives from Refugees 1666913030, 9781666913033

Table of contents :
Contents
A Note on Terminology
Foreword
Introduction
Access
Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy
(Un)Welcoming Admissions
Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education (CTE) for Refugees in the United States
Inclusion
Inclusive Education for Refugee Students
Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers in Educational Settings
Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports for Refugee Students
Application
Building Capacity
Sharing Information on Education Across Resettlement Agencies, Nonprofits, Schools, and Community Spaces
Conclusion
Afterword
Index
About the Authors

Citation preview

Accessing Quality Education

Accessing Quality Education Local and Global Perspectives from Refugees Edited by Bernhard Streitwieser, Katharine Summers, and Jessica Crist

LEXINGTON BOOKS

Lanham • Boulder • New York • London

Published by Lexington Books An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 www​.rowman​.com 86-90 Paul Street, London EC2A 4NE Copyright © 2024 by The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Streitwieser, Bernhard Thomas, 1969- editor. | Summers, Katharine,     1996- editor. | Crist, Jessica, 1995- editor.   Title: Accessing quality education : local and global perspectives from     refugees / edited by  Bernhard Streitwieser, Katharine Summers, and     Jessica Crist.   Description: Lanham, Maryland : Lexington Books, [2023] | Includes     bibliographical references and index. | Summary: "This book, written by     the faculty and students of The George Washington University Refugee     Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), examines the experiences of     refugees settled in the Washington, DC, Maryland and Virginia area (DMV)     during the last ten years and their pathways back to access and success     in education"-- Provided by publisher.   Identifiers: LCCN 2023034477 (print) | LCCN 2023034478 (ebook) | ISBN     9781666913033 (cloth : acid-free paper) | ISBN 9781666913040     (electronic)   Subjects: LCSH: Refugees--Education--United States. | Educational     equalization--United States. | Educational change--United States. |     Right to education--United States. | Education and state.  Classification: LCC LC3731 .A574 2023  (print) | LCC LC3731  (ebook) | DDC     371.826/9140973--dc23/eng/20230824  LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023034477 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023034478 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

Contents

A Note on Terminology

vii

Foreword xi Andrew Selee, President, Migration Policy Institute Introduction ‌‌ Jessica Crist, Katharine Summers, and Bernhard Streitwieser SECTION I: ACCESS



1 11

Chapter 1: Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola‌‌



13

Chapter 2: (Un)Welcoming Admissions: The Legal and Systemic Barriers Refugees in the DMV Face When Accessing Education Jessica Crist‌‌

29

Chapter 3: Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education (CTE) for Refugees in the United States‌‌‌‌‌ Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith‌‌

49

SECTION II: INCLUSION

73



Chapter 4: Inclusive Education for Refugee Students Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland‌‌



75

Chapter 5: Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers in Educational Settings ‌‌ Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola‌‌‌‌‌

111

Chapter 6: Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports for Refugee Students Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe‌‌

131

v

vi

Contents

SECTION III: APPLICATION



151

Chapter 7: Building Capacity: Improving Refugee-Background Students’ Enrollment and Inclusion Olivia Issa‌‌

153

Chapter 8: Sharing Information on Education Across Resettlement Agencies, Nonprofits, Schools, and Community Spaces ‌‌ Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe‌‌

165

Conclusion ‌‌ Katharine Summers, Jessica Crist, and Bernhard Streitwieser

179

Afterword ‌‌ Lisa Unangst, SUNY Empire State University

191

Index

195

‌‌About the Authors



203

A Note on Terminology

Access—access to education means that all students are able to register for and attend school, as well as use and understand learning materials.‌‌‌ ‌‌ Capacity building—“the process of developing and strengthening the skills, instincts, abilities, processes and resources that organizations and communities need to survive, adapt, and thrive in a fast-changing world.”1‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌DMV—DC, Maryland, and Virginia area.‌‌‌ ‌‌ ELL (English Language Learners)—those who are learning the English language for the first time.‌‌‌ ‌‌ ESOL (English to Speakers of Other Languages)—English language learning programs designed to teach ELLs the vocabulary and grammar of the language while also introducing them to various cultural ideas.‌‌‌ ‌‌ Funds of Knowledge—the idea that people have knowledge as a result of their life experiences.2‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌ Inclusion—the creation of learning environments in which all students, regardless of background or identity, feel equally safe, valued, and respected in the classroom.3‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌ Inclusive education—the integration of students with disabilities, or any student who is excluded from having an equitable educational experience, into mainstream education systems.4‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌ Intersectionality—coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw5 to denote the relationships between various identities and systems of power and ways that violence and vii

viii

A Note on Terminology

discrimination result from the intersection of various dimensions of personal identity including race, religion, gender, sexuality, class, and immigration status, among other identifiers.‌‌‌ ‌‌ Plurilingualism—the interconnectivity of the knowledge and experiences of individuals who speak multiple languages and sees them as building upon one another to create an enhanced “communicative competence.”6‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌ Refugee—an individual “who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion,” per the 1967 United Nations definition.7‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ ‌‌ Refugee Admissions Cap—the maximum number of refugees that can be admitted to the U.S. each fiscal year.‌‌ ‌‌ Resettlement—“the transfer of refugees from an asylum country to another State that has agreed to admit them and ultimately grant them permanent residence.”8‌‌‌ NOTES 1. United Nations (UN), n.d., “Capacity-Building,” accessed September 25, 2022, https:​//​www​.un​.org​/en​/academic​-impact​/capacity​-building. 2. Norma Gonzalez, Luis C. Moll, and Cathy Amanti, Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2005). 3. Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), 2012, “Is your classroom inclusive and child-friendly? A self-assessment tool for teachers,” December 4, https:​//​inee​.org​/resources​/your​-classroom​-inclusive​-and​-child​-friendly​-self​ -assessment​-tool​-teachers. 4. UNESCO, Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education, (Paris: UNESCO, 2009), 6-9. 5. Kimberle Crenshaw, 1991, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6, 1241–1299, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.2307​/1229039. 6. Council of Europe, Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

A Note on Terminology

ix

7. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2021, “What is a refugee?,” Accessed September 20, 2022, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/what​-is​-a​-refugee​.html 8. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), N.d., “Resettlement,” Accessed October 14, 2022, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/resettlement​.html

Foreword Andrew Selee, President, Migration Policy Institute

Refugees bring significant assets to their new communities, and studies show that over time they become net fiscal contributors as well as an important part of the diverse social texture of the communities where they reside. But refugees often face unique challenges that differ from other immigrants who arrive through family reunification and employment-based visa pathways. They often come from experiences of extreme violence, flight, and protracted displacement. They also have far less choice than most other immigrants on where they go. And while they receive more public support initially, their needs may be far greater than other immigrants as they get settled. Most of the research on refugee integration in U.S. communities takes a long view on the challenges they face in the aggregate and the gains they make over time. This study, however, is unique in centering refugees and their voices in the center of the research in an effort to understand how they see their own integration process and the barriers they face. This book focuses on “the DMV”—the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia metropolitan area—which has become a major resettlement destination for refugees from a wide variety of backgrounds. And it draws on the research of graduate students at George Washington University’s Refugee Educational Advancement Lab, who set out to understand how refugees themselves understood their own challenges and how institutions, especially in the education sector, could adjust to be more receptive and adaptable to refugees. Refugee-led organizations have a long history in shaping refugee policy in the United States, both at a national and a local level. They have become particularly visible in recent years at local, national, and international levels in trying to influence policy discussions, and they are often valuable partners for national and local governments and international organizations in designing xi

xii

Foreword

refugee resettlement and integration policies. This book takes a valuable step forward in recognizing not just the voices of refugee leadership, which are immensely important for these efforts, but also the individual experiences of refugees who come from highly diverse backgrounds and face a range of difficult challenges, from language to finances to documentation, especially as they navigate the educational system. This book will contribute to thinking in the DMV about how to enable the successful integration of refugees and how to tap into their own knowledge and wisdom in doing so. It can also serve as a template for further efforts to understand how refugees around the United States perceive the barriers they face on arrival and provide key insights into how institutions can adapt to dismantle these barriers. This book is, above all, a call to engage refugees themselves in designing strategies for successful integration, and to expand research that examines these challenges from the refugees’ own perspectives.

Introduction‌‌ Jessica Crist, Katharine Summers, and Bernhard Streitwieser

At its core, this book explores the reality of displacement through the lens of education. In particular, it considers ways to improve refugees’ educational access and inclusion as a means to increase opportunities, foster a sense of place, welcome varying identities, and explore new pursuits. While this book primarily focuses on one region of the United States (U.S.)—the tri-state midAtlantic area known colloquially as the DMV (District of Columbia (DC), Maryland, and Virginia)—what we learned from our local research has global implications beyond our geographic boundaries. In this book, we present multiple refugee perspectives, highlighting just a few of many diverse refugee experiences within education. Our hope is that this book serves as a guide for advocates, policymakers, practitioners, educators, and refugee-background students to improve the realities of educational access and inclusion for refugees within the U.S., building off of positive experiences and addressing common barriers. The original research included throughout this book was facilitated by the teamwork of George Washington University’s (GWU) Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL) to advance research in migration studies, but its findings seek to center refugee voices. We are grateful to everyone who spoke with us and whose experiences are included in this book. BACKGROUND Globally, millions of people have been displaced due to war, political conflict, economic instability, and climate change. By the end of 2021, an estimated 89.3 million people were forcefully displaced, among whom 27.1 million were legally recognized as refugees.1 According to the 1951 United Nations (UN) Refugee Convention, a legally recognized refugee is defined 1

2

Introduction

as “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”2 Education opportunities can support refugees who are resettled to another country by aiding their integration into their host community. In 2022, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported that almost half of the world’s 27.1 million refugees were under the age of 18.3 Of these, only 68 percent were enrolled in primary education and 34 percent in secondary education.4 Although the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and the 1951 Refugee Convention established the global right of refugees to access education, many refugee students are still excluded from and neglected within local school systems. In the U.S., as with other countries of resettlement, various migration and education policies, as well as social factors, may inhibit refugees’ access to and inclusion in their host society’s education system. In this book, we explore these barriers and challenges through a case study of the DMV area. Through this approach, we explored the evolving context of refugees’ experiences with education in the DMV, particularly with the increase in refugees resettling in the area since 2021 due to the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan and the war in Ukraine.5 Our book centers the voices of refugees to amplify their presence in research, but also details current support mechanisms and offers evidence-based recommendations to policymakers, educators, practitioners, and refugees. Awareness and human empathy are the foundation for action: REAL seeks to make the team more aware of migration challenges and also empowers us to act in ways that are humanitarian and helpful. Overall, this book examines the educational experiences of refugee background students in the DMV area and proposes policy recommendations to bridge gaps in access and inclusions. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This book is a culmination of the research conducted by REAL between November 2021 and September 2022, including desk research and qualitative interviews. The authors gathered background research consisting of the academic literature on displacement and reports by non-government organizations and research organizations. Through data analysis and a comprehensive literature review focused on each chapter theme, this book explores challenges and successes across refugees’ educational experiences while centering refugees’ voices. Through interviews conducted online via video calls, the authors interviewed scholars focused on refugee issues, practitioners working with refugees, and refugees themselves. The interviews examined refugees’

Introduction

3

educational experiences within the DMV area, as well as broader refugee education trends. We interviewed 19 people in total, including 11 refugees, two scholars, and six practitioners. Our goal is for this book to serve as a reference guide and textbook for academics, policymakers, and practitioners alike to use when discussing challenges for or working with students from refugee backgrounds. In order to protect our interview participants, we employed various measures of confidentiality. We interviewed each participant only once and allowed participants to stop the interview at any time. We sent each interviewee the questions ahead of time and gave them the option to skip any questions that they were uncomfortable answering. We received consent to record before the interview and allowed participants to not record if they did not feel comfortable. We anonymized all participant demographic information and assigned pseudonyms to each interviewee. Finally, we provided the editor contact information and offered to redact any information in the future after the interview at the request of the interviewee. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK The extant refugee and migration scholarship has noted the limited representation of refugee voices within academic literature.6 Instead, scholars have focused more broadly on the global increase in displacement, rising nationalism and anti-migration.7 As such, one of the main aims of this book is to center refugee voices by creating space for refugees to tell their stories and share their experiences. To feature their voices more prominently in academic scholarship, we employ a decolonial perspective to amplify the refugees’ experiences of access and inclusion in education in the DMV area. Scholar Stephen Legg describes decolonialism as an effort to “challeng[e] the practices that made colonies and which sustain colonial durabilities.”8 Using a decolonial framework, we consider the colonial legacies behind local and national policies and practices and seek to shift the focus of our book’s narrative to the voices of the refugees. As described by scholar bell hooks, education can serve as a means of freedom from historically colonial systems that limit the power of marginalized groups.9 As such, we highlight the voices and experiences of refugees in our research while also critiquing policies rooted in colonialism which privilege or take away power from certain groups or identities. By focusing on the narratives of voices often absent from policy and decision-making through direct interview quotes from refugees, we aim to disrupt traditional power structures in refugee scholarship and emphasize the importance of listening to and learning from refugee perspectives when engaging in research or advocating for policy change. Overall, we hope that

4

Introduction

by centering refugee narratives, we can shift power away from the historically privileged groups to the refugee population while calling on other actors to move from writing about and making policy for refugees to co-creating new policy with refugees. We also employ intersectionality theory in a few of our chapters. Intersectionality, originally coined by legal scholar Dr. Kimberlé Crenshaw in a piece critiquing antidiscrimination law, calls on actors to analyze Black women’s experiences with the law through the lens of the intersection of race and gender, rather than viewing discriminatory action through one lens or the other.10 Over time, the term intersectionality has grown to consider the various identities of people including race, gender, sexuality, and origin and how these identities intersect and impact their lives.11 According to scholars Cho, Crenshaw, and McCall, intersectionality exposes “how single-axis thinking undermines legal thinking, disciplinary knowledge production, and struggles for social justice.”12 Intersectionality draws upon other theories such as Critical Race Theory (CRT) and feminist theory, which are extensively outlined by bell hooks,13 while seeking a more nuanced treatment of identity within systems of power and policy. Intersectionality is used as a framework to examine and acknowledge the power dynamics that exist between and across overlapping identities while considering how these power dynamics create an opportunity imbalance for various communities. In our book, we seek to acknowledge refugees’ intersectional identities in our analysis and consider how varying identities impact refugees’ access to and inclusion within the education system. Our goal is to explore how each refugee’s experience varies according to their multiple identities such as race, gender, and sexual orientation, among others; access to information and resources; level of parent, caregiver, school, and community support; and experiences with displacement, among other factors. Centering the voices of refugees in the study follows decolonial theory by focusing the narrative on a population whose perspectives have traditionally been marginalized from refugee scholarship and highlighting their proposed solutions. We also provide multiple refuge perspectives, including positive, negative, and neutral experiences, to demonstrate the wide range of refugee experiences with education. By using an intersectional approach, our data analysis considers the refugee-background students’ various identities, enriching our understanding of how identity factors into the resettlement process in terms of educational access and inclusion.

Introduction

5

WHY THE DMV? As a result of the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, the DMV has seen an uptick in the number of refugees arriving to the area. Among these are many school-aged children in need of educational support. According to the most recent refugee admissions data, in 2020, 246 refugees were resettled in Maryland and 244 were resettled in Virginia.14 No data is made available about the number of refugees settled in the District of Columbia since DC cannot formally resettle refugees. Given the DMV’s location at the center of the U.S. federal government system, the area presents a unique context as both a centerpiece of policymaking, including federal refugee guidance, as well as home to numerous resettlement and non-profit offices which advocate for refugee policy and work with refugee populations. In 2020, 1,015 refugees and 625 asylees arrived in Maryland. Approximately 61 percent of new refugees in Maryland in 2020 were between the ages of 19 and 59.15 Of these refugees and asylees, 64 percent were resettled in the suburban Washington, DC, area and 35 percent were resettled in the Baltimore area.16 Since DC and Baltimore are bigger cities, refugees generally have access to more services and organizations in these areas. This resettlement data was not made publicly available for Virginia. Overall, the majority of our interview subjects were located in the DC suburbs and the Baltimore, Maryland, area. WHY EDUCATION? Education is a basic human right and plays a vital role in economic and social development.17 In accordance with the UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4), which seeks to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all,” refugees have the right to equal access to quality education.18 For refugees undergoing resettlement, education can increase social integration, provide additional economic opportunities, and bolster personal motivations and goals. In its simplest form, ensuring refugees’ access to education can provide a safe space where refugees can work through their trauma and the upheaval they experienced during displacement. In addition, education can serve as a critical tool to develop capacity among refugee communities. Capacity building is defined by the UN as “the process of developing and strengthening the skills, instincts, abilities, processes and resources that organizations and communities need to survive, adapt, and thrive in a fast-changing world.”19 Strengthening capacity through

6

Introduction

education can support the refugee community to develop the skills needed for successful resettlement. Expanding tools and processes across organizations, institutions, and stakeholders who support refugees can also improve equitable service provision and improve refugees’ access to and receipt of quality, inclusive education. POSITIONALITY OF THE AUTHORS REAL consists of faculty, undergraduate, and graduate student researchers. The book authors are of diverse genders, races, cultural backgrounds, and sexualities. However, as a lab, we also recognize our privilege as higher education students. We employed a decolonial and intersectional framework within this book to build-in opportunities for reflection on internal biases and subjectivity. We also sought to incorporate direct quotes from our interview participants to the extent possible to maintain their voice as a counterweight to our internal biases and subjectivities. By including quotes from several different participants within each chapter, we aimed to validate and balance our analysis by identifying cross-cutting themes across interviews while also minimizing our own subjectivities by highlighting how experiences differed between participants. We recognize that no research can be completely free of authors’ subjectivities and acknowledge that our findings are not representative of the experiences of all refugees in the DMV given the small and non-representative sample size. Recognizing our power as undergraduate and graduate student researchers, we seek to use our book and privileged position to amplify the voices of refugees and create a rich narrative for policymakers and scholars to engage with. Disclaimer: The views in this book are our own and do not represent the views or opinions of our employers, or the clients we support. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BOOK Elizabeth, a refugee who we interviewed, shared her own anecdote of integration when discussing the resettlement process. She stated: When life gives you lemons you don’t have to make lemonade. You really don’t have to. There are other things that you can do when life gives you lemons. I personally do not like lemonade, okay? I don’t, so I’m not going to make lemonade. Okay, I may cut down that lemon tree and plant a mango tree because I

Introduction

7

love mangoes. I can choose to say, “No, I’m not making lemonade, okay, I’m gonna go and buy mangoes and make mango juice.” And I think that’s how life is. We don’t have to make lemonade. We can change our lives, our story, our challenges.

Elizabeth shares how refugees in the resettlement process can change their own narrative and adapt to a new life through their own individual choices. Every day, refugees have the opportunity to rebuild and reshape their lives as they wish. Pursuing education is one of the choices that refugees can make to improve their resettlement experience. Among the varying challenges refugees may experience due to displacement, accessing education can provide an important form of safety, support, and belonging for transitioning into a new host country. We hope that by spotlighting the education-related challenges regarding refugee resettlement and sharing our findings, our work can inspire greater local advocacy, policy, and research efforts to improve refugees’ access to education and inclusion in the U.S. Through our study and contribution to the refugee and migration literature, REAL aims to fortify existing and future efforts by refugees, their communities, educational institutions, policy makers, and other audiences of interest. CONTENT OF THE BOOK This book is divided into three sections: access, inclusion, and application. The first section, “Access,” explores access to education, which is the starting point for refugee students who seek to continue their studies. When refugees can access education, they are able to further develop their capabilities and improve their sense of belonging. Ensuring access is the cornerstone for refugees to regain their foothold in education. Next, the second section, “Inclusion,” considers what happens once refugees are enrolled in an educational institution. To maximize refugees’ educational experiences and ensure that they receive quality instruction, refugees need to feel included in school and in their host community. Finally, the third section, “Application,” examines two practical applications of service provision for refugees in the DMV area. Specifically, the chapters consider what information refugees receive and by whom, as well as how to strengthen capacity for all actors involved in the refugee support system. Section I of the book, “Access,” focuses on access, opportunities, and challenges that refugees face when accessing education systems in the DMV area. The section begins with “Chapter 1: Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy,” which provides background information on U.S. refugee policy over

8

Introduction

the past 40 years. The chapter explores the policy changes which occurred between different Republican and Democratic presidential administrations, as well as analyzes how those policies impacted the state of refugee education in the DMV. Next, “Chapter 2: (Un)Welcoming Admissions: The Legal and Systemic Barriers Refugees in the DMV Face When Accessing Education” takes a deeper look at the legal and systemic barriers that refugees face when accessing education at all levels, from primary and secondary to higher education. Finally, “Chapter 3: Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education (CTE) for Refugees in the United States” focuses on the barriers that refugees face in accessing tertiary and career and technical education in the DMV area. Section II of the book, “Inclusion,” highlights how educational systems can foster an inclusive environment for refugees in the DMV area and outlines recommendations to improve inclusion in education. “Chapter 4: Inclusive Education for Refugee Students” discusses inclusive education efforts for refugee students in the formal school system and advocates for a curriculum that caters to refugees’ needs. Then, “Chapter 5: Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers in Educational Settings” examines asset-based approaches to refugee education, or opportunities to build on the knowledge and experiences refugees bring from their country of origin and refugee journey. It also considers how language education can supplement refugees’ educational experiences. Last, “Chapter 6: Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports for Refugee Students” presents extracurricular opportunities and educational opportunities that are available for refugee students outside of the classroom. Finally, section III, “Application,” focuses on practical examples of applying refugee services and support methods. “Chapter 7: Building Capacity: Improving Refugee-Background Students’ Enrollment and Inclusion” explores the importance of capacity building for refugee students and organizations which support refugees in accessing and receiving an inclusive education. “Chapter 8: Sharing Information on Education across Resettlement Agencies, Nonprofits, Schools, and Community Spaces” considers the impact non-profit organizations, education institutions, and other community organizations can have on sharing information with refugees to facilitate access and inclusion. These chapters include prospective solutions for organizations and policymakers to consider to provide more impactful education access and experiences to the refugee community. We end the book with the “Conclusion,” which revisits key takeaways from each chapter, discusses recommendations from interviewees, offers limitations to the research study, provides directions for future research, and ends with a call to action for all actors involved in refugee education.

Introduction

9

NOTES 1. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2022, “Figures at a Glance,” UNHCR USA, n.d., https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/figures​-at​-a​-glance​.html, n.p. 2. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2021, “What is a refugee?,” Accessed September 20, 2022, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/what​-is​-a​-refugee​.html. 3. UNHCR, “Figures at a Glance.” 4. UNHCR, 2021, “UNHCR Education Report 2021: ‘Staying the course’—The challenges facing refugee education,” Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​ //​ www​ .unhcr​.org​/612f85d64​/unhcr​-education​-report​-2021​-staying​-course​-challenges​-facing​ -refugee​-education. 5. Antonio Olivo, 2021, “Refugee aid groups in Washington region overwhelmed by Afghan caseloads,” The Washington Post, December 12, https:​//​www​.washingtonpost​ .com​/dc​-md​-va​/2021​/12​/12​/afghan​-refugees​-washington​-virginia​-cases​/; “The U.S. has admitted 100,000 Ukrainian migrants. It must keep going,” The Washington Post, July 30, 2022, https:​//​www​.washingtonpost​.com​/opinions​/2022​/07​/30​/us​-has​ -admitted​-100000​-ukrainian​-migrants​-it​-must​-keep​-going​/. 6. Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Gil Loescher, Katy Long, and Sando Sigona, 2014, The Oxford Handbook of Refugee and Forced Migration Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press). 7. Kathleen M. Roche, Bernhard Streitwieser, and Seth J. Schwartz, 2022, “A call for research on immigrant and refugee youth amidst the global rise in xenophobia and nationalism,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 90, 165–167, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.1016​/j​.ijintrel​.2021​.10​.001. 8. Stephen Legg, 2017, “Decolonialism,” Transactions-Institute of British Geographers 42, no. 3, 345–348, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1111​/tran​.12203. 9. bell hooks, 1989, “Pedagogy and Political Commitment: a Comment,” Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black (Boston, MA: South End Press). 10. Kimberlé Crenshaw, 1989, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics,” University of Chicago Legal Forum 1, no. 8, 139–167, https:​//​ chicagounbound​.uchicago​.edu​/cgi​/viewcontent​.cgi​?article​=1052​&context​=uclf. 11. Kimberlé Crenshaw, 1991, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6, 1241–1299, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.2307​/1229039; Lisa Unangst and Thomas M. Crea, 2020, “Higher Education for Refugees: A Need for Intersectional Research,” Comparative Education Review 62, no. 2, 228–248, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1086​/708190. 12. Sumi Cho, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, and Leslie McCall, 2013, “Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 38, no. 4, 787, https:​//​www​-journals​-uchicago​-edu​ .proxygw​.wrlc​.org​/doi​/epdf​/10​.1086​/669608. 13. bell hooks, “Pedagogy and Political Commitment.” 14. U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2021, Proposed Refugee Admissions

10

Introduction

for Fiscal Year 2022: Report to the Congress, Washington, DC, https:​//​www​.wrapsnet​ .org​/documents​/Report+to+Congress+for+FY+2022+USRAP​.pdf. 15. Ibid. 16. Maryland Office for Refugees and Asylees (MORA), 2021, “MORA Fiscal Year 2020 at a Glance,” https:​//​dhs​.maryland​.gov​/documents​/Refugees​%20and​ %20Asylees​/FY20​-Fact​-Sheet​-Final​-final​.pdf. 17. Sarah Dryden-Peterson, 2012, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees in a Global Movement for Primary Education,” Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees 27, no. 2: 10–18, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.25071​/1920​-7336​.34718. 18. United Nations, 2015, “Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” Accessed January 31, 2022, https:​//​sdgs​.un​.org​/publications​/ transforming​-our​-world​-2030​-agenda​-sustainable​-development​-17981, n.p. 19. United Nations (UN), n.d., “Capacity-Building,” Accessed September 25, 2022, https:​//​www​.un​.org​/en​/academic​-impact​/capacity​-building.

SECTION I

Access

11

Chapter 1

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola‌‌

‌‌ United States refugee policy has changed drastically over the past four decades in response to a changing international context. Although refugee policy is delegated between different government agencies and entities, such as the Department of State and Congress, the President is largely responsible for shaping national refugee policy. For example, the President sets the refugee admissions cap, or the maximum number of refugees that can be admitted into the U.S., each fiscal year. This chapter will outline the past 40 years of U.S. refugee policy and examine the impacts of these policies on refugees. Reviewing presidential administrations’ refugee policies is necessary to understand the complexities, opportunities, and shortcomings that refugees face in the U.S. Further, to examine these realities in context, the chapter will explore the application of U.S. refugee policy in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area, making connections to intersectionality and critical theories where possible. Analyzing U.S. refugee policy over this time period can improve understanding of the challenges that refugees in the DMV face today, as this analysis is a reflection of how the U.S. has shaped the lives of refugees living within these communities. It is important to understand the historic and political context of refugee admissions in the U.S. to understand and analyze the educational opportunities available to refugees, or unavailable to them. Policies and the circumstances that influence their creation affect the amount of refugees that are resettled in the U.S., the countries where refugees are coming from, and the public sentiment toward refugee resettlement. All of these factors have an impact on the educational opportunities offered to resettled refugees in the U.S. Scholars, practitioners, and policymakers need to be aware of the 13

14

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

historical political systems for refugees before they can create effective educational policies and programming for refugee students. JIMMY CARTER (1977–1981) The Refugee Act was officially passed in 1979 and signed into law in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter. The Act “raised the annual ceiling1 for refugees from 17,400 to 50,000, created a process for reviewing and adjusting the refugee ceiling to meet emergencies, and required annual consultation between Congress and the President.”2 It specifically amended both the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act that to date had defined U.S. refugee policy. Additionally, the Refugee Act changed the definition of “refugee” to describe individuals with “a well founded fear of persecution,” as was adopted by the United Nations in 1967.3 The Refugee Act also provided funding for the Office of the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs and the Office of Refugee Resettlement, and strengthened public-private partnerships between the government and refugee resettlement agencies to improve the resettlement process.4 The Refugee Act took a tremendous step towards fully embracing refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S. by formalizing the refugee admissions process. It legitimized refugees’ integration process into their host community and outlined their basic rights within U.S. policy. At the same time, it is important to note that the Refugee Act was passed out of necessity in response to the tremendous flow of refugees from Southeast Asia after the end of the Vietnam War. Specifically, “the push to authorize a permanent refugee admission program was driven in large part by Congress’s increasing frustration with the difficulty of dealing with the large-scale Southeast Asian refugee flow under the existing ad hoc refugee admissions procedures.”5 Approximately 300,000 Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees were resettled in the U.S. between 1975 and 1979.6 Congress recognized that the existing law regarding refugee admissions was restrictive given a lack of consistency and limited ease of functionality. In response, Congress sought to establish a better system that built a more solid immigration, resettlement, and political asylum framework. During his administration, President Jimmy Carter established the largest refugee admissions ceiling of any modern president at 231,700 refugees.

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

15

RONALD REAGAN (1981–1989) President Ronald Reagan’s time in office was characterized in part by significant challenges to the refugee policies previously put forth by Carter. According to the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), during Reagan’s presidency, “large-scale migration to the United States from Central America began, as hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans, Guatemalans, and Nicaraguans fled north from civil war, repression, and economic devastation.”7 This led to significant controversy among policymakers regarding the U.S.’s position on migration. The situation became increasingly complicated because the U.S. viewed the civil wars in Central America through the lens of the Cold War. The U.S. played a part in the conflicts in all three countries, from combatting Marxist movements in El Salvador and Guatemala to supporting the Contra rebels in Nicaragua against the Sandinista National Liberation Front.8 The refugee admissions cap continued to fluctuate throughout the Reagan administration, falling from 217,000 for fiscal year (FY) 1981 to 67,000 in FY 1986, but eventually increasing to 87,500 in FY 1988.9 As with the increase, the decrease was due to conflicting political interests along with the U.S. role in Latin American conflicts. Conversely, the rise was largely attributed to the increased allocation of refugees by Congress (15,000 to 30,000 in 1988) from Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in response to a growing number of refugees from that region.10 Reagan’s refugee policy had several notable shortcomings that tie into this substantial fluctuation in the refugee admissions cap throughout his eight years in office. The pursuit of “America First” policy fostered negativity towards immigration, increasing barriers (both physical and regulatory) and adversely impacting public attitudes towards refugees. This nationalist approach to foreign affairs put refugees at a disadvantage under Reagan’s administration. GEORGE H. W. BUSH (1989–1993) President George H. W. Bush repeatedly increased the refugee admissions ceiling throughout his term in office, allowing thousands of refugees to enter and resettle in the U.S. As a clear response to the fall of the Soviet Union, the first Bush administration specifically admitted large numbers of Eastern European refugees.11 According to the International Rescue Committee, “President Bush raised the FY 1989 refugee admissions ceiling to 116,500 refugees due to the increased need for admissions from Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Nearly 40,000 refugees from the region

16

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

arrived that fiscal year.”12 H. W. Bush increased the admissions ceiling to 125,000 in FY 1990.13 The admissions ceiling was set at 131,000 for FY 1992 and increased to 142,000 in FY 1993.14 H. W. Bush increased the admissions ceiling in 1992 in response to the war in Bosnia, further illustrating the pattern of European prioritization in this context.15 As a result, more than 100,000 Bosnian refugees arrived in the U.S. over the next ten years. In FY 1990, the U.S. also admitted close to 5,000 refugees from Cuba, the highest level in a decade.16 This continued the legacy of previous presidential administrations of providing humanitarian relief to Cuban exiles, also known as the open door policy.17 Cuba was an exception to the U.S. pattern of not accommodating Latin American refugees as compared to refugees from Europe. This is because the U.S. considered Cubans to be political refugees fleeing Fidel Castro’s regime. And of course, Cuba was of special interest to the U.S. due to Cold War power dynamics, in particular its alliance with the Soviet Union.18 In terms of challenges, H. W. Bush only served one term in office, cutting short efforts to raise the admissions ceiling and allow more refugees to resettle in the U.S. WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON (1993–2001) President Bill Clinton’s refugee policy was initially formulated in response to both the ongoing Eastern European refugee crises and the second Civil War in Sudan. As part of the FY 1999 admissions cap, which was set at 91,000, President Clinton allotted 20,000 spots for refugees from Kosovo. Additionally, 4,000 spots were allotted to Sudanese refugees that were living in refugee camps in Kenya.19 The highest refugee admissions ceiling set under the Clinton administration was 121,000 in FY 1994.20 In terms of Cuban refugee policy, Nackerud et al. explain that due to the 1994 Cuban Balsero Crisis, the Clinton administration ended the open door policy for Cubans in 1995.21 Prior to this policy change, Cubans were generally accepted as political refugees for over 30 years. The new shift in policy terminated the indefinite detention of over 28,000 Cubans held in safe haven camps, repealed the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, put severe new restrictions on travel to Cuba, prohibited Cubans from sending monetary remittances to Cuba, and equalized the number of annual visas for Cuba with other countries.22 In addition, the changes legalized the return (or transferring to a third country) of Cubans intercepted at sea, while providing those who made it to U.S. shores a chance to remain in the U.S. and an expedited route to citizenship. This particular aspect of Cuban policy later earned the nickname “wet foot, dry foot” policy.23 These policies, colonial in nature, shifted the U.S. government’s power dynamic in its favor to exert greater control over Cuba. Further, policy shifts

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

17

during the Clinton administration, most notably more restrictive immigration policy for Cuba and more open policy toward refugees from Europe and Africa, is a trend that continued in future administrations. GEORGE W. BUSH (2001–2009) George W. Bush’s administration altered the U.S.’s approach towards refugees in two profound ways which still resonate globally to this day. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan later that year and then Iraq in 2003, resulting in millions of refugees coming to the U.S from those countries.24 At the same time the U.S. turned inward, creating policies with more of a nationalist bent, especially relating to the immigration system as a whole and refugee resettlement specifically. These policies, colonial in nature, included a complete transformation of U.S. immigration policy, including the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2003.25 DHS is tasked with several immigration functions which are divided between three sub-agencies: Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which is responsible for enforcement at the border;26 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is responsible for interior enforcement;27 and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which manage the processing and adjudication of various immigration matters, including applications for work visas, asylum, and citizenship.28 Along with this new structure came stricter immigration laws, additional enforcement and greater punishment for violations. Collectively, these changes updated certain instruments of the empire—control of declared territorial borders, internal security and establishing nationality—as defensive elements to America’s overall Global War on Terror. Despite more vetting processes for refugees and other immigrants, Bush did make several considerations and allowances during his two terms.29 In 2004, W. Bush signed the North Korean Human Rights Act into law.30 The Act’s intent was to promote human rights and freedom to North Korean refugees by declaring all North Korean citizens eligible for political asylum in the U.S., among other policies. The act also approved up to $20 million for FY 2005–2008 to assist North Korean refugees. In addition, it instructed the State Department to support individuals from North Korea submitting asylum applications. During the remainder of the W. Bush administration, over 100 North Koreans were resettled in the U.S.31 In 2004, around 15,000 Hmong refugees arrived, fleeing their native country as a result of persecution due to their alliance with the U.S. during the Vietnam War.32 In 2005, the U.S. and Vietnam signed an agreement allowing certain Vietnamese citizens to immigrate to the U.S. The Orderly Departure Program

18

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

(ODP) was created for Vietnamese persons who spent three years or more in Vietnam’s reeducation camps or who worked for the U.S. government before the end of the Vietnam War.33 The ODP led to nearly 500,000 Vietnamese refugees and immigrants resettling in the United States. W. Bush authorized the admission of 70,000 refugees to the U.S. in FY 2006, maintaining the same ceiling set for FY 2005.34 In FY 2006, the refugee allocation was split into 20,000 refugees from Africa, 15,000 from East Asia, 15,000 from Europe and Central Asia, 5,000 from Latin America and the Caribbean, and 5,000 from the Near East or South Asia, with the remaining 10,000 unallocated. Due to budget constraints however, the actual number of refugees admitted was 53,813.35 Though W. Bush admitted refugees from various policies, W. Bush’s post–September 11 isolationist policies demonstrated a large shift in U.S. refugee and immigration policy that continues to impact policies in the present day. BARACK OBAMA (2009–2017) In many ways, President Obama’s immigration policy continued the previous administrations’ practices. While his administration discarded certain Bush-era tactics, such as worksite enforcement operations, other activities such as criminal and non-citizen deportations were emphasized and strengthened.36 At the same time, during Obama’s two terms, the U.S. refugee resettlement program grew to become the largest in the world.37 In FY 2009, 74,602 refugees were resettled in the U.S.38 In FY 2010, 73,293 refugees were resettled, a slight drop from the previous year. However, by FY 2011, the number of resettled refugees plunged to approximately 56,000.39 In FY 2012, those numbers started to reverse again, growing slightly to over 58,000.40 The drop in admissions numbers over the first three years of Obama’s presidency highlighted a continuing trend in stricter immigration policies throughout his administration. Between 2009 and 2012, another noticeable change was refugees’ countries of origin. While many refugees continued to arrive from Asia, the primary nationalities shifted to Burma, Bhutan, Vietnam, and China.41 There was also a significant number of refugees coming from Iraq as a direct result of Operation Iraqi Freedom.42 During the Syrian civil war from 2011 to 2016, the U.S. resettled over 18,000 Syrian refugees.43 A sizable increase occurred in FY 2013, with 69,933 resettled, accounting for two-thirds of the total 98,000 refugees resettled worldwide.44 However, these admissions numbers did not reach the original admissions ceiling of 70,000 for FY 2009. In 2014, the Obama administration modified a rule which blocked refugee and asylum seekers’ entrance to the U.S. if they provided any minor material

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

19

support to terrorist groups. Under the rule change, certain applicants who attested to having provided “insignificant” material support to such groups, such as small sums of money, meals, medical assistance, commercial interactions, or support under significant pressure, were no longer automatically denied eligibility.45 That policy change impacted an estimated 3,000 pending asylum cases and an unknown number of individuals in removal proceedings. Immigrant-rights groups approved of the policy update, claiming it would assist resettlement applicants who posed no threat to national security. Critics considered it an example of presidential abuse of power and a loophole for those who had aided terrorist groups.46 This policy change increased the number of asylum seekers and refugees who were resettled in the U.S., moving away from the restrictive practices to a more decolonial and welcoming approach. However, this policy change also marked a drastic change in U.S. public opinion regarding refugees. In FY 2015, 70,000 refugees were resettled in the U.S., increasing from Obama’s first term.47 The next year, President Obama co-hosted the UN Leaders Summit on Refugees.48 During his speech, he announced that the U.S. would increase the number of refugees received over the next two years by 40 percent, to 100,000 in 2017.49 That same year, the U.S. resettled 84,994 refugees.50 At the beginning of 2017, as part of his efforts to normalize relations with Cuba, Obama ended the Clinton-era Cuban refugee policies.51 Obama’s approach to refugee issues blended the post– September 11 emphasis on homeland security with a tradition of clear obligations to populations impacted by U.S. foreign policy (such as the Iraqis), as exemplified by the admissions data from previous administrations (Carter: Vietnamese and Cambodians;52 Reagan: Latin Americans;53 H. W. Bush: Cubans;54 Clinton: Cubans;55 and W. Bush: Vietnamese and North Koreans).56 Obama’s approach represented a shift to “soft” diplomacy, in contrast to W. Bush’s “hard” diplomacy. DONALD J. TRUMP (2017–2021) President Donald J. Trump’s campaign stance, “Make America Great Again” or MAGA, carried over to his policies in office.57 Trump’s immigration policy involved keeping out certain immigrants, refugees, and others who were perceived as a threat to the country.58 Citing continued homeland security concerns, particularly at the southwest border and national resentment fueled by protracted post-recession economic recovery, Trump blamed citizens from the Global South and their denizens for the U.S.’s problems. For example, when Trump formally announced his presidential candidacy, he claimed that Mexico “sends people [to the U.S.] that have lots of problems, and . . . [bring]

20

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

those problems with [them]. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some . . . are good people.”59 Soon after winning the election, at a high-level meeting regarding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy (DACA), Trump referred to African nations as “shitholes [that] send us the people that they don’t want” and asserted that “[the U.S. doesn’t] need more Haitians.”60 This nationalistic rhetoric served to harshly reinforce historical colonial power dynamics as Trump focused his policies on framing the U.S. as a superior nation. In 2017, under the pretense of saving money, the Trump administration cut the refugee admissions ceiling to 45,000.61 The next year, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that only 30,000 refugees would be allowed in FY 2019.62 In addition, the U.S. increased vetting procedures and included more restrictions for asylum seekers coming through the U.S.-Mexico border.63 As a result of these and other anti-immigrant actions in the U.S., Canada became the world’s top resettlement country.64 In FY 2020, the Trump administration planned to allow only 18,000 refugees to resettle in the U.S., the lowest level since the modern program began. By the end of FY 2020, fewer than 12,000 refugees were actually resettled.65 Officials announced plans to slash refugee admissions for FY 2021 to a record low of 15,000, the fourth consecutive year of declining refugee admissions under Trump.66 While this can be attributed in part to Trump’s anti-immigration rhetoric and MAGA policies, particularly pushed by Steven Miller, Trump’s Senior Advisor for Policy, the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic in late 2019 drove governments all over the world to restrict access to their respective countries.67 The rise in U.S. nationalism under the Trump administration is directly reflected in Trump’s refugee policies. For the first time in decades, the U.S. adopted an extremely isolationist immigration policy and accepted historically low numbers of refugees. The Trump administration reverted to colonial policies which served to not only lower the refugee admission ceiling but also to lower public opinion regarding refugees. This detrimental blow to the U.S. refugee system damaged the resettlement infrastructure, leading to future difficulties in the system. JOSEPH BIDEN (2021–PRESENT) President Joe Biden’s refugee policy has fluctuated greatly throughout his presidential term to date. In April 2021, President Biden announced that his administration would continue the 15,000-refugee admissions ceiling that began under the Trump administration. Eventually, criticism from human rights organizations and Biden’s own political party successfully motivated

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

21

him to increase the cap.68 Biden eventually raised the admissions cap to 62,500 in May 2021.69 In October 2021, he officially increased the cap further to 125,000 for FY 2022.70 The admissions cap remained at 125,000 for FY 2023.71 The refugee admissions cap was continually increased as a result of various migration crises during 2021 and 2022, including the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan and acquisition of the country by the Taliban in August 2021 resulted in the evacuation and resettlement of around 76,000 Afghan citizens in the U.S.72 In response to this crisis, the Biden administration imposed a temporary freeze on the admission of non-Afghan refugees to focus solely on the resettlement of Afghans or individuals meeting certain exceptions.73 In February 2022 Russia invaded Ukraine, resulting in mass displacement of Ukrainians. As of September 2022, the UNHCR projected that between 100,000 to 300,000 Ukrainians would resettle in the U.S., of the more than 8 million now scattered throughout Europe.74 It is important to consider the regional allocations for refugee admissions in FY 2023 in this context. In FY 2023, 40,000 spots were allocated to refugees from Africa, 15,000 from East Asia, 15,000 from Europe and Central Asia, 15,000 from Latin America and the Caribbean, 35,000 from Near East/ South Asia, and 5,000 spots were unallocated.75 Given the 15,000 allocation for Europe and Central Asia, the U.S. may face difficulties in accommodating more Ukrainian refugees if the conflict between Russia and Ukraine continues. However, in contrast to his predecessor, President Biden has taken an open approach to refugee policy overall. Given the current global migration crises, Biden has sought to aid these populations and create a welcoming environment for refugees in the U.S. CONNECTION TO CRITICAL THEORIES U.S. refugee policy over the past four decades illustrates a system deeply rooted in colonialism. From before Carter’s time in office, refugee populations attempting to enter the country were often a result of regional disruption caused by the U.S. imposing its policy decisions on various parts of the world (proxy and direct conflicts, embargoes, etc.). Yet, from even before the imagery of the “Yellow Peril” during the late 1800s, to Trump’s rhetoric about Latin Americans and Africans throughout his presidency, only certain ethnicities have been considered of consistent value to the country. Granted, most of America’s modern leaders have recognized moral obligations to various peoples regardless of origin. However, fluctuating refugee admissions caps based on political agendas, among other factors, with a noticeable

22

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

preference for European refugees over refugees originating from the Global South, is not representative of sustainable refugee policy with the best interests of refugees in mind. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Reagan and H. W. Bush’s refugee policies illustrate a broader U.S. trend of increasing admission caps to accommodate refugees originating from Europe as compared to those from Latin America, Africa, and Asia. This illustrates the ongoing imbalance that has characterized refugee admissions in the U.S. refugee policy during Clinton’s response to waves of refugees originating from Eastern Europe and Africa. Clinton’s refugee policy fell short, however, in critical ways. For example, he continued to maintain a higher admissions cap for European refugees as compared to refugees originating from the Global South while reversing policy towards Cuban refugees, illustrating the traditional U.S. approach to preferential treatment of European refugees compared to refugees from the Global South. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attack occurred at the beginning of George W. Bush’s presidency. This tragic event shifted public sentiment against immigration and resulted in less welcoming immigration policy reform and the creation of various immigration enforcement agencies. With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the W. Bush administration concentrated on admitting refugees from those countries. W. Bush also opened refugee admissions for North Korean and Vietnamese refugees. President Obama continued W. Bush’s policies by keeping the refugee admissions ceiling low and even continuing to lower it over the beginning of his term. When the Syrian civil war started, Obama began to raise the admission ceiling and admit more refugees to the U.S. During his second presidential term, he adopted more open immigration policies, including ending restrictive policies against Cuba. In his final months as president, Obama had increased the refugee admissions ceiling significantly. In contrast, Donald Trump’s nationalistic and isolationist rhetoric and policies greatly impacted the U.S. refugee resettlement program. By significantly lowering the refugee admissions ceiling, Trump decreased the existing resettlement infrastructure in the U.S. Trump’s rhetoric and anti-immigrant supporters ushered in four years of historically low refugee admissions numbers that led to the U.S. losing its spot as the top resettlement country. In the first two years of his presidency, the Biden administration has responded to numerous refugee crises through its policy. Activists and other government officials have called on the Biden administration to reshape how the U.S. provides immediate humanitarian response to conflicts and set new

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

23

standards for responding to issues of displacement. Biden can continue to eliminate barriers and allow more refugees to resettle in the U.S. in the future and rebuild the U.S. refugee system. In conclusion, it is important to review and understand the history of U.S. refugee policy to know how to shape future refugee policy through analysis of the positive and negative policies created over the past 40 years. Policymakers should consider the successful and unsuccessful policies from previous administrations to improve the refugee resettlement program. The Trump administration’s refugee reforms had a lasting effect on the resettlement of refugees in the U.S., adversely impacting the U.S.’ historic image as a refugee and migrant-friendly country. To build back the refugee resettlement infrastructure, current and future policymakers need to recognize and consider more long-term policy reforms. U.S. refugee policy has fluctuated tremendously over the past four decades. These changes are jarring and cause inconsistencies in both application and reception. Therefore, it is important for the federal government to establish greater consistency in its refugee policy. This can better prepare the U.S. to accommodate refugees in the future, including facilitating educational access and inclusion. NOTES 1. Ceiling refers to the number of refugees that are allowed admission under refugee status to the U.S. each year. 2. National Archives Foundation, 2016, “Refugee Act of 1980,” https:​ //​ www​ .archivesfoundation​.org​/documents​/refugee​-act​-1980​/. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 5. Ruth Ellen Wasem, 2020, “More than a Wall: The Rise and Fall of US Asylum and Refugee Policy,” Journal on Migration and Human Security 8, no. 3, 5. https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.1177​/2331502420948847. 6. National Archives Foundation, 2016, “Refugee Act of 1980,” https:​ //​ www​ .archivesfoundation​.org​/documents​/refugee​-act​-1980​/. 7. Susan Gzesh, 2006, “Central Americans and asylum policy in the Reagan era,” Migration Information Source, 1. https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/central​ -americans​-and​-asylum​-policy​-reagan​-era. 8. Ibid. 9. Migration Policy Institute, “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present,” Data Hub, accessed October 6, 2022, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/programs​/data​-hub​/charts​/us​-annual​ -refugee​-resettlement​-ceilings​-and​-number​-refugees​-admitted​-united​?width​=850​ &height​=850​&iframe​=true.

24

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

10. International Rescue Committee, “Four Decades of Presidential Leadership on Refugee Protection, until Now,” accessed October 7, 2022, https:​//​www​.rescue​.org​/ resource​/four​-decades​-presidential​-leadership​-refugee​-protection​-until​-now. 11. Bush refers to former president George H. W. Bush throughout this section. 12. Ibid. 13. Migration Policy Institute, “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present,” Data Hub, accessed October 6, 2022, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/programs​/data​-hub​/charts​/us​-annual​ -refugee​-resettlement​-ceilings​-and​-number​-refugees​-admitted​-united​?width​=850​ &height​=850​&iframe​=true. 14. Ibid. 15. Ibid. 16. Migration Policy Institute, “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present.” 17. Ibid. 18. Jorge Duany, 1999, “Cuban Communities in the United States: Migration Waves, Settlement Patterns and Socioeconomic Diversity,” Pouvoirs dans la Caraïbe Revue du Centre de recherche sur les pouvoirs locaux dans la Caraïbe, no. 11, 69–103. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.4000​/plc​.464. 19. “Four Decades of Presidential Leadership on Refugee Protection, until Now.” International Rescue Committee. 20. Migration Policy Institute, “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present.” 21. “Balseros are defined as persons who have escaped from Cuba in small boats, on homemade rafts (balsas), or on inner tubes, in an effort to reach the United States,” Holly Ackerman, 1996, “The Balsero Phenomenon, 1991–1994,” Cuban Studies 26, 170. http:​//​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/24487714. 22. Larry Nackerud, Alyson Springer, Christopher Larrison, and Alicia Issac, 1999, “The End of the Cuban Contradiction in U.S. Refugee Policies,” International Migration Review 33, no. 1, 176–92. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/019791839903300108. 23. Larry Nackerud, Alyson Springer, Christopher Larrison, and Alicia Issac, 1999, “The End of the Cuban Contradiction in U.S. Refugee Policies,” International Migration Review 33, no. 1, 176–92. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/019791839903300108. 24. Nicholas R. Micinski, 2018, “Refugee Policy as Foreign Policy: Iraqi and Afghan Refugee Resettlements to the United States,” Refugee Survey Quarterly 37, no. 3, 253–278, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1093​/rsq​/hdy007. 25. Department of Homeland Security, “Creation of the DHS,” History, About DHS, updated June 3, 2022, https:​//​www​.dhs​.gov​/creation​-department​-homeland​ -security. 26. Department of Homeland Security, “Guidelines for Enforcement Actions in or Near Protected Areas,” Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, Topics, updated January 11, 2022, https:​//​www​.dhs​.gov​/guidelines​-enforcement​-actions​-or​ -near​-protected​-areas. 27. Ibid.

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

25

28. Department of Homeland Security, “Citizenship and Immigration Services,” Topics, updated July 19, 2022, 1https:​//​www​.dhs​.gov​/topics​/citizenship​-and​ -immigration​-services. 29. In this section, Bush refers to George W. Bush. 30. North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004, H.R. 4011; P.L. 108–333 (2004). https:​//​www​.congress​.gov​/bill​/108th​-congress​/house​-bill​/4011​/text. 31. U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2010, “Humanitarian Assistance: Status of North Korean Refugee Resettlement and Asylum in the United States GAO-10– 691,” June 24, https:​//​www​.gao​.gov​/products​/gao​-10​-691. 32. Jennifer Yau, 2015, “The Foreign-Born Hmong in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/foreign​-born​ -hmong​-united​-states. 33. U.S. Department of State Office of the Spokesman, “Joint U.S. - Vietnamese Announcement of Humanitarian Resettlement Program,” news release no. 2005/1076, November 15, 2005, https:​//​2001​-2009​.state​.gov​/r​/pa​/prs​/ps​/2005​/56936​.htm. 34. Ibid. 35. Julia Gelatt, 2005, “President Bush Pushes for Increased Enforcement and a Temporary Worker Program,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​ .migrationpolicy​ . org​ / article​ / president​ - bush​ - pushes ​ - increased ​ - enforcement ​ - and​ -temporary​-worker​-program. 36. American Immigration Council staff, “President Obama’s Legacy on Immigration,” Immigration Impact (blog), American Immigration Council, January 20, 2017, https:​//​immigrationimpact​.com​/2017​/01​/20​/president​-obamas​-legacy​-immigration​/. 37. The White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2016, “Remarks by President Obama at Leaders Summit on Refugees,” September 20. https:​//​obamawhitehouse​ .archives​.gov​/the​-press​-office​/2016​/09​/20​/remarks​-president​-obama​-leaders​-summit​ -refugees. 38. Monica Li and Jeanne Batalova, 2011, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/ refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2010. 39. Joseph Russell and Jeanne Batalova, 2012, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/ article​/refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2011. 40. Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, 2015, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/ refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2013. 41. Monica M. Trieu and Chia Youyee Vang, 2015, “A portrait of refugees from Burma/Myanmar and Bhutan in the United States,” Journal of Asian American Studies 18, no. 3, 347–369. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1353​/jaas​.2015​.0029. 42. Ibid. 43. Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, 2017, “Syrian Refugees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/ syrian​-refugees​-united​-states​-2017. 44. Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source.

26

Savannah Smith and O. Abiola Akintola

45. Associated Press in Washington, “US Relaxes Strict Rules on Potential Immigrants with Limited Terrorist Links: First Action by Obama on Immigration Since State of Union, Automatic Bar Lifted for Giving ‘Limited Material Support,’” The Guardian, February 9, 2014, https:​//​www​.theguardian​.com​/world​/2014​/feb​/09​/us​ -relaxes​-rules​-immigrants​-terrorist​-links. 46. Ibid. 47. Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States.” 48. The White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2016, “Fact Sheet on the Leaders’ Summit on Refugees,” September 20, https:​//​obamawhitehouse​.archives​.gov​/the​ -press​-office​/2016​/09​/20​/fact​-sheet​-leaders​-summit​-refugees. 49. The White House Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by President Obama at Leaders Summit on Refugees.” 50. Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, 2017, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/ refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2015. 51. Richard Gonzalez, “Obama Administration Ends Refugee Policy That Favored Cubans,” The Two-Way (blog), NPR, January 17, 2017, https:​//​www​.npr​.org​/sections​ /thetwo​-way​/2017​/01​/12​/509575935​/obama​-administration​-ends​-refugee​-policy​-that​ -favored​-cubans. 52. National Archives Foundation, “Refugee Act of 1980.” 53. Susan Gzesh, “Central Americans and asylum policy in the Reagan era.” 54. Migration Policy Institute, “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present.” 55. Kurt Mills, 1998, “United Nations Intervention in Refugee Crises after the Cold War,” International Politics 35, no. 4, 391–424. http:​//​hdl​.handle​.net​/10315​/10029. 56. Department of Homeland Security, “Guidelines for Enforcement Actions in or Near Protected Areas.” 57. Lindsay Pérez Huber, 2016, “Make America great again: Donald Trump, racist nativism and the virulent adherence to white supremacy amid US demographic change,” Charleston Law Review, 10, 215. 58. Viet Thanh Nguyen, 2019, “In Trump’s vision of a white America, immigrants should be grateful and servile: What ‘go back’ really means,” The Washington Post, July 18, https:​//​www​.washingtonpost​.com​/outlook​/in​-trumps​-vision​-of​-a​-white​ -america​-immigrants​-should​-be​-grateful​-and​-servile​/2019​/07​/18​/0afb70c6​-a8e3​ -11e9​-a3a6​-ab670962db05​_story​.html. 59. Dow Jones Institutional News, “Donald Trump Transcript: ‘Our Country Needs a Truly Great Leader,’” Washwire (blog), The Wall Street Journal, June 16, 2015, https:​//​www​.wsj​.com​/articles​/BL​-WB​-55953. 60. Eugene Kiely, “What Did Trump Say at Immigration Meeting?” FactCheck Posts (blog), FactCheck.org, January 16, 2018, https:​//​www​.factcheck​.org​/2018​/01​/ trump​-say​-immigration​-meeting​/. 61. Joel Rose, “ Trump Administration Plans To Cap The Number Of Accepted Refugees To 45,000,” September 27, 2017, in All Things Considered, produced by NPR Politics Podcast, MP3 audio, https:​//​www​.npr​.org​/2017​/09​/27​/554057375​/ trump​-administration​-plans​-to​-cap​-the​-number​-of​-accepted​-refugees​-to​-45​-000.

Four Decades of U.S. Refugee Policy

27

62. Lesley Wroughton, 2018, “U.S. to sharply limit refugee flows to 30,000 in 2019,” Bank News, Reuters, September 17, https:​//​www​.reuters​.com​/article​/us​-usa​ -immigration​-pompeo​-idUSKCN1LX2HS. 63. Scott Horsley and Richard Gonzalez, 2018, “Trump Administration Seeks To Limit Asylum-Seekers With New Rule,” in All Things Considered, NPR Politics, November 8, https:​//​www​.npr​.org​/2018​/11​/08​/665875770​/trump​-administration​ -seeks​-to​-limit​-asylum​-seekers​-with​-new​-rule. 64. Canada.ca, 2021, “CIMM—Refugees and Resettlement - June 2, 2021,” https:​//​www​.canada​.ca​/en​/immigration​-refugees​-citizenship​/corporate​/transparency​/ committees​/cimm​-jun​-02​-2021​/refugees​-resettlement​.html. 65. Kira Monin, Jeanne Batalova, and Tianjian Lai, 2021, “Refugees and Asylees in the United States,” Migration Information Source, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/ article​/refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2021. 66. Ibid. 67. Cindy Cheng et al., 2022, “Capturing the COVID-19 Crisis through Public Health and Social Measures Data Science,” Scientific Data 9, no. 1, 1–9. https:​//​www​ .nature​.com​/articles​/s41597​-022​-01616​-8. 68. Shear, M., 2021, “The Biden Administration will raise the cap on refugee admissions to 125,000,” The New York Times, September 20, https:​//​www​.nytimes​ .com​/2021​/09​/20​/us​/politics​/biden​-refugee​-cap​.html. 69. Ibid. 70. The White House, 2021, “Memorandum on Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2022,” October 8, https:​//​www​.state​.gov​/the​ -presidential​-determination​-on​-refugee​-admissions​-for​-fiscal​-year​-2022​/. 71. The White House, 2022, “Memorandum on Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2023,” September 27, https:​//​www​.whitehouse​ .gov​/briefing​-room​/presidential​-actions​/2022​/09​/27​/memorandum​-on​-presidential​ -determination​-on​-refugee​-admissions​-for​-fiscal​-year​-2023​/. 72. Jordan, Miriam. “‘We Can’t Claim Mission Accomplished’: A Long Road for Afghan Refugees.” The New York Times, August 12, 2022. https:​//​www​.nytimes​.com​ /2022​/08​/12​/us​/afghanistan​-refugees​.html. 73. Jens Manuel Krogstad and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, 2022, “Key Facts about U.S. Immigration Policies and Biden’s Proposed Changes,” Pew Research Center, https:​//​www​.pewresearch​.org​/fact​-tank​/2022​/01​/11​/key​-facts​-about​-u​-s​-immigration​ -policies​-and​-bidens​-proposed​-changes​/. 74. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Operational Data Portal, 2022, “Ukraine Refugee Situation,” Accessed October 7, https:​//​data​.unhcr​.org​/en​/ situations​/ukraine. 75. The White House, “Memorandum on Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2023.”

Chapter 2

(Un)Welcoming Admissions The Legal and Systemic Barriers Refugees in the DMV Face When Accessing Education Jessica Crist‌‌

‌‌ Various legal and systemic barriers exist that problematize refugees’ access to education. Legal barriers are exacerbated by a lack of information on enrollment procedures or access to visas and residency documents. Systemic barriers include an inability to access official documents such as transcripts, an inability to prepare and pay for standardized testing, a lack of financial resources, and the adverse impact of language barriers.1 Furthermore, an increase in refugees arriving in the United States in 2021 caused a boom in the refugee population specifically in the Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area.2 With the 2021 U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, the conflict in Ukraine, and continued displacement due to crises in Syria and Venezuela, the DMV area must strengthen its support for current and future refugees, including through education. In the DMV area, barriers refugees face when attempting to enter education are heightened due to various factors, including the high cost of living and competition for everything from housing to schooling to access to even the most basic resources. As such, it is important to recognize the legal and systemic barriers refugees experience when accessing education and to develop strategies and political and educational reforms to respond to those barriers to facilitate refugee students’ enrollment processes at all education levels. Given its responsibility as a signatory of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), the U.S. needs to work to reduce refugees’ educational access barriers and provide more 29

30

Jessica Crist

robust assistance to integrate them into education systems at all levels, from preschool to higher education and throughout a lifetime of learning. Ensuring refugees’ access to education opportunities in the U.S. can help build their capacity and capabilities further, leading to more profitable and prosperous inclusion in their host communities and an overall improved quality of life. Additionally, providing educational opportunities to refugees brings multiple benefits to their host communities.3 Educational opportunities can lead to higher paying jobs, greater autonomy, and more control over their circumstances. This chapter will both highlight some of the challenges and also consider many of the opportunities that exist for facilitating refugee access to education at all levels. In doing so, it will consider the broad and diverse4 perspectives of refugees, school administrators, and policy makers. Specifically, this chapter will focus on the educational experiences of refugees in the DMV are over the past ten years, particularly as it pertains to accessing education services. First, I explain the importance of ensuring refugee’s access to education. Then, I identify and describe barriers to access to education opportunities for refugees in the DMV area through an analysis of legal and policy documents and interviews with refugee background students and families, as well as with experts in the field. Finally, I outline education and migration policy recommendations to address and reduce these barriers. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK Refugees’ voices are often absent from refugee-focused scholarship and lack the power to influence policy-making decisions. This study sought to disrupt this power imbalance by interviewing refugees and centering their voices and experiences in the analysis. This chapter employs decolonial theory5 in its examination of the systemic barriers that exist that prevent refugees from easily accessing education. As such, it will consider historically exclusionary education policies in the U.S. and analyze how they have created roadblocks for refugees looking to enroll in education in the U.S. Ultimately, this chapter highlights refugees’ various experiences within this system and offers opportunities to disrupt or adapt the system to be more inclusive while considering and advocating for use of refugees’ perspectives to inform future policy decisions.

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

31

FINDINGS Importance of access to education for refugees Academic scholarship outlines the various benefits of refugee education. First, education can build individual capacity and increase refugees’ independence. Education can improve refugees autonomy, build their agency in decision-making, and reduce their dependence on social services.6 For example, refugees who pursue education typically have higher overall satisfaction with their resettlement experience and are perceived as more successful.7 Refugees’ sense of success and accomplishment, often built through education, can influence their involvement and active participation in the resettlement process.8 One study found that when refugees could access additional education opportunities, such as school programming and higher education, refugees became more resilient and had increased ambition.9 Finally, access to education can increase refugees’ well-being, leading to longer, healthier lives.10 Education builds individual capacities, which can have a large impact on refugees’ resettlement and the construction of their new lives in their host country. Second, education can influence refugees’ integration into their host community. Refugees who gain cultural knowledge through education may have an easier time integrating and adapting to their host community.11 Their degree of integration and acceptance at school can serve as an indicator of their sense of belonging within the larger community.12 As stated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), “Students’ sense of belonging is . . . likely to be associated with lower rates of school dropout and to promote healthy social and psychological development among children and adolescents.”13 Refugees’ integration into the mainstream host society is more successful when they participate in the country’s education system.14 Additionally, at the tertiary level, higher education can improve refugees’ ability to participate in political and social activism within their host community and desire to advocate for change.15 Education for refugees can encourage and promote community integration and result in refugee-led infrastructure improvements. For example, refugees who pursue further education can improve their understanding of the systems in their host country. They can use this knowledge, along with their lived experiences and learning from the U.S. school system, to inform their decisions, make changes to existing systems, and develop new systems. To ensure their sense of well-being and belonging in their host community, it is important for refugees to feel accepted and a part of their community. Overall, this chapter argues that access to education can facilitate this integration by providing host country

32

Jessica Crist

cultural knowledge, increasing economic and social opportunities, and reducing refugees’ dependence on social services. Legal barriers While scholars have documented several reasons why education is an important and essential factor to the integration of refugees in their host community, various legal and systemic barriers exist that limit their access to education. For example, refugees face unique challenges when enrolling in education which limits their access. The first type of barrier that refugees face when attempting to enter education in the U.S. are legal barriers, which are rooted in the colonial legacy of U.S. migration policy, as outlined in chapter 1. Legal barriers include documentation and immigration requirements which can lead to improper grade placement or delays in enrollment. This can also result in immigration-based problems, especially for refugees looking to come to the U.S. while being resettled in a third country. While there is a large population of refugees who have been resettled in the U.S., 83 percent of refugees are hosted in low- and middle-income countries.16 This demonstrates the power differences between the U.S. and other nations. While the U.S. has greater economic capacity to provide for refugees as compared to some host countries, restrictive and nationalistic migration policies limit the number of refugees that are directly resettled to U.S. Refugees who are resettled or transit through low- and middle-income countries may need additional legal approval to travel to and resettle in the U.S. due to the pre-existing and often exclusionary migration policies. Documentation requirements Though many refugee youth attend some type of formal or informal schooling while in refugee camps or during their resettlement, official documentation such as transcripts or grade reports are difficult to access or may not exist.17 Those fleeing conflict may not have time to request official transcripts, may be unsafe to request official documents, or the students’ school may no longer exist. In addition to transcripts, schools require identity documents, such as passports and birth certificates, to enroll. If a refugee does not have these documents on hand, they may need to request documents from their embassy or have them sent by someone still located in their home country. Rebecca, an international higher education expert who was interviewed as part of the research study, shared that refugees may be unable to return to their home country for the documents or to ask for assistance from their family or friends in their home country due to violence and other risks. Many refugees are in

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

33

precarious situations while located in a country of transit, or a country they are only traveling through while awaiting permanent resettlement, and do not have immediate access to an embassy. Depending on the refugee’s legal status, they may be unable to travel due to the host country’s rules and regulations on refugees.18 This demonstrates one way in which the U.S. makes use of an unequal power dynamic to exercise control over refugees. Additionally, many times, a refugee’s home country may not have a working embassy in their host country. The refugee’s documents may have been destroyed or damaged in transit as well, all of which can hinder the school enrollment process. For Mohammad, a 29-year-old refugee in Virginia, the process to enroll his younger siblings in public middle and high schools was delayed by about two months because they did not have school transcripts. Mohammad explained: It took all of two months for me to enroll them in school because there were like, they had some reasons and school document, grading documents like transcripts and these things. While we were evacuating and in a different kind of situation that even lots of [refugees] were those who evacuated . . . they were evacuated with clothes and then they had no chance to bring their documents or other stuffs.

Mohammad stated that during his evacuation from their home country, there was chaos and he did not think to bring transcripts and other documents. He shared, “Most of the staff, they were not, they had no clue, and they had no, they know nothing about, like, the situation over in [my country]. They were asking if there is any relative of your people in [my country], asked them to collect the document.” School staff did not have the proper resources to assist Mohammad with enrolling his siblings. As discussed previously, documentation requirements can be insurmountable for some refugees. This can lead to delays in enrollment and eventual learning loss, as was exemplified by Mohammad’s situation. An additional requirement for primary and secondary school enrollment in the U.S. is showing proof of medical records and vaccinations. For many of the same reasons as previously stated, these documents may not be readily available and accessible. According to Hadiya, the mother of a young refugee student who came to the U.S. from Afghanistan, when enrolling her child in elementary school, she was required to present proof of immunizations. However, she shared that “we came in chaos, we just came with our dress and we just run out of the house in the middle of the night.” While fleeing from violence and war, she was not thinking about what documents to bring, such as immunization records. As a result, refugee families may be forced to attend expensive medical appointments to complete physical examinations and receive new rounds of vaccinations. Hadiya explained, “because we didn’t

34

Jessica Crist

have any paper, they started all of them again. He got all of that vaccine.” Hadiya was required to have her child start repeat rounds of vaccines that he had previously received to complete the official documentation needed for school enrollment. This process can be time consuming and pricey, potentially leading to further delays in enrollment. Immigration documentation and restrictions Refugee students who are in camps or awaiting resettlement outside of the U.S. face different barriers than those who have already been resettled in the U.S. due to the complex U.S. legal immigration framework. According to Rebecca, an international higher education expert, the legal framework can be a barrier for refugee students who are looking to attend school in the U.S., especially those who want to attend a higher education institution. Rebecca shared that the U.S. J and F student visa categories are non-immigrant visas and require students to “demonstrate strong ties to the country they’re living in.” It is very difficult for refugees to demonstrate such connections if they are living in a refugee camp or a transit country. This requirement privileges students who come from higher economic means and limits the power of those who are living in situations of displacement. Additionally, Rebecca explained that the U.S. student visa system does not provide refugee students with a pathway to permanent residency. As such, they are expected to leave the U.S. at the end of their program. For refugee students, this is typically not an option, as they do not have a safe country to which they can return. Usman, a refugee university student, described the difficulties he had when attempting to receive a student visa in his transit country to come to the U.S. He shared, “They let me down on like from the car and they interrogated me just because I went to the U.S. embassy, which was quite a like frightening experience.” Usman did not have access to a U.S. embassy in his home country and had to travel across borders, putting himself in potential danger, to receive his visa. Overseas refugees’ legal barrier to obtaining visas to study in the U.S. can place refugees in dangerous situations, as exemplified by Usman’s experience. This limits their opportunities to access education as well as other services. The difficult U.S. student visa and migration system leaves many refugees without any other choice but to place themselves in dangerous situations to resettle in the U.S. SYSTEMIC BARRIERS While non-U.S. based refugees predominantly face legal barriers with documentation and immigration challenges, systematic barriers exist for those

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

35

already resettled into the U.S., as well as for those accessing higher education in the U.S. from abroad. These exist at the school level, and especially impact PK-12 students. Socioeconomic Conditions Refugee children arriving in the U.S. often experience different socioeconomic conditions than their schoolmates. For example, many refugee parents have lower levels of education compared to other parents in the community.19 As a result, students may not have access to strong educational support at home, potentially leading to poorer academic performance as compared to their peers. Refugee students who do not have sufficient support at home are also at greater risk of grade repetition and may struggle to pass their exams. The U.S. education system is not built to support those who come from less privileged backgrounds, such as refugees. For example, refugees in the U.S. are more likely to have lower socioeconomic status and poorer living conditions.20 As such, refugee students may not be able to afford school supplies, books, and additional materials which inhibit their academic success. Students who do not live in conditions which are conducive to studying may fall behind in classes. While their peers may have access to tutoring and additional education resources, many refugee families’ socioeconomic situations can impede refugee students’ access to these resources. As a result, refugee students may lag behind their peers and struggle to achieve educational goals. Due to the emphasis on completing higher education in the U.S., those who have college or university degrees gain more power and influence over those with less education, including higher paying jobs. In the DMV area, the cost of living is higher than many other parts of the country. Washington, DC, has the second highest cost of living of all U.S. states and territories, with a 154.7 cost of living index.21 This means that the cost of living in the DMV is 54.7 percent more expensive than the national average.22 As of July 2021, the average monthly rent for a one bedroom apartment in DC was $2,344.23 To afford a one bedroom apartment as well as additional living expenses, DC residents should earn a minimum annual salary of $84,300.24 Refugees who are resettled in the region must account for these additional living costs. Refugee families in the DMV area must calculate the cost to rent an apartment, pay for groceries and food, and cover transportation fees. Refugees often have to find a job quickly upon resettlement, resulting in securing jobs that are lower paying. The nature of the U.S. refugee resettlement system may provide refugees with less choices and limit their future opportunities. More limited income can make DC area costs extremely difficult to afford.

36

Jessica Crist

In addition to a potential lack of support at home, due recently arrived refugees’ economic situations, their enrollment options are often limited to the U.S. public school system. While the U.S. public education system is not inherently bad, disparities in funding across communities can lead to differing school experiences. Some public schools in the DMV area are well-funded, such as Fairfax County schools, while others struggle due to funding deficits. Oftentimes, refugees enroll in schools that are located in low income, urban areas that are underfunded and underperform.25 In the U.S. schools in areas with large minority populations historically receive less funding. These schools may not have the capacity to support the unique needs of refugee students and properly foster their learning. Refugee students attending these low-income public schools are less prepared to enter higher education in the future.26 Though refugee youth and their families may aspire to continue to pursue education through high school and university, the economic circumstances may not provide sufficient preparation for further education. Language Barriers In addition to economic barriers at home, refugees may face language barriers in school. Many refugee families arrive in the U.S. without prior knowledge of the English language. To enroll in school and begin to attend classes, refugee students may attend English as a Second Language (ESL) programs and classes. While refugee students can more easily enroll in ESL programs, many parents do not have the same access to English classes. Senait shared, “I mean my parents don’t really speak English so I have to do all the things by myself.” Despite her young age, Senait had to navigate the enrollment process alone without her parents’ help. While young refugees tend to pick up English quickly, refugee children above the age of 12 have a more difficult time learning English.27 According to Clifford, Rhodes, and Paxton, it can take between five and seven years for a student to achieve academic proficiency in a second language.28 When refugee students face difficulties learning English, they may end up repeating grades, struggling in class, and performing poorly on exams.29 Refugee children are often placed in ESL classes which may be attended by few or none of their host country peers. While these classes are essential for refugee children to learn English, they can prevent refugees from integrating into the school community and building relationships with their peers. In particular, refugees may not have spaces to interact daily with their peers and instead may be isolated from them.30 The current structure of the U.S. education system can be exclusionary for certain groups of students, as refugee students are expected to fit into the mold of English-speaking students before they can attend traditional classes and participate in typical classrooms and interact regularly with their peers.

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

37

On the tertiary level, most U.S. higher education institutions require a high level of English proficiency to apply for and attend a program.31 Applicants must prove their English skills through standardized English language exams, such as Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) and International English Language Testing System (IELTS). Given that many refugees were forced to quickly leave their home countries, most are unprepared or unable to engage in English language classes prior to their arrival to their host country. During the resettlement process, it is unlikely that refugees have the time or money to undertake language training. An additional challenge for refugees is the high cost of language training and testing requirements—costs that are often too expensive for most refugees.32 The testing and language requirements favor international students who come from higher economic means while limiting the opportunities for refugee students. Language barriers can impede learning within the classroom, as well as inhibit enrollment. For many refugee parents, enrolling their children in primary or secondary school requires a level of English that they do not have. Hadiya, a refugee mother of a primary school aged child, her lack of English and the absence of enrollment information were two barriers to enrolling her child in school. Hadiya shared, “I know the technology, but for me to doing everything online was a little difficult because there is no a person to be contact with him or her directly and there is not an answer for some of questions.” She completed the enrollment process entirely online and without any technical assistance. As a result, it was difficult for her to understand the requirements at times. English language challenges, cultural barriers, and lack of a physical place to go and apply for enrollment each delayed the process. Such obstacles can make enrollment more difficult and further delay refugees’ inclusion into schools and their host community. Grade Placement When arriving in the U.S., schools must determine the appropriate grade level in which to place refugee students. Given that many refugee students have spent time away from school due to the situations in their home country, this placement can be difficult, especially when refugees cannot produce official transcripts or proof of their past studies. In these cases, U.S. primary and secondary schools must estimate their grade placement.33 According to Jennifer, an expert at a think tank on education for migrants, many schools will base grade placement on the student’s age, whereas others will place students based on previous knowledge. Often, age-based placement results in students entering the incorrect grade either through placement into a grade that is above the student’s knowledge level or in a grade that they have already completed. Those who are placed above grade level may struggle to keep up with

38

Jessica Crist

their peers, whereas those who are below grade level have been documented to become unengaged and sometimes even held back. Jennifer also explained that older refugee students may be too old to be enrolled in high school, thus leading to students being funneled into adult education or GED programs. Jennifer stated, “they may only have the choice to go for a GED and not have the choice to go for a traditional high school diploma.” While these programs allow the students to finish their studies, she shared that the students “don’t get the socialization and the high school experience.” As Jennifer explained, it is important that older students have access to programs such as the GED. However, when refugee students are placed in GED programs or inappropriate grade levels, they not only face more difficulties with academic integration, but also may struggle with social integration in their host community. Saeed, a refugee university student in Virginia who arrived in the U.S. at the age of 19, corroborated several of Jennifer’s points when interviewed about his educational experience upon resettling to the U.S. Saeed was unable to enroll in the public high school system because he was over the age of 18. He explained, “In a few months, I became 19. I couldn’t join public schools, because you had to be 18 and I live in Virginia, that’s the law apparently. And yeah so my siblings got to go to high school but I didn’t and I so choose to pursue a GED. Yeah, then that got delayed for quite a while . . . maybe around six months.” Saeed was funneled into a GED program, which took additional time due to the transition into life in the U.S. Though he appreciated that the GED program was free and self-guided, he did not get a full high school experience because the program was online. Saeed was forced to enroll in a non-interactive GED program. This pathway complicated his inclusion into the host community because he had more limited social interactions with his peers upon arrival to the U.S. Inappropriate grade placement and policies for over-aged students may not only delay the studies of refugee students but also impact their inclusion and sense of belonging within their new host community. Standardized Testing and University Admissions In addition to TOEFL and IELTS tests, many U.S. higher education institutions also require standardized entrance exams for admissions. These exams are often inaccessible for refugees.34 For example, some exams are not offered in the country where refugees are located. Taking the exam in other countries where they are often involves a substantial fee. Many U.S. colleges and universities admissions requirements include minimum score requirements for standardized exams—scores which may be unachievable for refugee applicants, especially those who are taking the exams in a second

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

39

language.35 Ali, a refugee student who took the SAT, shared that the questions themselves were easy, however understanding the English on the test was difficult. He explained, “On the SAT, on that math portion the questions were ridiculously easy. I actually missed two math questions because I didn’t understand words on them and I didn’t understand what they were asking.” Ali continued, “If I had taken it later in my senior year it would have been different but I did average, or a little better. I did 540, I did like 40 points better than the average in America for the English part of the SAT which I wanted to be proud of but it was not good enough for the Ivy Leagues.” Ali explained that if given the opportunity to retake the test at a later time with a higher English level, he imagined that his score would have been higher and he could have applied and potentially been offered admission to more competitive schools. Those who have strong English language skills are likely to produce a higher score on standardized tests, thus increasing their opportunities. As Ali demonstrated, U.S. higher education institutions’ strict admissions requirements can be prohibitive to refugee students and prevent college and university enrollment. DMV area universities are among the most selective in the U.S. While many of the schools in the region have recently made standardized test submission optional, their overall admissions rates remain low. For example, the University of Virginia does not require the SAT or ACT, however its undergraduate acceptance rate is only 23 percent.36 In comparison, the University of Maryland at College Park has an undergraduate acceptance rate of 49 percent, meaning that it has a higher admission rate compared to University of Virginia, but still accepts less than half of applicants.37 Refugee applicants must provide sufficient documentation of their academic achievements to be competitive candidates while also competing against the general population for an admission slot. Additionally, applicants are required to write a personal statement or essay for admissions. Samira, a refugee who pursued higher education in Virginia, explained that she was not used to having to write about herself and her experience, as required by the U.S. university admissions process. She shared that, “In [my home country] I did not feel valuable—but here I had to do that to get into [university], so talking about myself and my goals was new to me, to talk about what I can do and what I can offer to [the university] and what they can offer to me. . . . Writing essays to sell myself was the most difficult thing to do.” This cultural difference was difficult for Samira to overcome when applying to university in the U.S. The need to “sell herself,” or demonstrate her worth to schools, led to feeling desirable while applying to schools. At the graduate level, standardized tests are more commonly required because specialized graduate level programs require specific knowledge bases. For example, graduate programs in law, medicine, and business require

40

Jessica Crist

field-specific tests for admissions. At the George Washington University Law School in DC, the juris doctorate (JD) program requires applicants to take the LSAT. According to their class profile from 2021, the median LSAT score is 167 out of a 180-maximum score,38 demonstrating the highly competitive nature of the program. Financing higher education Finally, while there are strong public schools at the primary and secondary level in the DMV which do not have school tuition or fees, tertiary education tuition costs can be insurmountable.39 Under the U.S. higher education system, money and financial resources are influential in terms of levels of access and choice. Beginning with the application process, most U.S. colleges and universities require students to pay an application fee before their profile can be included in admission deliberations. This fee may be as much as $100 USD and can be a significant cost for refugee students.40 Once admitted to a program, students incur tuition fees and other charges such as room and board, library fees, and meal plans. Specifically, in the DMV, university costs are extremely high. At the George Washington University, a mid-sized private university in DC, the 2022–2023 undergraduate tuition costs were $62,110.41 This tuition price may be unaffordable for most recently arrived refugees. In contrast, for in-state residents, the University of Virginia, a large, public state school, costs approximately $18,000 per year, including tuition and fees.42 State schools provide lower tuition costs for in-state residents as compared to out-of-state students. However, refugees must complete additional paperwork and meet certain residency requirements before they qualify for in-state admission and tuition. Though state schools and public schools cost significantly less than private institutions, this tuition is often inaccessible for refugee students without financial support.43 While some scholarship programs do exist to support refugee students, the supply cannot keep up with the demand. Furthermore, students are still expected to front some of the costs that are not covered in scholarships.44 Refugee students can apply for federal financial aid, though this process can be difficult and confusing for recently arrived refugees. For Saeed, a refugee university student in Virginia, applying for federal student loans was a challenge. Saeed shared, I was glad that I was eligible for federal funding but, when you sign your loan, you have to have somebody who has known you for three years to sign on it, not to guarantee it, but just to sign on it that they know you. And like, when I told my refugee agency, they were familiar with me for three years, that was a problem that I had, but fortunately I knew somebody in the U.S.,

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

41

who knew me from years ago, so I was able to get in touch and get them to sign that. While a refugee resettlement agency did assist Saeed with the FAFSA, someone in the U.S. who had known him for at least three years was required to vouch for his identity. Given his recent arrival, this was a barrier to receiving federal funding. While Saeed was ultimately able to find someone to sign the document, such requirements illustrate other difficult financial barriers for refugee students. In contrast, Senait, another refugee who arrived in the U.S. as a high school student, reported that she received significant support with enrollment and financial aid from a refugee focused NGO. Senait explained, “I mean my parents don’t really speak English so I have to do all the things by myself. . . . So, the [NGO], yeah, they helped me a lot.” Through the help of a friend, she applied for and enrolled in a university with a full scholarship. While Senait did struggle with the English language, she received guidance through various formal and informal information sharing programs which helped her successfully navigate the college application process, the FAFSA, and prepare for university. Similarly, Samira shared that her friends assisted her in the university admissions process. She stated, “I was terrified not knowing what resources existed but I had friends who helped me to find out about and access resources.” Samira relied on her friends for support and for information on how to apply to universities in Virginia. These two cases highlight the importance of informal information sharing among communities and the large role that NGOs and other formal organizations play when assisting refugee students. Community-based practices can work to disrupt the power imbalances that exist in the U.S. through knowledge sharing. While more work needs to be done to remove the legal and system barriers, examples of successful NGOs and programming in the DMV area demonstrate possible short and medium-term solutions that can be pursued amidst changes to long-term policy and practice. Exemplary programs In line with the recommendations and despite the aforementioned barriers which impede refugee students’ access to education in the U.S., there are also several exemplary programs in the DMV and in the U.S. which work to break down these barriers and assist refugees with their studies. In Fairfax County, Virginia, Parklawn Elementary School assists incoming Afghan refugee students with comprehensive support services. For example, prior to enrolling refugee students, the Parklawn staff received trauma-informed instruction training.45 Collectively, the school counselors, the Parklawn family liaison, psychologist, and social worker have coordinated the enrollment

42

Jessica Crist

process and provide support for refugee students and their families.46 School leaders have assisted refugee families in seeking medical care and proof of vaccination from a free clinic in the area, as well as in accessing food, school supplies, and clothing.47 Counselors, psychologists, and other Parklawn school officials have hosted regular check-in meetings with students and their families to ensure they feel comfortable in the school and that their needs are met.48 Fairfax County Public Schools has continuously provided support services to incoming refugee students, helping to increase their level of integration and success. Since this program was designed specifically for Afghans arriving in Virginia after the U.S. military withdrawal in August 2021, efforts to replicate this program should consider expansion to all refugee students. In Prince George’s County, Maryland, Prince George’s Community College hosts a refugee training program. The program is open to all refugees, asylees, and Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) recipients who have arrived in the U.S. in the past five years.49 The program focuses on teaching English as a second language and U.S. culture with the goal of seeking employment or seeking admission to educational institutions.50 Classes are offered online in three different time blocks, allowing students to have flexible scheduling.51 The classes are free of charge and all textbooks and materials are provided by the program.52 There are four different English level classes, which ensures that students can advance as their language skills progress. Prince George’s Community College supports the refugee community by providing free English courses and cultural training which can increase the ability for refugees to integrate in the host community. While the program is free of charge, students must have access to a smart phone or computer and a solid internet connection in order to attend classes. This could pose a problem for recently arrived refugees who are unable to afford stable access to technology. RECOMMENDATIONS As demonstrated by the findings, legal and systemic barriers make it difficult for refugees to enroll and feel included in the U.S. education system. These barriers are the result of the historical structure of the U.S. education and immigration systems, which were built to marginalize certain groups of people. To better serve the refugee student community, policymakers and resettlement organizations need to improve the educational services offerings for refugees, as well as reimagine the current systems to be more equitable, accessible, and inclusive, such as the exemplary program models mentioned above. In order to address the legal barriers that refugees face, policymakers and school administrators need to complete various reforms. First, schools should

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

43

provide alternatives to transcripts and other documentation when enrolling refugees in school. Since many refugees do not have the required documentation, placement skills tests or the acceptance of alternative documentation can facilitate enrollment and ensure appropriate grade placement. This will limit learning loss and time spent out of school while also providing more inclusion for refugee students in the school community. Second, policymakers in the U.S. need to create a new category of student visa that takes into account the challenges that refugees face. Developing a refugee student visa that provides a pathway to permanent residency and removes strict financial and foreign residential requirements will allow more refugees to resettle in the U.S. as students. This will not only provide additional educational opportunities to students but will also assist in overall resettlement. To address the systemic barriers that impact refugee students, schools, resettlement organizations, and policymakers need to work in tandem to reform various existing systems. First, additional financial resources need to be provided to refugee families that are specific to education. While resettlement organizations do provide refugees with financial resources such as food and housing, additional investment needs to be made for education resources. Providing financial support can lift the burden that school costs place on refugee families and expand their educational options. Second, schools and service providers should provide quality language education for refugees. Teachers should be trained appropriately on the refugee experience to best include refugee students in their classrooms. Resettlement organizations should provide sufficient information on language programs to all refugees and assist in the enrollment process. NGOs, resettlement organizations, and schools should provide language classes not only to young refugees but also to their families. This will allow parents and other relatives to feel included in their community and to not rely solely on the assistance of their young children. On the tertiary education level, universities should provide alternatives to standardized testing and other admissions requirements. Refugees often struggle to meet strict university admissions requirements, thus limiting their higher education options. By waiving standardized tests and accepting placement tests in lieu of official transcripts, refugees’ university options will likely increase. Pursuing higher education and increasing access to more competitive or higher ranked higher education programs can open additional economic opportunities for refugees and their families. Finally, U.S. universities must develop more comprehensive financial support for refugees. Universities should consider covering not only tuition costs but also food and housing costs. Given that many refugees have additional responsibilities beyond studying, universities should create more holistic financial aid

44

Jessica Crist

packages to support the refugee community and allow more refugees to pursue higher education. CONCLUSION Education is proven to provide various economic and social benefits. Refugees can use education as a way to increase their economic welfare, integrate into their host community, and improve their chances of a successful resettlement. However, in the U.S., refugees struggle to enter the education system due to legal and systemic challenges. These systemic challenges stem from historical systems which privilege certain groups. Specifically, in the DMV area, increased competition, extremely high cost of living, and expensive higher education institutions pose additional barriers for refugee background students. This chapter has discussed the main legal barriers that refugees in the DMV face when accessing education, documentation requirements for enrollment and immigration documentations and restrictions for refugees coming from outside of the U.S. The main systemic barriers that refugees in the DMV face are socioeconomic conditions, language barriers, standardized testing and university admissions, and financial challenges for higher education. To alleviate the barriers refugees face when accessing education in the U.S., various educational and policy reforms must take place. These reforms need to be refugee-led and informed and work to counteract historical power imbalance in legal and educational policy. First, documentation alternatives should be offered to refugees who do not have access to transcripts and other documents required for enrollment in school. Alternatives such as grade placement testing and evaluation can ensure students do not spend long periods of time out of school while waiting for enrollment. Next, the U.S. should reform the student visa system to allow for more flexibility for refugee background students. This reform can help students to more easily enter the U.S. to begin their studies and resettlement. Overall, this chapter proposes five potential solutions to the systemic barriers refugees face. First, resettlement agencies should provide additional financial support to families to help students focus on their studies. Providing refugee students with financial assistance for school supplies, tutoring, and meals, can help to counteract barriers which may adversely impact their learning and help them get on track with their peers. Second, schools should emphasize language education for all incoming refugees. Third, NGOs and resettlement organizations should provide effective language classes not only to students but also to their families. Fourth, U.S. universities should provide alternate documentation and testing for refugee students. By waiving

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

45

standardized tests and allowing flexibility for transcripts, more refugee students can access higher education. Finally, U.S. colleges and universities should create comprehensive financial packages specifically to support refugee students. Greater financial support to refugee students can increase the number of refugees who can access further education. As the U.S. continues to accept refugees, it is important to create comprehensive inclusive programs into host communities and rebuild the resettlement infrastructure. By taking a decolonial approach to reforms and program design by focusing on equitable and inclusive systems, refugee voices and needs can move to the forefront of the education system. Education can serve as a pathway for refugees to integrate in their new community while also increasing their economic and social assets. In accordance with SDG4, refugees have a right to inclusive and equitable quality education. Removing legal and systemic barriers is an important step in ensuring refugees in the U.S. can access education. NOTES 1. Sarah Dryden-Peterson, 2012, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees in a Global Movement for Primary Education,” Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees 27, no. 2, 10–18. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.25071​/1920​-7336​.34718; Agata A. Lambrechts, 2020, “The super-disadvantaged in higher education: Barriers to access for refugee background students in England,” Higher Education 80, no. 5, 803–822. https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.1007​/s10734​-020​-00515​-4. 2. Antonio Olivo, 2021, “Refugee aid groups in Washington region overwhelmed by Afghan caseloads,” The Washington Post, December 12. https:​//​www​ .washingtonpost​.com​/dc​-md​-va​/2021​/12​/12​/afghan​-refugees​-washington​-virginia​ -cases​/; Antonio Olivo and Julie Zauzmer Weil, 2022, “Aid for arriving migrants strained amid dispute over who should help them,” The Washington Post, August 9. https:​//​www​.washingtonpost​.com​/dc​-md​-va​/2022​/08​/09​/dc​-migrants​-aid​-federal​/. 3. Mehak Sheikh et al., 2019, “A Qualitative Exploration of the Tertiary Education Experiences of Refugee and Asylum Seekers in Australia,” Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR) 24, no. 4, 346–368. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​ /10824669​.2019​.1657867; Dryden-Peterson, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees.” 4. Kimberlé Crenshaw, 1989, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics,” University of Chicago Legal Forum 1, no. 8, 139–167. https:​//​ chicagounbound​.uchicago​.edu​/cgi​/viewcontent​.cgi​?article​=1052​&context​=uclf 5. Stephen Legg, 2017, “Decolonialism,” Transactions-Institute of British Geographers 42, no. 3, 345–348. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1111​/tran​.12203. 6. Lambrechts, “The super-disadvantaged in higher education.” 7. Sheikh et al., “A Qualitative Exploration.”

46

Jessica Crist

8. Dryden-Peterson, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees.” 9. Bernhard Streitwieser et al., 2019, “Access for refugees into higher education: A review of interventions in North America and Europe,” Journal of Studies in International Education 23, no. 4, 473–496. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/1028315318813201. 10. Sheikh et al., “A Qualitative Exploration.” 11. Andreas Schleicher, 2015, “Editorial,” Immigrant Students at School: Easing the Journey Towards Integration, OECD Publishing. https:​//​www​.oecd​-ilibrary​.org​/ education​/immigrant​-students​-at​-school​_9789264249509​-en. 12. Nigar G. Khawaja and Glenn Howard, 2021, “Understanding Samir: Educational Difficulties of a High School Student from Refugee Background,” The educational and developmental psychologist 38, no. 1, 110–120. 13. OECD, 2015, “Immigrant Students at School: Easing the Journey towards Integration,” OECD Publishing, 35. http:​//​dx​.doi​.org​/10​.1787​/9789264249509​-en. 14. Sheikh et al., “A Qualitative Exploration.” 15. Dryden-Peterson, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees.” 16. UNHCR, 2022, “Refugee Data Finder: Key Indicators,” Accessed October 5, 2022. https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/refugee​-statistics​/. 17. Julia Ann McWilliams and Sally Wesley Bonet, 2016, “Continuums of Precarity: Refugee Youth Transitions in American High Schools,” International Journal of Lifelong Education 35, no. 2, 153–170. https:​//​www​-tandfonline​-com​.proxygw​.wrlc​ .org​/doi​/full​/10​.1080​/02601370​.2016​.1164468. 18. International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), 2020, “Expanding Complementary Pathways for Refugees and Displaced Persons: A Blueprint for the U.S. Government,” November 20. https:​//​refugeerights​.org​/wp​-content​/uploads​/2020​ /11​/Expanding​-Complementary​-Pathways​-for​-Refugees​-and​-Displaced​-Persons​-A​ -Blueprint​-for​-the​-U​.S​.​-Government​.pdf. 19. OECD, “Immigrant Students at School.” 20. Ibid. 21. Larry Hamilton, 2021, “How Much Does it Cost to Live in Washington, DC?,” The DC Post, August 7. https:​//​thedcpost​.com​/cost​-of​-living​-washington​-dc​/. 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. McWilliams and Bonet, “Continuums of Precarity.” 26. Ibid. 27. OECD, “Immigrant Students at School.” 28. Vanessa Clifford, Anthea Rhodes and Georgia Paxton, 2014, “Learning difficulties or learning English difficulties? Additional language acquisition: An update for paediatricians,” Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 50, 175–181. https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.1111​/jpc​.12396. 29. OECD, “Immigrant Students at School.” 30. Peer relationships are described further in chapter 5. 31. Dryden-Peterson, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees”; Lowe, “Doubling our Impact”; UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2019, “The

(Un)Welcoming Admissions

47

Three Year Strategy (2019–2021) on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways,” June. https:​//​reliefweb​.int​/sites​/reliefweb​.int​/files​/resources​/5d15db254​.pdf. 32. Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, 2021, “University Sponsorship of Refugee Students,” Initiative on U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students, November. https:​//​www​.higheredimmigrationportal​.org​/wp​-content​/ uploads​/2021​/11​/UniversitySponsorshipofRefugeeStudents​_v1a​.pdf. 33. Ibid. 34. Ibid. 35. Lowe, “Doubling our Impact.” 36. US News and World Report, 2022, “University of Virginia Admissions.” https:​ //​www​.usnews​.com​/best​-colleges​/uva​-6968​/applying. 37. US News and World Report, 2022, “University of Maryland–College Park Admissions.” https:​//​www​.usnews​.com​/best​-colleges​/university​-of​-maryland​-2103​/ applying. 38. GW Law, 2021, “JD Entering Class Profile,” https:​ //​ www​ .law​ .gwu​ .edu​ /jd​ -entering​-class​-profile. 39. Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, “University Sponsorship of Refugee Students.” 40. Lowe, “Doubling our Impact.” 41. GW Student Accounts, 2022, “Undergraduate Tuition.” https:​//​studentaccounts​ .gwu​.edu​/undergraduate​-tuition. 42. University of Virginia Student Financial Services, 2022, “Estimated Undergraduate Cost of Attendance 2021–2022.” https:​//​sfs​.virginia​.edu​/estimated​-undergraduate​ -cost​-attendance​-2021​-2022. 43. Streitwieser et al., “Access for refugees into higher education.” 44. Financial difficulties and scholarships for refugee students are covered more in-depth in chapter 6. 45. Fairfax County Public Schools, 2021, “Fairfax County Schools, Students Open Doors and Arms to Afghan Refugees,” September 20. https:​//​www​.fcps​.edu​/news​/ fairfax​-county​-schools​-students​-open​-doors​-and​-arms​-afghan​-refugees. 46. Ibid. 47. Ibid. 48. Ibid. 49. Prince George’s Community College, 2020, “Refugee and Asylee ESL.” https:​ //​www​.pgcc​.edu​/go​/refugeeprogram​/. 50. Ibid. 51. Ibid. 52. Ibid.

Chapter 3

Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education (CTE) for Refugees in the United States‌‌‌‌‌ Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith‌‌

INTRODUCTION Access to higher education for refugee students remains underrepresented in research compared to the primary and secondary levels. According to the 2022 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Refugee Education Report, across the 40 countries studied, only six percent of refugee students were enrolled in higher education, compared with 68 percent at the primary level and 37 percent at the secondary level.1 The low percentage of refugees enrolling in higher education, especially in the United States, is largely due to financial, logistical, and administrative barriers, including high tuition costs, limited access to standardized tests, complex application processes, and differences in culture and language.2 Higher education institutions can increase refugee students’ access by pursuing complementary pathways such as university sponsorship; facilitating access to other forms of financial aid; offering flexibility throughout the admissions process; and providing strong socio-emotional support once students arrive on campus. Similarly, research has documented the role career and technical education (CTE) can play in identifying labor market needs.3 Research has also shown that CTE can be used as a tool to advance efforts towards poverty eradication, create decent work4 and employment opportunities, reduce gender disparity, and address the demands of economic, social, and environmental issues.5 In the U.S., however, CTE programs remain largely inaccessible to refugees and 49

50

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

are thus underutilized as a pathway towards refugee and migrant inclusion into the U.S. at large.6 There are several nuanced differences between language, documentation, and complementary services barriers for refugees attempting to access CTE as compared to other levels of education. Addressing refugees’ CTE-specific access barriers can result in greater empowerment, equity, social inclusion, and labor market integration within host communities. This chapter will analyze refugees’ access to and inclusion within higher education and CTE spaces. Using the lens of intersectionality and critical theories, we will begin by reviewing existing institutional initiatives, which work to expand access and confront existing barriers while also providing examples from interview participants from the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area. Then, we will compare interviewees’ testimonies with the intended impact of these initiatives. Afterwards, we will illustrate best practices for institutions and analyze potential enabling conditions for these approaches. We will then outline options and tools that institutions supporting refugees can use to identify gaps in their services and opportunities to make refugee-oriented services more robust. We conclude with recommendations to strengthen higher education and CTE access in the DMV and throughout the U.S. more broadly. Connection to Critical Theories Integrating refugees into higher education institutions is connected to critical theoretical frameworks in valuable ways. As asserted in the methodology of this book, this part of the study follows decolonial theory by focusing on and amplifying the voices of refugee students from the perspective of their experiences and perceptions in higher education. This is done by analyzing how refugee students are able to integrate into higher education institutions based on the policies and pathways put in place to ease this transition. Further, the decolonial focus is notably balanced by the consideration of other factors that play a role in the refugee experience, such as policy initiatives and the strategic interests of universities, that have not traditionally taken action with this decolonial perspective in mind. The colonial underpinnings of current education policies and how those colonial ties impact refugee students are considered in this analysis. By shifting focus to refugee experiences, existing systems and policies are critiqued. Similarly, the study of successfully integrating refugees into CTE is distinct from the other levels of education highlighted thus far. Refugees coming to the U.S. as adult students or seeking to enter the CTE career pathway upon arrival face nuanced barriers to integrating into programs. Having the opportunity to analyze the existing entry points and hear the perspectives of refugees in the DMV who are experiencing these access and integration issues



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

51

provided great insights into the disconnect between the efforts of the state and federal governments and the refugees’ experiences. The existence of colonial practices that this study’s participants experienced necessitates a decolonialist lens to imminently improve policies for inbound refugees. Furthermore, this analysis observes how factors of race, gender, age, citizenship, level of formal education achieved, and language proficiency of refugees influenced the level of support or opportunities that refugees received. These factors are important to consider through the intersectionality lens due to the time-sensitive nature7 for refugees finding employment under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). It is through this perspective that existing systems and policies are examined. HIGHER EDUCATION The low percentage of refugees enrolling in higher education in the U.S. can be attributed to several financial and administrative barriers, including high tuition costs, logistical obstacles to completing standardized tests, and complexities in navigating the application process. Most refugees are given little to no financial aid, which hinders their ability to accept an offer of admission to a college or university.8 Refugee students’ educational trajectory may include incomplete academic records, gaps in school attendance, or missing test scores due to displacement. While these challenges may limit refugees’ access to and inclusion in higher education programs, various programs exist to improve enrollment. National and International Programs Several approaches exist to integrate refugees into education systems across the world. For example, Ergin, De Wit, and Leask argue that forced internationalization emerged as an effective strategy to integrate Syrian refugees into Turkey’s education system. Forced internationalization involves higher education institutions dedicating more resources to help refugees access education while simultaneously internationalizing educational institutions’ policies and functionality. This may involve updating universities’ teaching, research, and service functions.9 Forced internationalization “forces” governments or systems to take action to support the growing number of refugees entering their borders. It can produce beneficial results for both refugee and non-refugee students. Ergin et al. explain that forced internationalization offers “safe and regulated avenues for refugees that complement resettlement by providing a lawful stay in a third country where their international protection needs are

52

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

met.”10 Moreover, forced internationalization can be strategic for universities. When institutions are pushed to respond to incoming refugee populations, their actions can have spillover effects which may enhance internationalization efforts. More specifically, the knowledge refugee students can provide may strengthen host institutions, benefit institutions’ long-term economic growth, contribute to diversifying surrounding communities, and even benefit political efforts as a form of positive soft power investment. The concept of forced internationalization is limited in reach, as it has only been applied to Syrian refugees in Turkey. This presents an opportunity for additional research to be conducted in other contexts, including the U.S., to see if it could be successfully applied within other countries. Although similar, forced internationalization and complementary pathways are not interchangeable ideas. Complementary pathways offer an approach to increasing access to higher education which targets refugee students specifically. UNHCR defines complementary pathways as “safe and regulated avenues for refugees that complement resettlement by providing a lawful stay in a third country where their international protection needs are met.”11 According to the U.S. International Refugee Assistance Project, complementary pathways for refugees include family reunification, humanitarian parole, special immigrant visas, private sponsorship, labor pathways, and educational pathways.12 University Sponsorship Expanding higher education as a complementary pathway can take different forms, including through university sponsorship. The Project Associate for the Initiative on U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students at the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration explains the importance of sponsorship, arguing that “university sponsorship will help refugee students obtain a legal residence, increase diversity in different colleges and universities across the nation, and prepare these students for becoming excellent employees.”13 The Presidents’ Alliance is taking direct action to advocate for and support refugee sponsorship through the RESPONSE campaign. Officially launched in November 2021 by the Presidents’ Alliance, the RESPONSE Campaign illustrates how individual organizations can realistically advocate for refugee sponsorship. The RESPONSE Campaign specifically builds “support for a new college and university refugee sponsorship program, which involves providing refugee students expanded pathways to resettle, study, and obtain legal permanent residence in the U.S.”14 Under this program, refugee students would enter the U.S. under the P-4 category— a new visa category earmarked for private sponsorship. The P-4 category would provide refugees with the opportunity to study at a participating U.S.



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

53

college or university while also creating a pathway towards permanent U.S. residency.15 The RESPONSE Campaign was launched shortly after President Biden’s Report to Congress on Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2022 was released in September 2021. Biden’s report mentioned private sponsorship for refugees under the P-4 category. The report outlined: “A major initiative in FY 2022 will be the implementation of a private sponsorship pilot program, whereby community members will take on the primary responsibility of welcoming and providing initial support to newly arrived refugees, helping facilitate their successful integration.”16 Additionally, the report outlined the Biden administration’s increased support for community sponsorship.17 Such initiatives could tremendously improve refugee students’ access to higher education while taking action to demonstrate the Biden administration’s commitment to increasing educational access for refugee students. The new P-4 category also specifically makes strides to break from the historically colonial U.S. visa system. Higher education institution initiatives In recent years, several higher education institutions have created their own initiatives to address barriers refugees face when attempting to access higher education. For example, Every Campus A Refuge (ECAR), founded at Guilford College in 2015, aids refugees outside of traditional classroom settings using on and off campus resources.18 ECAR provides refugees with a variety of assistance, including housing and transportation.19 According to its vision statement, ECAR hopes to “transform the landscape of refugee resettlement and higher education by creating thousands of sustainable resettlement campus ecosystems.”20 The ECAR model illustrates how higher education institutions can mobilize their resources to assist refugee populations using education and non-educational tools. Since 2015, ten other college campuses have established their own ECAR chapters, including Old Dominion University in Virginia.21 Another noteworthy higher education institution-based program in the U.S. is Columbia University’s Scholarship for Displaced Students (CUSDS) program. CUSDS aids refugees through direct assistance, helping them overcome traditional access barriers to attend Columbia University. The scholarship provides refugee students pursuing undergraduate or graduate degrees with partial or full financial coverage of tuition, housing, and living expenses.22 The program spans across all 19 schools and affiliates of the university.23 As of 2022, CUSDS supported two cohorts, comprised of 33 students originating from 19 countries.24 Notably, CUSDS is the first scholarship initiative of its kind to directly support refugees throughout the entirety of

54

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

their higher education journey. The program views refugees as “vital contributors to global innovation and prosperity” at Columbia.25 CUSDS can shape refugee education policy in the U.S. over time by emphasizing the program’s positive impact to achieve demonstrable results. This information can further illustrate how investing resources to support refugee students can strengthen higher education institutions’ vibrancy and community. Establishing similar initiatives that address financial barriers at other higher education institutions can increase refugee student enrollment. However, a notable challenge in replication is the limited nature of CUSDS’s reach. In particular, Columbia is a highly selective university. Prestigious, well-funded universities such as Columbia have a lot more financial resources available to implement this type of scholarship program as compared to other less competitive, less-funded universities. Thomas reiterated this point, sharing that, “One of the biggest obstacles is money. In trying to fund or finance some different initiatives.” To address this challenge, colleges and universities should either provide justification regarding why they should dedicate their financial resources to helping refugee students or push for more financial support to cover a greater number of students in need of financial support. Thomas also shared a call to action for university administrations, noting that “given that all colleges have a number of sort of financial constraints, presidents are constantly trying to decide resources in one direction or another, so those are all things that, as you’re thinking about opportunities, you’ve got to sort of figure out how to balance those opportunities out and the funding streams out.” He concluded by expressing, “my hope is that a lot of this sort of initial push that’s been coming through the initial foundation, initial government support will be picked up by institutions as part of their overall fundraising strategies to help the institutions maybe generate their own funds that can help support refugee students.” Funding opportunities for refugee students is a major challenge that requires further development and commitment from various stakeholders. The Boise State Refugee Collaboration Team provides another example of an initiative which supports refugees pursuing higher education that colleges and universities in the DMV area should consider adopting. Founded in 2009 at Boise State University, community and campus leaders work to “assist refugees in rebuilding successful lives in Southwestern Idaho, educate our students and our community toward these efforts, and make the resources of BSU fully accessible to refugees in Idaho.”26 The Refugee Collaboration Team aims to expand support services for refugee students on campus. The Team’s goals include improving refugees’ retention and graduation rates and advocating for the resources to engage in educational activities. The team also works to educate non-refugee campus members on its efforts to promote a more inclusive and supportive environment for refugee students. Today,



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

55

membership includes campus leaders representing curriculum development, experiential learning, research and grants, and student support services, along with leadership of all refugee resettlement agencies in the area, illustrating the Team’s tremendous growth over time.27 A key takeaway from this initiative is the value of collaboration and community engagement. The Refugee Collaboration Team can help shape refugee education policy by encouraging campus community members to care about and prioritize refugee educational access. Replicating this model could encourage policymakers to advocate for policy change to remove barriers refugees encounter when pursuing higher education. Higher Education Initiatives Within the DMV and Suggested Actions To further conceptualize the barriers refugees face to accessing higher education in the U.S., it is helpful to analyze the potential pathways through a DMV case study. The DMV is notably home to a robust Afghan refugee population that has only increased following the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, as was discussed in chapter 1. The Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS) is one of the local resettlement organizations that has assisted Afghan refugees resettling in the area. LIRS is a faith-based nonprofit organization that specifically serves immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers in the country.28 LIRS opened a new resettlement office at the end of 2021 in Alexandria, Virginia, with the purpose of receiving refugees from Afghanistan and helping them settle, understand, and acclimate to their new community.29 Prior to opening this office, LIRS resettled more than 1,200 refugees in Northern Virginia.30 As of February 2022, U.S. Senator Mark Warner (Virginia) announced on Twitter that all Afghan refugees that had been living on military bases in the Northern Virginia area had been resettled, nearly 1,000 refugees total.31 Considering the DMV refugee population was significantly impacted by the 2021 Afghan migration crisis, it is imperative that DMV higher education institutions prioritize educational access for refugees living in the surrounding communities. Some universities have already taken strides towards admittance and inclusion, including George Washington University (GWU). GWU’s chapter of the national organization No Lost Generation launched the Presidents’ Alliance RESPONSE Campaign, which was mentioned earlier in the chapter, in conjunction with other partners such as Columbia University, Duolingo, the International Rescue Committee, and the United Nations Refugee Agency.32 No Lost Generation GWU’s involvement in launching the RESPONSE Campaign demonstrates one way in which higher

56

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

education institutions in the DMV can directly support refugees’ access to higher education. Additionally, No Lost Generation GWU expanded its existing Welcoming Campus Initiative, illuminating another example of direct support. The initiative advocated for “a program that would support students with refugee backgrounds on campus through the application process, arrival to campus, acclimation to academic and social life, and with the financial burden associated with attending a U.S.-based university.”33 In March 2022, the initiative was officially proposed and passed by the Student Senate as the “Welcoming Campus Initiative Act.” This model can inform other DMV institutions’ efforts to adopt scholarships and inclusive practices for refugees. However, our research reveals that DMV area universities, including GWU, are not doing enough to support refugee students when compared to other U.S. universities with refugee-focused initiatives discussed previously in this chapter. Interviews with local refugee students shed light on the difficulties students have faced when attempting to access higher education in the DMV area specifically. When Samira, a local DMV refugee student was asked how she enrolled in university, she said: Continuing education was the most difficult process for me. I started with ESL classes offered by the county; I had no income, was not clear how to start my education here but I wanted to, I did not want to stay at home. I took free classes offered by the county; I finished it, then took ESL classes at [a community college], then we moved to Virginia. I took ESL classes again at [a community college]; I finished ESL levels, then I started classes at [the same community college] and transferred to [a university in Virginia].

Samira’s English as a Second Language (ESL) experience highlights that refugee students may not have a linear educational experience. It is imperative for institutions to recognize and address such trajectories during their admission processes and in terms of the on campus support they provide. Samira also discussed the financial and systemic challenges she faced, explaining: “It was difficult because I didn’t know how the system works, what were grants and how to get them. My dad worked to pay for a family of nine, our income could only pay the rent. I was the oldest sibling, but I wanted to go to school.” Samira was able to persevere, however, as even though she “was terrified not knowing what resources existed. . . . I had friends who helped me to find out about and access resources.” Samira’s experience illustrates that the existing refugee orientation system does not always meet their needs. Refugee families continue to face financial hardships, in addition to educational inclusion challenges. Samira’s experience



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

57

also illuminates the continued need for additional higher education–based programs to support refugee students that seek to enroll. Higher education institutions should also work to promote more inclusive campus environments that are fully accepting and accommodating of varying cultural backgrounds. It is critical for higher education institutions to foster a welcoming environment that accounts for the various intersecting identities of students on campus. For example, Samira spoke about her experience navigating cultural celebrations while in school, stating, “When I email my professors they are nice and give me an opportunity to celebrate my culture, to be with my parents, but it’s tough. I don’t want to miss due dates or have less time, but celebrations with my family and being with them is important too.” Professors can provide flexibility with assignment deadlines, support, and understanding for students in these situations. This can help refugee students to balance cultural and family responsibilities with classroom obligations. By rooting campus culture in intersectionality, universities can avoid alienating students based on their identities. This further ties into Samira’s experience with feeling accepted on campus. She shared that the transition was particularly challenging, explaining, “I feel like an alien. I am [light] skinned, I have [light] hair, and it is fine as long as I don’t speak. But when I speak I don’t feel welcomed because of my accent and also because I come from a different country.” Samira further articulated, “I see people from Pakistan, Africa, India, but they were either born here or their parents were immigrants but I don’t feel accepted.” Samira’s experience demonstrates why providing uniform support to students transitioning to college is not always effective or helpful to all international or immigrant students. The refugee experience is unique. Campus policies pertaining to refugee students’ transition to campus should reflect this distinction across all higher education institutions. Identifying as a refugee is only one characteristic of the student, and because of this, universities should celebrate and respect the distinctive intersectional identity of each student. Elizabeth, another refugee we spoke with, reflected on the difficulties of cultivating this sense of belonging as a college student. She said, “That was one big challenge and not having a sense of belonging due to various factors, you know, like that comparison factor. Feeling like you are too poor to be in college, but at the same time, knowing like I belong here, I deserve to be successful, to be educated.” Ultimately, the feeling Elizabeth described is important to value for all students. However, refugee students may need additional support as compared to their peers to feel included on campus. To support refugee students, colleges and universities should prioritize cultivating and promoting welcoming, inclusive, and supportive campus environments.

58

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION (CTE) The Biden administration has taken measures to make education more inclusive for resettled populations.34 For the majority of the last two decades, the U.S. has hosted the largest number of international migrants.35 Despite these statistics, relatively few CTE services are offered to refugees in the country.36 The federal administration’s attitude toward CTE claims to promote “education about work, for work, or through work.”37 To stay true to this cause, as the Biden administration unravels the long-lasting refugee policy challenges stemming from the previous administration,38 it should dedicate time to ensuring refugees’ access to CTE. The anatomy of a CTE career pathway in the U.S. Due to the worldwide increase in refugee population,39 agencies look to CTE as examples of how to build capacity and autonomy,40 as internationally, robust CTE programs increasingly help refugees and companies to identify and fill labor market skills gaps, strengthen synergies in employer-employee matching, and stimulate local economies.41 By providing alternative routes to education or certification, CTE can (1) bridge the gap between resettlement and labor market inclusion through entrepreneurship, local work experience, and skills development;42 (2) facilitate labor insertion and social mobility43 for refugees through certifications; and (3) offer refugees a sense of stability, security, and community inclusion. The unique structure of CTE career opportunities in the U.S. positions it to, in some ways, provide more flexibility for refugees to access, but more restrictions in others. Federal programs are aligned with the National Career Clusters44 and are not taught in conjunction with the core curriculum.45 The vocational route branches off from the traditional secondary-associatebachelor’s academic track and serves as an alternative means of earning a specialized certification. For example, in the U.S., CTE programs are offered to high school students for credit. Those who graduate high school and seek to pursue a technical or vocational field can attend a two-year community or junior college, or a four-year college or university to receive their certificate or degree.46 Post-secondary CTE certifications can also be obtained through “proprietary post-secondary schools, adult learning centers, professional associations or labor unions, and government agencies.”47 Examples of such certification programs (federally funded under Title IV)48 can be found on the U.S. Department of Education (DoE) National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) website.49 Formal apprenticeship,50 non-formal apprenticeship,51 and in-company training programs52 are other options for refugees who resettle to the U.S. to receive CTE training.



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

59

Most CTE career pathways for refugees are broadly encompassed or funded by federal and state programs. These adult education classes come in the form of literacy, mathematics, English language, or professional development and training programs.53 Under the DoE’s Adult Education and Family Literacy Act,54 each state has authorized funding available for adult education and family literacy programs for postsecondary-level adults who are at least 16 years old. Resources, therefore, vary by state. In Maryland,55 Montgomery College and Prince George’s Community College have several resources and programs dedicated to serving the refugee community. For example, Montgomery College56 offers refugees English to speakers of other languages (ESOL) classes, vocational training and employment services, and a refugee training center. Virginia targets similar refugee needs through Northern Virginia Regional Adult Education’s Serving Refugees Professional Learning Community.57 However, the target audience of the latter are educators who will serve refugee populations.58 Furthermore, refugees who were technically trained often cannot document licensure, despite the presence of CTE programs that go to great lengths to provide English language services for technical fields and access to vocational employment services. Many of such programs have legal requirements and barriers that prevent significant refugee inclusion.59 At present, CTE programs are only equipped to assist refugees with proof of qualifications or DACA adult learners.60 These requirements impose additional costs and there would not be enough time to go through the licensure or certification process before refugees’ federal financial support ends.61 This scenario illustrates the disadvantageous situation that the federal government places on refugees regarding education broadly. Financial and temporal limits—such as those under USRAP—often prevent refugees from taking advantage of CTE. These policies are problematic from a decolonial lens, as (1) they perpetuate discriminatory practices against refugees who were forced to flee their countries and did not obtain prior authorization for work and education and (2) they benefit a population that was of a certain age in the U.S. under an administration seeking to increase education access to migrants. Another way to access resources offered by the DoE is through the Literacy Information and Communication System (LINCS).62 The LINCS offers educational materials, instruction, and a community of practice for all adult students as part of the federal initiative “Enhancing Access for Refugees and New Americans project.”63 The LINCS’ impressive platform captures a breadth of professional development and certification opportunities for adult students, ranging from ESOL to digital literacy and business. Furthermore, it offers an impressive database for English language instructors who implement a pedagogy of Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education.64 While the LINCS encompasses many technical and public community colleges,

60

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

non-profit organizations, state and federally-funded partnerships, and various adult learning centers, many of these do require documentation to enter the adult learning community. Because refugees are forced to flee their countries in response to a crisis, they may not have brought documentation and, as a result, might not be able to participate in the LINCS. Though an estimated $1.9 billion65 annually goes to grants and programs for adult education and literacy for non-English speakers, ultimately the participating schools will determine refugee admissions. This difference in attitudes displayed towards refugees versus, for example, DACA students illustrates the “othering”66 of refugees. The historically colonial system of excluding refugees and other marginalized populations from having access to CTE programs further delays refugees’ integration into their host community and their ability to achieve their academic and professional goals. These regulations reflect how proof of “formal” education and level of citizenship give certain migrant populations preferential access to CTE over refugee populations. CTE in the DMV Upon arrival in the DMV (or anywhere in the U.S.), refugees have a limited transition period during which they must become financially self-sufficient.67 Within this period, they explore their potential U.S. career trajectory based on several factors. These include: proof of qualifications, whether those qualifications meet U.S. standards, the cost-benefit of occupational licensure and taking CTE courses to re-enter prior profession or settling for a lower-paying job to sustain a livelihood, confidence in one’s ability to obtain said licensure tested in the English language, and whether one has familial obligations to support. Answering these questions requires identifying which resources refugees need and where courses are offered. Skilled immigrants may be unable to secure employment in their profession due to limited English language proficiency, high costs to attend and complete U.S. occupational licensure and reskilling68 courses, and lack of institutional knowledge and personal networks to overcome these barriers.69 Frequently, refugees take lower-paying jobs and eventually upskill70 in a new profession. Fortunately, the DMV is home to numerous organizations which support refugee access and inclusion to CTE through programs or services. Across the DMV, federal and state programs implement career, skills, and education development services for refugees, as well as offer complementary financial, transportation, or technological assistance services which can help refugees achieve financial self-sufficiency.71 Many of these organizations fall under the scope of non-profit or resettlement agency and state partnerships, as well as cooperative agreements.72 For example, LIRS works with state and local governments in the DMV to provide refugee services. Other



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

61

programs operate under independent organizations or federal contracts, such as the Virginia Department of Social Services (VDSS), which administers services to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)-eligible refugees through the Virginia Initiative for Education and Work (VIEW) program.73 These partners or contracts can range from a specialization in one service, such as the English for Refugees and Asylees Program74 in Maryland, to holistic CTE services, such as Asylum Works’ Path Forward and Reach Higher programs in DC.75 Many programs offer similar resources throughout the DMV, encompassing English language proficiency, resume building, interview preparation, career development and counseling, job readiness and assistance, networking with potential employers, local job market research, and case management. Less common complementary services in the area are cash assistance, transportation, certification course offerings or referrals, financial literacy, citizenship classes, or life skills and technological skills development. In addition, our research reveals few services to receive registered apprenticeships, informal job training, employee matching, post-employment follow-up, pre-employment training, advanced language courses, or small business development. Those that do offer these less common services are either independent businesses, such as in Falls Church and Fredericksburg, Virginia, state departments such as VDSS, or are embedded within individual branches of larger resettlement agencies, such as the Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC).76 However, despite such efforts, opportunities which attempt to facilitate CTE access for resettled refugees do not always reach their target audience. Persisting Challenges for Refugees in U.S.- and DMV-based CTE Programs Many education programs whose efforts center on refugee access and inclusion face overlapping challenges, including documentation, language, and education system structure, among others.77 However, best practices and recommendations that apply to inclusion and capacity-building at other levels of education in the U.S. may not necessarily address CTE-specific barriers. Solutions to the persisting challenges in CTE for refugees must be adjusted to fit the needs of this demographic. Language Acquisition, a Prerequisite to Maximizing CTE Program Outputs One challenge that resettled refugees must overcome is English language proficiency.78 In most U.S. education settings,79 refugees’ communication levels in English and degree of understanding influence their engagement in the classroom and the community. As such, almost all DMV programs have an ESOL component. However, language barriers are compounded by the

62

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

conceptual and specialized language knowledge specific trades may demand. ESOL classes may not cover materials which relate to CTE. Refugees may be required to extend extra effort—financial or otherwise—to learn trade jargon, in addition to learning the content in an unfamiliar language. One interview respondent, Cara—a non-profit volunteer—noted that this was the case in the Fredericksburg school system. The “system has an ESL group to work and progress together, but it seems a little bit isolated from the rest of the common classes.” This isolation perpetuates a power imbalance. Those who already have limited means (refugees) are forced to exert even more just to meet the standards of those groups in power. Cara tutored a young refugee woman who was finishing her associate degree after several years of living in the U.S. This woman finished her formal education and earned a degree in her home country. Cara shared that despite having the documentation at hand, the woman was denied work in that profession upon arrival to the U.S. She had to restart her credential process again in English to obtain an occupational license. Retaking an exam for a specialized profession in a foreign language to requalify for credentials can be challenging. Cara remarked, “That’s a big challenge I’ve seen—that adults don’t have the chance to have upward mobility because of the language barrier.” Cara highlighted that despite the importance of language proficiency to facilitate refugee inclusion, “our current system does not support that.” This exchange is unfortunately unremarkable. Too often, refugees seeking access to CTE or to practice their former profession are denied because the system is founded on Western ideology. The exclusion of refugees from practicing their previous specialties maintains that the prerequisite for educational and socioeconomic upward mobility be a Western degree. These admissions processes are obsolete and must extend their reach to encompass the skills and potential of refugees. Sacrificing CTE opportunities for Financial Obligations Upon arrival in the U.S., refugees must find employment within 90 days80 and begin paying rent within six months81 before the USRAP support ends. In theory, USRAP promotes economic self-sufficiency, but the program has come under scrutiny because the deadlines add pressure for refugees to find employment, limiting opportunities to take advantage of resources available during that period.82 The USRAP program’s limitations, as well as inclusion support gaps, may force refugees to focus on finding a job quickly, rather than strengthening their language and technical skills.83 Because refugees lack the opportunity to challenge these processes, they forfeit receiving CTE, moving



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

63

into skilled jobs, and getting better salaries. This discouraging reality exposes the continued colonialism in this process. Refugees may face additional strain if they need to cover CTE or qualification program costs. Refugees find themselves weighing the potential long-term pay increase from gaining certifications in professions such as teachers, doctors, nurses, cosmetologists, counselors, therapists, building contractors, or electricians, against the time, energy, and money needed to comply obtaining a license.84 Costs for these programs may exceed that of the income earned for displaced families.85 Furthermore, wages in the DMV states are not influenced by these qualifications.86 At the same time, certification regulations across all 50 states restrict access to multiple occupations and increase the cost of services rendered.87 The U.S. DoE provides supplemental resources to refugees interested in adult or CTE education88 to meet market requirements. To those who can access it, the LINCS provides literacy and language support, as well as opportunities for networking and information-sharing activities nationwide.89 However, with only 90 days of transitional socioeconomic assistance from the government, these options may seem too costly given that delaying employment can impact refugee families’ financial stability and livelihood security. As Mohammad, a recently resettled refugee and guardian to several siblings, shared, “[I] was . . . very frustrated. . . . We were . . . looking for a job and getting a job to take care of ourselves at the same time [as] we were busy with school enrollment of my [siblings].” Mohammad was busy with not only enrolling his siblings in school but also working through the resettlement process. Weighing the potential gains and drawbacks of accessing CTE resources is difficult given the current resettlement structure. Ultimately, this reality can affect refugees’ long-term integration and inclusion into the U.S. labor market.90 Preventability Analysis and Suggested Action Account for Transit, Linguistic, Temporal, Technological, and Other Possible Barriers Cara discussed her experience mentoring an older refugee woman. She shared, “I had limited resources to me as a mentor. I had to create those myself. . . . Her daughter—Because the mother couldn’t work, the children were taking on the financial responsibility and that impedes their own progress. It was very difficult but worked in the constraints that we had.” Looking at CTE barriers from the non-profit side, Cara faced several hurdles in supporting this older woman. Due to language barriers, Cara was unable to effectively explain how to set up a web conferencing app. In addition,

64

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

she was unable to meet with the woman frequently due to geographic and transportation challenges. While Caras’s organization matched her with this refugee to provide support during the resettlement process, in practice, Cara had limited resources and time to support this woman, impacting the quality of her support. There are currently no existing measures to accommodate for these persisting barriers. Each barrier—transportation, linguistic, geographical, technological—that Cara describes exerts effort on both her part and that of the refugee woman’s (and the woman’s family). Jessica Shea,91 drawing from Peggy McIntosh’s92 concept of the invisible backpack, would have called each of these barriers “invisible crutches.” Without proper planning in funding (i.e., federal government), oversight (i.e., resettlement agency), and implementation (i.e., non-profit organizations), these crutches will continue to hinder the extent of aid and services refugees are provided. Without factoring in these barriers, refugees will be unable to access CTE and the full extent of their agency due to the continuation of colonialism. Triangulate Existing Resources, Activities, and Successful Instances of Refugee Inclusion into CTE The federal government enacts legislation that makes funds available for states to allocate to school districts, and then states create individual legislative education frameworks for public schools to follow.93 However, because the U.S. public education system is decentralized, there is no centralized national qualifications framework for CTE teachers—each state dictates its educational requirements. States set their own CTE teacher qualifications.94 For example, in DC, 12 CTE careers clusters are recognized, but there is no criteria for CTE qualifications in the statute.95 In Virginia, certification licensure requirements vary depending on the CTE subject.96 Maryland has several options for certification or licensure ranging from education to work experience or CTE teacher training.97 Due to the flexibility of certification and licensure pathways for CTE instructors in the U.S. and the spectrum of subject matter, refugees seeking professional development will likely lean on these instructors for mentorship and guidance. Without continuity in instruction across counties or a refugee knowledge-sharing network, determining a plan of action within a limited timeframe can easily become overwhelming. To encourage best practices and standards of excellence from those offering CTE support for refugees, the government and resettlement agencies could survey the existing resources and activities available for refugees within each county and track successful case studies of refugee inclusion into CTE. This meta-analysis could inform which states need support for its employees and volunteers or whether programs need to adjust their implementation plan



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

65

based on their available resources. It could even be added to the LINCS community of practice to provide a platform for knowledge-sharing. Once this data is collected, it would also allow government agencies, non-profit organizations, and resettlement agencies to provide information about available CTE programs, resources, and important contact information to refugees upon arrival. Consider Amending the Existing Policies Finally, policymakers and resettlement agencies can make the process of resettlement and seeking asylum more manageable for at-risk groups like refugees. The timeline for finding employment and subsequently being able to pay rent is unrealistic because of the persisting barriers. Breaking down this obstacle would be the first step in creating a more inclusive space for refugees seeking educational equity. Further examination of education policies is also needed to reform existing discriminatory sentiments, as seen throughout this study, in line with a decolonial framework. Conclusion and Recommendations Overall, complementary pathways for refugee students, such as sponsorship and connections to other forms of financial aid, offer flexibility throughout the higher education admissions process and provide refugees with robust socio-emotional support once on campus. Various higher education institutions across the U.S., including Columbia University, Guilford College, and Boise State University, have enacted policies to improve refugees’ educational access. These programs can serve as models for other higher education institutions, notably in the DMV area where there is identified, demonstrable need, to adopt similar policies. Such initiatives can contribute to shaping future refugee policy in the U.S. by encouraging other higher education institutions to prioritize reducing barriers for refugee students, ensuring that they are able to study on campus. Finally, higher education institutions should cultivate welcoming, inclusive, and supportive campus environments that recognize the uniqueness of the refugee experience. Such action is representative of intersectional programming, which recognizes and supports the various connecting identities of refugees. Higher education institutions can update transitional support services to accommodate refugee students, and specifically at the professor level, showing that they recognize how refugee needs may differ from other international students through demonstrable flexibility, support, and understanding as mentors. Due to how refugee resettlement services are designed, refugees may be less likely to access CTE. Policymakers and resettlement agencies should

66

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

examine the relationship between resources offered in each county, existing activities, and their success in making CTE programs accessible and inclusive for resettled refugees. This can help actors to identify gaps and modify activities so that refugees can more consistently enroll in CTE programs and strengthen their capacities. Overall, higher education institutions and CTE programs need to consider various reforms to better include refugees. First, the U.S. federal government should create higher education sponsorship programs supported by universities to provide greater access to programs for refugee students. Additionally, higher education institutions should create and foster scholarship and other funding opportunities for refugee students specifically, similar to the scholarship created by Columbia University. Finally, higher education institutions should nurture student-based initiatives to create welcoming environments for incoming refugee students. For CTE, to better serve refugees, organizations offering mentorship and other services should evaluate additional needs of refugee families before providing aid to avoid additional strain to those at risk, as well as the volunteers. Resettlement organizations should add CTE programs and information to their resettlement plans to ease transitions. Next, the funding timeline should be changed so that refugees have greater flexibility to become proficient in English and begin CTE programs better prepared. Finally, future policies and amendments must adopt a decolonial and intersectional lens to provide equitable inclusion and access to CTE for adult refugee learners and break down policies still rooted in colonialism. By following these recommendations, more refugees can access higher education and CTE, leading to greater economic opportunities in their host communities in the future. NOTES 1. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2022, “UNHCR Refugee Education Report 2022,” https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/631ef5a84​/unhcr​-education​ -report​-2022​-inclusive​-campaign​-refugee​-education. 2. These barriers are discussed in detail in chapter 2. 3. Cameron Sublett and David Griffith, 2019, “How Aligned is Career and Technical Education to Local Labor Markets?,” Thomas B. Fordham Institute, https:​//​eric​ .ed​.gov​/​?id​=ED598867. 4. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2016, “Sustainable Development | Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development A/RES/70/1,” January 1, https:​//​sdgs​.un​.org​/2030agenda. 5. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2016, “Strategy for Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) (2016– 2021),” 15, https:​//​en​.unesco​.org​/sites​/default​/files​/tvet​.pdf.



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

67

6. Carroll Doherty, 2016, “5 Facts about Trump Supporters’ Views of Immigration,” The Pew Research Center, August 25, https:​//​www​.pewresearch​.org​/fact​-tank​ /2016​/08​/25​/5​-facts​-about​-trump​-supporters​-views​-of​-immigration​/. 7. Jeffrey Bloem and Scott Loveridge, 2017, “The secondary migration of refugees resettled in the U.S.,” Forced Migration Review 54, 26. 8. Eric Hoover, 2021, “Escaping Oblivion: A promising refugee dreams of college. He can’t make it on his own,” Chronicle of Higher Education, June 24, https:​//​www​ .chronicle​.com​/article​/escaping​-oblivion. 9. Hakan Ergin, Hans De Wit, and Betty Leask, 2019, “Forced Internationalization of Higher Education: An Emerging Phenomenon,” International Higher Education 97, Spring 2019, 9–10, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.6017​/ihe​.2019​.97​.10939. 10. Ibid. 11. UNHCR: The UN Refugee Agency, n.d., “UNHCR Global Report 2020,” Accessed March 9, 2022, https:​//​reporting​.unhcr​.org​/sites​/default​/files​/gr2020​/pdf​/ GR2020​_English​_Full​_lowres​.pdf; International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), 2020, “Expanding complementary pathways for refugees and displaced persons: A blueprint for the U.S. Government (2020),” Accessed March 8, 2022, https:​//​ refugeerights​.org​/news​-resources​/expanding​-complementary​-pathways​-for​-refugees​ -and​-displaced​-persons​-a​-blueprint​-for​-the​-u​-s​-government​-november​-2020. 12. Ibid. 13. Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, 2021, “New campaign launches to expand refugee access to U.S. colleges and universities,” November 17, n.p., https:​//​www​.presidentsalliance​.org​/press​/new​-campaign​-launches​-to​-expand​ -refugee​-access​-to​-u​-s​-colleges​-and​-universities​/. 14. Ibid. 15. Ibid. 16. U.S. Department of State, 2021, “Report to Congress on proposed refugee admissions for Fiscal Year 2022—United States Department of State,” September 20, https:​//​www​.state​.gov​/report​-to​-congress​-on​-proposed​-refugee​-admissions​-for​-fiscal​ -year​-2022​/​#​_Toc80119710. 17. Ibid. 18. Diya Abdo and Krista Craven, 2018, “Every Campus a Refuge,” Migration and Society: Advances in Research 1, 135–146, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.3167​/arms​.2018​ .010112. 19. Ibid. 20. Every Campus A Refuge (ECAR), n.d., “Mission & Vision,” http:​ //​ everycampusarefuge​.net​/mission​-vision​/. 21. Ibid. 22. Columbia Global Centers, n.d., “Columbia University Scholarship for Displaced Students (CUSDS),” Accessed March 8, 2022, https:​//​globalcenters​.columbia​ .edu​/CUSDS. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid.

68

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

26. Boise State University, 2022, “Refugee Collaboration Team,” February 15, https:​//​www​.boisestate​.edu​/servicelearning​/faculty​/going​-international​/partner​-with​ -refugee​-orgs​/refugee​-collaboration​-team. 27. Ibid. 28. Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS), 2022, “About Us,” January 3, https:​//​www​.lirs​.org​/about​/. 29. Fredrick Kunkle, 2021, “Faith-based organization opens Northern Virginia Office to aid Afghan refugees,” The Washington Post, December 17, https:​//​www​ .washingtonpost​.com​/dc​-md​-va​/2021​/12​/16​/afghan​-refugees​-aid​-virginia​-lutheran​ -nonprofit​/. 30. James Jarvis, 2021, “Nonprofit opens afghan resettlement office in Alexandria,” InsideNOVA, December 23, https:​//​www​.insidenova​.com​/headlines​/nonprofit​ -opens​-afghan​-resettlement​-office​-in​-alexandria​/article​_9ceacccc​-627a​-11ec​-9165​ -dfab1d533b33​.html. 31. Hiba Ahmad, 2022, “Afghan refugees who have settled outside D.C. now help others to do the same,” NPR, February 13, https:​//​www​.npr​.org​/2022​/02​/13​ /1080464218​/afghan​-refugees​-who​-have​-settled​-outside​-d​-c​-now​-help​-others​-to​-do​ -the​-same; NBC12 Newsroom, 2022, “Last Afghan refugees at Fort Pickett resettled,” February 2, https:​//​www​.nbc12​.com​/2022​/02​/02​/last​-afghan​-refugees​-fort​-pickett​ -resettled​/. 32. GW Today, 2021, “GW plays role in launching campaign advocating for university sponsorship of refugee students,” December 3, https:​ //​ gwtoday​ .gwu​ .edu​/gw​-plays​-role​-launching​-campaign​-advocating​-university​-sponsorship​-refugee​ -students. 33. No Lost Generation GWU, n.d., “Welcoming Campus Initiative,” Accessed March 8, 2022, https:​//​nolostgenerationgw​.wixsite​.com​/website​/welcoming​-campus​ -initiative. 34. The White House Briefing Room, POTUS Joseph R. Biden Jr., 2021, “Executive Order on the Establishment of Interagency Task Force on the Reunification of Families,” February 2, https:​//​www​.whitehouse​.gov​/briefing​-room​/presidential​ -actions​/2021​/02​/02​/executive​-order​-the​-establishment​-of​-interagency​-task​-force​-on​ -the​-reunification​-of​-families​/. 35. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 2017, “World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables,” Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP/248. 36. U.S. Department of Education, 2017, “Educational Resources for Immigrants, Refugees, Asylees and other New Americans [Reference Materials],” September 5, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/immigration​-resources​.html. 37. UNESCO-UNEVOC International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training, 2014, “World TVET Database | United States of America,” May 5, Accessed April 21, 2022, http:​//​hdl​.voced​.edu​.au​/10707​/531583. 38. Ruth Ellen Wasem, 2020, “More than a Wall: The Rise and Fall of US Asylum and Refugee Policy,” Journal on Migration and Human Security, 8, no. 3, 246–265, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/2331502420948847.



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

69

39. UNHCR: The UN Refugee Agency | USA, n.d., “Refugee Statistics,” Accessed September 30, 2022, https:​//​www​.unrefugees​.org​/refugee​-facts​/statistics​/​#:​​ ~:​text​=The​%20number​%20of​%20refugees​%20and​,million​%20people​%20displaced​ %20across​%20borders. 40. UNHCR: The UN Refugee Agency | USA, n.d., “Technical and Vocational Education and Training,” Accessed October 4, 2022, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/ technical​-and​-vocational​-education​-and​-training​.html. 41. Thomas F. Remington, 2018, “Public–private partnerships in TVET: adapting the dual system in the United States,” Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 70, no. 4, 497–523, https:​//​doi​-org​.proxygw​.wrlc​.org​/10​.1080​/13636820​.2018​ .1450776. 42. UNESCO-UNEVOC, n.d., “The Impact of Migration on TVET,” Accessed May 4, 2022, https:​//​unevoc​.unesco​.org​/home​/Migration+and+TVET. 43. David F. Labaree, 1997, “Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational goals,” American Educational Research Journal 34, no. 1, 39–81. 44. Howard R. D. Gordon and Deanna Schultz, The History and Growth of Career and Technical Education in America: Fifth Edition (Illinois: Waveland Press, 2020). 45.UNESCO-UNEVOC International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training, 2021, “United States of America TVET Country Profile,” Accessed April 21, 2022, https:​//​unevoc​.unesco​.org​/home​/Dynamic+TVET+Country+Profiles​/ country​=USA. 46. Ibid. 47. Ibid., 11. 48. Federal Student Assistance Programs Under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as Amended, 63 FR 48412 (Sept. 9, 1998) 49. National Center for Education Statistics, 2022, “Career and Technical Education Statistics, Accessed October 7, 2022, https:​//​nces​.ed​.gov​/surveys​/ctes​/index​.asp. 50. Howard R. D. Gordon and Deanna Schultz, The History and Growth of Career and Technical Education in America: Fifth Edition (Illinois: Waveland Press, 2020). 51. Jennifer Gonzalez, 2010, “Apprenticeship Programs Expand With Help of Community Colleges,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, no. 57, 15–16, September 19, https:​//​www​.chronicle​.com​/article​/apprenticeship​-programs​-expand​-with​-help​-of​ -community​-colleges​/. 52. The Tent Partnership for Refugees, 2022, “Bridging Language & Work: Solutions to Invest in Immigrant and Refugee Talent,” January, https:​//​welcomingamerica​ .org​/wp​-content​/uploads​/2022​/02​/Tent​_BridgingLanguageWork​_v9​-SINGLE​-PAGE​ .pdf. 53. U.S. Department of Education, 2017, “Educational Resources for Immigrants, Refugees, Asylees and other New Americans [Reference Materials],” September 5, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/immigration​-resources​.html. 54. Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, 112 Stat. 936, 1998, https:​//​aefla​.ed​ .gov​/. 55. Maryland Department of Labor, n.d., Directory of Maryland Adult Education Programs/Classes—Adult Education and Literacy Services, Accessed February 11, 2023, https:​//​www​.dllr​.state​.md​.us​/adultliteracy​/programs​.shtml.

70

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

56. Montgomery College, 2023, “Vocational Training & Employment Services: Refugee and Asylee Career Development Services,” Accessed February 11, 2023, https:​//​www​.montgomerycollege​.edu​/workforce​-development​-continuing​ -education​/english​-language​-skills​/refugee​/targeted​-assistance​-program​.html. 57. Northern Virginia Regional Adult Education, 2022, “Serving Refugees PLC,” Accessed February 11, 2023, https:​//​www​.novarae​.org​/plc​-opportunities​/sector​ -strategies​-and​-career​-pathways​-academy​-t4ce2​-zl2zg​-nw3ce. 58. Beth Clifton, “How Virginia’s Refugee PLC Has Impacted Fairfax County Public Schools’ Adult ESOL Program,” Virginia Adult Learning Center: Beginning Literacy Culturally Responsive Education Diversity Equity-Minded Practice ESOL Instruction Literacy Professional Learning Community PROGRESS VALRC (blog), July, 2022, https:​//​valrc​.org​/news​/how​-virginias​-refugee​-plc​-has​-impacted​-fairfax​ -county​-public​-schools​-adult​-esol​-program​/. 59. Department of Education, 2015, “Federally Funded Adult Education and Family Literacy Programs,” September 15, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/ adulted​-daca​.pdf. 60. Department of Education, 2015, “Federally Funded Adult Education and Family Literacy Programs,” September 15, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/ adulted​-daca​.pdf. 61. U.S. Department of State, “Proposed Refugee Admissions for FY 2023,” Report to Congress, http:​//​www​.state​.gov​/documents​/organization​/198157​.pdf. 62. U.S. Department of Education, 2017, “Educational Resources for Immigrants, Refugees, Asylees and other New Americans [Reference Materials],” September 5, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/immigration​-resources​.html. 63. LINCS, 2023, “Enhancing Access for Refugees and New Americans,” February 5, Accessed February 6, 2023, https:​//​lincs​.ed​.gov​/state​-resources​/federal​-initiatives​/ refugeesandnewamericans. 64. LINCS, 2023, “Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education (IELCS) Resources,” February 5, Accessed February 6, 2023, https:​//​lincs​.ed​.gov​/program​/ building​-opportunities​-ielce​/additional​-resources. 65. U.S. Department of Education Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, 2014, “Grants and Programs,” June 18, Accessed February 1, 2023. 66. Rita Himmel and Maria Manuel Baptista, “Migrants, refugees and othering: constructing Europeanness. An exploration of Portuguese and German media,” Comunicação e sociedade 38, (December 2020): 179–200, http:​//​journals​.openedition​ .org​/cs​/4316. 67. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2022, “Refugees,” October 26, Accessed February 5, 2023, https:​//​www​.uscis​.gov​/humanitarian​/refugees​-and​ -asylum​/refugees. 68. Ananda Devan Sivalingam and Shaheen Mansori, 2020, “How Organizations Should View Reskilling and Upskilling The Workforce,” SSRN, Accessed October 1, 2022, http:​//​www​.sastraeducation​.com​/how​-organizations​-should​-view​-reskillng​-and​ -upskilling​-the​-workforce​-​.html.



Increasing Access to Tertiary and Career and Technical Education for Refugees

71

69. Skilled Immigrant Taskforce, n.d. “About this Resource,” Maryland Entrepreneur Hub, Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​marylandentrepreneurhub​.com​/ resource​-profile​/skilled​-immigrant​-task​-force. 70. Ananda Devan Sivalingam and Shaheen Mansori, 2020, “How Organizations Should View Reskilling and Upskilling The Workforce,” SSRN, Accessed October 1, 2022, http:​//​www​.sastraeducation​.com​/how​-organizations​-should​-view​-reskillng​-and​ -upskilling​-the​-workforce​-​.html. 71. Ibid. 72. Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS), 2022, “About Us,” LIRS, January 3, https:​//​www​.lirs​.org​/about​/. 73. Virginia Department of Social Services, TANF Manual: Chapter 900 The Virginia Initiative for Education and Work (VIEW), Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​ www​.dss​.virginia​.gov​/benefit​/tanf​/manual​.cgi. 74. English for Refugees and Asylees (ERA) Program, “Refugee and Asylee ESL,” Prince George’s Community College, Accessed August 26, 2022, https:​//​www​.pgcc​ .edu​/go​/refugeeprogram​/. 75. “Employment Services,” Asylum Works, Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​ asylumworks​.org​/employment​/. 76. Virginia Department of Social Services (VDSS), 2022, “Refugee Services,” Accessed October 13, 2022, https:​//​www​.dss​.virginia​.gov​/community​/ona​/refugee​ _services​.cgi; ECDC: African Community Center DC Metro, 2021, “What We Do,” Accessed October 13, 2022, https:​//​acc​-dc​.org​/. 77. See chapter 2 for more information on issues in refugee access to and inclusion in the U.S. education system. 78. Anastasia Brown and Todd Scribner, 2014, “Unfulfilled promises, future possibilities: The refugee resettlement system in the United States,” Journal on Migration and Human Security 2, no. 2, 101–120. 79. See chapter 2 for more information on language barriers for refugee educational inclusion. 80. Melanie Nezer and H.I.A.S. U.S. Policy and Advocacy, 2013, “Resettlement at risk: meeting emerging challenges to refugee resettlement in local communities,” Manchester Research Group 89, https:​//​scholars​.unh​.edu​/mrg​/89. 81. Jeffrey Bloem and Scott Loveridge, 2017, “The secondary migration of refugees resettled in the U.S.,” Forced Migration Review 54, 26. 82. Michael Fix, Kate Hooper and Jie Zong, 2017, “How are refugees faring? Integration at US and state levels,” Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. 83. Jeffrey Bloem and Scott Loveridge, 2017, “The secondary migration of refugees resettled in the U.S.,” Forced Migration Review 54, 26. 84. Morris M. Kleiner and Evgeny Vorotnikov, 2017, “Analyzing occupational licensing among the states,” Journal of Regulatory Economics 52, no. 2, 132–158. 85. Victoria Rietig, 2016, Moving beyond crisis: Germany’s new approaches to integrating refugees into the labor market (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute). 86. Ibid. 87. Ibid.

72

Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski and Savannah Smith

88. U.S. Department of Education, 2017, “Educational Resources for Immigrants, Refugees, Asylees and other New Americans [Reference Materials],” September 5, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/overview​/focus​/immigration​-resources​.html. 89. Ibid. 90. Regina Konle-Seidl and Georg Bolits, 2016, “Labour market integration of refugees: Strategies and good Practices: Study,” European Parliament. 91. Jessica Shea, 2018, “The Invisible Crutch,” In privilege, pp. 41–42. Routledge. 92. Peggy McIntosh, 1995, “White privilege: Unpacking the invisible backpack,” Women: images and realities: A multicultural anthology: 264–267. 93. James R. Stone III and Morgan V. Lewis, 2010, “Governance of vocational education and training in the United States,” Research in Comparative and International Education 5, no. 3, 274–288. 94. UNESCO-UNEVOC International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training, 2021, “United States of America TVET Country Profile,” 15, Accessed April 21, 2022, https:​//​unevoc​.unesco​.org​/home​/Dynamic+TVET+Country+Profiles​/ country​=USA. 95. D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 5-A, § 1602,“Individual State Profile—District of Columbia, Secondary Career and Technical Education, last modified April 2020, Accessed September 30, 2022, https:​//​reports​.ecs​.org​/comparisons​/view​-by​-state​/38​/DC. 96. 8 Va. Admin. Code 20-23-220—8 Va. Admin. Code 20-23-290, “Individual State Profile—Virginia,” Secondary Career and Technical Education, last modified April 2020, Accessed September 30, 2022, https:​//​reports​.ecs​.org​/comparisons​/view​ -by​-state​/38​/VA. 97. COMAR 13A.12.02.15, “Individual State Profile—Maryland,” Secondary Career and Technical Education, last modified April 2020, Accessed September 30, 2022.

SECTION II

Inclusion

73

Chapter 4

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland‌‌

Disclaimer: The views in this chapter are our own and do not represent the views or opinions of our employers, or the clients we support. ‌‌ the United States, including the District of Columbia, Maryland, and In Virginia (DMV), all children have the right to attend school, regardless of immigration status, citizenship, or national origin. These educational rights derive from the court case Plyler v. Doe (1982)1 and were emphasized in a joint Dear Colleague Letter (2014)2 penned by the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice. While refugee students’ rights are legally protected, U.S. policy does not always translate into practice, as merely registering for and attending school does not equate inclusion, nor it is indicative of educational success. Furthermore, inclusive educational efforts are often limited when students attend schools that lack resources or are located in marginalized areas.3 Inclusion of refugee students in education systems is vital to support their development and to offer hope for a brighter future.4 For refugee children, inclusive schools and classrooms can serve as safe, supportive environments to learn and grow and where they can embrace their various backgrounds and identities. However, many schools and educators are unprepared to offer refugee-specific services. Moreover, they may not understand the differences between providing support for immigrant students and support for refugee students.5 To highlight this issue and to inform educators, schools, and policymakers on good practices, we first introduce inclusive education and discuss the importance of utilizing an intersectional lens when examining inclusivity in 75

76

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

education. Then, using a combination of original data from refugees in the DMV, interviews with experts in the field, and a review of relevant literature, we present an analysis of inclusive education for refugees within the DMV. We end our chapter by highlighting refugees’ recommendations to improve inclusive education efforts based on their personal experiences. BACKGROUND To improve refugee students’ inclusion into U.S. education systems, some educators have implemented inclusive education practices. Traditionally, inclusive education has been associated with the integration of students with disabilities into mainstream education systems. In reality however, the term is much broader, and refers to any students who are excluded from having an equitable educational experience.6 While this includes students with disabilities, it also pertains to students who do not speak the classroom language, practice a different religion than the majority, have refugee backgrounds, and/ or live in poverty and come to school hungry, among other marginalizing factors.7 For many refugees, they may fall into several of these categories simultaneously. What Is Inclusive Education? Inclusive education systems are defined as singular, unified education systems that meet the needs of all students across the education continuum, with appropriate support provided as needed.8 According to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), “Inclusion involves a profound cultural shift to ensure that all children, as well as staff, parents and other members of the school community, feel valued, welcomed and respected. It requires a process of systemic reform with changes and modifications in content and materials, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies.”9 Inclusive education also involves taking into account the social and political climate, as well as a classroom’s physical environment, to fully understand the impact these factors may have on a child’s education and personal life.10 Inclusion is often conflated with “access,” but it is important to distinguish between the two terms. In practice, access to education means that all students are able to register for and attend school, as well as use and understand learning materials. On the other hand, inclusion signifies the creation of learning environments in which all students, regardless of background or identity, feel equally safe, valued, and respected in the classroom.11 According to a 2012 self-assessment tool for teachers published by the Inter-Agency

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

77

Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), inclusive classrooms have the following five characteristics:12 1.  Do not discriminate, exclude, or marginalize any student on the basis of gender, socio-economic background, ethnicity, abilities or disabilities, etc.; 2.  Are student-centered, meaning teachers design their lessons based on what will most effectively meet the needs of their students; 3.  Are a healthy space for all students, and promote proper health and wellbeing practices; 4.  Are a safe and caring environment, free from harm, abuse, physical and mental punishment, and bullying; and 5.  Involve families and communities to best support the education and wellbeing of their children. Beyond fostering an effective space for learning, inclusive classrooms create safe, supportive environments where children can expect their rights to be upheld, to be protected from harm, and to be respected and treated equitably, regardless of different abilities, identities, and learning needs.13 This sense of respect and support is especially important for refugee students because it helps alleviate societal tendencies towards mistrust of refugee students while also promoting their participation and inclusion in the classroom.14 With a recent sociopolitical climate that has weaponized refugees and “stoked a xenophobic strain in the American psyche”15 against humanitarian migrants, it is critical that schools are actively fostering safe, equitable, and inclusive classrooms. Integration vs. Inclusion It is also important to note the distinction between integration and inclusion. They are often perceived as interchangeable concepts, however, each term has a different implication within schools. When an integrated, rather than inclusive, approach is taken in the classroom, refugee students are more likely to experience marginalization, bullying, and discrimination, and receive inadequate academic support.16 Integrated education views the child as a “problem” that must conform to the education system, whereas inclusive education recognizes that the education system is the problem, not the child.17 Education practices are not inclusive if all children are put into the same mainstream classroom without structural changes to the curriculum and pedagogy, among others. Rather than placing the burden of change on the child, inclusive education places the burden on the system.

78

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

This distinction is critical when considering refugee students in the classroom. Instead of urging refugee students to conform to one ideal standard and type of education—potentially further marginalizing them and masking their unique identities and backgrounds—the goal of inclusive education is to recognize these differences and adapt the classroom and education system accordingly. Ultimately, inclusive education aims to move away from an “us vs. them” mentality amongst students and instead foster a “we” mentality. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Building off of the above definitions, this chapter utilizes decolonial theory as well as Kimberlé Crenshaw’s18 theory of intersectionality to frame our analysis of inclusive education for refugees within the DMV. Decolonial and intersectional theory allow us to delve into the complex legacies of colonization and identity politics as they relate to refugees within the education sector. These two theories are crucial in considering that refugees arrive in countries of resettlement with diverse identities and experiences. For refugees to succeed in new educational settings, it is important for policymakers, schools, and teachers to understand these various complexities. Furthermore, it is necessary to examine how historical systems of oppression and Western supremacy present challenges to refugee inclusion in educational systems and spaces. Crenshaw’s intersectional framework19 is particularly useful in understanding how the refugee’s various marginalized identities interweave. Originally a black, feminist view on critical theory, the use of intersectional theory has expanded to understanding the relationships between various identities and systems of power. Importantly, Crenshaw highlights the fact that violence and discrimination are often the result of the intersection of various dimensions of a person’s identity, such as race, religion, gender, sexuality, class, and immigration status, among others. Refugee students may hold several or many of these identities and are often subject to discrimination in their host countries, including in the U.S. Additionally, as authors, it is important that we reflect on our own identities and intersectionalities to examine the ways in which we may be biased when interpreting our data. As white, cisgender, heterosexual women who do not come from a refugee background, it is crucial that we deeply reflect on our own privilege so that we can more actively listen to the experiences and perspectives of refugee students. Current scholarship, such as Unangst and Crea’s study on existing literature surrounding refugee student support programs, calls for an increase of intersectional research within higher education.20 It is important to note that intersectional research is needed at all levels of education, and that by centering refugee voices in discussions surrounding

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

79

inclusion, we can better understand the services and the support refugee students need to succeed. As such, throughout our chapter and analysis, we employ a decolonial and intersectional framework to consider how refugees’ identities and backgrounds may impact their experiences in the classroom, as well as how educators and schools can use this lens to bolster inclusive education approaches and improve their support of refugee students. ANALYSIS Inclusive Education for Refugee Students in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia Our analysis is based on recent scholarship and interview data from experts who work directly with refugees in educational settings such as scholars and practitioners, and, most importantly, from refugee students. Using the five characteristics of inclusive classrooms described by INEE,21 we identified five overarching themes for analysis: respect for identities and cultural differences; student-centered learning; health and wellbeing; safe and caring environments; and family and community engagement. Using these thematic categories, we wove in intersectional analysis of various refugee identities throughout each section. Findings across each of these categories also underlined that refugee students are not a monolith and furthered our understanding of the successes and gaps in inclusive education for refugees within the DMV. 1. Respect for Identities and Cultural Differences Inclusion is essential in all aspects of a student’s environment, both in and outside of the classroom. Scholars have posited that the inclusion of refugees in schools requires administrators, staff, and teachers to create an environment where everyone is accepted and valued for their unique abilities.22 Educators themselves play a large role in helping refugee students to socialize and learn about U.S. culture.23 Unfortunately, many U.S. schools are not equipped to offer proper training to teachers and staff. Therefore, they may be unaware of the most effective ways to include refugee students in their classrooms and schools. Every interaction that students and their families have with school staff and teachers can impact their experiences and learning. It is essential that schools are equipped with the infrastructure and resources to support their teachers and staff in their inclusion efforts. For these reasons, this section on respect for identities and cultural differences has been divided into school staff, teachers, and school programming to explore each aspect in more detail.

80

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

School Staff Schools and their staff (such as administrators, front desk staff, lunchroom staff, among others) play an important role in welcoming refugee students in educational settings and fostering a sense of belonging. Therefore, a school leadership and climate that promotes respect for diverse identities and cultural differences can set a positive example for educators, students, parents, and community members.24 In Cureton’s study of refugee parental educational involvement in Chicago, Illinois, “the presence of co-racial and ethnic staff members conveyed that school is a space shared with people who are culturally and racially familiar and who also possess power at the institution.”25 The diversity of staff, especially in leadership and guidance positions, may help refugee students feel more welcome and supported in a new school environment. Elizabeth, a refugee who received her graduate degree from a university in DC, reflected on the importance of feeling understood during her own college application process. She shared, “My guidance counselor was originally from [a Caribbean nation] so she had that immigrant mentality, you know? She kind of had an idea of the challenges, expectations, you know for refugees like myself, you know, refugee population, like myself. So she was very intentional about targeting that refugee student population in school and dumping resources in front of us. Looking back . . . my guidance counselor really, really inspired me, pushed me to research about colleges that I wanted to attend.” While Elizabeth’s guidance counselor was not a refugee herself, she came from an immigrant background which helped her relate to and support refugee students at the school. It is also important to consider that oftentimes, students’ and parents’ first interaction with a local school is with the staff at the front office. This moment can serve as an opportunity to welcome refugee students, yet front desk staff are not always provided with specific training or may be unaware of the available resources on how to best support refugee students and families. For example, when registering his younger siblings for school, Mohammad, a recently arrived refugee in Virginia, explained, “Most of the staff, they were not . . . they had no clue, and they know nothing about the situation over in [my home country].” This led to communication challenges, as the school staff did not understand the complications involved with refugees obtaining transcripts. Although the state of Virginia released guides on how to welcome refugee students, Mohammad’s experience reveals that not all school staff had been sufficiently trained with these guidelines. Instead, his sisters and brother were not allowed to begin school in the U.S. for two months. Mohammad shared, “they were lost in that two months. They lost their hope.” After missing one year of school due to displacement and living in military

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

81

camps, Mohammed described how the two month delay in attending school was detrimental to his siblings’ wellbeing. While school staff are not expected to immediately understand the complexities of every student’s situation, it is important that they are provided with federal and state guides and resources to help refugee students arriving at local schools. Cultural competence training for school staff is also an essential component of creating an inclusive educational environment. Since refugee students arrive in host countries with varying experiences, identities, and cultures, cultural competence training can provide school staff with tools and strategies to communicate in a culturally understanding and effective manner. Sarah, a volunteer in Virginia who works with resettled refugee students and local schools, discussed her concerns about staff training. She stated, “Front office staff education to me is huge and needs to happen immediately.” Cultural competence training, workshops on inclusive education, and websites or toolkits specific to working with refugee student populations are some of the many ways in which schools can offer support and education to educators and staff. By providing these tools and resources, school staff may be able to ease refugee students’ transition and make them feel more welcome at school. This was the case for Ali, a refugee who attended high school in Maryland, who reflected on his positive experience working with school staff during his enrollment process. Ali shared, “We received a tremendous amount of help from the school officials to get enrolled before the deadline. I mean, that was incredible. They just did everything. We were just, ‘Here are our files,’ and boom, boom, boom, they did everything. I felt supported.” Although registration and enrollment at schools can be a stressful time for refugee students and families, welcoming and culturally responsive staff members can help make the process smoother and create an inclusive environment. Teachers Teachers are also crucial in welcoming refugee students because they serve as authority figures in the classroom.26 Unfortunately, teachers may not know how to promote respect for cultural differences or diverse identities, which can lead refugee students to feel ostracized or not accepted within the school. Samira, a recently arrived refugee in Virginia, expressed feeling unwelcome because her professors and peers in a course at her university did not make an effort to understand her culture. She explained, “My teachers were really nice, but that doesn’t mean I feel seen because they don’t know my background. They treat me like another American who grew up here but I should not be treated that way. . . . The professors expect me to know everything like a bright student, but I don’t always have the preparation and background of my classmates.” Samira’s experience shows that although her teachers made an effort to show her kindness and may have been well-intentioned, Samira

82

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

still felt excluded. The teachers’ absence of deeper understanding of Samira’s background led them to place unfair expectations on her as a refugee student who was new to the American school system. Samira shared the importance of recognizing that refugee students bring diverse perspectives and knowledge bases to the classroom that may be vastly different from their U.S. peers. Furthermore, she suggested, “If [professors] could gain more knowledge about the culture, my culture, it would really help. . . . I don’t want to be ignored anymore. I want my professors not to ignore me or other students. Identity is very important to me.” Samira’s advice for teachers and professors indicates that making an effort to acknowledge and understand the culture of refugee students may help improve the classroom experience and relationships between the teacher and student. She explained that understanding her “identity” would make her feel seen, whereas her teachers’ lack of knowledge of her culture instead made her feel “ignored.” Samira also felt that other cultures, and even other refugee crises, seemed to be valued more highly than her own, which made her feel invisible in her educational setting. She shared, “I am from [the Middle East] and you know what happened [there]. And now Ukraine. No one shared sympathy with me about my country. But when Ukraine happened, the professors asked for students to donate and to help. But nothing had been done about [my country] at the time. I then broke down, the professor did not realize my situation. The situation in [my country] is not better than it is in Ukraine. It was just as bad. But I did not hear a word about my country, not one word of sympathy.” In this instance, refugees from Eastern Europe were treated more sympathetically than Samira, a refugee from the Middle East. Students in her class were encouraged to offer support and aid to Ukraine, a predominantly white, European country, yet there was no acknowledgment of the crisis in Samira’s Middle Eastern home country. This highlights that region, nationality, and context of the host country, among others, can intersect to create different levels of marginalization for refugees in educational settings. Moreover, intersecting marginalized identities may not be apparent to educators or schools. If these identities are not taken into consideration, as in Samira’s situation, students may feel isolated and as if their diverse perspectives and backgrounds are not valued within the classroom. Several studies have reported instances of female Middle Eastern, Muslim refugee students being particularly targeted by teachers and peers, who associate them with terrorist threats.27 These instances were specific to female, hijab-wearing Muslim refugees, while male Muslim refugees and non-Muslim refugee students did not report the same type of bullying. This example is important to consider through an intersectional lens: not only do the students face religious-based discrimination and prejudice, the genderbased component of wearing a hijab is also targeted. Teachers are in an ideal

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

83

position to address instances of discrimination and bullying towards refugee students by modeling behavior of inclusion and encouraging dialogue about respecting people’s overlapping identities and backgrounds. Throughout the study, several refugees also reflected on the positive and welcoming support they received from the teachers in the DMV, demonstrating that refugees’ experiences in the education system are not a monolith. Samira later reflected that although she had several negative experiences at her university, there was one professor who made an active effort to accept and understand her identity. She shared, One of my [professors] is listening to me and trying to accept me [and] my identity. . . . She tells [me] that if she can help me with anything, she will. I am doing a research project with a friend, and she offers help and says she can offer ways how to do it. That is something that has been offered for the first time by my professor. She knows my name, that is a great thing. She has introduced me to other things at [the university]. She is willing to help me, that is huge for me.

By offering support, resources, and a listening ear, Samira’s professor demonstrated that she values her unique identity. Her professor’s efforts helped Samira feel part of the university community and a part of her classroom. For teachers with refugee students who identify with multiple marginalized groups, such as those who are part of the LGBTQIA+ community, it is especially important that they establish a respectful and open learning environment. Usman, an advocate for refugees, shared that it may be difficult for LGBTQIA+ refugee students to trust teachers, especially those from similar cultural backgrounds, due to prior experiences of hate and disrespect. In those instances, Usman recommended that educators tell students, “Hey, I’m a safe space, even though I’m from your culture.” By addressing and mitigating these worries, as well as honoring the nuances of their identities, LGBTQIA+ refugee students may feel more comfortable and accepted in the classroom. It is also notable that not all refugee students may be comfortable sharing their refugee status or experiences with their teachers. Saeed, a refugee student who attended college in Virginia, shared, “All of my professors don’t know that I’m a refugee. It’s not something that I publicize a lot. . . . It might help lots for somebody, for example, who’s not familiar with the American system or has some language issues, but I felt that it’s going to make it easier for me to become a part of the community without getting that special attention.” While teachers should be trained on how to support refugee students, they should not push or force students to share their background or experiences. This highlights the need for inclusive education practices, as the concept of inclusion promotes a welcome and supportive environment for everyone, including refugees, without singling out students’ specific situations.

84

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

However, for other refugee students, teachers’ awareness of their situation can help to connect those students with proper resources and services, as well as provide support. A recently arrived refugee in Virginia, Mohammad, is the guardian of his younger siblings. He described, “the welcome by teachers . . . that’s like beautiful. . . . So I think that there is a good environment inside school between teachers and students.” He went on to explain that the teachers had worked hard to help his siblings adapt and feel included as refugees in their new school. Mohammad also shared that the school principal was also a large source of support because the principal provided Mohammad and his siblings with resources, such as information about the school, transportation, and school lunches, and asking how the school could help his siblings. As demonstrated by the experiences of refugees interviewed in the DMV area, educators play an influential role in building respectful relationships with refugee students and including them in schools. English Language Program Considerations28 In addition, to ensure that school staff and teachers are set up for success, it is critical to create and enforce robust policies of inclusion in their school and/ or district, including cultural awareness training opportunities and English Language Learning (ELL) programs for students. Respecting students’ language differences, as well as offering English language services, are crucial to inclusion in schools for all grade levels. In Virginia, Fairfax County Public Schools surveyed elementary school students during the 2018–2019 school year and found that 182 different languages or dialects were spoken in students’ homes. This was a total of 48.4 percent, or almost half of their student population.29 District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) offers six unique types of language programs for ELL and newcomers, including a Secondary Newcomer Literacy Program. This program serves students with interrupted formal education (SIFE)—which includes refugee students—to address gaps in education and can also include a native language component, orientation, support for parents, and tutoring. Such program offerings depend on the availability of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers, as well as the location of the school, signaling that not all students may be able to access these services.30 According to Jennifer, an expert at a migration-focused think tank, despite the high demand, Washington, DC, lacks a sufficient number of dual language and bilingual education programs, especially when compared to other large cities with significant populations of ELL students. As a result, there is a greater risk that the needs of refugee students who are also English Language Learners may be overlooked and underserved, and that these students may not receive the support they require to succeed.

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

85

For students in secondary education, learning English quickly is especially imperative for attending, integrating into, and succeeding in school.31 For those whose first language is not English, the new language can be incredibly difficult to learn, especially if their schooling is interrupted. At the same time, secondary students are expected to utilize English at a higher level than students in elementary or middle school. Senait, a refugee student who entered a Maryland high school during her sophomore year, shared, “I mean at the beginning I was like very nervous and you know, I don’t speak English. I don’t know anyone here. And yeah, school was hard. Even the teachers wasn’t like welcome, like, I don’t know, because I don’t speak English, they don’t really explain well, you know? This—I wasn’t really accepted in first but yeah.” As a non-native English speaker, Senait struggled to feel accepted in academic settings. Her teachers did not take the time to welcome her, nor did they account for and address her needs as a newly arrived refugee and ELL student. Reflecting on a similarly negative experience with the staff in her high school cafeteria, Senait explained that although there were many food options available, she was not familiar with the names of the different foods. She did not know what to say to the cafeteria worker at lunchtime. “I just kept pointing and [the cafeteria worker] wouldn’t understand me, so I cried. That’s how I left that school.” Ultimately, Senait’s experience led her to transfer to a school with a larger number of refugee students from her home country. Students who attend school with other students from their home country or who share a native language may have an easier transition and feel more included in the school community because their identities might be more readily recognized and accepted. English language proficiency can also be a challenge if students wish to pursue higher education, as the tests used to help with admissions decisions, such as the SAT and ACT, are only offered in English. Ali, a refugee student who attended high school in Maryland and pursued higher education in Washington, DC, explained that he felt well prepared for the math section of the SAT due to rigorous high school training in his home country. However, Ali shared, “My English sucked! I actually missed two math questions because I didn’t understand words on them, and I didn’t understand what they were asking.” Ali had only arrived in the U.S. six months prior to taking standardized tests for college, and therefore did not have enough time to gain sufficient English proficiency to understand several of the questions on the test. In recent years, many universities across the U.S. have opted for test-optional admissions policies,32 including numerous in the DMV. These changes have addressed some of the barriers marginalized students may face upon entry to higher education, such as costs related to standardized tests and underfunded school districts. However, English language services remain an important

86

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

offering for refugee students. These services need to be available not only within the classroom but also across every step of the college application process to help ensure inclusion of refugee students in higher education. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) While respecting the different cultures and identities in the classroom can help refugee students feel more comfortable at school, creating a student-centered learning environment that incorporates the framework of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a crucial part of inclusive education.33 UDL is a widely-accepted framework that emphasizes changing the learning environment to fit the student, rather than changing students to fit a learning environment.34 It aims to create an inclusive educational experience for all learners.35 This learning strategy involves incorporating refugee students’ diverse identities in both the classroom and the curriculum.36 Studies have shown the importance of drawing on students’ personal experiences, yet not all educators are trained to understand refugee experiences and incorporate their diverse perspectives and identities into classroom learning.37 Samira, a refugee student attending a university in Virginia, believed that there was much room for improvement in this area. She explained, “I feel the system is designed for those people, for Americans, and they feel that is the right way to do it. But I don’t feel welcomed as much as other students are if I compare myself to others and to Americans. So I think it’s designed that way, but I’m not included. Those who have designed these programs have not thought about me or about what it is like for immigrants.” Samira’s reflection reveals the dichotomy between “those people” or “Americans” and students such as herself who are “not included.” She recognizes that her new school system was not designed with diverse experiences and identities in mind and that it is not built to serve marginalized students. However, Samira also emphasized that inclusive change is possible and necessary, noting, “So, there is work to be done and it can be done.” In line with Samira’s suggestion, the needs of students of all backgrounds and identities must be taken into consideration when designing curriculum and learning environments. This suggestion falls directly in line with the principles of UDL, which argue that school environments must be intentionally designed to reduce the barriers that learners of various identities may face within the classroom.38 To ensure refugees do not feel excluded or unwelcome at school, it is important to consider the ways in which refugee students can best learn and center their experiences in the classroom. Many U.S. classrooms utilize a culturally U.S.-based curriculum which can be a challenge for refugee students. Gilhooly’s39 study on educational experiences of Karen refugee students from Myanmar in primary and secondary

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

87

school in the state of Georgia discussed the difficulties that students had in understanding cultural and linguistic references, such as idioms and phrasal verbs. Gilhooly, who reflected on his extensive field notes from his work as an English as a Second Language (ESL) tutor, remarked that his students and their siblings did not know colloquialisms of “home.” This negatively impacted students’ experiences with reading and comprehension, as well as taking standardized tests. Without providing context to students from different backgrounds, the utilization of U.S. cultural words and concepts within the classroom privileges certain types of knowledge over others, mainly favoring Western concepts and ideas. Ultimately, the teachers in Gilhooly’s study failed to account for the experiences of their refugee students and how their misunderstanding of cultural concepts may adversely affect their learning outcomes. Sarah, a volunteer in Virginia who works with resettled refugee students and local schools, mentioned a small-group model that allowed refugee students to share their personal experiences in an academic setting. She shared that the students are “able to share and maintain some of their own personal identity, but they may also be able to thrive from some of their previous experiences and bring on the new.” However, Sarah also reflected that this group is for ESL learners and remains isolated from other mainstream classes which contradicts the tenets of inclusive education. This separation can impede opportunities for refugee students to exchange experiences and ideas with the rest of the school community. This may lead refugee students to feel isolated or unwelcome because their cultures are not discussed outside of their small ESL group. However, Mendenhall and Bartlett’s study on academic support for refugee students based in New York showed that small groups can encourage exchange and inclusion.40 Their study revealed that encouraging students to share their own experiences in heterogeneous groups enabled the students to learn about diversity and culture from one another. In this example, the sharing of culture was reciprocal—not only did the refugee students learn about U.S. culture, but U.S. students learned about other cultures as well. Cara, a leader at a non-profit focused on changing community perceptions of refugees, spoke about the issue of refugee inclusion within curriculums. She shared, “On our website, we provide a curriculum for K–12 classrooms, really trying to create an inclusive environment through classrooms, understanding the refugee story and why they migrated. Trying to bridge the cultural gaps. I think fear is a big thing and that filters down to children, so educating local communities is something that’s important to us.” This example demonstrates that it is crucial to embed knowledge and appreciation of other cultures within lesson planning and curriculum development. Given that negative perceptions of newcomers, such as refugees, are often passed

88

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

from adults to children, it is important that students learn to be open and respectful of those with different backgrounds in school. One specific way in which teachers and school staff can show respect and more deeply understand migrant and refugee students’ identities is by incorporating assignments or lessons in which refugee students can discuss their experiences.41 Senait, a refugee student living in Maryland, explained that her high school English teacher made her feel that her story and experiences were valued. For example, when Senait wrote a paper about her and her parents’ journey as refugees, the teacher encouraged her to write more and made an effort to get to know her personally. This teacher’s support and demonstrated interest in Senait’s experiences provided an invaluable way to connect and foster inclusion. By including a curriculum in which Senait was encouraged to share her personal experiences, her teacher created a welcoming and student-centered classroom atmosphere that aligned with UDL’s goal of adjusting the classroom environment to best serve all learners. Health and Wellbeing To comprehensively analyze refugee inclusion in education, refugee students’ health and wellbeing must be considered. Scholars have argued that rather than viewing refugee students’ health and wellbeing holistically, educational settings often place too much emphasis on their trauma.42 When teachers solely focus on trauma, they do a disservice to their students in that they only recognize one of the many complex identities refugee students hold and ignore the ways in which trauma may intersect with other parts of their student’s individuality. Veck and Wharton note that inclusion efforts for refugee students are often led by educators who fixate on deficits, specifically “on trauma, restricted literacy and interrupted or diminished experiences of schooling.”43 While trauma is one important aspect of health and wellbeing, when schools and educators only focus on deficits and trauma, refugee students may be unable to reach their full potential because their individualized identities are not valued. People who work with refugees should seek to understand how a student’s trauma history may impact their educational experience while also exploring refugee students’ mental health and wellbeing through an intersectional lens. This involves considerations of how trauma intersects with various identities, including refugee status. Mohammad, a refugee living in Virginia, reflected on his and his two younger siblings’ experiences evacuating from their home country, and the ramifications on their mental health. He shared, “During this one year, all of our family had trauma and I believe this will impact my sisters and my brother. I think they will need some psychological help for students that came from traumatic situations. I don’t know if they

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

89

[the school] are providing that kind of support or not, because I didn’t hear anything about that from them. But I really think that we need that kind of support; even I need that kind of support.” Inclusive education should strive to create safe learning environments for all students. This is especially critical for students with refugee backgrounds and/or trauma histories. By ensuring that teachers and schools do not fixate on refugee students’ trauma as a deficit, these actors can ensure that students are referred to the appropriate mental health and wellbeing services and receive support without undo interruptions to their education. According to the DCPS website, DCPS is a “trauma-responsive, healing-centered school district that creates learning environments within our schools that acknowledge and address the impact of trauma on a student/school.”44 For all students, including refugees, cultivating a traumaresponsive environment is an essential component of creating a safe learning environment. With the ubiquity of school shootings across the U.S., this is an even more urgent priority. One refugee in Virginia referenced the 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, that killed 19 students and two teachers,45 stating that despite leaving the dangers of his home country, he still worries for the safety of his school-aged siblings while they are at school. News of dangers such as school shootings can leave refugees at risk of retraumatization. The difficult U.S. sociopolitical climate highlights the necessity of making trauma-responsive resources available and accessible within schools. Sarah, a volunteer in Virginia who works with resettled refugee students, shared a conversation with her mother about the availability of trauma-informed training for local educators. Her mother, a public school teacher in a district with many refugee students, explained to Sarah, “Well, we do have these trauma-informed teachings. We have these trainings that are supposed to help with that.” While her mother’s school is implementing trauma-informed training for teachers and making efforts to address students’ needs, Sarah also noted, “I don’t know that the teachers necessarily are responding to it or that it’s being delivered in the proper way.” Providing training for educators does not always result in the implementation of best practices, especially if teachers are not motivated to incorporate these training initiatives or the training themselves are not informed by refugee experiences. Moreover, when school leadership does not advocate for training sessions or these sessions are not delivered as intended, teachers are less likely to incorporate these practices. Sarah also mentioned the need for schools to prioritize hiring school counseling staff who are culturally aware and trained to help refugee students. She shared that public school teachers are often “overworked and underpaid. So I think we’re asking way too much of them when we’re asking them to be counselors and teachers, and in some cases fulfill a parent-like role for some

90

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

students. . . . So I think it’s more about increasing the number of trained counselors in schools. That’s something that’s definitely missing at the school that I’m referring to. There’s one counselor in every school building, and five in the high school, so there’s not enough.” Hiring more counselors can help alleviate some of the pressure put on teachers and staff to address these complex issues, such as trauma and mental health concerns. Therefore, schools should prioritize hiring counselors to support not only their refugee students but also their educators. Beyond making these resources available, it is equally important that they are easily accessible. School counselors are especially important because lack of insurance may serve as a barrier for refugees to access counseling outside of their local school, even if they are aware of the existence of such resources. To help connect refugee students with mental health resources, many local schools have a Student Assistance Program (SAP) which allows educators or volunteers like Sarah to fill out a form if they are concerned about a student. From there, the student and family are connected with the school guidance counselor and other mental health resources. Sarah attended the same school as the refugee students with whom she now works and was therefore already aware of SAP. She shared, “I wouldn’t have known about SAP . . . I probably could have looked it up, but it wouldn’t have been something that was readily available to me if I hadn’t attended that school district personally. . . . I knew about it because it was a resource that was presented to us when we were students.” Without her previous experience and knowledge, Sarah may not have been able to connect refugee students and their families with vital mental health resources. Sharing this type of information, as well as raising awareness of programs such as SAP, need to be commonplace at schools and volunteer agencies so that refugee students can receive the help and support they need. Elizabeth, a refugee who received her graduate degree from a university in DC, also advocated for more counseling resources within schools. She argued, “I want policymakers to also prioritize mental health for the refugee population. I swear I think that I would have benefited a lot in secondary school with counseling. I didn’t get that counseling.” Elizabeth’s experience highlighted the lack of mental health resources for refugee students at the secondary level. Many practitioners shared that this issue continues to affect refugee students in higher education as well. Rebecca, a leader at a global nonprofit that advocates for refugees, explained that many support services at universities do not consider the perspective of refugee students. She shared, “All campuses have a counseling center and have an office to support international students but often they are not attuned to particular legal issues a refugee student would come with, particularly one from overseas, or some of the more trauma backgrounds that

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

91

refugee students may come with. . . . They’re sort of lumped together with all international students even though, in many cases, they really face particular challenges and differences.” Rebecca’s observation calls attention to the lack of intersectional services offered for students at many higher education institutions. In this way, the varying identities and experiences of refugee students are not accounted for. Instead, they are “lumped together with all international students,” and therefore they may not have access to adequate support services such as legal aid and trauma responsive care, among others. Universities should not claim that they are equipped to support refugee students if they do not have services that are responsive to the unique needs of this population, as doing so essentially leaves these students stranded. Jennifer, an expert at a migration-focused think tank, shared, “Luckily, college campuses have mental health resources, but oftentimes they’re not adequate or trauma-informed so we also partner with local organizations to provide some of those resources. We have connections at [a DC] Med School. They are doing projects to help the local communities and refugees are one of that group. Last year, we encouraged them to take on refugee mental health. We also contacted [a university in Northern Virginia] and their [inclusive initiative] to create a series of four workshops around February or March to implement those. We are still learning the right way to help with this need. It’s a big need.” Jennifer highlighted the need for holistic approaches to supporting refugees’ mental health and well-being. She also suggested that using a community-wide approach that draws on resources from schools and local organizations can provide refugees with more comprehensive and individualized care. In addition, Jennifer noted that local organizations need to continue to learn and understand more about the “right ways” to serve refugee students and communities. It is important for schools to not only leverage community partners in their area to provide holistic support, but also to include refugee students in conversations surrounding their wellness needs. By working in collaboration with refugee students, as well as with community partners, schools and educators can help build a support system that addresses each student’s varying identities and helps them successfully participate in the U.S. education system. Safe and Caring Environments An essential component of inclusive education learning environments is maintaining classrooms that are free from bullying, harm, abuse, and physical and mental punishment.46 This requires both teachers and students to work together to foster and encourage a caring and protective space for learning. Creating an environment free from inequality and harm is critical in supporting student’s learning outcomes.47

92

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

Peer Interactions One of the early ways refugee students may learn about their host country’s new cultural norms and practices is through exposure to their peers at school. New students’ treatment by their peers can have a large impact on their identity, as well as their educational experience and overall classroom climate.48 Benjamin, an expert at an educational access nonprofit for refugees, noted that many of the students he works with have expressed feeling lonely or that they do not belong in their school community. He stated that many students “feel like when they’re put into a group and in group work, that no one really wants to hear their opinion, and no one really wants to be in their group because they have an accent or because they look different. So there’s this perception that they’re not wanted. That definitely weighs [heavily] on a lot of our students.” Benjamin explained that these feelings of solitude can also be exacerbated if the student is the only person of color in their classroom. Amongst other marginalizing factors, refugee students’ language, race, and/or ethnicity may make them feel unwelcome in educational settings. Improving refugee students’ inclusion in schools requires solutions that take into account how students’ identities influence their feelings of belonging. Ali, a refugee student who attended high school in Maryland, explained that he faced difficulties making friends when he began attending school due to language challenges. He shared, “My English was not good. I couldn’t understand people when they spoke fast. That created a huge problem with making friends . . . it was kind of an emotional up and down, an emotional roller coaster because of the language barrier.” Although Ali made many friends by his last year in high school, the transition was challenging socially due to the language barrier between him and his peers. While one’s legal and migratory status was the focal point of our study, Ali’s experience highlights that for some refugees, their identity as a non-native English speaker was a bigger barrier to inclusion than their status as a refugee. Samira, a refugee student who attended college in Virginia, felt a similar disconnect with peers but at the tertiary level while at university. She shared: I felt like a total stranger. It is a very different environment, no one understands me, no one knows my culture, I feel like an alien. I am [light] skinned, I have [light-colored] hair, and it is fine as long as I don’t speak. But when I speak I don’t feel welcomed because of my accent and also because I come from a different country. I don’t feel as welcomed there . . . I don’t see as many people like me there. I see people from Pakistan, Africa, India, but they were either born here or their parents were immigrants, but I don’t feel accepted.

While Samira felt as though her complexion does not stand out on campus, she still felt othered and “like an alien.” Her accent and her culture made

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

93

Samira feel isolated from other peers, even those that hold different cultural identities. Samira recognizes that other diverse students attend her university, but she felt that they could not relate to her, as many of them were born in the United States. Even though university communities or schools may have a diverse population of students, including immigrants and first generation citizens, such populations’ experiences are vastly different from those of refugee students. Therefore, refugee students may still feel unwelcome or alone within their school. Samira reflected further on a peer interaction in her political science class, explaining that, “There was one specific girl who was at first welcoming but then she stayed away. She kept sources from me, we were in a group project, and she gave assignments to my group mates but not to me. I tried not to take it personally, but it was personal. Also, working in a poli sci class, a politics class, the whole class is white people and it’s tough being alone as an outsider.” Samira expressed how her feelings of loneliness were exacerbated by bullying she experienced at the hands of her peers which made her feel like “an outsider” who did not belong. The exclusion she felt due to her classmates’ behavior heightened her feelings of isolation as the only student in her class of both a minority race and refugee status. For refugee students experiencing social exclusion or bullying by peers at K–12 schools, there are bullying prevention policies, resource guides, and pathways through which one can report instances of bullying.49 At the tertiary level, however, it can be difficult to address these occurrences due to required and often lengthy processes and regulations within each institution’s Student Code of Conduct. According to American University in Washington, DC, the Student Conduct Code “is designed to support a safe, honest, and inclusive community with a shared commitment to acting with mutual respect and forming the highest standards of ethics and morals among its members.”50 If a violation occurs, there are a variety of procedures to determine the proper disciplinary action. However, both violations and disciplinary actions differ amongst institutions. Unfortunately, not all violations are reported, and even those that are reported may take weeks or even months to resolve which may cause students to feel even more isolated if they report these instances. While some refugee students experienced discrimination and loneliness, others had no difficulty making friends. Mohammad, a refugee in Virginia, shared that the principal of the school helped his siblings connect with other students from their home country. These students had high English proficiency levels and had arrived in the U.S. six or seven years prior. Mohammad explained that the other students “help[ed] each other, like to take care of each other.” He continued, sharing that this experience was positive and was a new way for him and his siblings to connect with their community. Finding others

94

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

who share similar cultural backgrounds, language, and experiences can support refugee students in their transition to local schools. Mina, a mother of two elementary-age refugee students in Virginia, shared her advice for fostering respect and making friends with those who share different religious beliefs. She explained that if someone asks why her sons do not eat pork, she taught her children to say, “‘I’m a Muslim’ and that’s it, and don’t argument with anyone that ‘I’m a Muslim and you are not.’ Just follow that you are a Muslim and that said, don’t [argue] with anyone. Just accept everyone.” While acknowledging that carrying on the traditions of Islam is important to her family, Mina recognized that her sons should also respect differences and diversity. Her advice directly promotes ideals of inclusion and acceptance of other religions and identities, which is critical in fostering positive student-student interactions.51 Classroom Discipline Refugee students may be unjustly disciplined in educational settings based on educators’ misunderstanding or ignorance of cultural differences and expectations of behaviors in U.S. classrooms. For example, Birman and Tran52 observed the academic engagement and disengagement of Somali Bantu refugee students with limited formal education within a Chicago public elementary school. These students were often found to exhibit behaviors that their teachers considered disruptive, unsafe, or distracting, such as hoarding, fidgeting, getting out of their seats, and at times, crying or running away from class. Birman and Tran posit that for refugee students who exhibit behavioral and academic disengagement, it is not a sign of “resistance or disrespect, but rather reflects a lack of knowledge of or cultural mismatch in expectations for how to be in school.”53 Classroom behaviors that are considered appropriate or acceptable often differ across cultures and contexts. By ignoring the diverse backgrounds of refugee students and requiring all students to conform to U.S. standards of engagement, educators in this study privileged U.S. cultural knowledge and behaviors over those of the students’ home country. It is essential for educators to understand these cultural nuances and how they play out in a classroom setting, rather than disciplining or punishing students. Sarah, a volunteer in Virginia who works with resettled refugee students, noted that if a student with partial English language skills does not respond to a teacher in the way the teacher expects the student to, the student’s response could be seen as disrespectful and could result in punishment. As such, a teacher’s lack of understanding of refugees’ experiences may quickly create an environment that does not feel safe or welcoming for the student. Unfortunately, this is the reality in many classrooms, as educators often lack

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

95

the proper training to recognize, understand, and gently share classroom expectations with refugee students when faced with misunderstandings. Sarah also pointed out that refugee students often come from environments where violence was common. Making jokes about violence in the classroom is one typical way for these children to cope with the violence they have seen and/or experienced.54 As Benjamin, an expert at an educational access nonprofit for refugees, shared, “resettled individuals . . . they start to feel safe, then some of the trauma starts to come forward because they’re no longer in a survival situation, although they kind of still are. But as they feel safe, then some of that trauma starts to crop up.” Teachers often over-discipline refugee students’ purportedly inappropriate classroom behaviors—actions which may stem from or represent coping mechanisms to deal with trauma from their home country.55 Framing these students’ experiences as potential trauma responses, rather than poor behavior, is critical because punishment and discipline are not always appropriate responses. Without this alternative perspective, refugee students may end up with greater feelings of anxiety about going to school, rather than feeling safe and welcomed in this environment. Instead, such behaviors should be dealt with in trauma responsive ways. Furthermore, Sarah observed a racialized component to disciplinary action for refugee students within the classroom. She shared, “They’re not treated as children all the time because they’re from a marginalized identity. . . . I think more may be expected of them because of their marginalized identity.” Several interviewees shared instances of unfair treatment or discipline influenced by the intersecting identities such as race, religion, refugee status, and nationality. Ali, a refugee student who attended high school in Maryland, shared, “My [college application] essay, I really wrote it myself. People helped me minimally because they have these, in my opinion, stupid moral dilemmas about helping someone like me with their essays.” Ali mentioned that because he was still learning English, he struggled with writing. However, when he asked for help, teachers were often reluctant. Without receiving the proper tools or training to support refugee students, teachers may view certain identities, such as non-native English speakers, as deficits or problems, rather than acknowledging how they may connect to complex cultural identities and experiences. Ultimately, deficit-oriented teaching can weaken educational opportunities for refugee students, as their intersecting identities and unique talents are ignored, rather than respected, in the classroom. Family and Community Engagement Inclusion of refugee families and communities in local school systems is crucial for the success and wellbeing of refugee students. Families and caregivers can represent incredibly important support systems for refugee students

96

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

in ensuring the students attend and complete school. Moreover, Gilhooly’s study of Karen refugees in the state of Georgia showed that including parents and families in educational settings for refugee students increases academic achievement.56 Elizabeth, a refugee who attended a graduate program in Washington, DC, reflected on the importance of family encouragement in her educational journey. She shared, “My dad was a headmaster in [my home country], you know, he was a very educated man. He was a teacher as well, so he also pushed us, influenced us to reach higher, get more education.” When discussing her successes, Elizabeth also added, “My people back home, my siblings, that family support was so big. My uncles were cheering, cheering for me, encouraging me and that made a big difference. That family support was so important.” Not only did her immediate family play a role in supporting her educational goals, but also Elizabeth’s extended family served as strong proponents in her pursuit of higher education. It is helpful for educators to understand these different educational support systems and how they can draw on these supports to deliver positive academic and social benefits to refugee students. Coupled with an understanding of the importance of families to the success of refugee students, it is crucial that schools make concerted efforts to be welcoming and inclusive to refugee communities. In Cureton’s study of refugee parental educational involvement in Chicago, Illinois, “parents whose children attended more refugee-friendly institutions express patterns of inclusion that make them feel more connected to the schools.”57 When the school community prioritizes creating an inclusive school environment for refugee parents and families, refugees can form connections which may facilitate further conversations about educational achievement and necessary communication for student success. Yet several barriers exist in communicating and building these connections between schools, educators, and refugee families. Cureton noted that tensions may arise between families and schools, as families may worry about their children losing their home culture and language.58 Benjamin, an expert at an educational access nonprofit for refugees, shared that cultural and familial tensions may rise “as students become more ‘Americanized’ and start to exert some independence as they gain an education.” Refugee students often learn U.S. cultural customs from their peers and teachers. While this can broaden perspectives, families may worry about their students losing aspects of their home culture and language. It is important that educators understand these potential strains between families and students while also recognizing that refugees’ identities are dynamic and may change over time. Language may also be a challenge for refugee families with regards to effective communication with schools and enrollment in programs such as early childhood education.59 In 2014 alone, the U.S. welcomed refugees

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

97

who spoke more than 288 languages,60 but several studies have noted that practitioners across the U.S. are generally ill-prepared or trained to work with refugee populations and speakers of other languages.61 These linguistic difficulties are shared by educators and refugee families at multiple levels of education. Some schools have made efforts to provide translation services to aid in communication. For example, refugee families in Cureton’s study “expressed gratitude for linguistic inclusion, acknowledging how it helped them feel connected to school staff.”62 However, this is not a universal practice, and languages less commonly spoken in the U.S. may be more difficult to accommodate. Scholars have also indicated that newcomers may not easily understand the level of family engagement required in U.S. school systems, as many other countries do not emphasize this type of educational involvement.63 For example, refugee parents who are new to the U.S. school system may not know that they are expected to come to school for parent-teacher conferences or to attend school functions. Often, these expectations do not consider many of the common barriers to refugee family engagement such as language, transportation, and socioeconomic status, among others. Moreover, parents and guardians may want to take an active role in their children’s education but may be unaware of how to do so in a U.S. cultural context. While refugee students may have difficulties understanding classroom expectations, parents and caregivers may also struggle to learn U.S. familial expectations in educational settings. This may hinder parental involvement and communication with schools and cause greater frustrations between parents and local education systems. Family engagement will likely be hindered without a liaison or volunteer to work with families and guide them through the new school’s educational process and expectations. Sarah, a volunteer in Virginia who works with non-profits and resettlement agencies, noted some of these challenges when helping a newly resettled refugee family to communicate with the local school. She shared, “I stepped in as a liaison between the school system and family. . . . The parents had no English. This [was] a good experience for me to recognize the [county’s] schools had amazing resources, but no way outside of their current model to communicate with families. As a local family, you have to sign up and register with schools, get vaccinations, sign up for listserv—this is something that these families had no idea about, so the communication was something to worry about.” Although these local schools offered resources that may have helped many refugee families, limited information sharing generated a disconnect. Such challenges can exclude families and students and make it very difficult to communicate and provide support to families without a third-party liaison. Therefore, schools and organizations should bear in mind

98

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

such barriers and provide resources or flexibility to meet the different needs of refugee families. Difficulty finding transportation, work commitments, and familial care obligations are a few additional barriers refugee families may face which can impact their ability to set up and attend meetings with teachers or participate in school gatherings.64 Sarah, the previously mentioned volunteer in Virginia, explained that there was only one phone in the home of the refugee family she was working with. Unfortunately, the father of the family was unable to answer school phone calls during the day because he was at work. For refugee families who rely on one working family member for English communication and/or financial support, it may be difficult to communicate with educators during the school day. In this case, Sarah explained, I was communicating through Facebook messenger . . . or Zoom [with the family] if they needed to, but the school had no way of doing that. The school had translators, a really robust ESL program, but it required me to contact the high school, middle school, elementary school to connect with proper school teachers to communicate the needs of the family. I was really trying to engage the mother in those decisions. I was really trying to empower the mother, but it was really difficult to get the circumstances, timing, and the translator.

When systemic barriers prevent families from being involved in their child’s education, such students and their families are more likely to face exclusion and isolation from their overall educational experience. Inclusive practices at schools need to account for the complexities surrounding resettlement and communication between families and schools. To address some of these systemic barriers, schools can identify community liaisons, such as Sarah, and collaborate with them and students’ families to best support their children’s education. Mohammad, a newly arrived refugee in Virginia who is the legal guardian of his younger siblings, shared similar frustrations regarding communication and connection with local schools. After searching the school website and calling several times with questions regarding the new school year, he received no response and only heard the school voicemail stating that it was summer vacation. Mohammad shared, “So somehow I feel that I’m disconnected with this school, and I have nothing. I don’t know what will happen in [the] future. How [do] I provide the transportation? How do we select my sister[’s] subjects? So that’s the problem.” After his interaction with the school, or lack thereof, Mohammad had more questions than answers and left feeling uncertain and neglected. He explained that this disconnect is a shared problem amongst many refugee families in the area who do not know the best ways to communicate with the school. Schools and refugee organizations can

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

99

help bridge this gap by facilitating access to information and resources, as well as ensuring that these are available in a variety of languages to include refugees who may not speak English. Although there is an online parent portal that Mohammad checks every day to monitor his siblings’ homework and attendance, he noted that it can be confusing. “It’s new for me, and I know for lots of refugees it’s new interacting with technology or with systems to control their [children’s] development.” Refugee families’ trouble accessing and effectively utilizing these systems can serve as a barrier to participating in their child’s education and may lead to feelings of exclusion and isolation. School outreach to refugee families and communities specifically targeting these issues could likely go a long way in family engagement in their child’s education. Communities, especially of other refugees, can play an important role in alleviating some of these miscommunications and guiding others to helpful resources and services. Mina, a refugee mother in Virginia, described meeting other refugee parents at the local park and offering advice about enrolling in English classes and educating their children in the U.S. She has also given back to her community by becoming an assistant English teacher at a local resettlement agency. Even outside of class, Mina helps her students, saying, “they couldn’t write and read in Pashto/Dari. That’s why that was really difficult for them, and I really helped them. I said when you don’t know how to write and read, please [send a] voice message in my WhatsApp . . . I’ll send you something to help you.” Mina offered extra help to her students and served as a resource in her community for other refugee parents to learn about U.S. culture and education systems. She embodied inclusive educational practices by building on available support networks and connecting families and communities with necessary resources. Mina also shared her positive experience communicating with her sons’ primary school teachers soon after her family’s resettlement in the U.S. She reflected, “The teachers are really good. They really help my kids, and I’m working really hard with them at home because I was a teacher in [my home country].” Mina’s prior career as a teacher motivated her to be highly involved in her sons’ education, even though she did not speak English when she first arrived. She recounted looking up different words online to help with her children’s homework and having her sons complete extra lessons during the summer. Mina also said that the teachers called her to show their appreciation for her help. In describing her eldest son’s progress, Mina mentioned, “In three months, he was just speaking fluently.” This positive communication between the students’ mother and teachers helped the family adjust and be successful in their new U.S. school. By intentionally connecting with local refugee parents and communities, educators can create inclusive spaces where all feel welcome and a part of their children’s educational journeys.

100

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

Elizabeth, a refugee who gained her graduate degree at a university in Washington, DC, explained: My success is not my own, it has that communal element. And these communal elements, I have been able to show it through this, you know, supporting other people in need, through you know, different ways, but also, through service to others. I served [as a volunteer where] I tutored math, math to low income students and also refugees (Hmong) in Minnesota, Hmong refugee students. So, I always, in everything that I’ve been, in the success that I have, I also owe it to other people, and I’ve been able to give back to my community in ways that I can, sharing my story, just like what I’m doing now, advocating for other refugees, etc.

Elizabeth described how the support she received from her family and the greater community encouraged her to continue pursuing education at the tertiary level. She emphasized that “these communal elements” not only impacted her individual journey, but can also help other refugee students succeed. Through volunteering and sharing her story, Elizabeth has built on the strength she gained from her support network and continues to support other refugees. It is leaders like Elizabeth who can play a large role in the lives of refugee students by helping them feel seen, understood, and included in educational settings. Mohammad similarly emphasized the importance of community and the personal responsibility he felt towards helping other refugee families: We have some proverb in our culture that says that everyone is responsible for others. I think everyone is responsible not just for themselves and their families, but for other people as well. As human beings, somehow we are all related to each other, in our pains and our happiness. In everything, we need each other’s support. It’s important to support others’ children. Here, I helped three or four [refugee] families about how to interact with schools and use school’s information systems, and how to track their children’s development. I think everyone needs to help each other and take each other’s hands and walk together.

The proverb Mohammad mentioned suggests that his culture shares a greater collective sense of responsibility to take care of one another as “human beings,” and that his lived experience embodies these words. By facilitating the relationships between schools and other newly arrived refugee families, Mohammad provided the support and guidance to others that he felt was lacking when he was enrolling his siblings. In this way, he gave back to his community and truly “walk[ed] together” with other refugees in the education system. Communities have the power to play an impactful role in students’ and families’ educational journey. Through our interviews, we have seen

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

101

multiple examples of how communities throughout the DMV have stepped up to support refugees families and students in various capacities as they navigate the school system. One of the most important ways that a community can support a refugee is through helping families and students make connections in the school, as well as serving as an advocate for them in and out of the classroom. Ultimately, communities have the power to make connections between people who together can leverage their roles and resources to better support the inclusion of refugee students in school. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our analysis of the experiences of refugee students in local DMV schools, it is clear that inclusive education practices should be implemented throughout the education system. The following recommendations are based on the findings from the literature, as well as our interviews with experts and refugees in and around the DMV. These recommendations can be divided into two categories: recommendations for educators and schools, and recommendations for policymakers and governments. Recommendations for Educators and Schools 1.  Create welcoming environments. The refugees interviewed in this chapter articulated the importance of educators acknowledging their identities and cultural backgrounds in the classroom, rather than ignoring them. Teachers and staff should receive cultural competency training that informs them how to engage with refugee students and make them feel safe and supported, without singling them out and making them feel isolated. Creating a space for all students to share their identity and background at their comfort level could be a way for refugee students to feel acknowledged and seen, while making aspects of their identities known if they so desire. Making opportunities for English language support, counseling, and other services readily available to refugee students also contributes to an inclusive and welcoming environment. 2.  Holistically support the health and wellness of refugee students. By not fixating on refugee students’ trauma as a deficit, teachers and schools can refer students to appropriate mental health and wellbeing services so that they are able to receive support without interrupting their education. This is vital in ensuring that refugee students are better equipped to succeed in school. The assumption that all refugee students arrive to their new host country with trauma is a blanket generalization that neither accounts for their individual needs nor recognizes the complexities

102

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

of their intersecting identities. Trauma-responsive care should be provided when needed, but each refugee student should not be automatically categorized as such without proper assessment. 3.  Involve families and communities. Families of refugee students are an instrumental support system that should be leveraged by school administrators, teachers, and staff to help refugee students feel supported and connected to schools. Educators, school leaders, and administrators should communicate directly with the families of refugee students to help avoid miscommunications, clarify expectations, and improve schools’ and teachers’ understanding of the students’ backgrounds. School staff may benefit from partnering with the case workers at refugee resettlement agencies to learn how to best engage with and support newly arrived refugee families with school-aged children. 4.  Provide inclusion resources to educators of all levels. School staff must be equipped with the necessary tools and knowledge to create an inclusive environment for refugee students. Front desk staff and administrators should receive training on the unique situation that refugee families will be coming in with, and be prepared to support families in enrolling students even when the families lack documentation that may otherwise be required. If a school district is aware that a population of refugees from a specific country or region may be arriving, that district should ensure that their website and resources are available in a language that is accessible to that population. Curriculums should prioritize principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to ensure that all learners are best positioned to succeed in the classroom, and teachers must be trained in these UDL principles and how they are applicable to refugee students. Recommendations for Resettlement Agencies, Policymakers, and Governments 1.  Provide schools with inclusive education resources. School staff must be equipped with resources to create an inclusive environment for refugee students. Refugee resettlement agencies should partner with school systems, curriculum writers, and school leaders to provide guidance and training about refugees and the contexts from which they are arriving, so that inclusion resources are actionable and relevant to refugee students. Front desk staff and administrators should receive training on the unique situation that refugee families will be arriving with, and be prepared to support families in enrolling students even when the families lack documentation that may otherwise be required. If a school district is aware that a population of refugees from a specific country or region may be arriving, that district should ensure that their website and

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

103

resources are available in a language that is accessible to that population. Curriculums should prioritize principles of UDL to ensure that all learners are best positioned to succeed in the classroom, and teachers must be trained in these UDL principles and how they are applicable to refugee students. Improving resource sharing through training and awareness raising, among other initiatives, can improve teachers,’ staff, and school districts’ awareness and use of these resources. These resources should be the norm throughout schools and classrooms, not an exception. 2.  Prioritize inclusive education. On a macro-level, the U.S. government should make a statement on the importance of employing inclusive practices in schools, including the principles of UDL, in particular for refugee students. Leadership on the federal level is necessary to spark greater systemic change. This begins with governments and policymakers prioritizing the implementation of inclusive education practices in schools. When governments acknowledge inclusive education as a priority, states and districts may be more incentivized to adopt inclusive education practices into their curriculums and teacher training. A statement of importance should be followed by concrete, actionable steps that states and school districts can take to promote inclusion in their own contexts. 3.  Present national guidelines on the implementation of inclusive practices. Given that each state and school district have differing policies, standard guidelines are needed to better support the inclusion of refugee students in the education system. This would greatly benefit schools and educators who want to improve their support to refugee students but do not know what concrete steps to take to implement such actions. They should include specific recommendations for all actors in an education system, such as front desk and administrative staff, school and district leaders, teachers, school nurses, guidance counselors, curriculum writers, and locally-elected school board members, among others. These guidelines should be drafted as a collaboration between experts on Universal Design for Learning, refugees, educators, disabled persons organizations (DPOs), and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that the guidelines are representative and inclusive of all refugee learners with intersecting identities. They should be easily available online and released in multiple languages.

104

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

LIMITATIONS Several limitations arose during our study that impacted the scope of our analysis and recommendations. Difficulties in finding willing participants to schedule interviews led to a lack of inclusion of pre-K and TVET perspectives. While we would have liked to expand our analysis to include these levels of education, we were unable to discuss these topics with any of our participants. Furthermore, we were unable to discuss inclusive education for several refugee populations, such as refugees with disabilities, due to the limited number of interviewees. Therefore, our analysis is not representative of all refugee student experiences with inclusive education. As such, we wish to reiterate that the refugee student experience is not a monolith, and believe that future studies should explore the experiences of refugees with disabilities in terms of educational access and conclusion. The structure of the U.S. education system also proved challenging in analyzing systems, policies, and experiences across two states (Virginia and Maryland) and one district (Washington, DC). School curriculum, policies, and rules often differ between states and districts, and so deferring to state board of education and district websites was crucial in understanding these differences. CONCLUSION Schools and educators have a responsibility to adopt inclusive education practices by not only providing support to refugee students but also involving communities and families in their children’s education. Creating a safe and caring environment free from discrimination and judgment is also crucial in order for refugee students to feel a sense of belonging and welcome in their new environment. Throughout our interviews with refugees and experts, it was clear that the adoption of inclusive education practices must take into consideration the various intersectional identities that refugee students may hold while also recognizing that not all refugee experiences are the same. It is critical to remember that inclusion is not equivalent to integration. Simply putting all students into a mainstream classroom without any structural and pedagogical changes does not make a classroom inclusive. Integration does not consider all students’ needs and identities, and does not take into account cultural differences for programming and cultural awareness for staff, teachers, and leadership. Meeting refugee students where they are and respecting and valuing their unique identities ultimately aids educators in creating a truly inclusive educational experience.

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

105

NOTES 1. Margaret MacDonnell, n.d., “Enrolling Refugee Children in US Schools,” BRYCS, accessed May 1, 2022, https:​//​brycs​.org​/schools​/enrolling​-refugee​-children​ -in​-u​-s​-schools​/​#:​​~:​text​=School​%20districts​%20may​%20not​%20bar​,have​%20the​ %20documents​%20usually​%20required. 2. U.S. Department of Education, 2014, “Dear Colleague Letter: School Enrollment Procedures,” accessed May 8, 2022, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/about​/offices​/list​/ocr​ /letters​/colleague​-201405​.pdf. 3. Sarah Dryden-Peterson et al., 2019, “The Purposes of Refugee Education: Policy and Practice of Including Refugees in National Education Systems,” Sociology of Education 98, no. 4, 346–366, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/0038040719863054. 4. Gene Sperling and Rebecca Winthrop, 2016, “What Works in Girls’ Education” (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press), https:​//​www​.brookings​.edu​/wp​ -content​/uploads​/2016​/07​/whatworksingirlseducation1​.pdf. 5. J. Lynn McBrien, 2009, “Beyond Survival: School-Related Experiences of Adolescent Refugee Girls in the United States and Their Relationship to Motivation and Academic Success,” in Global Issues in Education: Pedagogy, policy, practice, and the minority experience, eds. Greg Wiggan and Charles B. Hutchison (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education), 199–217. 6. UNESCO, 2009, “Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education,” 6–9, https:​//​ unesdoc​.unesco​.org​/ark:​​/48223​/pf0000177849. 7. Ibid. 8. USAID, 2018, “How-to Note: Disability Inclusive Education,” 1–2, https:/​ /w ​ ww.​ edu​ -links​.org​/sites​/default​/files​/media​/file​/How​-ToNote​_DisabilityInclusiveEducation​_0​ .pdf. 9. Ibid. 10. Center for Teaching Innovation at Cornell University, n.d., “Inclusion, accessibility, & accommodation,” accessed May 22, 2022, https:​//​teaching​.cornell​.edu​/ teaching​-resources​/assessment​-evaluation​/inclusion​-accessibility​-accommodation. 11. Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), 2012, “Is your classroom inclusive and child-friendly? A self-assessment tool for teachers,” December 4, https:​//​inee​.org​/resources​/your​-classroom​-inclusive​-and​-child​-friendly​-self​ -assessment​-tool​-teachers. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid. 14. Wayne Veck and Julie Wharton, 2021, “Refugee children, trust and inclusive school cultures,” International Journal of Inclusive Education 25, no. 2, 210–223, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/13603116​.2019​.1707304. 15. Ruth Ellen Wasem, 2020, “More than a wall: the rise and fall of US asylum and refugee policy,” Journal on Migration and Human Security 8, no. 3, 246–265, https:​ //​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/2331502420948847. 16. Ibid.

106

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

17. Richard Rieser, 2012, “A Commonwealth Guide to Implementing Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” (London: Commonwealth Secretariat). 18. Kimberle Crenshaw, 1991, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6, 1241–1299, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.2307​/1229039. 19. Ibid. 20. Lisa Unangst and Thomas M. Crea, 2020, “Higher Education for Refugees: A Need for Intersectional Research,” Comparative Education Review 62, no. 2, 228– 248. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1086​/708190. 21. Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), “Is your classroom inclusive and child-friendly? A self-assessment tool for teachers.” 22. Veck and Wharton, “Refugee children, trust and inclusive school cultures.” 23. McBrien, “Beyond Survival: School-Related Experiences of Adolescent Refugee Girls in the United States and Their Relationship to Motivation and Academic Success”; Sherrill W. Hayes, 2016, “Educational Considerations for Refugee And Migrant Children in the United States,” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 11, no. 3, 120–125, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/15423166​.2016​.1222593; Mary Mendenhall and Lesley Bartlett, 2018, “Academic and Extracurricular Support for Refugee Students in the US: Lessons Learned,” Theory Into Practice 57, no. 2, 109–118, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.1080​/00405841​.2018​.1469910. 24. Sandra Taylor and Ravinder Kaur Sidhu, 2012, “Supporting refugee students in schools: what constitutes inclusive education?” International Journal of Inclusive Education 16, no. 1, 39–56, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/13603110903560085. 25. Ashley E. Cureton, 2020, “Strangers in the School: Facilitators and Barriers Regarding Refugee Parental Involvement,” The Urban Review, 52, 924–949, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.1007​/s11256​-020​-00580​-0. 26. Hayes, “Educational Considerations for Refugee And Migrant Children in the United States.” 27. McBrien, “Beyond Survival: School-Related Experiences of Adolescent Refugee Girls in the United States and Their Relationship to Motivation and Academic Success”; Shirley Mthethwa-Sommers and Otieno Kisiara, 2015, “Listening to Students from Refugee Backgrounds: Lessons for Education Professionals,” Perspectives on Urban Education 12, no. 1, https:​//​files​.eric​.ed​.gov​/fulltext​/EJ1056671​.pdf. 28. Language barriers and considerations are also explored in further detail in the following chapter, Using an Asset Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers in Educational Settings. 29. Fairfax County, Virginia, n.d., “Languages Spoken at Home by Fairfax County Elementary Students,” accessed May 1, 2022, https:​//​www​.fairfaxcounty​.gov​ /demographics​/languages​-spoken​-home​-fairfax​-county​-elementary​-students. 30. District of Columbia Public Schools, n.d., “Supports for English Learners (ELs),” accessed May 20, 2022, https:​//​dcps​.dc​.gov​/service​/supports​-english​-learners​ -els. 31. Lyn Morland and Dina Birman, 2016, “Practice with Immigrant and Refugee Children and Families in the Education System,” in Immigrant and refugee children

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

107

and families: Culturally responsive practice, eds. Alan Dettlaff and Rowena Fong (New York: Columbia University Press), 355–391. 32. Scott Jaschik, 2022, “Will Test Optional Become the ‘New Normal’?” Inside Higher Ed, January 24, https:​//​www​.insidehighered​.com​/admissions​/article​/2022​/01​ /24​/will​-test​-optional​-become​-new​-normal​-admissions. 33. CAST, 2018, “Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2,” http:​//​ udlguidelines​.cast​.org. 34. Ibid. 35. Ibid. 36. Ibid. 37. Mendenhall and Bartlett, “Academic and Extracurricular Support for Refugee Students in the US: Lessons Learned.” 38. CAST, “Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2.” 39. Daniel Gilhooly, 2015, “Lessons Learned: Insights into One Teacher’s Experience Working with Karen Refugee Students in the United States,” Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 10, 1–25, DOI: 10.7771/2153-8999.1121. 40. Mendenhall and Bartlett, “Academic and Extracurricular Support for Refugee Students in the US: Lessons Learned.” 41. Ibid. 42. Taylor and Sidhu, “Supporting refugee students in schools: what constitutes inclusive education?”; Veck and Wharton, “Refugee children, trust and inclusive school cultures.” 43. Veck and Wharton, “Refugee children, trust and inclusive school cultures,” 216. 44. District of Columbia Public Schools, n.d., “School Mental Health,” accessed August 1, 2022, https:​//​dcps​.dc​.gov​/service​/school​-mental​-health. 45. NPR, 2022, “Uvalde Elementary School Shooting,” accessed September 7, 2022, https:​//​www​.npr​.org​/series​/1101183663​/uvalde​-elementary​-school​-shooting. 46. Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), “Is your classroom inclusive and child-friendly? A self-assessment tool for teachers.” 47. Roberta M. Hall and Bernice R. Sandler, 1982, “The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women?” Association of American Colleges, 2; Susan A. Ambrose et al., How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010), 156–158. 48. Ambrose et al., How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, 156–158; Hayes, “Educational Considerations for Refugee And Migrant Children in the United States.” 49. District of Columbia Public Schools, n.d., “Bullying Prevention in DCPS,” accessed August 1, 2022, https:​//​dcps​.dc​.gov​/bullying; Maryland State Department of Education, n.d., “Model Policy—Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation,” accessed August 1, 2022, https:​//​marylandpublicschools​.org​/about​/Documents​/DSFSS​/SSSP​ /Bullying​/MarylandsModelPolicyBullyingHarassmentIntimidation​.pdf; Virginia Board of Education, 2013, “Model Policy to Address Bullying in Virginia Public Schools,” https:​//​www​.doe​.virginia​.gov​/support​/prevention​/bullying​/model​_policy​ _to​_address​_bullying​_in​_va​_schools​.pdf.

108

Haley Skeens and Isabelle Hoagland

50. American University, 2022, “Student Conduct Code,” August 1, https:​//​www​ .american​.edu​/policies​/students​/student​-conduct​-code​.cfm. 51. Ambrose et al., How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, 156–158. 52. Dina Birman and Nellie Tran, 2017, “When worlds collide: Academic adjustment of Somali Bantu students with limited formal education in a U.S. elementary school,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 60, 132–144, http:​//​dx​.doi​ .org​/10​.1016​/j​.ijintrel​.2017​.06​.008. 53. Ibid. 54. Cherie S. Lamb, 2020, “Constructing Early Childhood Services as Culturally Credible Trauma-Recovery Environments: Participatory Barriers and Enablers for Refugee Families,” European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 28, no. 1, 129–148, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/1350293X​.2020​.1707368. 55. Ibid. 56. Gilhooly, “Lessons Learned: Insights into One Teacher’s Experience Working with Karen Refugee Students in the United States.” 57. Cureton, “Strangers in the School: Facilitators and Barriers Regarding Refugee Parental Involvement,” 937. 58. Ibid. 59. Maki Park, Caitlin Katsiaficas, and Margie McHugh, 2018, “Responding to the ECEC Needs of Children of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Europe and North America,” Migration Policy Institute, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/sites​/default​/ files​/publications​/ECECforRefugeeChildren​_FINALWEB​.pdf. 60. Morland and Birman, “Practice with Immigrant and Refugee Children and Families in the Education System.” 61. Joseph Tobin, 2020, “Addressing the Needs of Children of Immigrants and Refugee Families in Contemporary ECEC Settings: Findings and Implications from the Children Crossing Borders Study,” European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 28, no. 1, 10–20, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/1350293X​.2020​.1707359; Jennifer J. Hurley et al., 2013, “Use of the Pyramid Model for Supporting Preschool Refugees,” Early Child Development & Care 183, no. 1, 75–91, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​ .1080​/03004430​.2012​.655242. 62. Cureton, “Strangers in the School: Facilitators and Barriers Regarding Refugee Parental Involvement,” 937. 63. Shari Golan and Dana Petersen, 2002, “Promoting Involvement of Recent Immigrant Families in Their Children’s Education.” Harvard Family Research Project, http:​ //​www​.hfrp​.org​/family​-involvement​/publications​-resources​/promotinginvolvement​ -of​-recent​-immigrant​-families​-in​-their​-children​-s​-education; Gilhooly, “Lessons Learned: Insights into One Teacher’s Experience Working with Karen Refugee Students in the United States.” 64. Jason Greenberg Motamedi et al., 2021, “Welcoming, Registering, and Supporting Newcomer Students: A Toolkit for Educators of Immigrant and Refugee Students in Secondary Schools,” U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional

Inclusive Education for Refugee Students

109

Educational Laboratory Northwest, https:​//​files​.eric​.ed​.gov​/fulltext​/ED610689​.pdf; Gilhooly, “Lessons Learned: Insights into One Teacher’s Experience Working with Karen Refugee Students in the United States.”

Chapter 5

Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers in Educational Settings‌‌ Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola‌‌‌‌‌

‌‌ INTRODUCTION In many U.S. classrooms, a deficit-oriented approach is used when educating refugee students. However, we argue that employing a “funds of knowledge” approach, or the idea that people have a wealth of knowledge which comes from their life experiences, can help improve the quality of educational instruction and support for refugees.1 In addition, an asset-based approach, which focuses on students’ unique strengths, can support refugees’ inclusion within schools. As such, in this chapter, we explore the effectiveness of asset-based approaches in the classroom in terms of improving the quality of education for refugees in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area. Specifically, we examine how teachers trained on this approach may help refugee students in overcoming language barriers in the classroom. We also consider the impact of refugee youth engagement with English outside of the classroom, such as at-home English language usage, on their educational outcomes. Furthermore, we discuss English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL)2 programs in K–12 and higher education spaces in terms of how they may support refugee students in increasing English language proficiency and overcoming language barriers, as well as how these programs may 111

112

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

improve refugee’s inclusion within education. Our research on refugees in the DMV area highlights how their experiences with a linguistically diverse environment can positively contribute to their educational outcomes. Finally, we argue that a community-based approach to language learning, including friend, family, and neighbor care, can foster a sense of belonging and inclusion within the classroom and serve as a practical living-learning experience to build intercultural competence and understanding. Overall, our research examines the extent to which refugees’ experiences in the U.S. education system have or have not drawn on these knowledge resources as an asset within the classroom, with a specific focus on the DMV area. We start by rationalizing our theoretical framework, funds of knowledge, and then examine whether educators and students value the existing knowledge and life experiences refugees bring with them when they join new classrooms. We also underline the importance of incorporating a decolonial perspective in our analysis to center our discussion on refugee voices and shift power away from the U.S. education system’s traditional, mono-lingual English focus.3 Next, we review literature on asset-based approaches to language learning and studies regarding the quality of education provided to refugees. Then, we analyze the data collected from qualitative interviews with refugees and experts in the field and examine the extent to which refugees do or do not benefit from the current standards of second language instruction within the DMV area in K–12 schools and in higher education. Finally, we offer recommendations on how to include asset-based learning approaches within the classroom to better support refugee students, including providing adequate training to teachers who work with refugee students in educational settings. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Traditionally, the U.S. education system employs a deficit view of immigrant and refugee levels of literacy and fails to respect or value refugee students’ “plurilingual” knowledge.4 Plurilingualism highlights the interconnectivity of the knowledge and experiences of individuals who speak multiple languages and how this knowledge and experience is built on to create an enhanced “communicative competence.”5 Such experiences might include tools and resources acquired through belonging to a different culture which serve as a living example of interacting within different social and cultural worlds6 and facilitating foundations of intercultural competence.7 A plurilinguistic approach to refugee education aligns with the aim of decolonial theory, which critically examines and seeks to interrupt Western and colonial bias within systems and policies, such as the focus on English language usage



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

113

within the U.S education system. Throughout this chapter, we center refugee voices and incorporate an asset-based approach to language learning to emphasize the need to elevate the voices of multilingual refugee communities. This chapter argues that using funds of knowledge, such as plurilingualism and plurilinguistic knowledge can enrich refugees’ educational experience and should be included within U.S. classrooms. Researchers Harvey and Mallman discuss the extent to which refugee students’ funds of linguistic knowledge may include the possession of “linguistic capital.”8 This work builds on Yosso’s definition of linguistic capital, or the “intellectual and social skills attained through communication experiences in more than one language and/or style.”9 Immigrant youth may draw on several linguistic assets when learning a second language. At the same time, “these children are less likely to access early childhood programs and subsidies than their peers,”10 a reality which may affect refugee students’ future educational and lifestyle outcomes. The concept of linguistic funds of knowledge is defined as the language skills and knowledge that students bring to the classroom which allow them to build on elements of their home culture.11 Our research will utilize the framework “funds of knowledge,” or the idea that people are competent and have knowledge as a result of their life experiences,12 to highlight the shortcomings of the current ESOL programs for U.S classrooms—a problem that was evident in DMV classrooms as well. In tandem with a “funds of knowledge” framework, our research also draws on Crenshaw’s theory of intersectionality,13 or the consideration of how individuals’ various identities intersect and impact their experiences,14 by exploring how refugees’ experiences with language barriers vary according to their identities. Harvey and Mallman posit that refugees possess not only linguistic capital, but also have a wide range of other knowledge bases stemming from their life experiences, cultural values, and previous academic experiences within their home country.15 Acknowledging the vital life experiences refugees bring into their new cultures and classrooms, as well as their unique identities, can be mutually beneficial to refugees and host communities alike if appropriately valued. For the purpose of this chapter, we will focus on refugees’ linguistic knowledge base and how to use it as a strength within educational settings. BACKGROUND ON LANGUAGE EDUCATION There are several language education programs which are available to refugee students. These include ESOL, English as a Second Language (ESL), and English as a Foreign Language (EFL), as well as dual language programs where students learn in both English and another language, similar to

114

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

bilingual programs.16 The DMV area primarily uses the term ESOL for their language education programs. For most refugee students, especially those arriving to the U.S. from non-English speaking countries, ESOL classes serve a twofold purpose. First, ESOL programs provide English Language Learners (ELLs) with instruction on the alphabet, syntax, phonetics, and other technical aspects of understanding and communicating in English. Second, they teach ELLs about sociolinguistics, or the definitions, variations, and references (cultural and professional, among others) that provide context for the English language form. At all educational levels, ESOL programs pursue both purposes in a variety of ways. These include introducing speech, reading and/or writing to a student with no prior exposure; preparing students for college-level study; or training them for an entry-level position. Across all programs, ESOL programs’ goal is to advance ELLs’ comprehension of English. The ESOL coursework helps socialize students while guiding their overall adjustment to life in their respective host region, country, and society.17 In the field of K–12 education, family, friends, and neighbors (FFN) play an important role in shaping refugee youth’s language learning abilities. Due to public schools’ lack of linguistically and culturally relevant services, FFN can serve as a key supporter to help foster language development. For example, these communities may share the same culture as the refugee and be perceived as more trustworthy, and thus may be well-positioned to teach refugee youth in non-classroom settings.18 Although FFN support is important, it cannot fully supplant the lack of services within the school system. There is a need for increased tools to support this population of students and a growing demand for education programs that are responsive to the refugee population’s needs. Our literature review revealed that current research only analyzes this type of care in relation to children of immigrant youth, without specifically focusing on refugee students. In addition to emphasizing the role of external support from FFN, another key finding from current research was that language education in the U.S. does not engage in a holistic and culturally appropriate assessment of immigrant students.19 Elizabeth, a refugee student, recalls, “I feel like some of my teachers just were not culturally aware. To be honest, they really, they were caring teachers. They wanted me to be successful, but they were not culturally sensitive or culturally aware.” Although Elizabeth believed that her teachers cared about her, she stressed that they were not supporting her in a culturally responsive manner. Lazarín and Park offer policy recommendations for improving the assessment of ELLs’ experiences and knowledge. These recommendations include investing in increasing cultural and linguistic understanding of students’ diverse backgrounds.20 By understanding a student’s cultural and linguistic background, educators can gain a more nuanced



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

115

understanding of refugees’ identities and incorporate a more individualized level of support to refugees within the classroom. Funds of knowledge literature also emphasizes that applying this approach to education can improve classroom instruction by increasing representation and consideration for the resources that different student populations possess.21 Overall, gaps in the current literature surrounding funds of knowledge and refugee language education include limited reflection on how the U.S. education system can better value refugee students’ knowledge and experiences within classroom spaces. Frydland’s study of adult refugee students in New York highlighted that a contributing factor to refugees’ success in higher education was the presence of well-trained teachers.22 With specialized instruction, such as the Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm (MALP), teachers can recognize and utilize refugees’ experiences and knowledge, as well as plan ways to address their unique needs, such as developing learning aids. By using an adaptive curriculum, such as MALP, teachers can help refugee students to engage in more complex tasks while also reducing cultural dissonance.23 However, this study did not discuss the reality that refugees may also need support outside of the classroom, such as specialized instruction, tutoring, counseling, job assistance, and/or short-term financial support.24 Much of higher education research lacks a specific focus on refugee students, especially in the U.S. Instead, many scholars study refugees within broader research analysis which explore the perspectives of diverse and underrepresented student populations.25 Among the scholarship that did specifically examine refugees in higher education, one study of German higher education institutions noted that refugee students contribute positively to higher education and are generally viewed as a highly skilled population.26 However, our findings suggest that the quality of language course offerings for refugees varies. Overall, pedagogical approaches in school systems generally remain too rigid and out of step with the specific needs of refugee students.27 While educators are not against refugees coming into the classroom, educators may feel challenged beyond their capacities when they have not received the necessary training, additional material, and necessary personnel resources to be able to respond adequately to refugees’ needs.28 As a result, refugees’ language proficiency varies, a reality which can impact their access to quality job opportunities in the labor market.29 While this analysis is specific to Germany, its focus on the failure of higher education institutions to incorporate and value refugee students’ past educational and linguistic skills in the space of university classes is relevant to the U.S. and DMV contexts.

116

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

FINDINGS FROM K–12 LANGUAGE EDUCATION To successfully integrate refugee students into the U.S. society, including into schooling in the DMV area, refugees must learn the U.S. form of the English language. A significant component of refugees’ educational experiences within U.S. K–12 classrooms deals with navigating their evolving identity as a refugee while entering a primarily English-speaking classroom environment. The large refugee population in the U.S. presents a major challenge for the education system. Most refugee students enter mainstream classrooms without strong English speaking, writing, and reading skills in a country where, in the majority of schools, English is the language of instruction for all content areas, from pre-K through higher education. In addition, barriers to achieving language proficiency—and the low value generally placed on non-English language proficiencies by teachers and school administrators—can result in poor educational outcomes and feelings of estrangement for refugee students.30 In other words, teachers may expect refugee students to conform to the norms of their English language classroom which may vary significantly from their experiences in their home country’s educational system. A U.S. educational system that primarily values English-language acquisition, neglects to honor refugee students’ evolving identities and experiences, and overall fails to create a learning environment that meets refugee students’ needs and expectations. Often, teachers receive little to no training on how to support and incorporate refugee students into their classrooms. ESOL Standards and Teachers Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia are all part of the World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium. WIDA is a member-based consortium that is dedicated to the research, design, and implementation of high-quality standards for ELLs.31 WIDA provides an English Language Development (ELD) standards framework which is designed for K–12 classrooms. The purpose of WIDA’s ELD framework is to provide members with measurable goals for English language development. The framework consists of four components: ELD standard statements, key language uses, language expectations, and proficiency language descriptors.32 WIDA also has a screening tool to identify proficiency levels and place ELLs in the appropriate classroom. In addition, it has an assessment to track progress and achievement. The DMV area uses both the WIDA ELD framework and assessments. Within many schools in the DMV, teachers do not need to specialize in ESOL in their pre-service teacher training to teach and assess ELL students.



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

117

Due to the decentralized nature of teaching education programs in the U.S., including in the DMV area, there is a large variation across programs in terms of how they train teachers to work with multicultural and multilingual students. Some programs require courses in multicultural education to meet the needs of diverse learners. Other programs, however, do not require any such training, even though the likelihood of working in a classroom setting with absolutely no diversity or ELLs is quite low. Teachers may choose to add an ESOL certification to their education training and take a few extra courses in the topic. In the DMV area, teachers may choose to add an ESOL endorsement to their existing teaching license. The endorsement does not require any formal training. Instead, any teacher can decide to complete the ESOL Praxis exam. Once they pass the exam, an ESOL endorsement is added to their license and they can become an ESOL teacher.33 ESOL teachers work with ELLs using push-in/pull-out and co-teaching strategies. Push-in is a strategy where ESOL teachers teach ELLs in their regular classroom by pulling a small group of students aside or working with a student one-on-one. Conversely, with the pull-out strategy, ESOL teachers will pull ELLs out of their regular classroom and provide them with services elsewhere. Co-teaching is a strategy where both the regular classroom teacher and the ESOL teacher work together in the ELLs’ regular classroom setting.34 One important factor to consider, though, is that there is not a designated number of ESOL for each school or grade-level. Some schools have an ESOL teacher for every grade level, however, other schools only have one ESOL teacher for the whole school. In some cases, schools may share ESOL teachers with other schools, and as a result the ESOL teacher is only available to support students on certain days. Consequently, in most schools ELLs spend the majority of their time with their regular classroom teachers who typically do not have an ESOL endorsement. Typically, these teachers are not adequately, if at all, trained to meet ELL students’ specific needs.35 One of the biggest challenges for this population stems from teachers’ inadequate preparation to work with refugees who are learning English for the first time. Without proper training, teachers may not know how to accommodate refugee students in their classrooms. In particular, classroom teachers are the ones that are confronted with these needs every day but frequently lack the training and resources to effectively work with this population of students. Teaching Beyond Their Training ELLs may bring a variety of unique learning challenges to the classroom, such as limited background knowledge of English, restricted communication skills in English, need for language development in reading and writing, and difficulties tackling learning content simultaneously with language.36 Most

118

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

K–12 teachers do not have any formal training pertaining to teaching ELLs. There are a large number of ELLs in the DMV area, yet the teaching certification programs and professional development programs have not adapted to provide tools to serve this growing population. A study about the challenges that teachers face when working with ELLs states, “To work effectively with ELLs, a need exists to reform educational policies, curriculum, materials, and management, as well as teacher training. However, U.S. society and the educational system seem unprepared for this challenge; thus, many issues have emerged with regard to the teaching and learning of ELLs in the United States.”37 Often, ELLs tend to be far behind their native English-speaking classmates due to the different quality of instruction they receive as a result of learning from teachers who are not well-trained to address their needs. An important aspect of ESOL in the K–12 system and the WIDA framework used in the DMV area is their focus on students developing language while simultaneously learning content subjects. When teachers are not trained in this methodology, they may ignore the language and cultural barriers these students experience and focus only on content delivery.38 A sole focus on content delivery overlooks the opportunity to accentuate the strengths of refugee students by drawing upon their linguistic and cultural knowledge bases within classroom settings, and support refugee students acquire English language proficiency. It takes time to become proficient in the English language. Studies have shown that there is a 10-to-20-year adjustment period to a new home country, including learning the language.39 For K–12 students, language learning involves reaching conversational and academic proficiency. Initially, students may appear to learn to speak and understand English quickly. This is because conversational English can be a lot easier for students to grasp, as it does not have the stricter structure and rules of academic English. Students have the flexibility to speak with their peers without the pressure of their performance being formally graded or evaluated. Academic language and more advanced conversational language can take a lot longer to learn, thus impeding students from catching up to their native English-speaking peers. The speed of learning English, both conversational and academic, also depends on environmental factors. Researchers have found that an important step to helping ELLs learn English is to connect content with language.40 Teachers need relevant training, including on how to differentiate their instruction to assist ELLs language development at the same time as learning content areas. Elizabeth, a refugee student, stated: I think that all my teachers, all teachers who had refugee population students should have received some sort of training in handling, teaching, interacting with those students. I remember. In one of my classes, we were reading a book, and the teacher said “Oh, I appreciate you wanting to read, but you know, the



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

119

way that you pronounce words sometimes. You know, kind of throws me, you know, throws me off a little bit.” I was a little bit embarrassed, and I remember this teacher, I remember this teacher. You know, so that hurt me a little bit, and I wish this teacher knew where I come from, why my accent is this way, why I pronounced words this way.

Elizabeth’s experience of feeling embarrassed by her accent within an English classroom is likely a result of learning from a teacher without proper training on how to work with ELL and/or refugee students. Her teacher did not understand how to effectively teach the subject of reading while simultaneously developing Elizabeth’s language development. Elizabeth’s experience is also reflective of the cultural sensitivity training that is also needed to be part of a teacher’s training. Jennifer, a refugee policy expert, shared, “I think the other thing we know from research is that you definitely don’t want to wait to start introducing content. You don’t do language first and then content, even for older students. You really need to hook the language learning into content learning that’s interesting to them.” Jennifer reemphasized that ELLs need both language development and content knowledge to have a meaningful educational experience. All teachers could benefit from mastering this skill set, not just ESOL teachers. If school districts cannot supply a sufficient number of ESOL teachers for every school, then teachers should receive training in pre-service teacher education programs and through ongoing professional development opportunities. As it stands, teachers do not receive proper training to provide a meaningful learning experience for their ELL students. To strengthen the efficacy of teachers’ work with ELLs, training programs must equip teachers with the tools they need to succeed.41 This may include supplying them with information about best practices that they can employ in their own classroom, as well as training in asset-based approaches to learning and strategies regarding how to scaffold language into content areas.42 These strategies can build on teachers’ current practices to teach content areas, such as using visuals, hand gestures, hands-on activities, and graphic organizers. Training programs can also provide strategies for teachers to leverage the preexisting plurilinguistic knowledge that refugee students enter the classroom with as a means to support improved learning outcomes in a more inclusive environment. Pre-service training and in-service professional development can then focus on how to adapt these same strategies to help develop language development for ELLs.

120

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

Classroom Challenges In the classroom, refugee students may experience a variety of challenges, including social isolation, adjustment to formal schooling, and achievement gaps. According to our interview data from refugee students in the DMV area, many shared that interacting with teachers not culturally aware or sensitive to their backgrounds was challenging. For example, Elizabeth, a refugee student, recalled that her classroom teachers seemed to be “just speeding us up to adjust to American life, and the American way of speaking English.” She highlighted that teachers were not getting to know her or what knowledge she was bringing to the classroom. Instead, she felt that her teachers were focused on assimilating her to a U.S. classroom, rather than recognizing her strengths and identifying and providing tools to help her address some of the challenges she would likely face in her new learning environment. Elizabeth also expressed that felt pressured by her teacher to conform to American English. She explained, “we spent so much time being taught how to pronounce English words the American way, to the extent that I felt like my teachers, sometimes we’re trying to change my accent, you know?” Elizabeth shared how her experience exacerbated her pre-existing feelings of social isolation and lack of belonging because she felt that something was wrong with how she spoke. She noted that one ESL instructor attempted to aid refugees in combating their feelings of isolation, however, in her experience, her teacher ultimately failed. She stated, “I just felt like they were trying hard to make me fit in, feel a sense of belonging, but they just didn’t have the right training to do it the right way.” As such, Elizabeth noted inadequate training as one reason why her teachers were not able to provide her with the support she needed within the classroom. Another refugee student, Mohammed, shared that when he first started high school in the U.S. he felt unwelcomed. He stated, “at the beginning I was like very nervous and you know, I don’t speak English. I don’t know anyone here. And yeah, school was hard. Even the teachers wasn’t like welcome, like, I don’t know, because I don’t speak English, they don’t really explain well, you know?” Both Elizabeth and Mohammad mentioned challenges related to belonging and feeling (un)welcomed, especially in relation to their efforts to learn English. Their negative experiences with their teachers speak to the need for more cultural sensitivity training for teachers to ensure that refugee background students receive a high-quality education and feel welcomed within their classroom. Another challenge that refugee students may face is interruptions in their formal schooling back in their home country due to political, environmental, or infrastructural factors. In describing her move to the U.S. and her experience starting high school, Elizabeth explained:



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

121

I didn’t have like enough English, so my parents were really concerned about how some of my siblings and I would survive and handle schooling and we also had to play catch up, because when we were in the refugee camp our education was a little bit disrupted. You know, starting with the journey from [my home country] to [a neighboring country], you can imagine the process itself, so you know our lives were quite disrupted, so when we arrived here, you know my parents were concerned about the language is what is how we would just handle school life.

Elizabeth refers to challenges she faced as her education was disrupted during her experience of displacement and resettlement. It is important to consider how refugees’ limited or lack of English knowledge, as well as limited, or disrupted, formal classroom experience, may compound and influence their educational experience. For example, refugee students’ inability to understand instruction or communicate in their new environment impacts their learning. This can put refugee students at a further disadvantage when coupled with educational interruptions, as well as other stressors related to migration journeys, from settling in a new country to adjusting to a new culture or dealing with potential trauma related to leaving their home country.43 It is important to consider how these different factors may manifest within the classroom, and ensure that teachers are trained to recognize the variety of identities and experiences that refugee students hold. Teachers must take a nuanced understanding of refugees’ identities into account as they strive to support their learning. Research shows a persistent gap where non-English speakers perform significantly lower in school than their native English-speaking peers.44 Language barriers within the classroom may impact the achievement gap between native English and non-native English speakers. Researchers have also found that ELLs “are disadvantaged in terms of their educational attainment, economic situation, and social security, compared to the native U.S. population.”45 However, while disadvantaged in these areas, there is little research that indicates ELLs as being valued for the assets and plurilingualism knowledge base that they enter the classroom with. Refugee students may feel unsupported in school and academically adrift due to educational, and socioeconomic disadvantages.46 The school system may not be providing refugee students with the necessary support to ensure their success in the U.S. When students feel academically abandoned, they are more likely to drop out or not graduate.47 In 2020, 55.6 percent of ELLs graduated from high school in Maryland compared to an overall graduation rate of 86.8 percent for non-ELLs.48 In Virginia, 73 percent of ELLs graduate in 2020, whereas 94 percent of non-ELLs graduated.49

122

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

ELLs may face persistent struggles in their educational trajectory due to a lack of support from their teachers and feelings of social isolation.50 When Samira, a refugee student, was asked how her teachers treated her, she said: So far my teachers were really nice, but that doesn’t mean I feel seen because they don’t know my background. They treat me like another American who grew up here but I should not be treated that way. I have different knowledge and abilities, and I’m treated like any other student but I should not be treated that way and I should not be seen as the same because I am a different person, I have a different background.

Samira felt unseen by her teachers because her unique strengths and knowledge from her experiences were ignored, rather than acknowledged and employed to improve the quality of instruction she received. Her experience shows how imperative it is for teachers to take an asset-based approach when working with refugees. Samira went on to say: If [my teachers] had more cultural background information and knowledge of my and other immigrant cultures, it would help. It would help if they were careful about the words they used, and used better words. Having knowledge of my country and other immigrants’ countries, where we come from, what immigrants do or don’t have access to, would be good for them to understand better.

Samira suggests that using an asset-based approach and providing proper teacher training would have been beneficial in fostering her a sense of belonging and reducing her feelings of isolation. Teachers should use a funds of knowledge approach to take advantage of refugee students’ wealth of knowledge and experiences in order to support their transition into U.S. classrooms and foster a greater sense of inclusion within school. FINDINGS FROM HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH Language may serve as a barrier for students in the K–12 system, however it can also present a challenge for refugees pursuing higher education. While K–12 ESOL programs focus on language development while learning content subjects, higher education programs work to prepare students for higher level college courses and entrance to the workforce. ELLs might take ESOL at a higher education institution to pursue a college education, learn a vocation, or simply improve their communication skills. Although ESOL in higher education can fulfill multiple purposes as compared to K–12 ESOL, both programs are similar in that the main goal is for the ESOL program to support the acquisition of English language skills.51



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

123

Many of the same challenges from the K–12 system present themselves in ESOL courses at higher education institutions. Samira, a refugee student previously enrolled in university in Virginia, highlighted the fact that her university teachers inaccurately addressed her refugee experience and cultural identities inaccurately. This led to continued feelings of misunderstanding and social isolation. She described the lack of recognition of her own cultural identity inside the classroom, sharing: [My home country]is a multicultural society, and it is a multiethnic country, there is not just one group of [people]. . . . So I want my professors to use more vocabulary about what [a person from my culture] is. . . . In [my home country] I did not have a voice but here I do. I can practice democracy, here we don’t ignore people and their identity. I don’t want to be ignored anymore.

Samira referenced the multicultural societies to which many refugee youth belong. She also stresses that students bring a variety of identities and experiences which are not identical and need to be acknowledged. It is important for educators to understand how refugees’ identities may intersect with those of other marginalized students within their classrooms, as well as the uniqueness of each student’s identity and experience. Employing an intersectional approach can aid educators in both further understanding the complexities of refugee youth identities, and connecting their experiences to that of other students within their classrooms to build mutual understanding. Thus, it is imperative that U.S. educators engage in an inclusive and effective cultural sensitivity training that discusses more holistic approaches to understanding the varying identities and needs of refugee youth within schools. In part due to the previously discussed lower high school graduation rates, migrant students also graduate from college at a lower rate than their peers.52 Beyond lower secondary school graduation rates, admissions requirements also contribute to lower immigrant student college enrollment and graduation rates. Once enrolled in higher education, however, refugees face many of the same challenges as their high school counterparts, especially if they are required to learn English while completing their college courses. A key difference between English language learning at the primary and secondary as compared to the tertiary level is that learning English while attending college is primarily an independent endeavor. To succeed at the university level, ELLs need to learn to read, understand subject specific vocabulary, and write analytically at a college level.53 Benjamin, an expert in the field of helping refugees access higher education, described the gap between refugee ELL’s and their peers:

124

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

Individuals may speak and listen to English really well, even if they went to elementary school here in the U.S., they’re still growing up in a family where there isn’t a high education level and so for that reason as they graduate high school, they may be able to transition into college but then reading comprehension and technical writing skills are going to lag behind other college students just because they are making that up on the fly and trying to navigate that as well.

Benjamin notes the importance of recognizing the disadvantages that refugee students may face at the college level as compared to their peers. This is an important piece of context for college and university professors and support staff to bear in mind when determining how to best support refugee students and help them succeed. The U.S. higher education system prioritizes English language proficiency, a reality based on the exclusionary and colonial foundations of the system which puts refugees and other migrants at a disadvantage. To facilitate access to this system and provide opportunities for students from less privileged backgrounds to succeed, it is crucial that universities consider reimagining academic instruction and assessment methods to accommodate the academic needs of refugee students. Language Requirements Another challenge that refugee students face in pursuing higher education is foreign language requirements. Requiring students to take another language beside English and their native language(s) places an additional burden on refugee students and fails to acknowledge the fact that many refugee students already come from a multilingual background. For refugees who recently arrived to the U.S., foreign language assessments may dissuade them from applying to and attending a higher education institution while they try to integrate and adjust to their new home country. When refugee students do attend higher education, foreign language requirements and language tests vary based on the college or university. Samira recounted her experience enrolling in higher education in Virginia: At [my community college] I had to take placement tests. The process was a bit smoother at [my community college], I took Math and English placement tests and was placed based on my scores. But at [my university] it was more difficult, I had to write. In my country, I did not learn how to write an essay; we were good at memorizing and reading, being told what to do but not good at being creative. . . . My school did not care about writing, it was all copy and paste and memorize. Here, I had to learn to talk about myself.

While Samira was able to take her foreign language requirement in her native language, she still faced challenges in completing it because the requirement



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

125

did not align with her skill set. Her experience reveals a disconnect between the knowledge bases of refugee students like Samira and what is typically valued in higher education placement tests. Additionally, Samira’s experience provides a clear example of some of the barriers refugee students must overcome to enroll in tertiary education. The process was not consistent from school to school nor from the community college to university level, which added additional stress and pressure to Samira’s application process. Another refugee student, Mohammad, described his relief when the university admissions office allowed him to forgo the foreign language requirement. He explained, “I was told that I have to take another language class, but I told them that I speak two more languages and they waived it.” Mohammad’s experience of waiving the English language requirement illustrates potential pathways for refugee students to reframe their existing linguistic knowledge as an asset when enrolling in higher education. Another high school refugee student, Senait, described her vastly different experience with attempting waiving the English language requirement. She explained that despite asking school administrators to be more lenient with her language classes, she was told that if she didn’t receive a certain score on the language exam, she would not be able to move forward with her schooling. She stated, “So yeah, they put me in ESOL, yeah they put me in ESOL first, and I said I have to do it, I have to you know, to—I said I have to do this. And I did it, I just did it, I don’t know how.” Senait’s experience highlights how limited flexibility in admissions requirements can be detrimental to refugee students, especially if foreign language proficiency is needed to move forward with higher education enrollment. As Mohammad described, increased flexibility of language requirements can create a more streamlined pathway to higher education for refugee students. Above all, it is important for universities to recognize the funds of linguistic knowledge that refugee students enter higher education with by continuing to employ flexibility with regards to foreign language requirements. This process is consistent with the funds of knowledge and asset based approaches to teaching because it explicitly recognizes and respects refugees’ previous linguistic knowledge as a vital resource which can aid them in completing their higher education studies. It also recognizes and honors the specific challenges that refugee students face in learning English and earning their degree in their non-native language. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In general, refugee students enter educational institutions with a wealth of pre-established linguistic knowledge. While refugee students do require

126

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

educational support in learning and improving their proficiency in English, primary, secondary, and tertiary educators should increase their focus on and take advantage of the linguistic and experiential knowledge bases that refugees already possess. This shift in focus is critical to obtaining better learning outcomes for refugee students in traditionally marginalized multilingual communities, and shifting away from sometimes exclusionary foundations of the U.S.’ primarily English language focused education system. We recommend that K–12 institutions adopt a funds of knowledge approach to classroom-based language instruction and provide sufficient training for all teachers, either through in-district training and/or pre-service training, to successfully incorporate this approach in their teaching practice. Aside from improving refugee students’ English language proficiency, adopting a funds of knowledge approach can help schools to foster a more inclusive and cohesive learning environment for students of all backgrounds. However, this inclusive learning environment is contingent on teachers and other school staff being respectful and cognizant of the various challenges that refugee students may confront, both inside and outside of educational institutions. To foster a sense of empathy and respect towards refugee students, we recommend that K–12 and higher education administrators require school faculty to complete cultural sensitivity training. Empathy and respect is also conditional upon educators’ awareness of refugee students’ intersectional identities, and how to leverage the diverse array of assets and knowledge that refugee students bring to the classroom. Lastly, within higher education institutions, we recommend that administrators build in flexible policies which allow for language requirements to be waived for students learning English as a second language. We also call for administrators to adapt language assessments to better accommodate refugee students’ needs and realities. Given that the U.S. experiences continuously changing demographics within its communities and classrooms, we urge academic institutions at all levels within the U.S. to consider implementing these changes to foster an inclusive learning environment and improve the overall quality of language instruction. NOTES 1. Norma Gonzalez, Luis C. Moll, and Cathy Amanti, 2005, Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers). 2. Some parts of the country use the phrase English as a Second Language (ESL). For the purpose of this chapter, English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL) will be used.



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

127

3. Stephen Legg, 2017, “Decolonialism,” Transactions-Institute of British Geographers 42, no. 3, 345–348, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1111​/tran​.12203. 4. Julie Choi and Ulrike Najar, 2017, “Immigrant and Refugee Women’s Resourcefulness in English Language Classrooms: Emerging possibilities through plurilingualism,” Literacy and Numeracy Studies 25, no. 1, 20–37, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.5130​/lns​ .v25i1​.5789. 5. Council of Europe, Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press, 2001). 6. Lew Zipin, 2009, “Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy: Exploring boundaries between lifeworlds and schools,” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 30, no. 3, 317–331, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/01596300903037044. 7. Lew Zipin, Sam Sellar, and Robert Hattam, 2012, “Countering and exceeding ‘capital’: a ‘funds of knowledge’ approach to re-imagining community,” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 33, no. 2, 179–192, https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.1080​/01596306​.2012​.666074. 8. Andrew Harvey and Mark Mallman, 2019, “Beyond Cultural Capital: Understanding the Strengths of New Migrants within Higher Education,” Policy Futures in Education 17, no. 5, 657–673, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/1478210318822180. 9. Tara J. Yosso, 2005, “Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth,” Race Ethnicity and Education 8, no. 1, 69–91, https:​ //​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/1361332052000341006. 10. Maki Park and Jazmin Florez Peña, 2021, “The Invisible Work of Family, Friend, and Neighbor Caregivers and Its Importance for Immigrant and Dual Language Learner Families,” December 1, https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/sites​/default​ /files​/publications​/nciip​-ffn​-care​-brief​_final​.pdf. 11. Grace Onchwari and Jared Keengwe, 2019, Handbook of Research on Engaging Immigrant Families and Promoting Academic Success for English Language Learners (Hershey: IGI Global). 12. Gonzalez, Moll, and Amanti, Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms. 13. Kimberlé Crenshaw, 1989, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics,” University of Chicago Legal Forum 1, no. 8, 139–167. https:​//​ chicagounbound​.uchicago​.edu​/cgi​/viewcontent​.cgi​?article​=1052​&context​=uclf. 14. Kimberlé Crenshaw, 1991, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6, 1241–99, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.2307​/1229039. 15. Harvey and Mallman, “Beyond Cultural Capital.” 16. Lisa Barrow and Lisa Markman-Pithers, 2016, “Supporting Young English Learners in the United States,” The Future of Children 26, no. 2, 159–183, https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.1353​/foc​.2016​.0017. 17. Ibid. 18. Park and Peña, “The Invisible Work of Family, Friend, and Neighbor Caregivers and Its Importance for Immigrant and Dual Language Learner Families.”

128

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

19. Melissa Lazarín and Maki Park, 2021, Taking Stock of Dual Language Learner Identification and Strengthening Procedures and Policies (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute). 20. Ibid. 21. Gonzalez, Moll, and Amanti, Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms. 22. Nan Frydland, 2022, “Our Book: Creating a Scroll-Based Curriculum to Serve Adult SLIFE,” in English and Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education, ed. Luis Javier Pentón Herrera (Cham: Springer Cham), 263–284. 23. Ibid. 24. MALP, LLC, 2014, “What is MALP?,” https:​//​malpeducation​.com​/wp​-content​ /uploads​/2015​/10​/What​-is​-MALP​.pdf. 25. Harvey and Mallman, “Beyond Cultural Capital,” 656. 26. Jana Berg, 2018, “A New Aspect of Internationalization? Specific Challenges and Support Structures for Refugees on Their Way to German Higher Education,” in European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies, eds. Adrian Curaj, Ligia Deca, and Remus Pricopie (Cham: Springer Cham), 219–235. 27. Julie Sugarman, 2017, Beyond Teaching English: Supporting High School Completion by Immigrant and Refugee Students (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute). 28. Nan Li and Angela W. Peters, 2020, “Preparing K-12 Teachers for ELLs: Improving Teachers’ L2 Knowledge and Strategies Through Innovative Professional Development,” Urban Education 55, no. 10, 1489–1506, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​ /0042085916656902. 29. Berg, “A New Aspect of Internationalization?,” 222. 30. Sugarman, Beyond Teaching English. 31. WIDA, 2020, WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition: Kindergarten–grade 12 (Madison: Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System). 32. Ibid. 33. Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE), n.d., “Adding Teaching Endorsement Certification(s),” DC Government, Accessed October 13, 2022, https:​//​osse​.dc​.gov​/page​/adding​-teaching​-endorsement​-certifications; Virginia Department of Education, n.d., “English Learner Education,” Commonwealth of Virginia, Accessed October 13, 2022, https:​//​doe​.virginia​.gov​/instruction​/esl​/index​ .shtml; Maryland State Department of Education, n.d., “Adding an Endorsement,” Accessed October 13, 2022, https:​//​marylandpublicschools​.org​/about​/Pages​/DEE​/ Certification​/Endorsements​.aspx. 34. Melissa A. Facella, Kristen M. Rampino, and Elizabeth K. Shea, 2005, “Effective Teaching Strategies for English Language Learners,” The Journal of the National Association for Bilingual Education 29, no. 1, 209–221, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​ /15235882​.2005​.10162832. 35. Ibid.



Using an Asset-Based Approach to Overcome Refugees’ Language Barriers

129

36. Nan Li and Angela W. Peters, 2020, “Preparing K-12 Teachers for ELLs: Improving Teachers’ L2 Knowledge and Strategies Through Innovative Professional Development.” 37. Thi Diem Hang Khong and Eisuke Saito, 2014, “Challenges confronting teachers of English language learners,” Educational Review 66, no. 2, 210–225, https:​//​doi​ -org​.proxygw​.wrlc​.org​/10​.1080​/00131911​.2013​.769425. 38. Sultan Turkan and Ester J. de Jong, 2018, “An Exploration of Preservice Teachers’ Reasoning About Teaching Mathematics to English Language Learners,” Teacher Education Quarterly 45, no. 2, 37–60, https:​//​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/90020314. 39. Trish Weekes, Lorraine Phelan, Sally Macfarlane, Jenny Pinson, and Virginia Francis, 2011, “Supporting successful learning for refugee students: The Classroom Connect project,” Issues in Educational Research 21, no. 3, 310–329, http:​//​www​.iier​ .org​.au​/iier21​/weekes​.pdf. 40. Facella, Rampino, and Shea, “Effective Teaching Strategies for English Language Learners.” 41. Margarita Jimenez-Silva, Kate Olson, and Norma Jimenez Hernandez, 2012, “The Confidence to Teach English Language Learners: Exploring Coursework’s Role in Developing Preservice Teachers’ Efficacy,” The Teacher Educator 47, no. 1, 9–28, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/08878730​.2011​.632471. 42. Ester J. de Jong and Candace A Harper, 2005, “Preparing Mainstream Teachers for English-Language Learners: Is Being a Good Teacher Good Enough?,” Teacher Education Quarterly 32, no. 2, 101–124, https:​//​files​.eric​.ed​.gov​/fulltext​/EJ795308​ .pdf. 43. Geert Driessen and Michael S. Merry, 2011, “The effects of integration and generation of immigrants on language and numeracy achievement,” Educational Studies 37, no. 5, 581–592, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/03055698​.2010​.539762. 44. Barrow and Markman-Pithers, “Supporting Young English Learners in the United States.” 45. Khong and Saito, “Challenges confronting teachers of English language learners,” 212. 46. Heejoo Suh, 2020, “Preparing Mathematics Teachers to Teach English Language Learners: What We Know and What We Can Do,” The Educational Forum 84, no. 3, 200–209, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/00131725​.2020​.1728805. 47. Ibid. 48. The Maryland State Department of Education, 2021, “Maryland Public School Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity and Gender and Number of Schools,” September 30, https:​//​www​.marylandpublicschools​.org​/about​/Documents​/DCAA​/ SSP​/20212022Student​/2022​_Enrollment​_ByRace​_Ethnicity​_Gender​_Publication​ _Accessible​.pdf. 49. Chad Stewart and Kathy Mendes, 2021, “Changing Gears: Addressing Virginia’s Persistent Lack of Support for English Learner Students,” The Commonwealth Institute, October, https:​//​thecommonwealthinstitute​.org​/research​/changing​ -gears​-addressing​-virginias​-persistent​-lack​-of​-support​-for​-english​-learner​-students​/. 50. Linda McSpadden McNeil, Eileen Coppola, Judy Radigan, and Julian Vasquez Heilig, 2008, “Avoidable Losses: High-Stakes Accountability and the Dropout

130

Ciara Hoyne, Ashley J. Mitchell, and O. Abiola Akintola

Crisis,” Education Policy Analysis Archives 16, no. 3, 1–48, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.14507​ /epaa​.v16n3​.2008; Elizabeth S. Park, 2019, “Examining Community College Students’ Progression Through the English as a Second Language Sequence,” Community College Review 47, no. 4, 406–433, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/0091552119867467. 51. Olga D. Lambert, 2015, “Learner Characteristics and Writing Performance in a Community College English as a Second Language Course: Some Unexpected Findings,” Community College Journal of Research and Practice 39, no. 1, 5–19, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.1080​/10668926​.2012​.754731. 52. Barrow and Markman-Pithers, “Supporting Young English Learners in the United States,” 159–183. 53. Yasuko Kanno and Manka M. Varghese, 2010, “Immigrant and Refugee ESL Students’ Challenges to Accessing Four-Year College Education: From Language Policy to Educational Policy,” Journal of Language, Identity & Education 9, no. 5, 310–328, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/15348458​.2010​.517693.

Chapter 6

Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports for Refugee Students Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe‌‌

INTRODUCTION Education occurs not only in schools, but also through informal and outside of school opportunities. Informal, after school, or extracurricular educational programming for refugee students, often led by schools, non-profits, communities, or local governments, can improve refugees’ access to and inclusion within the U.S. education system and broader community. This chapter considers extracurricular and community-based influences which can help support and improve the quality of refugees’ education. In particular, the chapter explores “additive” opportunities, or non-classroom-based educational programming which build on and strengthen in-school learning. The range from scholarships and fellowships, which have been documented to help refugees overcome financial barriers,1 to mentorship and study-abroad opportunities, which can enrich refugee students’ learning experiences to a level comparable to that of their host community peers. While additional resources and programs aimed at enhancing refugee students’ education can be beneficial, their necessity also reveals the systemic inequalities present within U.S. education for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. These inequalities are rooted in colonial attitudes and practices which continue to favor predominately white and socioeconomically privileged communities. For this reason, we will employ a decolonial lens in the discussion of our findings on additive educational supports to deepen our analysis. Overall, it is important for teachers, school administrators, and community leaders to 131

132

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

increase the availability and accessibility of these types of educational supports to improve refugees’ educational inclusion. Drawing on a literature review and original qualitative interview data, we studied additive education experiences and educational support programs for refugee students within the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area. Our analysis focused on four contexts: scholarships, mentorship, extracurricular activities, and study abroad opportunities. Drawing on qualitative data collected from interviews with refugees, service providers, and experts in the field, our chapter highlights the value of assistive services and non-classroom-based learning opportunities to improve the quality of education for refugees, as well as their inclusion within broader school communities. We also utilize the framework of intersectionality within our data analysis to explore a more nuanced understanding of refugee identities and consider how these identities may be affirmed within outside of school and community-based educational programming. We conclude by offering recommendations for educators and program providers to facilitate the inclusion of refugees within learning environments and improve the quality of education refugees receive. SCHOLARSHIPS Refugees who are resettled to the U.S. can receive support from resettlement agencies for 30 to 90 days after arrival.2 Resettlement agencies are not obligated to provide refugees with specific educational support or resources beyond what is mandated through state-based compulsory education laws. Individual U.S. states have crafted their compulsory education laws with a variety of different stipulations. Most states require students to begin schooling around the age of six and remain enrolled until age of 16 at a state-accredited, public, or private institution.3 DC, Maryland, and Virginia all require students to enroll in school from ages five to 18, or until graduation requirements have been satisfied.4 Given the limited amount of time resettlement agencies work with each refugee, refugee students who are over the age of 18 when they enter the U.S. may be advised to seek employment rather than to immediately pursue higher education pathways. While compulsory education laws for primary and secondary education can facilitate refugee students’ enrollment, their level of access to higher education differs within the U.S.5 Article 26 of the United Nations’ 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights created a framework for free compulsory primary education while also explicitly mentioning one’s right to access to higher education. Article 26 states: “Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

133

stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.”6 The United Nations frames higher education as an extra, rather than essential, level of education. The U.S. higher education system follows similar logic, as it is not universally accessible and it may be more difficult for students from more marginalized backgrounds, such as refugees, to enroll. This is especially prevalent when considering the financial barriers refugees face, as noted in other chapters. Efforts to make higher education more equitable include the creation of inclusive scholarships and financial aid programs that consider the specific needs and experiences of marginalized groups, such as refugees. Although primary and secondary education is available for free through public schools, scholarships help refugee students overcome financial barriers at the tertiary level. Financial scholarships can make a big difference in transforming a refugee’s dream of earning a higher education degree or certification into a reality. Given that most literature on refugees and financial scholarships focuses on higher education, our research and analysis also focus on this level. In the U.S., financial support for refugee education is more readily available at higher levels of academic achievement. One of the largest access barriers that refugee students face across age levels is their lack of educational choice due to financial limitations.7 Overall, understanding higher education through a decolonial lens can help to identify who has power or privilege within the system, as well as shape recommendations for addressing systemic barriers that prevent refugees and marginalized communities from accessing and completing higher education. Information Sharing Refugee students’ degree of access to scholarships can be limited by various factors including their education level, financial need, visa classification, and the robustness of information sharing systems. As discussed above, scholarships for refugees enrolled in primary and secondary education are limited, primarily due to the role that public institutions, such as public schools, play in resettlement within the U.S. Public institutions are well-positioned to serve as a key information-sharing platform for refugee students. For example, all educational institutions in the U.S. offer students basic information on tertiary education. However, the level of post-secondary school preparation institutions offer to students, including discussions about scholarship opportunities, varies based on their resources. When accessing higher education, students attending public secondary schools may receive in-school support through guidance counseling and

134

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

mentorship. Typically, secondary schools serve as a central information sharing hub for all students who seek higher education, but especially for refugee background students. Guidance counselors can play a particularly important role in ensuring students’ college readiness. Their main responsibility within schools is to share information and provide psychosocial support. Counselors can provide students with programs and resources based on individual needs.8 For example, students from traditionally underrepresented groups may require more personalized support to successfully navigate the U.S. postsecondary education system. Elizabeth, a refugee student with several higher education degrees mentioned that in secondary school, she “had a really good guidance counselor, but it also took other factors like pushing myself as a student to want to go to college, seeking out resources from my guidance counselor.” Even with the help of a good counselor, Elizabeth shared that she had to seek out additional support. Guidance counselors may not receive formal training on specific resources or support services which target refugee background students. As a result, these students may unknowingly miss out on opportunities, such as refugee-specific scholarships. For example, Samira, a refugee student resettled in Virginia, shared: I wish I knew that scholarships existed for me as someone coming from a war torn country as a woman. The financial pressure was the most terrifying pressure I had on myself, so I wish I’d known how to deal with that. Now, I know that there are people and centers that want to help women. I did not know that then, I did not know that people wanted to help me. So, I wish I had known the many resources I do now.

Samira expressed regret that she was unaware of available support and assistance from people and centers specifically dedicated to helping women. This highlights that given Samira’s identity as a female refugee with limited economic means, she faced overlapping challenges when attempting to enroll in higher education. As Samira’s experience demonstrated, refugee students may simply be unaware of the resources available to them. Often this is because scholarship information can be difficult to find, digest, and disseminate through established information sharing networks. In considering how to improve information sharing on scholarships, it is important to consider how refugees’ unique identities may impact their financial needs and level of information. When refugee students do receive information about scholarships, the opportunities may still fall short of meeting their financial needs. Hillary, a former case worker and refugee education expert, shared that, “many refugees are like, ‘unless I have full tuition, room, and board paid for, there’s no way I’m going to be able to afford this or my family is going to be able to



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

135

afford this,’ and that’s a huge barrier. And not knowing the multiple options to say, ‘oh, well you could go to community college for two years and then do that’ . . . again there are information barriers.” Hillary’s words reveal a notable gap in the information refugees receive regarding financial support services for those pursuing higher education, as well as how inclusive scholarships are in terms of covering refugees’ financial needs. It is important for stakeholders such as university administrators, admissions officers, and high school guidance counselors to increase the variety and amount of scholarship information available to refugee students to improve knowledge of programming and access to scholarship opportunities. Scholarship Sources The U.S. has several types of scholarships, each of which offer different degrees of access and resource support: institutional, federal, state, and private, as well as grants and loans. Institutional scholarships and student loans are the most accessible. For example, students can seek support within higher education institutions through financial aid and admission offices. Many higher education institutions have specific offices with dedicated staff who can help students navigate this system. Building relationships with admission and financial aid officers can help improve a refugee student’s access to scholarships. However, for refugee students and their host community peers who are Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC), developing these relationships may be more difficult. Specifically, implicit biases and a lack of demographic representation in college administrations can result in unfair scholarship allocation which favors white host community students and fails to improve equity of opportunity for refugee background students seeking to access higher education.9 The federal government provides a very limited amount of financial aid to individuals and its website serves predominately as an information sharing platform. Students enrolling in U.S. universities can complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).10 This application is very lengthy and the paper format consists of nearly 100 questions.11 Navigating the FAFSA may be confusing for U.S.-born students, but may be especially challenging for refugee students. According to Hillary, “refugees qualify for federal financial aid, [and] if they’ve been here more than a year, they qualify for in-state tuition.” This policy signals that refugees should be able to apply for federal financial support. However, Hillary continued, “understanding how to navigate that [system] or having the financial documentation that [refugees] have to produce for that can be really challenging.” In particular, the FAFSA questions are confusing and require students to provide a lot of personal background information, including regarding their parents’

136

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

backgrounds. These questions may be challenging for refugees to answer for several reasons, including if they are separated from their parents or if they have a limited knowledge of English. Overall, providing university personnel with supplementary training to accommodate refugee students’ financial and linguistic barriers and assist refugees with financial aid applications can improve refugees’ participation in scholarship opportunities. Fellowships The authors define fellowships as paid research or study opportunities that provide students with economic support in exchange for certain deliverables, such as a research report or write-up of their experience. Conversely, the authors consider scholarships to focus more generally on covering tuition and/or room and board to alleviate partial or full educational costs. As of 2021, only five percent of the refugee population had access to higher education.12 Even fewer refugees enrolled in higher education have successfully obtained fellowships. Between 1995 and 2016, only two to five percent of refugee students obtained a fellowship.13 This speaks to the systemic challenges of higher education inaccessibility and affordability, and may suggest a potential bias in qualifications towards more privileged populations. Recommendations for improving refugee students’ access to fellowships include improving information sharing methods and providing refugee students with more holistic support throughout the duration of their education journey. At the same time, more research is needed regarding fellowship opportunities for refugees. Looking Beyond Financial Support Overall, scholarships can make higher education more obtainable for refugee students. However, our desk review and interview data demonstrate that information barriers present an ongoing challenge. While many of the refugee students we spoke with were able to overcome financial challenges and find scholarships or access necessary information, their individualized efforts may not be reflective of all refugees’ situations and experiences accessing higher education in the U.S. Jennifer, an expert from a local refugee service provider organization, shared: It’s not so easy to provide scholarships because money is hard to come by, but scholarships are the easy part of supporting students. We can give out money all day long, and that’s helpful and it’s needed. But without the commensurate support to students as they’re accessing higher education, it’s not going to have the impact that we really want. So that’s my strongest advice that I can



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

137

give: scholarships have to be coupled with a program to provide the mentoring support that students need. Now that can be done on campuses, it doesn’t have to be an independent organization. . . . I do think college campuses can do this, they just have to be fully committed to a full program and not just to providing funding.

Jennifer calls for educational assistance to refugees to extend beyond financial support to providing additional resources for those seeking to enroll in higher education. While financial support is beneficial and necessary, colleges and universities should strive to provide refugees with more interpersonal and community-based support to ensure the highest quality educational experience. MENTORSHIP Within the field of education and community development, a mentor is an individual who is typically older and/or more experienced than the person they are mentoring and who offers support to facilitate the mentee’s personal and/or professional development.14 Mentorship programs can exist at all educational levels. The mentor/mentee relationship can play a particularly important role in cultivating refugees’ sense of belonging and inclusion within the educational environment. Bullying and Discrimination Refugee students may feel uncomfortable or unsafe within their learning environments.15 Across multiple studies, refugee students in the U.S. have expressed feelings of isolation within their school communities.16 They also may be more likely to fall victim to discrimination and bullying from their peers and their teachers due to their religious and cultural backgrounds.17 In addition, refugee students come to the U.S. with multiple identities and potential marginalizing factors, such as their income level, race, culture, among others. These factors can negatively impact how supported refugee students’ feel within their school communities.18 For example, Usman, a recently resettled refugee enrolled in a local university, described his experience with discrimination on his college campus. He stated: My first roommates, they were physically racist—I had to be moved the next day. And I faced lots of like instances of micro aggression here specifically . . . not only I’m from an Arab Muslim country [but I] also identify as gay so that

138

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

issue has put me in like an issue with people here that aren’t Arabs and specifically the people that came with me from [my home country].

Usman’s words illustrate how a refugee’s varying identities may influence their feelings of belonging in their educational environment. This is important to consider when developing programming to support refugees within and outside of school. Mentorship programs may be able to combat some of these challenges and foster greater inclusion and belonging. Elizabeth, a refugee student who completed a graduate degree in the DMV area, also expressed that she did not feel like she belonged or fit in with her peers at school. She shared, “I didn’t have a lot of money, and then secondly a sense of belonging. I didn’t really have that, I didn’t fit in, and a little bit of that identity confusion you know I just didn’t know who I was.” This illustrates how various identities and belonging can intersect and impact refugee students’ educational experiences. Elizabeth also shared that she was bullied in high school because of her cultural background and her thick accent. She stated, “I was bullied in high school and because I was African and with a thick accent, really struggled to fit in in high school. And then in college, it was the same, like people always mentioned something about my accent.” Her experience of being bullied further exacerbated feelings of isolation and estrangement from her school community. Elizabeth’s remarks illustrate how refugee students’ feelings of isolation and exclusion may stem from a variety of factors, including their unique and evolving identities. This speaks to the importance of offering refugees opportunities to receive additional emotional and logistical support as they attempt to navigate the difficult process of enrolling and participating in U.S. schools. Adult and peer mentors can provide this support within and outside of school settings. However, Usman and Elizabeth’s experiences highlight the significance of gaining a nuanced understanding of each refugee’s identity and adjusting additive educational approaches, including mentorship, to the particularities of their experiences and needs within their educational setting. According to Brown, the absence of a safe learning environment is correlated with poor educational outcomes, a fact that may significantly lower the quality of education that refugee students receive.19 Furthermore, children who experience discrimination from teachers have been associated with a negative sense of belonging at school, less confidence in their academic abilities, and lesser likelihood of pursuing further education.20 Overall, refugee students’ feelings of isolation and exclusion stem from multiple factors. It is important for teachers to introduce different cultural perspectives into the classroom teaching and discussions, as well as adopt welcoming attitudes towards refugee students. To this end, Usman suggested that the bullying and discrimination he experienced stemmed from a lack of intercultural



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

139

competence. He explained, “it’s mainly because people aren’t culturally aware or exposed to other cultures in a way.” Models such as communitybased classroom instruction and mentorship opportunities, especially those that include diverse perspectives or identities, can facilitate a more inclusive learning environment for refugee students. Vickers, McCarthy, and Zammit’s 2017 study highlighted successful mentorship programs for refugee students in Australia. While this program was originally created within the Australian higher education system, the authors’ insights can be relevant in understanding the potential of implementing similar mentorship programs within the U.S. and the DMV area. For example, the Australian program “Equity Buddies” emphasizes how forming relationships among culturally diverse students can generate intercultural competence.21 Mentorship programs between host country and refugee students can also provide a level of “personal understanding” and appreciation of students from different cultural backgrounds.22 This model can motivate refugee students’ peers to pursue deeper friendships with them. When host country students are more open to refugee students of diverse backgrounds, host country students have demonstrated more willingness to “question stereotypes” and address incorrect assumptions they may hold regarding refugee students.23 Above all, the Vickers, McCarthy, and Zammit study emphasizes how mentorship programs can break down cross-cultural barriers between domestic and refugee students, foster friendships and reduce students’ reluctance to interact with diverse students.24 However, Vickers, McCarthy, and Zammit’s study failed to include a focus on refugees’ voices and specific experiences as students. In addition, their study did not consider the social, linguistic, or logistical challenges that host country and/or refugee students might encounter throughout the process of forming mentor-mentee relationships. Lastly, Vickers, McCarthy, and Zammit did not discuss how accessible similar mentorship opportunities and programs are to refugee students, nor what barriers exist that may prevent students from participating in such programs. These are all important considerations when building a mentorship program and determining the feasibility of applying pre-existing models to new contexts. Overall, use of mentorship programs at all educational levels can strengthen schools’ and universities’ welcoming and socially inclusive environments. Mentorship opportunities can also help to combat bullying, discrimination, and refugee exclusion within U.S. schools and learning environments. Refugee students can use their mentors as assets to help them navigate challenges they face with bullying and discrimination within U.S. schools.

140

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

Mentorship and Acquisition of Capital Positive mentorship relationships can help refugee students feel more confident in their academic environment, as mentorship helped refugees to acquire certain forms of capital. For example, Dumenden’s 2011 study highlighted that mentorship for refugee students can facilitate the acquisition of capital that the students would not otherwise be able to access.25 She describes the mentor relationship as one that “replicates the process through which privilege is reproduced in families rich in cultural capital.”26 Accordingly, mentors can supply refugee students with “linguistic capital” in the form of native English fluency; “academic capital” in the form of homework support; “emotional capital” in the form of time, affection, patience, and commitment that parents normally give to their children; and “cultural capital” in the form of necessary knowledge to navigate the university lifestyle and process.27 By supplying refugee students with these various forms of capital, mentors can help reduce the linguistic, academic, and emotional barriers refugees face within their school environment, as well as support refugee students in feeling more supported and included. While Dumenden’s discussion of capital and mentorship reflects positive benefits for refugee students, her study is only based on a singular case study and not grounded in a representative number of refugee voices and experiences. However, our interview data corroborated the notion that refugee students who engage in mentorship programs benefited from the experience and acquired various forms of capital more easily. Acquisition of capital is significant in confronting systemic inequity within the U.S. education system by increasing marginalized students’ power and resources. The practice of acquiring capital is also particularly relevant to non-parental adult and student mentorship relationships. Non-parental Mentorship Hillary noted that an important factor to consider with mentorship programs is the presence of a trusted adult that refugee students can rely on and connect with, outside of their own parents. She stressed that mentors’ “non-parent” relationship with their mentees was essential, as refugees tend to take on parenting roles themselves or are asked to provide language interpretation on behalf of their parents. One refugee student, Elizabeth, described a particularly influential adult mentor during her school experience. She shared: One of my guidance counselor, who wasn’t my primary . . . another one, told me that taking AP classes, advanced college classes, in high school would help me to get financial aid and increase my chances of getting into college, so I



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

141

took advantage of those honors classes, advanced AP courses. So, you know, as simple as something like taking an advanced course, really put me in that mode to be expecting to apply to college, looking forward to college, and being given a scholarship . . . the fact that my guidance counselor was able to tell me about advanced AP classes, it was all like part of the preparation to go to college.

Elizabeth’s experience with her guidance counselor demonstrates the positive role that adult members of the school community, such as guidance counselors, can play in assisting refugee youth to overcome barriers. In Elizabeth’s case, her guidance counselor provided valuable “cultural capital” which helped set Elizabeth up for success as she looked to apply to colleges. Guidance counselors can serve as beneficial mentors as well as providing refugees with important information about other forms of support such as scholarships and fellowships, as discussed earlier. Peer Mentoring Similar to non-parental adult mentorships, peer to peer mentoring can also be a valuable asset in supporting refugee students’ academic success. Such relationships can positively influence refugee students’ attitudes surrounding education and school. Hillary described refugee peer mentors as follows: What I really think is valuable is to have role models of other refugee students and other refugee youth and that they can see them going on a pathway. So that if I’m younger, I can see these teenagers that are like me and have learned English and I can see them going to college or I can see them getting a job or I can see that there are options for me because otherwise they are only seeing their parents and maybe their parents are miserable or maybe their parents aren’t learning English, etc.

As Hillary explains, the definition of mentorship is actually broader than just older, more experienced individuals, as adults and peers alike can serve as mentors. As such, refugees can receive education information from a variety of sources. Peer mentors can help assist refugee students achieve their academic goals, whether they want to access higher education, learn English, or succeed in school. They can also provide capital that refugees may be less likely to receive from their parents or other adult mentors. Elizabeth shared an example from her participation in a peer mentorship program. The program provided low-income high school students with guidance and information on the college admissions process. As part of this program, participants can take classes and receive extra tutoring at local universities. Elizabeth reflected that “95 percent of my interest in college was influenced by my participation in a local mentorship program because I got

142

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

to meet people who looked like me, former refugees who attended my school and were at this university, who got to share testimonies about being in college, what it was like, so I got really, really inspired.” Elizabeth’s account demonstrated the positive impact establishing peer or community mentorship programs can have on refugee students’ overall educational trajectories. In particular, she stressed the importance of meeting others who looked like her and thus may have shared similar identities or experiences. Overall, peer mentors can act as role models and support systems. They can also illuminate pathways for refugee youth to access higher education and to feel included. After-School Mentorship Programs Within the DMV area, there are several non-profit organizations which work with migrant students, including refugees, to improve the quality of their education. According to Hillary, one program provides opportunities for refugee students to engage in fun and recreational activities while also offering after-school, college access, and mentorship programming. Hillary noted that the program “uses [a recreational activity] as a vehicle to build community amongst refugee students and also has this academic component.” This extracurricular activity provides refugee youth not only temporary relief from the challenges they may experience as part of their resettlement but also may serve as a gateway to building community and a sense of belonging. Ensuring refugee background students feel included in their host community through mentoring and cultural exchange through recreational activities may improve refugees’ educational outcomes. Senait, a refugee student, described the network of support she received from the same extracurricular-based mentorship program within the DMV area. She shared, “Yeah, so they help you with homework—you play [a sport], you get to enjoy it you know, you get to know each other. Yeah, you feel welcomed in this . . . there’s a lot of people who speak your language. . . . It’s like, who knows like, you know how you feel.” Senait reflected on the importance of building friendships and feeling welcomed and comfortable in that environment. As such, one way to foster inclusive environments is to informally connect refugee students with peers with similar backgrounds who previously navigated resettlement through shared recreational activities. Mentorship programs should consider offering not only academic support and a welcoming environment, but also recruiting people who share similar experiences and backgrounds, when possible, to provide that support. Such recommendations can improve efforts to include refugees in their educational environment and host community. Another refugee student, Felipe, described his positive experience with the same recreational and extracurricular mentorship program. He shared, “For



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

143

me . . . basically after school everybody comes here, like anybody who’s from out of the state, they speak more than one language . . . just like me! So they always have been like, they play sports but they always help with homework and academics and make sure they are passing their classes more, not just slacking off.” He shared that the program offered a welcoming and positive environment. While the program uses sports as a way to build community and foster participation, refugees involved in the program also received additional academic help. Through the program, Felipe was able to speak and spend time with other youth who shared similar academic, cultural, and familial experiences. He noted, “it’s like always new people to meet, people coming from all directions, left and right, you will never see the same person who speak the same language as you. It would be the smallest chance you will find someone who speaks the same language as you.” His positive reflection on the program speaks to the potential of extracurricular programming to help refugee students build community and foster respect amongst peer youth across similar and diverse cultural, linguistic, and national backgrounds. Using a program model that emulates Senait and Felipe’s experiences can facilitate refugees’ sense of acceptance, welcoming, and inclusion within their educational setting and broader community. Community Building and Mentorship Researchers Mendenhall, Skinner, Collas, and French’s 2018 study described the benefits of mentorship for teachers in refugee camps. These partnerships involved the use of technology to connect teachers in remote refugee camps to educators across the world. The goal of the partnerships was to strengthen the skills of the teachers within the camps and improve refugee students’ academic outcomes.28 The study demonstrated how the mentorship program enhanced teacher professional development and expanded teachers’ network of support.29 However, a persistent challenge the researchers noted was teachers’ varying degrees of responsiveness to the methodology.30 Using a “technological mentorship” framework, or incorporating technology in the classroom to aid in the mentoring process, can illuminate other opportunities to strengthen refugees’ educational inclusion. In particular, using technology as a communication tool may help connect refugee students with other students around the world who are undergoing similar experiences.31 Elizabeth also spoke about the importance of the “communal aspect of education” for refugee students. She stated: For me, education is a communal thing, it is not only for me to achieve my goals, but you know, to do so in order to give back to my community, to my family that I left back home, so it was a communal thing that, yes, I’m going to

144

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

be successful, but this success is being communally shared with others: my family or maybe a friend who may need support who will definitely depend on me.

Elizabeth emphasized the importance of sharing her success with her community by offering support and giving back. It is important for U.S. educators and refugee practitioners to look into and improve not only classroom resources, but also programming within refugee communities, to strengthen overall educational access and inclusion by capitalizing on community ties to support a larger population. Such efforts can build a stronger support system for refugee students. EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES In addition to mentorship programs, extracurricular and after-school activities such as sports, music programs, and community service can improve integration for refugees by providing a supportive environment for refugee students. However, it is important to note that many refugee students take on a lot of responsibility within their families and households, and therefore may not have the time, resources, or availability to participate in extracurricular activities. Refugees may struggle to balance their educational and familial obligations, which could negatively impact on their success and inclusion into their school community environments. For example, Abdul, a refugee pursuing a PhD in the U.S., discussed his increased familial obligations while studying in the U.S. He reflected, “I had to balance my PhD at that time with taking care of [my brother’s] family and [my brother’s] fourteen children.” This demonstrates one of several extra responsibilities refugee students may face during their studies, on top of the traditional challenges of pursuing education in the U.S. Similarly, Benjamin, a director of a refugee organization, described the refugee students’ financial obligations. He stated, “there’s this whole other aspect, financially, that is so difficult for students from a refugee background, is that the individuals who are most ready for college, who have the best English, are academically prepared, are also the primary breadwinners and the biggest income generators for their family.” In other words, refugee students enrolled in college may be required to manage the demands of studying for their degree while also supporting their families financially. As a result, refugee students may not have the time or energy to take advantage of extracurricular activities. Educators and after-school program providers should be aware of these obligations and strive to make their programs inclusive by attending to different socioeconomic, familial, and cultural needs. This may include providing flexible program times or reducing program entry requirements to increase accessibility.



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

145

In terms of how extracurricular activities may benefit refugee students, Elizabeth described, “I was able to put all my energy into something meaningful that benefited other people, but in doing so, also benefited me.” In addition to feeling a sense of purpose and belonging within her own community, Elizabeth also expressed that her involvement in extracurricular activities aided her in her pursuit of a college education. She shared, “One of the reasons why I participated in extracurricular activities was because I had heard from my guidance counselor that my college application would look good. So it was part of the preparation too, okay, so I was able to put those extra-curricular activities on my resume.” Refugee students’ participation in extracurricular activities can improve their sense of belonging within their community and open up future opportunities through informal information sharing and non-formal educational experiences. It is important for educators and local organizations to continue to offer extracurricular opportunities, including ones which include formal and informal mentorship programming, to refugee students while adapting programming to ensure their access and inclusion. STUDY ABROAD OPPORTUNITIES Our literature review revealed very limited literature that discussed the availability of study abroad programs for refugee students. This may be a result of refugee students’ limited finances or scholarship options, legal barriers or visa issues, a dearth of study-abroad specific scholarships for refugee students, or familial obligations that may prevent refugee students from being able to leave their homes for a summer or semester abroad. Study abroad is also widely understood as an “elite practice”32 which traditionally has involved lesser participation or inclusion of students from marginalized backgrounds.33 Streitwieser’s 2019 study emphasized that international student mobility and study abroad is widely understood as an activity of a small socio-economically advantaged group that entails a “mobility for enlightenment” motivation.34 Mobility for enlightenment is defined as providing a mutual benefit to the participating student and host community in which the student is studying—a benefit that can build relationships, broaden horizons, and promote horizontal mobility.35 Much of the literature in the study abroad field focuses specifically on this aspect of “mobility for enlightenment” while neglecting the practice of “mobility for survival” that many refugees undergo while migrating to a different country and enrolling in a different education system.36 This distinction is important to highlight, as the authors recognize that refugees’ previous migration experiences may deter some refugee students from seeking out study abroad opportunities. Virtually no literature

146

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

exists that discusses what opportunities for “mobility for enlightenment” are available to refugees studying at colleges and universities. However, there are a wide variety of study abroad programs geared toward U.S. students that focus on the theme of refugee studies, often delivered in a service-learning format.37 Increasing refugee students’ access to these specific types of study abroad programs could prove to be an effective way to enhance discussions around refugee studies. Such an approach could also help educators and scholars to incorporate perspectives from students who have lived through similar experiences. In our interviews with refugee students attending higher education institutions, several shared challenges in overcoming legal barriers which prevented them from pursuing study abroad opportunities. Samira, a refugee student enrolled in college in Virginia, explained, “My school . . . has really great programs. There are great internships that you can qualify for, but the citizenship status issue comes in and then you can’t do it.” She elaborated: There was an opportunity for students to go abroad and I was qualified but I couldn’t do it because I was not a citizen. That is a big barrier as an immigrant. So, I was not able to have that opportunity. Although I am a green card holder and a permanent resident, and I am not like those without documents who are illegal, but when I missed that opportunity at [community college] it was really disappointing. It would have been a great opportunity, and I did my best to find a way, and I was qualified too, but I could not do it in the end because I was not a citizen.

Samira’s status as a refugee rather than a citizen excluded her from parking in a stuck abroad experience. Her experience highlights the need for alternate pathways and opportunities for refugees to participate in study abroad or similar programs. One potential option is to bolster in-country study programs, such as a semester in DC or another major U.S. city. Such programs already exist at some colleges and universities and could create a similar educational experience to studying abroad for refugee youth while also ensuring they experience fewer access and inclusion barriers. Considering that its primarily affluent students who participate in study abroad experiences, it is important for study abroad opportunities and programs to become more financially accessible to disadvantaged students, including refugee youth. Refugee background students may take on a tremendous financial burden in pursuing higher education, especially if they are unable to receive full scholarships. As a result, studying abroad may not be financially viable. To improve the availability of study abroad opportunities to refugee students, educational administrators should increase the amount of financial assistance available to students from low-income backgrounds.



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

147

Stakeholders should also increase the availability of domestic program options and provide shorter term programs, such as winter or spring break trips, to provide more feasible options for refugee students and other low-income students to study abroad, especially those with familial obligations. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION Throughout this chapter, we explored non-classroom based opportunities which can improve refugee students’ educational access and inclusion in the U.S. Based on our research and interview findings, we conclude with five recommendations to improve the quality and availability of educational support to refugee students. First, stakeholders should collaborate to increase the standardization of holistic information sharing with refugee students. This is necessary to provide refugee background students with more access to scholarships, fellowships, mentorships, and extracurricular education opportunities. This can also increase refugees’ awareness of the variety of support services available to them. Increased information sharing is additionally crucial in repositioning the availability of educational opportunities toward refugees and marginalized communities which have traditionally faced lesser access or support. Second, universities should provide extra guidance to refugee students when filling out financial aid applications to reduce language barriers and help them navigate challenges related to obtaining and sharing personal and financial information. Third, we recommend that educators continue to provide and introduce both peer and adult mentorship opportunities to refugee students. Mentorship can reduce discrimination and facilitate a greater sense of safety, comfort, and support within learning environments. Fourth, we recommend that service providers connect refugee students with extracurricular and mentorship programs which are linked to the broader refugee community and networks. Such opportunities can provide refugee students with connections who affirm their individual identities and experiences and provide valuable capital through information sharing. Lastly, we recommend that schools and universities diversify study abroad options to introduce more low-cost programs, including domestic and short-term excursions, to increase refugee students’ participation. Overall, these recommendations can improve refugee students’ inclusion within their schools and wider community.

148

Ciara Hoyne and Brittany Troupe

NOTES 1. UNHCR, 2019, “Universities providing scholarships to refugees call on others to do the same,” November 26, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/protection​/conferences​ /5ddcdf3c7​/universities​-providing​-scholarships​-refugees​-call​-others​.html. 2. U.S. Department of State, n.d., “U.S. Refugee Admissions Program: Reception and Placement,” Accessed February 26, 2023, https:​//​www​.state​.gov​/refugee​ -admissions​/reception​-and​-placement​/. 3. National Center for Education Statistics, 2020, “Enrollment and Attendance Policy,” https:​//​nces​.ed​.gov​/programs​/statereform​/1​_eap​.asp. 4. D.C. Code. § 38–202. Establishment of school attendance requirements; MD Code. §7–301; VA Code. § 22.1–254. Compulsory attendance required; excuses and waivers; alternative education program attendance; exemptions from article. 5. As discussed in chapters 6 and 8. 6. UN General Assembly, Resolution 217 A, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (December 10, 1948), https:​//​www​.un​.org​/en​/about​-us​/universal​-declaration​ -of​-human​-rights. 7. As discussed in chapter 2. 8. Mary E. M. McKillip, Anita Rawls, and Carol Barry, 2012, “Improving College Access: A Review of Research on the Role of High School Counselors,” Professional School Counseling 16, no. 1, 49–58, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1177​/2156759X1201600106. 9. Lauren Moser Klink, 2022, “An Intervention Strategy Addressing Implicit Bias in Scholarships,” Journal of Student Financial Aid 51, no. 2, 1–8, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​ .55504​/0884​-9153​.1751; U.S. Department of Education, 2016, “Advancing Diversity and Inclusion in Higher Education: Key Data Highlights Focusing on Race and Ethnicity and Promising Practices,” November, https:​//​www2​.ed​.gov​/rschstat​/research​/ pubs​/advancing​-diversity​-inclusion​.pdf. 10. Federal Student Aid, n.d., “Complete the FAFSA Form,” Accessed October 11, 2022, https:​//​studentaid​.gov​/h​/apply​-for​-aid​/fafsa. 11. Emma Kerr and Sarah Wood, 2022, “Completing the FAFSA: Everything You Should Know,” USNews & World Report, September 27, https:​//​www​.usnews​.com​/ education​/best​-colleges​/paying​-for​-college​/articles​/completing​-the​-fafsa. 12. UNHCR, n.d., “Tertiary Education,” https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/en​-us​/tertiary​ -education​.html. 13. Mark Kantrowitz, 2019, “College Scholarships Statistics,” Saving for College, October 23, https:​//​www​.savingforcollege​.com​/article​/college​-scholarships​-statistics. 14. APA, 2012, “Introduction to Mentoring: A Guide for Mentors and Mentees,” Accessed October 4, 2022, https:​//​www​.apa​.org​/education​-career​/grad​/mentoring. 15. As explored in chapter 5. 16. Christia Spears Brown, 2015, The Educational, Psychological, and Social Impact of Discrimination on the Immigrant Child (Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute), 1–17. 17. BRYCS, 2011, “Refugee Children in U.S. Schools: A Toolkit for Teachers and School Personnel,” https:​//​brycs​.org​/wp​-content​/uploads​/2018​/08​/tool4​.pdf. 18. Ibid.



Additive Education Experiences and Educational Supports

149

19. Brown, The Educational, Psychological, and Social Impact of Discrimination on the Immigrant Child, 1–17. 20. Ibid. 21. Margaret Vickers, Florence McCarthy, and Katina Zammit, 2017, “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding: Support for Refugee-Background and Immigrant Students Beginning University Study,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 60, no. 1, 198–209, https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1016​/j​.ijintrel​.2017​.04​.015. 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. Iris E. Dumenden, 2011, “Agency as the Acquisition of Capital: The Role of One-on-One Tutoring and Mentoring in Changing a Refugee Student’s Educational Trajectory,” European Educational Research Journal 10, no. 4, 472–483, https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.2304​/eerj​.2011​.10​.4​.472. 26. Ibid. 27. Ibid. 28. Mary Mendenhall, Makala Skinner, Sophia Collas, and Sarah French, 2018, “Expanding Teacher Support through Mobile Mentoring in Kakuma Refugee Camps,” Current Issues in Comparative Education (CICE) 20, no. 2, 9–23, https:​//​ files​.eric​.ed​.gov​/fulltext​/EJ1205676​.pdf. 29. Ibid. 30. Ibid. 31. Ibid. 32. Bernhard Streitwieser, 2019, “International Education for Enlightenment, for Opportunity and for Survival: Where Students, Migrants and Refugees Diverge,” Journal of Comparative and International Higher Education 11, no. 2, 4–9, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.32674​/jcihe​.v11iFall​.1357. 33. Zemach-Bersin, 2007, “Global citizenship and study abroad: It’s all about US,” Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 1, no. 2, 16–28. 34. Bernhard Streitwieser, 2019, “International Education for Enlightenment, for Opportunity and for Survival: Where Students, Migrants and Refugees Diverge,” Journal of Comparative and International Higher Education 11, no. 2, 4–9, https:​//​ doi​.org​/10​.32674​/jcihe​.v11iFall​.1357. 35. Ibid. 36. Streitwieser, “International Education for Enlightenment, for Opportunity and for Survival,” 5. 37. GoAbroad, 2022, “Study Refugee Studies Abroad,” https:​//​www​.goabroad​.com​ /study​-abroad​/search​/refugee​-studies​/study​-abroad​-1.

SECTION III

Application

151

Chapter 7

Building Capacity Improving Refugee-Background Students’ Enrollment and Inclusion Olivia Issa‌‌

INTRODUCTION Capacity building, defined by the United Nations (UN) as “the process of developing and strengthening the skills, instincts, abilities, processes and resources that organizations and communities need to survive, adapt, and thrive in a fast-changing world,” plays an important role in shaping the skills the refugee community needs to successfully resettle in their host community.1 Education can increase refugees’ capacity building by creating more socioeconomically inclusive environments.2 As such, organizations continue to work to foster the necessary conditions to improve the accessibility and inclusivity of education for refugees. Using original data from interviews with refugees, practitioners from refugee service organizations, and experts in the field, this chapter examines the importance of building the capacity of communities to include refugees in every level of education. Specifically, this chapter will highlight examples from the DC, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) area, exploring refugees’ experiences in their own words. Across this book and within this chapter, the authors center refugee voices in an effort to shift decision making power structures in the U.S. regarding refugee policy and practices. Traditionally, those with refugee experiences are excluded from decision points about refugee policy, which the authors argue upholds a problematic tradition of maintaining power among an exclusive group without considering the needs of those most affected by the group’s decisions. By incorporating refugees’ thoughts using their own words, this 153

154

Olivia Issa

book intends to break this cycle by amplifying refugee voices. By highlighting policy recommendations based on refugees’ statements, this book aims to call on other actors to continue to center refugee voices and help shift decision making power to those with experiences of displacement. This chapter will first discuss barriers that refugees may face during enrollment in primary and secondary (K–12) and higher education. Then, the chapter will cover the post-enrollment period in which refugees adjust to school environments, focusing particularly on higher education. Finally, the chapter will highlight key recommendations for building the capacity of resettlement providers, schools, nonprofits, and government organizations to respond to the barriers and challenges that are posed in each step of the educational enrollment and inclusion process. This chapter puts in conversation the varying experiences of refugees interviewed as they impact refugee experiences in education. ENROLLMENT K–12 Education For refugee-background students at the K–12 level, enrollment in primary or secondary school is an important step towards facilitating inclusion in their host community. In the DMV area, children ages five to 18—including refugee children—must be enrolled in school, in line with state education laws.3 As such, one of refugee resettlement agencies’ top priorities is to quickly enroll refugee children in schools, and ensure that refugee parents have adequate information on the school systems and requirements.4 However, as discussed throughout this book, due to infrastructure, staffing, and time constraints, refugees often lack sufficient information, leading to delayed enrollment. Additionally, some refugees experience disruptions in their educational trajectories due to their displacement. For example, the UN reports that between 2018 and 2020, nearly one million children were born as refugees into refugee camps.5 Children in these circumstances may spend their whole lives in refugee camps, many of which have either informal education programs, or programs that are of a different pace than U.S. schools. As such, not all refugee-background students enter the U.S. with equivalent educational experience necessary to join their similarly-aged peers. Public schools in the U.S. build on students’ knowledge each year, frequently referencing previous years’ teachings in lessons, and do not have clear pathways for bridging learning gaps for new students entering school in the U.S. after kindergarten. This system can present several challenges for refugee students with educational gaps, including: grade placement deliberations based on age versus

Building Capacity

155

educational experience; bridging learning gaps before and while entering school; and providing secondary education to refugees who are older than 18. According to U.S. law, when working with refugee-background students, school districts cannot ask students or families about their immigration status, nor can they bar a student from enrolling if they are unable to produce a birth certificate.6 Additionally, parents are not required to provide a social security number during the enrollment process.7 In the U.S., a social security number serves as the identification number for those who are permanent residents or citizens of the country, something that not all refugees or other displaced individuals will have. The U.S.’ flexible documentation policy opens enrollment to students from all immigration backgrounds. However, in practice, schools may disregard or be unaware of these laws, and ask refugee students for documents that they are unable to provide. This serves to further a colonial tradition of educational segregation, by marginalizing students who already face additional barriers to schooling such as educational gaps and language barriers, and in turn facilitating the education of U.S. citizens above non-citizens. It is important for resettlement agencies to continue focusing efforts on quickly enrolling refugee students in school so that they may continue their studies, which are often disrupted by displacement. Ensuring smooth access to education upon resettlement may increase refugee’s ability to successfully complete school and pursue future education and/or employment. Often, refugee resettlement case workers serve as mediators between primary and secondary schools, and recently arrived refugees; case workers can connect with school administrators before the refugee family arrives and can provide the school with information about the family’s needs, potentially combating educational segregation. While resettlement agencies are responsible for helping to enroll K–12 aged refugee children in schools, there are instances where enrollment information can be hard for refugee families to access, or may be miscommunicated. Refugees receive the bulk of resettlement services for the first 90 days after their arrival in the U.S., including coverage by a case worker.8 For, Mohammad, a refugee in Virginia, this was not enough time to enroll his siblings in school—a task he was responsible for completing. He shared that after arriving in the U.S., it took two months to enroll his siblings in school. He did not have the documents the school administration requested to complete his siblings’ grade placement because his family did not have time to take any documents with them while fleeing the country. When speaking with teachers and administrators, Mohammad shared, “Most staff we talked with knew nothing about what was happening in [his home country]. They were asking for our documents. I told them that we couldn’t provide them.” Mohammad’s experience demonstrated that some school staff were unprepared to welcome displaced students from his country. In particular, they were unaware of the

156

Olivia Issa

conditions there, the circumstances that led him and others from his country to flee, or why they may be unable to produce or procure prior education documents. This represents the lack of preparation and orientation of school staff to the situation in Mohammad’s home country, or what to expect of any refugee student, regardless of the situation of their home country. It is not uncommon for refugees to lack documents from previous education institutions, as many do not have time to gather documents in the process of fleeing immediate danger.9 It is important that refugee resettlement agencies, and particularly any case workers involved in enrolling refugee students in school, communicate these circumstances or realities to schools receiving refugees. This can facilitate a smoother enrollment process for refugee students. It can also reduce the onus on refugee students to explain or repeat details of their often challenging circumstances to school staff. Challenges for refugee students may extend to post-enrollment processes as well. Cara, a volunteer working with recently-arrived refugees in Virginia, described her challenges communicating with schools on behalf of refugee families. She shared about her experience working to enroll a fifteen-year-old boy in high school. Cara said, “The school either communicates by email or phone calls. There was only one phone, the dad [worked] at [a fast-food restaurant], so any time the school called, he was too busy. . . . The kids didn’t even know when school was going to start, would it be delayed, it was difficult.” This experience demonstrates the challenges associated with often inflexible communication methods that schools may traditionally use to reach students’ families. Poor communication can impede students’ participation in school and uphold systems of privilege. For example, if all primary caregivers in a home have to work or are unable to be at home during working hours—a reality that may also be the case in low-income homes where all available caregivers work are unable to work from home—this communication method can be extremely challenging and exclusionary. The school system’s preference toward families with at least one stay-at-home caregiver can create a power dynamic amongst families, to the detriment of those with multiple caregivers in the workforce. To increase communication with working parents to discuss enrollment and school attendance concerns, schools should re-examine their policies and consider adding options to contact parents after working hours and on weekends. Education laws in Maryland and Virginia state that students are eligible to remain in public high schools until the age of 21, while in DC, there is no age limit on high school participation.10 Staying in high school past the age of 18 can be beneficial for many refugees who resettled to the U.S. in their teenage years or young adulthood. For example, spending a longer period in secondary school can bridge educational gaps between refugees and their peers, and give refugee students greater opportunities to improve their English skills

Building Capacity

157

before entering a full-time workforce. Furthermore, such enrollment can provide a cushion between resettlement and entrance into full-time work, as well as ensure refugees can graduate from high school and subsequently apply for and enroll in university or college. For refugees who are unable to complete their high school studies or earn their GED, enrollment in a U.S. university or college is impossible. Overall, laws which allow students to attend public high schools past the age of 18 can be crucial to the long-term success of refugees resettled in young adulthood. However, these laws are not always applied in practice. Saeed, a refugee student, stated that before evacuating his home country, he was in twelfth grade. Upon arriving in the U.S., he was nineteen and told that he “couldn’t drain public schools, because you had to be 18 and . . . in Virginia that’s the law apparently . . . so my siblings got to go to high school but I didn’t and [so I] chose to pursue a GED.” When Saeed was told he would be a “drain” to school resources, this comment was likely a reference to the student outcomes benchmarks that teachers receive annually. As explained by a refugee policy expert, Jennifer, with these benchmarks, students’ grades and test scores are considered as indications of a teacher’s success and subsequently, the success of the school. If a teacher’s benchmarks are consistently low, the school may fire them. As such, this system may encourage teachers and high school administrators not to take on students who might need extra support to succeed in their classes,11 such as those entering the U.S. education system for the first time. Additionally, the actors involved in Saeed’s enrollment case may not have been well versed in the state education laws. For example, they may have incorrectly assumed he was not eligible to enroll in high school. Combatting these shortcomings can include a twofold approach. First, equip teachers and administrators with tools to successfully transition refugee students into high school in the U.S. Second, train stakeholders involved in enrolling refugees in school on the laws around age of eligibility for public schools. These improvements can ensure that young people like Saeed are given the opportunity to finish high school in the U.S. while also offering potential pathways for smoother inclusion into the U.S. workforce. Higher Education For refugee students who finish high school or complete a GED and are interested in continuing on to higher education, barriers discussed in previous chapters can impact their enrollment. Ensuring an accessible enrollment process is a crucial step for colleges and universities to decolonize their institutions, accounting for challenges faced by many populations historically excluded from the U.S. higher education community. Standardized tests, such

158

Olivia Issa

as SAT and ACT, and English language proficiency exams pose a challenge to many refugee-background applicants to higher education. Most higher education institutions (HEIs) require international applicants to provide Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) scores to ensure their English language proficiency is up to par with the demands of their institutions’ courses. While proof of proficiency may be a non-negotiable requirement for many HEIs, TOEFLs are not always accessible to refugee applicants. Standardized testing locations may be scarce, test preparation courses may be too costly, test proctors may be unavailable, or registration fees may be too expensive.12 Similarly, applicants are required to take SAT and ACT tests at official testing sites—a reality which may require test takers to travel to other regions or even other countries.13 For refugees living in camps, leaving the camp, let alone the country, may not be possible.14 Those who were educated in their country of origin and fled without taking official transcripts or academic certificates with them, as well as those who never received official transcripts to begin with, also face unique barriers when attempting to enroll in higher education institutions. Several HEIs, including the George Washington University in Washington, DC, have taken a creative approach to combat TOEFL access challenges such as allowing students to use the English level assessment through Duolingo, at least during the COVID-19 pandemic.15 This alternative test can be significantly easier for refugee-background students to access. While the official Duolingo English Test costs US$49,16 the price is low compared to the US$180 TOEFL fee, which also involves additional charges to send the TOEFL scores to schools.17 Additionally, students can take the Duolingo English Test anywhere that has internet and without an appointment—removing the difficulties of locating and reaching testing sites.18 HEIs should strengthen their capacities to assess and admit refugee students in a more equitable way by accepting alternative English language assessments such as the Duolingo English Test, in addition to traditional examinations such as TOEFL. In terms of other standardized tests, the World Education Services (WES) report entitled “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications: Practical Tips for Credential Assessment”19 recommends that if HEIs insist on testing their students’ abilities as part of admissions, they should write their own tests or skills assessments to substitute for standardized tests like the SAT or ACT.20 As the report outlines, admissions staff can coordinate interviews with students to assess their language proficiency, and ask them to complete skills-based tasks on the call.21 However, these techniques require staff to go out of their way to connect with students. As such, they may be more effective if implemented during the final stage of applicants’ selection when the candidate pool is smaller. At the same time, the report notes that the simplest approach would

Building Capacity

159

be to waive standardized testing requirements for refugee-background applicants.22 Felipe, a refugee student, shared his experiences with standardized tests. He stated, “I come from a family that has many family members abroad, we were moderately stable in [our home country], but some people have a salary of US$20 per month and you need US$300 to live per month, and all family member work, so paying a US$320 SAT fee is almost impossible, so that’s a struggle many have.” Even refugees with the financial means to cover some costs or travel to testing sites may not be able to overcome challenges related to testing. HEIs should consider waiving standardized testing requirements for refugee students—if not all students—in order to ensure equitable access to higher education applications and admissions. Refugees’ educational disruptions may result in incomplete or inaccessible transcripts from previous education institutions.23 In some situations, the education institutions that refugee students graduated from no longer exist because of damage caused by war. Alternatively, contacting a refugee’s prior institution to access transcripts may require communicating with the refugee’s embassy which could put the refugee in danger if they fled persecution from their home country’s government.24 To address this concern, World Education Services (WES) works to validate transcript alternatives through their “Credential Evaluations” program. WES partners with HEIs to confirm that applicants have received diplomas and other documents from institutions abroad, even if the applicants themselves do not have access to their official documents.25 This kind of credential evaluation can help remove enrollment barriers for refugee-background applicants. HEI’s admissions offices can establish partnerships with WES or other organizations with similar services to add credential evaluation to their admissions offerings, specifically when reviewing applications from refugees. Additionally, programs like WES should consider providing training or information sessions to inform admissions offices of their services, as well as raise awareness about alternative options to evaluate unofficial transcripts when refugees cannot present official ones. When refugees are formally resettled, the UNHCR recommends that countries of resettlement provide cultural orientation programs to all refugees prior to arrival in their country of resettlement.26 However, refugees coming to the U.S. on international student visas do not receive these services because this process is not classified as resettlement. Thus, preparing HEIs to offer cultural preparation services to students before and upon arrival to the country can help address this gap and provide refugees with knowledge of the social, cultural, and economic norms in the U.S. Such information can ensure the refugees have realistic expectations. According to the UNHCR, “If not addressed, these expectations will not only cause stress to the newcomers upon arrival, but may also cause undue pressure on the social service

160

Olivia Issa

providers in the host communities, and may weaken prospects of integration and public support for resettlement of refugees in general.”27 Faculty, staff, and students at HEIs can help refugees adjust to their new contexts by providing social support and cultural acclimation services upon arrival to campus. George Mason University in Virginia has a center on campus dedicated to ensuring that first generation college students—including refugee-background students—receive guidance on navigating campus. The First-Gen+ Center focuses staff and services on students who are of the first generation in their families to attend college, particularly limited income, undocumented, and refugee students.28 In their words, “The First-Gen+ Center serves as an accessible starting point for students (and their families) to understand and connect with relevant university resources.”29 The Center has helped undocumented, refugee, and other first-generation students feel supported and seen on campus.30 George Mason’s center can serve as an example for other institutions of how to build a social inclusion program. These programs support refugee students to register and attend school, understand the school resources and culture, and improve how accepted they feel on campus. RECOMMENDATIONS Schools and resettlement providers alike should work together to ensure that families understand what documents are required of them to enroll in school, when their children will start, and how to get to school. For example, schools and resettlement providers should give refugee families school “orientations” to outline all necessary logistics for starting school. A translator should be present for these meetings. During the sessions, schools and resettlement providers should distribute written guidelines for enrollment, transportation, class materials, and other logistics in families’ native languages. This may be more feasible for schools which receive a high number of migrants from the same linguistic backgrounds. For example, schools which receive large numbers of Spanish-speaking migrants could translate all logistical materials into Spanish. In addition to these services, ideally, case workers should support refugee families until their kids are attending classes, and transportation to and from schools has been arranged and tested. However, resettlement case workers receive set funding amounts based on the number of refugees they resettle or parolees they place—funding which covers services for up to 90 days per refugee or parolee.31 Case workers are not always able to complete enrollment and necessary education support within the 90 days of allocated funding. As such, one recommendation is for resettlement agencies and the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, run by the U.S. Department of State,32 to take responsibility for increasing the funding for resettlement

Building Capacity

161

case workers to support. This can help ensure that refugee families and their children are settled in their new community and school while reducing the impact of structural barriers on school enrollment. The onus for bridging refugee-background children’s learning gaps should be shared across schools, resettlement providers, and, when possible, nonprofits. Schools across the DMV have English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, but refugee students often require support in classes other than English as well. To make up for education gaps without isolating refugee-background students from their peers, schools can employ flexible placement practices. For example, they can enroll refugee-background students in grade levels aligned with their age in relation with peers, but schedule these students to take math and reading courses with the grade most appropriate to their level upon resettlement. Additionally, when possible, nonprofit organizations and resettlement providers should provide robust training for any volunteers or teachers to strengthen the quality of programming dedicated to bridging refugee-background students’ learning gaps. Providing more funding can also help refugee-background students receive more one-on-one support during their transition to school and help school administration and teachers to tailor each student’s learning plan. As Hillary, a service provider who works with refugee youth, shared, the government and private donors can help develop these kinds of programs by providing funding opportunities, similar to past Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) grants like the Refugee School Impact Grant and the Refugee Youth Mentorship Grant. These kinds of grants can foster innovation—when paired with specific requirements to close learning gaps—that could go a long way in ensuring that refugee-background students are receiving high-quality support programs in and outside of school. Higher education institutions can improve their admissions and enrollment processes by adopting Duolingo English testing as an alternative option to TOEFL, removing or offering replacements to standardized test requirements like the SAT and ACT, and accepting alternatives to official transcripts. Already, numerous schools are accepting the Duolingo English Test in addition to TOEFL and other English proficiency tests, providing an alternative testing option without requiring HEIs to cover costs. Removing other standardized test requirements like the SAT and ACT is another no-cost option for HEIs and can be a crucial step to mitigating geographic and financial barriers. Alternatively, as outlined in the WES report, HEIs could develop their own free-of-cost test to determine applicants’ academic abilities, and conduct them over a video call or another individualized setting.33 HEI admissions teams should receive training on refugees’ situations and realities, including understanding that not all refugee-background applicants will have official or complete transcripts. When assessing refugee applicants, institutions can hire admissions staff that have experience and expertise in inclusive admissions

162

Olivia Issa

practices for refugees. These actors should then train other staff on inclusive admissions practices to build overall team capacity. While this requires some financial commitment, staff members could also support the general admissions staff, making this a cost-effective investment. Finally, HEIs should partner with WES and similar programs to verify refugee-background applicants’ unofficial education history documents. When it comes to inclusion on campus, HEIs can replicate and expand upon the George Mason University’s FirstGen+ Center model. At minimum, this requires dedicating staff and space on campus to support these students. CONCLUSION Across all levels of education, it is important for relevant actors to communicate and collaborate to increase refugees’ access to education. Interviewees highlighted that resettlement agencies and schools should discuss refugee-background students’ unique needs, especially during refugees’ initial years of resettlement. While resettlement agencies work to connect refugee families with information about schooling, these organizations’ funding systems may disincentivize case workers from providing refugee families with support throughout the lifecycle of the enrollment process. Changing the way resettlement agencies are funded has the potential to improve the capacities of case workers to provide the basic services that students need to enroll, attend, and succeed in schools. K–12 schools and school systems can also build their capacities to welcome refugee-background students by investing in services to translate enrollment materials, and by creating orientation programming for newcomer families. Such efforts can improve families’ awareness of every step of the school enrollment process, as well as increase their autonomy to navigate the enrollment system themselves. Building capacity for refugee education is the responsibility of every individual who has a stake in refugees’ success. When each actor builds strong communication with the others involved, this system has the potential to prepare refugee-background students for both short- and long-term success in every aspect of their lives. Such preparation begins with strengthening all actors’ abilities to support refugee-background students’ access to schools. By engaging in widespread efforts to make education accessible, inclusive, and welcoming, the U.S. education system can reimagine structures that are more equitable for refugee background students and positively impact their economic mobility. With the right skills and abilities, every actor in education, policy, and refugee resettlement can contribute to breaking down these barriers and improving refugee educational access and inclusion.

Building Capacity

163

NOTES 1. United Nations (UN), n.d., “Capacity-Building,” Accessed September 25, 2022, https:​//​www​.un​.org​/en​/academic​-impact​/capacity​-building. 2. UNESCO UNEVOC, 2019, “The Impact of Migration on TVET,” International Centre for Technical and Vocational Training, https:​//​unevoc​.unesco​.org​/home​/ Migration+and+TVET. 3. U.S. Department of Education, 2017, “State Education Practices (SEP),” National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of Education, https:​//​nces​.ed​.gov​/programs​/statereform​/tab1​_2​-2020​.asp. 4. Bridging Refugee Youth and Children's Services (BRYCS), 2016, “Enrolling Refugee Children in U.S. Schools,” August 1, https:​ //​ brycs​ .org​ /schools​ /enrolling​ -refugee​-children​-in​-u​-s​-schools​/. 5. UNHCR, 2021, “1 million children born as refugees in three years globally,” June 18, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/pk​/13229​-1​-million​-children​-born​-as​-refugees​-in​ -three​-years​-globally​.html. 6. BRYCS, “Enrolling Refugee Children in U.S. Schools.” 7. Ibid. 8. Utica: The Last Refuge, 2021, “Home, Utica: The Last Refuge,” Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​www​.lastrefugedocumentary​.com​/. 9. Bryce Loo, 2016, “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications: Practical Tips for Credential Assessment,” World Education Services, May, https:​//​glotalent​.org​/ wp​-content​/uploads​/2017​/05​/Recognizing​-Refugee​-Credentials​-Pratical​-Tips​-for​ -Credential​-Assessment​.pdf. 10. U.S. Department of Education, “State Education Practices (SEP).” 11. Ibid. 12. Nele Feldmann, 2021, “From Right to Reality: Global and National Efforts to Provide Higher Education Opportunities for Refugee Students,” Course Lecture (EDUC 6640 Migrants, Refugees and Education: Addressing a Global Challenge Spring 2021, Virtual, Zoom, January 13). 13. College Board, 2022, “International Testing,” Accessed October 11, 2022, https:​//​satsuite​.collegeboard​.org​/sat​/registration​/international​-testing. 14. Feldman, “From Right to Reality.” 15. GW Office of Undergraduate Admissions, n.d., “International Applicants,” Accessed September 22, 2022, https:​//​undergraduate​.admissions​.gwu​.edu​/ international​-applicants. 16. Duolingo, n.d., “Duolingo English Test,” Accessed May 2, 2021, https:​ //​ englishtest​.duolingo​.com​/. 17. ETS TOEFL, n.d., “Revised TOEFL Paper-delivered Test Fees (For Test Takers),” Accessed May 2, 2021, https:​//​www​.ets​.org​/toefl​/rpdt​/about​/fees​/. 18. Duolingo, n.d., “Certify your English proficiency today!,” Accessed May 2, 2021, https:​//​englishtest​.duolingo​.com​/applicants. 19. Bryce Loo, 2016, “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications: Practical Tips for Credential Assessment,” World Education Services, May, https:​//​glotalent​.org​/

164

Olivia Issa

wp​-content​/uploads​/2017​/05​/Recognizing​-Refugee​-Credentials​-Pratical​-Tips​-for​ -Credential​-Assessment​.pdf. 20. Ibid., 14. 21. Ibid., 14–17. 22. Ibid., 14. 23. Ibid., 2. 24. Ibid., 2. 25. World Education Services, 2021, “Credential Evaluations,” June 3, https:​//​www​ .wes​.org​/credential​-evaluations​/. 26. UNHCR, n.d., “Orientation Programs and Processes,” https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​ /handbooks​/ih​/placement​-reception​-orientation​/orientation​-programs​-and​-processes. 27. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2011, “UNHCR Resettlement Handbook,” 378, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/46f7c0ee2​.pdf. 28. George Mason University, n.d., “First Gen+ Center,” Accessed October 8, 2022, https:​//​firstgen​.gmu​.edu​/. 29. Ibid. 30. Anna Stolley Persky, 2022, “Mason’s First-Gen+ Center Helps Students Navigate the University Experience,” George Mason University, July 20, https:​//​www​ .gmu​.edu​/news​/2022​-07​/masons​-first​-gen​-center​-helps​-students​-navigate​-university​ -experience. 31. Utica: The Last Refuge, 2021, “Home, Utica: The Last Refuge,” Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​www​.lastrefugedocumentary​.com​/. 32. US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2022, “Funding the Refugee Program,” Accessed October 8, 2022, https:​//​www​.usccb​.org​/issues​-and​-action​/human​-life​-and​ -dignity​/migrants​-refugees​-and​-travelers​/fundingtherefugeeprogram. 33. Loo, “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications.”

Chapter 8

Sharing Information on Education Across Resettlement Agencies, Nonprofits, Schools, and Community Spaces‌‌ Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe‌‌

INTRODUCTION Recently arrived refugees in the United States face various challenges during their resettlement and integration process, which are influenced by the colonial underpinnings of migration into the U.S. This process starts with the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). USRAP works with nine U.S. resettlement agencies to provide pre- and post-arrival services to refugees.1 These agencies meet refugees at airports or detention centers and transport them to furnished homes. In the following days and weeks, the agencies ensure that refugees have access to the services they are guaranteed by the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees.2 USRAP also connects refugees with case workers and health specialists, as well as mentors, academic tutors, and employment specialists, when possible and as needed.3 However, after the first 90 days of services, resettlement agencies are not required—and often do not have the funding or ability—to provide further support to refugees.4 The vast majority of refugees still need linguistic, academic, employment, adjustment, and medical support even after their first six months in the U.S. Given the need for support, various nonprofit organizations have been developed to provide education and focus on the intersectional needs of refugees. Refugees are not a homogenous group; refugees come from diverse countries of origin, and have different identities based on categories like race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, English proficiency, education 165

166

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

history, and ability. With these differences in mind, nonprofits, resettlement agencies, and schools must approach refugee education through an intersectional lens, by addressing the unique and often overlapping needs of various refugee populations.5 This chapter will outline the barriers to education during the enrollment process in U.S. education, addressing both refugee resettlement agencies and schools. Next, the chapter will address transportation barriers to education access, ranging from knowledge of transportation systems, to transportation infrastructure. Additionally, the chapter will address access to counseling and guidance for applying to and entering higher education. In responding to each barrier to education access, nonprofits, schools, resettlement agencies, and refugee communities each play vital roles in this process. This chapter centers refugee stories in their words and, in some cases, slight paraphrasing of their words, in line with the decolonial framework of this book, and will also examine data based on a comprehensive literature review. INFORMATION SHARING DURING ENROLLMENT Education access resources, such as how to enroll in public schools, what documents are required for attending any level of schooling, how to travel to and from schooling, and what non-traditional education options exist in the community, are often shared at multiple stages of the refugee resettlement process. The refugee family is assigned to an NGO’s case worker, who then conducts an initial assessment, and helps develop an immediate and mid-term plan to reach familial integration goals.6 A resettlement case worker’s job is to help refugees acclimate to their new homes. As such, case workers provide information about K–12 education requirements for children or young adults to these newly resettled families. According to Hillary, a former case worker, informing students of these requirements is the bare minimum that agencies provide towards refugee education. She stated, “As a case manager, it’s a little sad, but your role is really to get them enrolled, check the box, and you’re done.” Case workers also coordinate with local public schools to register children for the grades appropriate for their age, ability, and education history. Despite these various activities, case workers are not positioned to fully address the intersectional nuances of refugee education needs. Hillary shared this sentiment, saying, “that’s kind of sad, but that is the role of resettlement.” This was a sentiment shared across several interviewees—that case workers often only have capacity to share information on school enrollment, but actually getting students prepared to attend classes was often in the hands of the families or through community-based support.



Sharing Information on Education

167

In some cases, refugee students do not receive services and do not have a case manager, so they are enrolled by parents or guardians. This can be extremely challenging without any information or guidance on where to find information. In Fairfax County, Virginia, the enrollment system is online-only. The website has a translation option, providing information on the enrollment process in multiple different languages.7 Neighboring Arlington County also offers translation of the enrollment website into many languages. However, neither of the two counties offer translation into Dari or Pashto, the two most common languages spoken in Afghanistan.8 This is important given the rise in Afghan refugees in 2021 after the fall of Kabul. Abdul explained the process of enrolling family members using an electronic system, “When I was going to [the county] for enrolling my sisters, I meet there another [person from my home country] that . . . came to enroll . . . his daughter and his son. So I told him, do you have any information about how to enroll your son. . . . He told me that he has no clue.” Navigating the website with school information was not possible for either of these two families due to the language barrier, but may have been much more easily accessible if services were offered in their native language. English as the dominant language in the U.S. causes many difficulties for refugees who come from non-English speaking countries. Refugees, similarly to indigenous groups or linguistic minorities, must acquire English as a secondary language in order to participate in the U.S. education system, which may lead to feelings of leaving their own linguistic and cultural heritage behind.9 This may lead to feelings of marginalization and a loss of identity, making it harder for refugees to integrate and succeed in their new communities, posing even more challenges and barriers to a successful education. The harm caused by the colonial idea of English as the dominant language is a significant challenge faced by refugees, and it is important to acknowledge and address this issue in order to promote greater cultural inclusiveness and understanding. For in-person options, refugees must secure transportation to visit the county’s enrollment office. If refugees do not have access to an interpreter, in-person enrollment may prove challenging when they face language barriers or lack the necessary documentation. Many refugees face barriers when simply enrolling into secondary schools in the DMV because the support refugees may receive during the enrollment process can vary greatly depending on a variety of factors, including the district, resettlement agency, nonprofit support, or a recent large influx of refugees. One refugee student, Ali, enrolling in school in a county in Maryland, had a different experience: “I think we received a tremendous amount of help from the school officials to get enrolled before the deadline. I mean that was incredible, they just did everything. We were just ‘here are our files’ and boom, boom, boom they did everything. I felt supported.” Officials at this particular school in this district were able

168

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

to help this student, not because they were a unique case, but because the school had the knowledge and resources needed to support them. This kind of support is crucial to employing a decolonial practice, one which works to meet a refugee where they are, rather than making them adjust entirely to the systems of the U.S., which is itself a form of colonialism. Valuing the refugee experience and empowering refugee students is an essential shift in the power dynamic. The wide range of experiences from different refugees, living in relatively close proximity to each other, highlights the inequities they experience when accessing information. Different students experience different challenges, levels of information, levels of assistance, and, subsequently, levels of access to schooling in the DMV. Enhancing transportation options and information about them, reforming English language learning services, and providing information and assistance on access to education are major practices that can help refugee students in the DMV succeed. Two factors come up during enrollment that can place refugee students into the wrong grade level. First, it can be difficult for families to provide documented proof of formal education for refugee children to the school administrators, especially for the many refugee children who are born into refugee camps.10 Second, school administrators have to meet certain benchmarks on student outcomes at the end of the year.11 Together, these can be a determinant of what grades schools place refugees into since administrators may think that refugee students are not well-equipped to succeed in school or that the student outcome scores will end up being lower, reflecting poorly on the administration. A senior refugee policy expert, Jennifer, explained that in some cases, older refugee students (15–17 years of age) “arrive at the school and the administrators say ‘you don’t have any kind of an education and you’re not literate and you’re not going to graduate within 4 years and you’re going to mess up my data and I’m going to get fired, so let’s send you to adult education.’” Jennifer continued that the consequences of administrators not meeting their student outcomes benchmark can be grounds for firing, which is why they may not want to enroll a refugee student into their grade-level or school. Thus, school administrations’ significant need to meet annual benchmarks can create a situation that harms refugee students’ access to an equitable education, and can place a high-school-aged student into adult education. However, the Plyler vs. Doe Supreme Court case set the precedent that denying student enrollment based on legal status is illegal.12 This means that the act of sending a secondary level refugee student to adult education is against the law, yet still happens. The colonial underpinnings of the U.S. legal system create additional barriers for migrant students, especially those who are refugees. Increasing access to information for these refugee families is crucial when it comes to stopping cases like this. If the family has knowledge of their legal



Sharing Information on Education

169

rights in regards to education, student-aged refugees may not end up being placed wrongfully. In fact, it is important that administrators are aware of the rights of refugee students, and violating these rights should be much more consequential than receiving lower student outcome benchmark results. One refugee student, Elizabeth, described the inaccuracies that occurred while she was trying to enroll herself and her siblings in school. She shared, “I was too grown up to be in middle school, you know it wasn’t my fault it’s just that my life as a refugee interrupted my educational process, so I ended up starting in grade nine when I should have started in grade eight. And because of the language barrier, some of my siblings had to start in the lower grades.” Some refugee students, like Elizabeth’s siblings, are placed in grades lower than they should be rather than higher. As a result, these students could end up repeating content, graduating secondary school when they are college-aged, and more. Without advocates, some refugee children can be placed into grades that result in a lack of self-confidence, which can make succeeding academically and socially in the long-term that much more challenging.13 Refugee students deserve, and are legally obligated, to receive an equitable education upon resettlement in the U.S., and effective information sharing and advocacy can help this process for all parties involved. In some cases, refugee families rely on word-of-mouth, known as community information sharing, to find information on the enrollment process. Community information sharing can be a valuable tool for refugee families, but may require some level of English language mastery. Abdul, a refugee who previously worked in government in his country of origin, explained that when trying to enroll family members into 10th grade, “they need to find your documents from [home country]. But we could not send our family to the ministry of education to find their documents [due to government ties].” Through word of mouth with another refugee from his country of origin, after meeting out of sheer luck, Abdul found out about a resettlement-support nonprofit that helped facilitate the enrollment of refugee students. Ultimately, it took two months of negotiating with the school to successfully enroll his family members, cutting it close with the final enrollment deadline. If it was not for community information sharing, enrollment of these refugee children may have turned out to have been a more difficult experience. This practice of community information sharing can be viewed as a decolonial practice, by shifting weight and power to refugee communities, borne out of necessity from a colonial system. Overall, information sharing during enrollment is vital to adequately ensure schools are providing these students with the education they deserve. Refugee families, depending on their situational context, rely heavily on the help and information they get from resettlement agencies. If they do not have access to this information or guidance from an agency, they can end up placed

170

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

into a school where they do not belong, a grade that they are not prepared for, or a grade that they have already completed. Adequate information sharing during the enrollment process helps confirm to these refugee students that they are in the right place and age-appropriate grade and will be able to succeed in their new schools. ACCESS, INFORMATION, AND CHALLENGES In the DMV, refugee students’ experiences are largely influenced by geographic location, accessibility of enrollment systems, transportation, and the existence of documentation. In K–12 education, refugees are typically placed in public schools in the regions where they live, in line with the U.S. Department of Education law.14 This is typically what happens in the DMV area, as most refugee students go to school close to where they are newly resettled. Refugee services and the quality of resources vary greatly depending on funding, urban vs. rural settings, and infrastructure of these resettlement agencies and support organizations nearest to the schools and refugees. One example is the quality of cultural orientation. Jennifer, an expert in K–12 policy analysis working in immigration integration in the DMV area, shared that “it’s easier for bigger places and places that do this [cultural orientation] more often.” For smaller organizations, cultural orientation may not even exist, or if it does, may be lower in quality than the ones provided by these bigger organizations in “bigger” places. Even when effective cultural orientation programs are in place, there remains a challenge of accessibility, making it essential to incorporate diverse identities, intersectionality, and an understanding of how information barriers stem from colonialism in order to advance inclusivity and challenge established power dynamics. Jennifer continued to explain that refugee services in Arlington, VA, may be more accessible when compared to other areas in the U.S. because “it is pretty easy to get around [in some places] such as Arlington.” Stronger public transportation systems can be a geographic solution that is usually an afterthought when thinking about practical solutions about mobility in both urban and rural settings. Transportation is a huge accessibility barrier for refugees, including refugee students. Even with a robust transportation system, information about how to actually use the modes of transportation is also extremely important. Mohammad, a refugee student in Virginia, shared that even with “the help of some organization here . . . we were not familiar with public transportation here [in Virginia].” This made enrolling his younger siblings into high school and middle school more difficult because they could not physically go to the school to enroll unless they knew how to properly navigate the



Sharing Information on Education

171

public transportation system. Abdul, a refugee looking to pursue his PhD in the U.S., explained how transportation impacted his efforts to take language courses in Virginia, which were required for entrance into a new higher education program: Another issue that I had was . . . that it was very far for me to [get to] the course, it takes time when I go from here to the cultural center in Alexandria. I told them I have a transportation problem and I have a housing problem so if you provide me some transportation or some housing because most of the time transportation was the problem. My nephew was working and in the early morning he was taking me to the course at the university and then from that side I have to come by bus so I take more than two hours, sometimes three hours.

Abdul knew that transportation being provided would remove some of the barriers he faced to eventually pursuing his PhD. Having access to transportation helps refugee students only as long as they also have information on how to use it to get around the city. By providing refugees with information on how to travel around the area where they have resettled, resettlement agencies can help alleviate some of the geographical barriers that end up negatively affecting refugee access to education. EMPLOYMENT AND HIGHER EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND PROGRAMS When analyzing higher education access, standards around refugee employment and “self-sufficiency” often mean that higher education ranks low on the list of priorities for a college-ready refugee. The Department of State encourages refugees aged 18 and over to gain employment as soon as possible, as refugees receive employment authorization at the time of resettlement.15 This aligns with one of the main goals of the resettlement system: to build refugees’ independence and financial stability as quickly as possible. This priority is rooted in capitalism and colonialism, limiting refugees’ opportunities to create the lives they want and pursue higher education if desired; instead prioritizing the profitability of a new workforce. This rapid push to find employment can also take away refugees’ bargaining power to negotiate wages, or to wait to accept a more skilled or interesting job. Additionally, refugees who are resettled as adults and might be interested in higher education may have to wait until they are financially stable to do so, which may take decades for refugees who work entry-level jobs. Students who are resettled in their youth often still face barriers to accessing higher education, such as navigating the complicated higher education

172

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

system, especially if they are the first person in their family to attend a U.S.-based college or university. The college application process may be confusing even for U.S.-born students whose family members studied in the U.S.16 Often, refugee-background students who seek to study at a college or university first receive information from a college counselor or advisor at their high school.17 These individuals can be important resources to refugee-background students, for providing clarity regarding college prerequisites, to working on college essays—which can be particularly challenging for non-native English speakers. They can also help identify what college environments might be best when considering the student’s family obligations, such as the need to live with family members. However, not all college counselors may be aware of the unique challenges refugee students face. As such, a number of college-readiness programs have developed for high school refugee students. George Mason University in Virginia has a FirstGen+ center, which has its own website within the GMU network where it shares resources for first-generation college students, undocumented students, and students with migration backgrounds.18 GMU also added a refugee student page, to share resources in a number of languages about navigating the common application, applying to GMU, accessing scholarships, offices on campus that could support them through their studies, and more. The FirstGen+ staff work with students before and after enrollment to ensure they have a smooth transition into school, and are able to successfully graduate.19 Refugee programming offered by local universities can provide assistance to refugee students looking to pursue education. Information about these programs should be streamlined efficiently and effectively, and universities lacking this sort of resource should quickly develop their own. Another support organization is Maryland-based MLaw Migrant Assistance Program (MMAP) at the University of Maryland (UMD) which was created in October 2021.20 It aims to aid recently arrived refugees who have migrated, primarily from Afghanistan, to Prince George’s County and the greater DC area. The program targets UMD students who are pursuing a law and society minor and who want to help refugees.21 Through the program, the students act as tutors and mentors to refugee students and receive one credit which applies to their degree. MMAP partners with Solutions in Hometown Connections (SHC) and Lutheran Social Services (LSS). As of Spring 2022, the program continues to be offered with the service-learning component and opportunities for reflection.22 This is an interesting blend of service-learning and community-based assistance, as refugees in the program are tutored by other students in the area. Another such mentorship support organization is EducationUSA, a U.S. State Department–sponsored advisory program for international



Sharing Information on Education

173

applicants to U.S. higher education institutions.23 The program involves over 430 international student advising centers, housing over 550 advisers, in 175 countries and territories, and the services are free for all participants. EducationUSA works with a large population of at-risk and displaced applicants, with some staff designated specifically for students from countries of recent displacement such as Afghanistan and Ukraine.24 EducationUSA has departments with specific knowledge related to promoting education in crises and the eligibility requirements for various legal pathways based on students’ backgrounds. EducationUSA clients are paired with advisors and/ or volunteer mentors to work with students through the application process and share resources about education opportunities. Applicants can enroll in EducationUSA services via email or social media.25 This mentorship program provides direct assistance and information for refugee students wanting to apply to higher education institutions, and is a great example of what is needed for these refugee students in terms of access to information. DC-based nonprofit Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (PAHEI) is an alliance of American college and university leaders dedicated to increasing public understanding of how immigration policies and practices impact our students, campuses and communities.26 PAHEI created a digital platform that “integrates data, policies, and resources about . . . refugee students to support immigration reform and federal policymaking, fuel change at the state and campus level, and build a diverse movement of partners and stakeholders advocating for these students.”27 This portal is publicly-accessible, and has thousands of site visits by people looking to know their rights about entering higher education spaces, and what resources are available for this purpose. The PAHEI portal is also geared towards a set of students who are not undocumented, and who do not come through the formal refugee resettlement process: refugees who arrived in the U.S. that come into the country on student visas.28 These students engage in “complementary pathways to refugee resettlement,” or situations wherein refugees enter a safe country on a visa outside of the resettlement visa process, such as with a student or labor visa.29 These pathways are not affected by the refugee admissions ceiling set by the U.S. president, providing alternative legal opportunities to enter and study in the U.S.30 Overall, information sharing programs provide refugees with abundant resources to help them pursue education in the DMV, and increasing the accessibility to these programs will help a greater number of potential students pursue higher education in the area. Information sharing services, whether they be about application to higher education, legal pathways to education, or data-driven advocacy, help refugees acquire the tools they need to pursue their personal education goals in the DMV.

174

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

When it comes to English language learning programs, the quality of information shared is complex. According to Jennifer, “There isn’t one right model [of English language programs], there isn’t a best, even if you gave me the characteristics of a place, I don’t know if I would be able to pick a best because it’s about capacity, it’s about what are the alternatives.” These programs might be so complex and disparate that it’s difficult to really dissect the best practices and facets. Some alternatives may be vocational and life skills programs that are typically offered in tertiary educational institutions. The wide variety of English learning services are often a result of the diverse needs of the English language learner populations they serve, with some structured around the first language of the students (especially for classes with students from one national or regional origin), others structured around language for workforce preparation, and still others for populations with no literacy in any language. These are all examples of education settings that meet refugees where they are, and recognize the intersectionality of refugee identities. English as a Second Language (ESL) classes at community colleges are often the first introduction to U.S. higher education for many refugee students. As such, many refugee-support organizations have connections with local community colleges and offer discounted ESL and vocational training programs for their refugee clients. One such organization is CASA, Inc.31 CASA works with colleges across Maryland and Virginia to host vocational training courses on-campus at significantly reduced rates. CASA also hosts English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes in two categories: life skills and workforce development. In both classes, CASA partners with local colleges and universities, such as Northern Virginia Community College and University of Maryland, to make students aware of opportunities to continue their education.32 Barbara, an expert working for an immigration service organization in Maryland, shared that “A lot [of our] people are intimidated about going off to university in the U.S.” and that programs like CASA’s can be a huge help in introducing a blend of English language training, workforce development, and life skills training specific to the U.S. context. Blending English language education with vocational training can be a powerful tool that helps refugee students gain mastery of a new language and knowledge of area-specific life skills at the same time. Information about where to find these programs and how to enroll must be provided to refugee students once they arrive in the area and universities without organizations or programs similar to CASA need to prioritize the formation of one.



Sharing Information on Education

175

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION Refugees have few opportunities to access education without adequate information about enrollment. Resettlement agencies and schools must work together to ensure refugee families have the necessary enrollment information in their native languages, which could take the form of enrollment websites and resources in the languages that refugees speak, and/or case workers working with the refugee families until children are fully enrolled and attending schools. Refugees have a right to public education by law, and should be informed and empowered as such to ensure they are receiving the services that the state is required to provide. Beyond enrollment, transportation is a major barrier for many refugees in accessing education. These challenges can be remedied if resettlement agencies and nonprofits are able to provide refugees with a deeper orientation of public transportation options and how to navigate them depending on where they have resettled, as well as better orientation on how to work with schools to secure school bus and other transportation options. Furthermore, when working to increase refugee access to higher education, building out nonprofit-led and in-school mentorship programs to guide refugees through the college application process can be vital to ensuring refugees are aware of their higher education options. Programs like the ones listed above help provide refugees with the information they want and need to help integrate into their communities. Information must be streamlined and accessible for all refugee families regardless of their context, and assistance needs to be effectively provided if we want to create an equitable environment for refugee students in the DMV area. Programs designed from an intersectional perspective, taking into account the many identities and experiences of refugees vastly increase the accessibility of their services to all refugees. The act of improving information sharing on education opportunities for refugees is in itself a step towards decolonizing education and refugee resettlement, by prioritizing individuals above profits, and meeting refugees where they are rather than forcing them to adhere to American standards of language proficiency and customs in order to access education. NOTES 1. U.S. Department of State (Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration), n.d., “Reception and Placement,” Accessed September 9, 2022, https:​//​www​.state​.gov​/ refugee​-admissions​/reception​-and​-placement​/. 2. Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, 1970, “The 1967 Protocol,” September 29, https:​//​www​.kaldorcentre​.unsw​.edu​.au​/publication​/1967​-protocol.

176

Alexander Erickson, Olivia Issa, and Brittany Troupe

3. Office of Refugee Resettlement, n.d., “Resettlement Services,” Accessed September 9, 2022, https:​//​www​.acf​.hhs​.gov​/orr​/programs​/refugees. 4. U.S. Department of State, 2021, “Reception and Placement—United States Department of State,” February 1, https:​//​www​.state​.gov​/refugee​-admissions​/ reception​-and​-placement​/. 5. Office of Refugee Resettlement, “Resettlement Services.” 6. UNHCR, n.d., “Integration Case Management,” The Integration Handbook, Accessed October 10, 2022, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/handbooks​/ih​/support​-services​/ integration​-case​-management. 7. Fairfax County Public Schools, n.d., “Registration: Fairfax County Public Schools,” Accessed September 11, 2022, https:​//​www​.fcps​.edu​/registration#. 8. Arlington Public Schools, 2022, “Registering Your Child,” July 15, https:​//​www​ .apsva​.us​/registering​-your​-child​/. 9. Susan Bosher, 1997, “Language and Cultural Identity: A Study of Hmong Students at the Postsecondary Level.” TESOL Quarterly 31, no. 3: 593–603. https:​//​doi​ .org​/10​.2307​/3587843. 10. UNHCR, 2021, “1 million children born as refugees in three years globally,” June 18, https:​//​www​.unhcr​.org​/pk​/13229​-1​-million​-children​-born​-as​-refugees​ -in​-three​-years​-globally​.html. 11. Maryland State Department of Education, “Division of Assessment, Accountability, and Performance Reporting,” Accessed October 9, 2022, https:​ //​ marylandpublicschools​.org​/about​/Pages​/DAAIT​/index​.aspx. 12. American Immigration Council, 2017, “Public Education for Immigrant Students: Understanding Plyler v. Doe,” June 15, https:​//​www​.americanimmigrationcouncil​ .org​/research​/plyler​-v​-doe​-public​-education​-immigrant​-students. 13. Bridging Refugee Youth & Children’s Services (BRYCS), “Education Integration Barriers: Perspectives from Refugee Youth,” Accessed October 9, 2022, https:​ //​brycs​.org​/schools​/education​-integration​-barriers​-perspectives​-from​-refugee​-youth​/. 14. Bridging Refugee Youth & Children’s Services, n.d., “Refugee Children in U.S. Schools: A Toolkit for Teachers and School Personnel: Tool 6: Enrolling Refugee Children in U.S. Schools,” Switchboard, Accessed September 9, 2022, https:​//​ switchboardta​.org​/resource​/refugee​-children​-in​-u​-s​-schools​-a​-toolkit​-for​-teachers​ -and​-school​-personnel​/. 15. U.S. Department of State, “Reception and Placement.” 16. Khadijah Booth Watkins, 2022, “The Challenges of First-Generation College Students: MGH Clay Center,” MGH Clay Center for Young Healthy Minds, June 9, https:​//​www​.mghclaycenter​.org​/parenting​-concerns​/young​-adults​/first​-generation​ -college​-studnets​/. 17. Bridging Refugee Youth & Children’s Services (BRYCS), 2021, “Overcoming the Financial Challenge of Higher Education,” Switchboard, October 19, https:​//​ switchboardta​.org​/blog​/overcoming​-the​-financial​-challenge​-of​-higher​-education​/. 18. George Mason University First Gen+ Center, n.d., “Refugee Students,” Accessed September 9, 2022, https:​//​firstgen​.gmu​.edu​/refugee​-students​/. 19. Ibid.



Sharing Information on Education

177

20. Rachael Grahame, 2021, “New Program to Help Refugees in Prince George’s County,” Maryland Today, December 1, https:​//​mlaw​.umd​.edu​/feature​/new​-program​ -help​-refugees​-prince​-george​%E2​%80​%99s​-county. 21. Ibid. 22. MLaw Programs, n.d., “New Spring One Credit MLAW Course Available! (MMAP),” University of Maryland, Accessed October 12, 2022, https:​//​mlaw​.umd​ .edu​/feature​/new​-spring​-one​-credit​-mlaw​-course​-available​-​%28mmap​%29. 23. Education USA, n.d., “EducationUSA: About,” U.S. Department of State, Accessed October 9, 2022, https:​//​educationusa​.state​.gov​/. 24. Ibid. 25. Ibid. 26. Jose Magaña-Salgado, 2021, “New Higher Ed Immigration Portal Launches: One-Stop Digital Resource for Federal and State Data, Policy Resources, and Best Practices,” Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, March 2, https:​//​www​.presidentsalliance​.org​/press​/statement​-immigration​-portal​/. 27. Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, 2022, “Higher Ed Immigration Portal,” August 15, https:​//​www​.higheredimmigrationportal​.org​/. 28. Ibid. 29. Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, 2021, “Report: The Initiative on U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students,” Higher Ed Immigration Portal, 7, https:​//​www​.higheredimmigrationportal​.org​/effective​_practice​/report​-the​ -initiative​-on​-u​-s​-education​-pathways​-for​-refugee​-students​/. 30. Ibid. 31. Casa, Inc., n.d., “We Are Casa,” Accessed September 9, 2022, https:​//​wearecasa​ .org​/. 32. Ibid.

Conclusion‌‌ Katharine Summers, Jessica Crist, and Bernhard Streitwieser

Throughout this book, we have sought to illuminate the challenges and opportunities faced by refugees in the DMV who seek to access and be included in the education system. In this final chapter, we will revisit the key takeaways from each chapter, as well as offer suggestions from our interviewees, in an effort to generate actionable recommendations for the various stakeholders who are involved in refugee education today. Our recommendations are organized into ideas that relate primarily to issues related to access, inclusion, and application. We also consider enabling factors that will help various stakeholders transform the landscape of refugee education in the DMV and the U.S. more broadly. CENTERING REFUGEE VOICES Confronting access and inclusion barriers requires listening to and learning from diverse voices, including those of refugees and students. As Rebecca, an expert in international higher education who studies refugees, shared, “any solution that is lasting and appropriate needs to include refugees themselves, including in leadership positions.” Thomas, a scholar focused on refugee education, reiterated this point, explaining that he’s “seen a lot of instances where people talk about refugees but don’t necessarily converse with [them], however, when you’re talking about refugee higher education access, the most important constituents are refugees themselves.” Finally, Benjamin, an expert at an educational access nonprofit for refugees, noted the importance of asking, “What do [refugee] students really want and what do they need for support?” Such inquiries require actively listening to refugees. As these three examples demonstrate, throughout our book we have worked to center refugee voices in order to first and foremost highlight their experiences. We 179

180

Conclusion

strongly believe that other scholars and practitioners who read our work should seek to pursue similar approaches as they advance the quality and applicability of their work. Refugee voices can have a profound influence on refugees’ access to education. As an illustration of this, Benjamin argued that, “Success breeds success and so as you have [refugees] who are navigating higher education . . . , then their testimonials and their voice is extremely powerful within their own families and their own communities . . . I think access is one thing . . . the other piece is the encouragement piece of not only can you access it, but you can do it.” Looking at it from the student angle, Elizabeth, a student of refugee background, corroborated this point, explaining how “family support was so important” to her success in pursuing her educational journey in the U.S. Amplifying refugees’ own voices within their communities and across broader educational spaces is a critical motivator to others to also pursue access to education and demonstrate pathways to surmount barriers. In addition, empowering refugees and helping them to take ownership of their stories, both positive and negative, is an important step for their educational journeys as well as their pathways towards inclusion within their host country. Centering refugee voices through the chapters also complemented our other analytical frameworks, namely intersectionality and decolonial theory. In highlighting quotes from refugees, several chapters, especially those regarding educational inclusion, examined refugees’ commentary on their identities through the lens of intersectionality to consider how refugees’ identities influenced their experiences and feelings of belonging or exclusion within their schools. This information helped shape recommendations regarding how educators, policymakers, practitioners, and scholars can consider these varying realities when developing or improving upon programming and/or support services for refugees. Decolonial theory was primarily employed in chapters that explored access barriers, particularly in terms of identifying systems and structures that give power or privilege to a specific subpopulation. In their analysis, chapter authors explored opportunities to shift power towards students from less privileged backgrounds, including refugee students, as well as called on stakeholders to reimagine systems to be more inclusive. The recommendations that follow build upon these three main frameworks and the content of each chapter. RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this book is to serve as a guide for federal and state policymakers, school administrators, and higher education institutions to follow when creating programs and policies related to refugees in education. Based

Conclusion

181

on the three sections we identified—access, integration, and application—we provide the following recommendations, rooted in the key takeaways from the qualitative interviews. Access Among the many barriers that refugees must overcome to enter or re-enter education, finances are often among the most burdensome challenges. To address financial barriers to refugee inclusion in higher education, one recommendation already in the works is creating a model of private refugee sponsorship in the U.S. In the summer of 2022, the U.S. Department of State launched a call for concept notes for higher education institutions to design such a model, with an intended start date of October 2022. This initiative was led by several actors, including the President’s Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration. As Rebecca shared, the Alliance “lead the [sponsorship model] initiative and [the] campaign, bringing together under one umbrella lots of different people and organizations who come from quite disparate worlds, bridging higher ed and refugee resettlement and students themselves.” In January 2023, the Welcome Corps, a private-sponsorship model for refugees arriving to the U.S., was officially launched.1 Addressing access barriers requires not only strong partnerships across sectors, but also leadership and coordination. As Hillary, a former caseworker and refugee education expert, shared with us, the use of coordination platforms, such as Switchboard, run by the IRC, provides a set of archives for various refugee agencies regarding refugee youth education. This platform provides a variety of templates and helps to combat the fact that “in refugee resettlement, [agencies] tend to try to reinvent the wheel a lot.” By coordinating among actors, refugee-support organizations can build synergies and learn from best practices. Better coordination can also help “ensure folks don’t fall through the cracks,” and that all refugees are able to access education. At the same time, Rebecca noted that while university sponsorship can “creat[e] a new pathway [for] university sponsorship, [actors] should not forget and [should] continue to think about what [they] can do to make the F1 student visa more accessible to refugees.” She pointed out that “only a relatively small number of refugees will ever be able to access [the] university sponsored pathway.” This is particularly critical given that higher education administrations have many competing priorities in terms of funding and that refugees are most familiar with what might work to support them. Usman, a refugee we spoke with, also discussed that providing more F1 visas, in addition to gaining access to greater funding opportunities, can support both refugees and other migrant populations who come from war torn countries. Such efforts can shift the system towards more equitable practices.

182

Conclusion

Benjamin shared that it is equally important to think holistically about supporting students from refugee backgrounds in accessing higher education. The advice he gave was for “scholarships . . . to be coupled with a program to provide the mentorship support that students need.” Access and inclusion barriers often interact with each other; as such, it is crucial for actors to consider them collectively and to work toward building more comprehensive programming and approaches to support equitable and inclusive educational services for refugees. Pursuing several forms of mentorship, including peer-to-peer and adult mentors and inside and outside of school opportunities, can improve refugees’ sense of belonging. However, it is critical that actors involved in designing holistic programming also consider and account for refugees’ varying identities and needs and offer sufficient flexibility in terms of the type of services offered. In addition to financial burdens, another major obstacle refugees often face is navigating a maze of legal intricacies. To address legal barriers to higher education access, especially as they relate to documentation for overseas refugees seeking to study at a U.S. university, one option that Thomas, the refugee scholar, shared is to utilize distance learning options. These programs have lower admissions thresholds and simply require computer and internet access, without the need for a visa. CTE is another option that is underutilized. Adjusting resettlement processes and providing refugees more information about CTE options can generate other pathways to greater income-generating opportunities. At the same time, stakeholders should also actively work to reimagine the education system to facilitate greater access to opportunities for refugee students. Given fluctuations and changes in refugee policy across presidential administrations, it is important for actors to engage in sustained advocacy and to consider what long-term changes are needed to create more equitable opportunities for refugees to access and be included in the U.S. education system. This builds on what was discussed in section I of this book. For example, to address systemic barriers to accessing higher education, Rebecca stated that “displaced students and refugee students as a whole haven’t been too much on the radar of higher education institutions,” including admissions departments. Similarly, Thomas noted that “you’ve got to sort of keep [refugee education] issues in front of folk’s minds, make sure that you’ve got people thinking about, talking about why issues of refugee higher education access is an important area.” By sharing data and generating greater awareness of refugee access barriers across higher education personnel and institutions, refugees can gain greater support. Empowering refugees to use their voice and advocate for their needs and raise awareness about the obstacles they face can also generate engagement and action. In addition, looking to successful international programs, such as the Canadian models, including

Conclusion

183

World University Service of Canada (WUSC), can provide guidance on pathways to adapt the current systems, policies, and programming. In general, improving access requires actors to not only resolve barriers, but also to improve the education system and increase the offerings available to students from refugee backgrounds. For example, Jennifer, an expert at a think tank on education for migrants, shared that the DMV area does not “have as many dual language and bilingual education programs in the K-12 system as many other metropolises do.” The DMV area has a large volunteer work force in the area, political capital, and school resources and funding. As such, Jennifer argued addressing this systemic issue is important in order to close the gap in refugee service provision. She noted that this may require an assessment of state and county-level capacity and persistent challenges, such as transportation. Abdul and Mohammad, both refugees, and Cara, a leader at a non-profit focused on changing community perceptions of refugees, all reiterated the importance of addressing transportation and housing challenges. Responding to cascading barriers and ensuring that the supply of services for refugees, such as dual language and bilingual education programs, meets the demand, can increase refugees’ education access. However, it is important that these programs are of a good quality and engage students in an effective and inclusive manner which affirms their varying identities. Recommendations: • • • • •

Pursue innovative financial models at the higher education level. Encourage enrollment in distance learning opportunities. Offer a variety of mentorship programs within schools and communities. Adapt resettlement processes to encourage CTE enrollment. Improve coordination and information sharing across resettlement agencies. • Build capacity across services. • Engage in sustained advocacy for policy change. • Review and learn from other refugee education models globally. Inclusion As Elizabeth, a refugee, noted in her interview, “when refugees come [to the U.S.], sometimes their priority is not to get education, to be educated. It is to survive, adjust to the new life. . . . We miss our family, we are homesick, even though our home places are not safe. . . . We’re dealing with a lot of things, so sometimes our priorities is not to be successful, to be educated it is to survive.” As we demonstrated throughout our book, inclusive education for refugees requires educators to consider refugees’ identities and experiences, as well as understand the competing demands and realities refugees face upon

184

Conclusion

resettlement. Refugees’ experiences are not a monolith; as such, it is critical that programs and policies geared towards increasing inclusion acknowledge this and are adaptable to varying identities and experiences. Involving the community can help generate creative solutions to address outside factors which can impede or affect refugee educational inclusion efforts. For example, Every Campus A Refuge is an initiative on several U.S. college campuses which provides housing to recently arrived refugee families. This display of welcome can go a long way in promoting inclusion by building community ties and demonstrating their support early on in the resettlement process. Looking forward, exploring similar community-based initiatives which partner with educational institutions can improve refugee well-being and provide additional forms of support. As Barbara, an expert working for an immigration service organization in Maryland, shared, other options include offering low-cost language and skills courses virtually, at refugees’ job locations, and in local refugee communities. It is also important to reconsider the way in which educational programs are designed. For example, Samira mentioned that educational programs should be inclusive of non-Americans and immigrants. Creating safe spaces for refugees to embrace their identities can help them feel included without forcing them to hide their home culture. They can also empower refugees to make their voices heard. As Hillary, a practitioner who supports a non-profit that helps refugees, shared, it is important to “strengthen the public education systems around newcomers,” as many refugees are enrolled in the public education system and “spend the most time at school.” Rethinking how our education systems and supports operate and include diverse learners can improve refugees’ sense of belonging and overall inclusion within their host country. As Jennifer, a non-profit practitioner supporting refugees, explained, it is important for educators and non-profits to “have the language knowledge, knowledge of what their specific trauma could look like,” as well as information about health and social services, to build strong partnerships with schools and improve upon service offerings. Coupled with refugee input, well-informed actors can more accurately and effectively design programming, as well as advocate for more long-term changes to the education system to increase access and inclusion. Another way to improve inclusion is by shifting school administrators and teachers’ mindsets surrounding how to teach and support students from a refugee background. For example, Jennifer shared that one of the “first things we need to do . . . is [to] look at front office staff and the way that they are welcoming, and what their knowledge level [of refugees and their situations] is.” Educating school staff can foster a welcoming environment for refugees from the start of their experience within the U.S. school system. Similarly, Elizabeth advocated for greater “cultural awareness training or sensitivity

Conclusion

185

training for teachers,” as well as school leadership. Senait, a refugee who accessed secondary and higher education in the DMV, also noted how better training can provide more appropriate support to students with lower English language skills. Another refugee, Felipe, suggested that fostering dialogue between refugees and teachers can also improve the flexibility of teaching practices and classroom support for refugees. Offering teacher training can help schools and teachers to shift away from deficit thinking and from an integration-oriented approach to an inclusion-oriented and asset-based mindset. By drawing on refugee students’ wealth of knowledge and fostering safe spaces for them to show up fully without hiding their identity, educators and school staff can help improve refugees’ overall well-being and sense of belonging within schools. At the same time, building a more inclusive educational environment goes further than just school staff. Ali, a refugee who attended higher education in the DMV, shared his thoughts about host countries’ and teachers’ attitudes towards students from a refugee background. He explained, “I think people need to stop telling [refugees] they are disadvantaged. That’s a bad word. I hate that word. Stop telling people they are from a disadvantaged background.” Ali continued, sharing that he had “become depressed and very disheartened and not motivated when [he was] put in this box of ‘How can we help the disadvantaged?’” Ali advocated for educators to focus less on the negatives so often associated with the refugee experience and to be less pessimistic. Instead, Ali recommended for actors to change the social culture surrounding refugees and stop labeling refugees a certain way. This fits with Jennifer’s suggestion to “[help] teachers understand the cultural backgrounds of their kids.” Our findings take this a step further by advocating for the use of asset-based approaches to refugee education and corroborates the potential benefits of learning from and utilizing refugees’ experiences and knowledge to strengthen inclusion efforts. Elizabeth reiterated Ali and Jennifer’s point, arguing that policymakers “need to believe [refugees’] stories, [their] stories of suffering, [their] stories of resilience, [and to acknowledge] that [refugee] stories are not there for entertainment.” Sarah, a non-profit practitioner in Virginia who works with resettled refugee students and local schools, also discussed this topic and noted the importance of bridging the empathy gap between teachers and refugees through trauma-informed training, among other approaches. Strengthening actors’ knowledge of refugees, shifting attitudes away from deficit-oriented thinking, and creating welcoming environments are a few approaches which can strengthen support for refugees and create a more inclusive education environment. Educational inclusion also extends beyond the classroom. For example, Hilary explained that she “think[s] that having some form of mentorship is really helpful to help [refugees] to navigate and understand the various

186

Conclusion

pieces and/or helping to create a sense of community for refugees.” Building positive relationships between refugees and either peers or trusted adults can help to foster an inclusive environment for refugees, not only inside but also outside of schools. Ali, a refugee who obtained a higher education degree in the DMV area, shared how important meeting with mentors, professors, and prospective employers was during college. He noted that having conversations helped to boost his confidence. Ali advocated for refugees to “tak[e] advantage of [opportunities]” such as ESL, mentorship, and relationships with teachers and professors. Usman, another refugee we interviewed, also shared that teachers can serve as mentors, create safe spaces for refugees, and provide support throughout their educational journeys. Other refugees we interviewed spoke about the importance of guidance counselors in terms of sharing information and helping them access higher education. Mentorship opportunities can provide refugees with supportive relationships where they can receive important information, interact with others with similar identities and/or experiences, and receive additional support and guidance during their educational journey. In general, several interviewees advocated for greater support services. Elizabeth reflected that providing “programs for the refugee student population on campus in secondary school to just console [refugees], help [them] adjust” would have helped her and her siblings to adapt to their new school. Sarah also spoke about refugee students’ mental health. She advocated for refugees to make use of school districts’ mental health resources, such as student assistance programs. However, she also noted that schools and refugee-focused non-profits need to do a better job of publicizing resources, both within and outside of schools. Offering mentors, counselors, and a stronger support system for refugees can foster greater inclusion and result in better educational outcomes by attending to refugees’ mental health. Recommendations: • • • • • • • •

Understand that refugee experiences are not a monolith. Use an inclusive, rather than deficit-oriented, perspective. Train actors on refugees’ experiences and realities. Engage in community-based solutions. Strengthen in-school support for diverse learners. Provide mental health resources to refugee students and families. Improve information sharing of services for refugees. Build partnerships between schools and other stakeholders involved in resettlement. • Take advantage of different available opportunities.

Conclusion

187

Application To build capacity and strengthen information sharing, it is important to ask refugees what they wished they had known about and what resources would have been most useful for them to know about early in their resettlement process. For example, Samira, a refugee who accessed higher education, mentioned that she “wish [she] knew that scholarships existed for [her] as someone coming from a war torn country as a woman.” Given the financial barriers refugees face in access during education, discovering financial support options earlier could have eased her challenges during the application process. Continuing to bolster resources and increasing refugee’s awareness of such opportunities can go a long way in improving refugee’s access to education. It can also increase opportunities for students from less privileged backgrounds, such as refugees, to access higher education through improved information sharing. Tangible and information resources were also mentioned by interviewees. Mina, a refugee we interviewed, noted that providing refugees with computers during their summer breaks is one specific resource that can improve educational continuity during their studies. Elizabeth noted that sharing about “alternative avenues to get education,” such as vocational and trade schools, can support refugees in making informed decisions about their educational pathways and pursuing options that are financially viable and suit the refugee’s needs. Jawad, another refugee we interviewed, repeated Elizabeth’s sentiment. He shared that “A community college might be a better option, [whereas] for some other people, postponing their education might be a better option.” When actors understand and share with refugees about the different educational opportunities after secondary education, as well as GED offerings, they can facilitate greater educational access and support job preparation and community inclusion. Addressing communication barriers can also improve information sharing. For example, Cara, a non-profit practitioner working in the refugee space, noted local challenges she faced in communicating with families due to time pressures, language barriers, and the demands of resettlement. Jennifer reiterated the prevalence of communication challenges more broadly and recommended that educators and agencies engage in greater discussion regarding this barrier. Jennifer shared the example of the non-profit One America based in Seattle, Washington, which holds “a monthly meeting where the refugee people, the school people, the health people, everybody who is interested in immigrants or refugees . . . comes together . . . to talk about what’s going on.” Efforts to improve coordination and cross-sector collaboration can go a long way to ensuring sufficient coverage of services and building synergies

188

Conclusion

and stakeholder capacity through sharing of information, initiatives, and good practices. Recommendations: • • • • •

Improve availability and breadth of resources available to refugees. Strengthen information dissemination to refugees. Share information about alternative education pathways such as CTE. Establish strong communication between actors. Engage in coordination and cross-stakeholder collaboration. LIMITATIONS AND NEXT STEPS IN THE RESEARCH

As outlined in our book, systemic barriers, including financial limitations, can greatly restrict refugees’ access to education. While most of our discussion of financial challenges centered around higher education access, one of the refugees we interviewed, Mina, noted that pre-K is too expensive to afford. This is one area that requires additional research and attention in future studies. We also received limited information about career, technical, and vocational education and training opportunities during our interviews. As such, this is another area which merits greater research in future studies. Given that our research focused on refugees in the DMV area, our exclusion criteria limited our interactions with other categories of migrants such as Afghan parolees, undocumented migrants, and migrants with temporary protected status, among others. Like refugees, these populations also face various challenges and barriers when accessing education. Though they were not included in this study, at-risk migrant voices should also be highlighted in further academic work. In future research, we may consider broadening our study criteria to include all at-risk migrants and analyze the impact of their legal status on access to and inclusion in the U.S. education system. To make our research more accessible to the public, we hope to build out a list of best practices from our interviews and these chapters to help list out actionable steps for ways to improve refugees’ access to and inclusion in the U.S. education system. We will also continue to add new resources to the George Washington University Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), as well as increase and diversify our membership to generate and share ideas to improve refugee educational access and inclusion. Finally, we will also establish spaces for virtual and in-person convening between refugees and experts for ongoing and mutual learning opportunities which center refugee voices, as well as explore new research projects within the scholarly community which can affect practices on the ground.

Conclusion

189

CALL TO ACTION Overall, our findings presented a mix of persistent barriers and promising opportunities to strengthen refugees’ access to and inclusion into the U.S. education system. By examining our local area, we come away from our project with a better understanding of what services exist and some of the many educational access and inclusion experiences refugees may have in the DMV area. Moving forward, we can use our findings to pursue action and advocate for change. As such, we hope that each set of stakeholders involved in refugee education can take with them recommendations and new knowledge after reading this book. We call on other scholars to listen to and partner with refugees to investigate and determine areas for action. We encourage scholars to zoom in on their local context to examine what their own community and institution can do to support refugees. We urge policymakers to reassess the historical refugee admissions trends and consider what role they can play in removing or reducing admissions barriers. Similarly, we call on policymakers to reimagine traditional systems and structures and implement more equitable, accessible, and inclusive policies. We advocate for non-profit and resettlement practices to regularly engage with refugees to collaborate with other organizations and improve their processes, as well as pursue innovation in service provision. We also encourage school leadership, staff, and teachers to reexamine school policies through the lens of inclusion and consider the varying and unique identities and needs of each refugee student. Finally, we call on refugees to continue to make their voices heard in all spaces which may affect their educational trajectory. NOTES 1. U.S. Department of State, n.d., “Frequently Asked Questions,” Accessed February 26, 2023, https:​//​welcomecorps​.org​/resources​/faqs​/.

Afterword‌‌ Lisa Unangst, SUNY Empire State University

The work presented in this book points to gaps in key definitions, data, policy, and practice in the DMV as has been elucidated at the national level in a nascent literature (e.g., Luu and Blanco, 2019; Unangst et al., 2022).1 This work is vital: the international scholarship has pointed to clearly distinct educational ecosystems serving displaced learners in metro settings, rural settings, and more and less supportive policy contexts (e.g., Brown, 2022; Dagar, 2022).2 In short, location matters as we consider educational access and success among displaced learners holding a range of intersectional identities. As a grounding point, the editors in their introduction identify that no data is made available about the number of refugees in the District of Columbia since DC cannot formally resettle; this relates to gaps in data that are profound and pervade state contexts. We must continue to emphasize that there is no comprehensive data set on how many prospective or enrolled displaced learners are engaged with U.S. higher education. However, given that the U.S. refugee resettlement program prioritizes families with young children and that between FY 2010 and 2020 64 percent of all refugees were under age 14, there is a significant grouping of future tertiary-level learners.3 So how, then, do the authors construct this regionally focused case study? They interviewed 19 people in total, including 11 refugees, two scholars, and six practitioners. The promise of this approach must be underscored. Triangulation data is of course cited by Yin as an essential component of the case study.4 In addition, given the paucity of scholarship in this area, considering the perspectives of displaced learners, researchers, and practitioners as well as policy makers is essential to grasp key elements of processes of change that are times parallel, at times intersecting. Further, it is data drawn from all of these sources together that will produce the most effective advocacy, culling attention and support from career policymakers and elected

191

192

Afterword

officials alike. Finally, it allows for the comprehensive identification of bright spots, or emerging best practice that might be replicated/adapted elsewhere. Let me offer an example of how drawing from these various stakeholders is useful. Jennifer, an expert at a think tank on education, shared that the DMV does not have as many bilingual education programs as other cities; this relates not only to higher education pathways but also represents another way that higher education institutions (HEIs) can engage with refugees (through teacher training/bilingual program collaboration). Additionally, there are several mentions of mentorship programs. These may take place within HEIs, through state offices (e.g., Maryland Office for Refugees and Asylees’ Refugee Youth Mentoring Project), and through various nonprofits. A lingering question in the literature relates to the training and ongoing professional development of those mentors: paid and unpaid, short-term and long-term. Who are these folks preparing FAFSA forms for displaced learners, advising them on degree options, and supporting the writing of college application essays? The editors write that they hope to encourage policy actors to “move from writing about and making policy for refugees to co-creating new policy with refugees.” As I and others have written in considering various national contexts, indeed participatory policy creation is imperative. Dal Zotto and Fusari have asserted in discussion of the Italian case, “the university enters the co-design process in a dual role.5 First, it is the institutional actor of the academic community. Second, at the national and international levels, it plays a decisive role in designing reception and inclusion policies.”6 How HEIs, state and federal policy entities, and nonprofit actors will engage in this area remains to be seen. Finally, this text gestures towards policy liminality experienced by refugees, understood as one of many displaced groups. Others recognized by the Office of Refugee Resettlement include: • • • • • • • •

Asylees or Individuals Paroled as Asylees Cuban and Haitian Entrants Certain Amerasians Unaccompanied Refugee Minors Victims of Human Trafficking Iraqi and Afghan Special Immigrant Visa Holders Afghan SI/SQ or Humanitarian Parolees Ukrainian Humanitarian Parolees7

When I say that displaced learners pursuing U.S. higher education experience policy liminality, I mean that they are positioned between discourses rather than being centered within a cohesive suite of federal, state, and

Afterword

193

institutional-level policy initiatives. There is some evidence that HEI and nonprofit staff “service” may buffer the effect of policy liminality for some learners at some HEIs. This text’s consideration of lived experience(s) of policy liminality among learners is crucial: it will serve as an important reference point for the field moving forward—a field that itself is positioned at the intersections of refugee studies, higher education, and public policy. Congratulations to the authors and editors on their important work. NOTES 1. Luu, D. H., & Blanco, G. L. (2019). Exploring US federal policy discourse on refugee access to postsecondary education. Higher Education Policy, 34, 456–473. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1057​/s41307​-019​-00144​-2; Unangst, L., Casellas Connors, I., & Barone, N. (2022). State based policy supports for refugee, asylee, and TPS-background students in U.S. higher education. Refuge: Canada’s Journal of Refugees, 38(1), 95–110. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.25071​/1920​-7336​.40819. 2. Brown, J. L. (2022). Educating in the context of ‘dispersal’: Rural schools and refugee-background students. International Journal of Inclusive Education, online first edition. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/13603116​.2022​.2041112; Dagar, P.  (2022).  Evaluating and reframing vocational education and training for refugees: insights from five refugee groups across three cities of India. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education,  online first edition. https:​//​doi​.org​/10​.1080​/03057925​ .2022​.2078957. 3. Monin, K., Batalova, J., & Lai, T. (2021, May 13). Refugees and asylees in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. https:​//​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/ refugees​-and​-asylees​-united​-states​-2021. 4. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications Design and Methods (6th edition). Sage Publications. 5. Dal Zotto, E., & Fusari, V. (2021). How can universities commit to designing and implementing inclusive practices for forced migrants. In L. Van Praag (Ed.), Co-creation in migration studies: The use of co-creative methods to study migrant integration across European societies (pp. 221–246). Leuven University Press. 6. Ibid., 233. 7. Office of Refugee Resettlement. (2023). Fact Sheets: Eligibility & Benefits. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. https:​//​www​.acf​.hhs​.gov​/orr​/programs​ /refugees​/factsheets.

Index

1951 Refugee Convention, 1, 2 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2 academic capital, 140 access, 181–83 achievement gaps, 120, 121 acquisition of capital, 140 ACT, 85, 158, 159, 161 additive education experiences, 131–47; extracurricular activities, 144–45; mentorship, 137–44; recommendations for, 147; scholarships, 132–37; study-abroad opportunities, 145–47 adjustment to formal schooling, 120 Afghanistan, 173; humanitarian crisis, 5; U.S. invasion of, 2, 17, 21 Africa, 22 after-school mentorship programs, 142–43 analytical framework, 3–4 application, 187–88 Asia, 22 asset-based approach, 111–26; background on language education, 114–16; higher education research, 122–25; K-12 language education,

116–22; recommendations for, 126; theoretical framework, 112–13 Asylees’ Refugee Youth Mentoring Project, 192 Asylum Works’ Path Forward program, 61 awareness, 2 Biden, J. (2021–present), 20–21, 22–23, 53; career and technical education, 58 Birman, D., 94 Boise State University: Boise State Refugee Collaboration Team, 54–55 bullying, 137–40 Bush, G. H. W. (1989–1993), 15–16, 22 Bush, W. (2001–2009), 17–18, 22 call to action, 189 capacity building, 153–63; definition of, 5, 153; enrollment, 154–60; recommendations for, 160–62 capital: academic, 140; acquisition of, 140; cultural, 140, 141; emotional, 140; linguistic, 113, 140 capitalism, 171 career and technical education (CTE), 50, 182; career pathway in the U.S., autonomy of, 58–60; connection

195

196

Index

to critical theories, 51; in DMV, 60–66; language acquisition, 62; opportunities for financial obligations, sacrificing, 62–63; preventability analysis, 64–65; recommendations for, 65–66 Carter, J. (1977–1981), 14, 21 CASA, Inc., 174 Cho, S., 4 classroom discipline, 94–95 Clifford, V., 36 Clinton, W. J. (1993–2001), 16–17, 22 colonialism, 3, 21, 63, 64, 66, 168, 170, 171 Columbia University, 56; career and technical education, 65, 66; Columbia University’s Scholarship for Displaced Students (CUSDS), 53–54 communicative competence, 112 community building, and mentorship, 143–44 community information sharing, 169 complementary pathways: definition of, 52 co-teaching strategy, 117 Crea, T. M., 78 Crenshaw, K., 4, 78 Critical Race Theory (CRT), 4 CRT. See Critical Race Theory (CRT) CTE. See career and technical education (CTE) Cuba, 16–17, 22; Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, 16; Cuban Balsero Crisis (1994), 16 cultural capital, 140, 141 cultural competence, 81 cultural orientation, quality of, 170 Cureton, A. E., 80, 96, 97 decolonialism, 3 deficit-oriented approach, 111 De Wit, H., 51 disabled persons organizations (DPOs), 103

discrimination, 77, 78, 83, 93, 104, 137–40, 147; religious-based, 82 District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS): ELL language programs, 84; health and wellbeing, 89; Secondary Newcomer Literacy Program, 84 DMV (District of Columbia (DC), Maryland, and Virginia), 1–3, 5–8; additive education experiences, 131– 47; capacity building, 153–63; career and technical education, 50, 60–66; higher education initiatives, 55–58; inclusive education for refugee students, 75–104; refugee policy, 13; refugees’ access to education, legal and systemic barriers to, 29–45 DPOs. See disabled persons organizations (DPOs) Duolingo English test, 158, 161 Eastern Europe, 22 ECAR. See Every Campus A Refuge (ECAR) ECDC. See Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC) education, 5–6, 29–45; higher, 51–58; refugees’ access to, 29–45 EducationUSA, 173 educators: recommendations for, 101–2 EFL. See English as a Foreign Language (EFL) ELL. See English Language Learners (ELLs) El Salvador: Marxist movements, 15 emotional capital, 140 employment: information sharing, 171–74 English as a Foreign Language (EFL), 84, 114 English as a Second Language (ESL), 56, 87, 114, 161, 174; programs, 36 English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL), 111–14, 174; higher

Index

education institution, 122–23, 125; standards and teachers, 116–17 English for Refugees and Asylees Program, 61 English Language Learners (ELLs), 84, 85, 114–22 English language program considerations, 84–86 enrollment: higher education, 158–60; information sharing during, 166–70; K-12 education, 154–57 Ergin, H., 51, 52 ESL. See English as a Second Language (ESL) ESOL. See English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL) Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC), 61 Europe, 22 Every Campus A Refuge (ECAR), 53, 184 extracurricular activities, 144–45 FAFSA. See Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) Fairfax County schools, 36 family and community engagement, 95–101 federal scholarships, 135 fellowships, 136 feminist theory, 4 FFN (family, friends, and neighbors), 114 financial barriers, 41, 54, 131, 133, 162, 181, 187 financial support, 136–37 financing higher education, 40–41 Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), 41, 135–136, 192 Frydland, N., 115 funds of knowledge, 111–13, 115, 122, 125, 126 GED programs, 38, 157, 158, 187

197

George Mason University (GMU): enrollment, 160; First-Gen+ Center, 160, 162, 172 George Washington University (GWU): financing higher education, 40; No Lost Generation, 55–56; Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), 1, 2, 6, 7, 188; Welcoming Campus Initiative, 56; “Welcoming Campus Initiative Act,” 56 George Washington University Law School: juris doctorate (JD) program, 40 Global South, 22 GMU. See George Mason University (GMU) governments, recommendations for, 102–3 grade placement, 37–38 Guatemala: Marxist movements, 15 guidance counseling, 134 Guilford College: career and technical education, 65 GWU. See George Washington University (GWU) Harvey, A., 113 health and wellbeing, 88–91 HEIs. See higher education institutions (HEIs) higher education, 122–25; enrollment, 158–62; information sharing, 171–74; initiatives within DMV and suggested actions, 55–58; language requirements, 124–25; national and international programs, 51–52; university sponsorship, 52–55 higher education institutions (HEIs), 192, 193; enrollment, 158, 159; initiatives, 53–55 hooks, b., 3, 4 human empathy, 2

198

Index

IELTS. See International English Language Testing System (IELTS) inclusion, 183–86; integration vs., 77–78 inclusive education, for refugee students, 75–104; analysis of, 79–101; background of, 76–78; characteristics of, 77; definition of, 76; English language program considerations, 84–86; identities and cultural differences, respect for, 79–101; limitations of, 104; recommendations for, 101–3, 186; school Staff, 80–81; teachers, 81–84; theoretical framework, 78–79; Universal Design for Learning, 86–101 INEE. See Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) information sharing, 133–35, 165–75, 187; access, 170–71; challenges to, 170–71; community, 169; employment, 171–74; during enrollment, 166–70; higher education, 171–74; recommendations for, 175 institutional scholarships, 135 Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education, 60 integration vs. inclusion, 77–78 Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), 76–77 intercultural competence, 112, 139 International English Language Testing System (IELTS), 37, 38 International Rescue Committee, 56 intersectionality, 4, 57; theory of, 4, 78 invisible backpack, 64 Iraq: U.S. invasion of, 17 K-12 education, 183; enrollment, 154– 57; language. See K-12 language education K-12 language education: classroom challenges, 120–22; ESOL standards

and teachers, 116–17; FFN (family, friends, and neighbors), role of, 114; higher education research, 122–23; recommendations for, 126; teaching beyond training, 118–20 language: acquisition, 62; barriers, 36–37, 111–26; education. See language education; requirements, 124–25; See also individual entries language education: background on, 114–16; K-12, 116–22 Latin America, 22 Lazarín, M., 114 Leask, B., 51 Legg, S., 3 LINCS. See Literacy Information and Communication System (LINCS) linguistic capital, 113, 140 LIRS. See Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS) Literacy Information and Communication System (LINCS), 59–60 loneliness, 93 LSS. See Lutheran Social Services (LSS) Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS), 55, 61 Lutheran Social Services (LSS), 172 Mallman, M., 113 MALP. See Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm (MALP) Maryland Office for Refugees, 192 McCall, L., 4 mentorship, 65, 66, 131, 132, 134, 137– 45, 147, 161, 173, 175, 182, 183, 185, 186, 192; and acquisition of capital, 140; after-school mentorship programs, 142–43; bullying, 137–40; community building and, 143–44; discrimination, 137–40; non-parental, 140–41; peer mentoring, 141–42 Migration Policy Institute (MPI), 15

Index

Miller, S., 20 mobility for enlightenment, 145, 146 mobility for survival, 145 Montgomery College: ESOL classes, 59 MPI. See Migration Policy Institute (MPI) Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm (MALP), 115 Nackerud, L., 16 National Career Clusters, 58 non-parental mentorship, 140–41 Northern Virginia Community College, 174 Northern Virginia Regional Adult Education: Serving Refugees Professional Learning Community, 59 North Korean Human Rights Act, 17 Obama, B. (2009–2017), 18–19, 22 ODP. See Orderly Departure Program (ODP) OECD. See Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), 14, 161, 192 Old Dominion University, 53 Operation Iraqi Freedom, 18 Orderly Departure Program (ODP), 17–18 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): on refugees’ access to education, 31 ORR. See Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) PAHEI. See Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (PAHEI) Park, M., 114 Parklawn Elementary School, Fairfax County, Virginia: exemplary programs, 41–42

199

Paxton, G., 36 peer interactions, 92–94 peer mentoring, 141–42 plurilingualism, 112–13, 121 policymakers, recommendations for, 102–3 Pompeo, M., 20 Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (PAHEI), 181; information sharing, 173; Project Associate for the Initiative on U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students, 52; RESPONSE Campaign, 52–53, 56 Prince George’s Community College, Prince George’s County, Maryland, 59; exemplary programs, 42 Project Associate for the Initiative on U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students (Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration), 52 push-in/pull-out strategy, 117 Reach Higher program, 61 Reagan, R. (1981–1989), 15, 22 “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications: Practical Tips for Credential Assessment” (World Education Services), 158–59 refugee(s): access to education. See refugees’ access to education; definition of, 1–2; intersectional identities, 4; policy of the U.S. See refugee policy of the U.S.; voices, centering, 179–80 refugee policy of the U.S., 13–23; analysis of, 22–23; Biden, J (2021–present), 20–21; Bush, G. H. W. (1989–1993), 15–16; Bush, W. (2001–2009), 17–18; Carter, J. (1977–1981), 14; Clinton, W. J. (1993–2001), 16–17; connection to critical theories, 21–22; Obama, B. (2009–2017), 18–19; Reagan, R.

200

Index

(1981–1989), 15; recommendations for, 22–23; Trump, D. (2017–2021), 19–20 refugees’ access to education, 29–45; analytical framework, 30; documentation requirements, 32–34; exemplary programs, 41–42; financing higher education, 40–41; grade placement, 37–38; immigration documentation and restrictions, 34; importance of, 31–32; language barriers, 36–37; legal barriers, 32; recommendations for, 42–44; socioeconomic conditions, 35–36; standardized testing, 38–40; systemic barriers, 34–42; university admissions, 38–40 Refugee School Impact Grant, 161 Refugee Youth Mentorship Grant, 161 research methodology, 2–3 resettlement, 2, 5, 6, 17–23, 32–35, 41–45; agencies, information sharing across, 165–75; complement, 52; process, 4, 6–7, 14, 31, 37; recommendations for, 102–3; refugee, 7, 14, 17, 18, 22, 23, 35, 41, 53, 55, 66, 102, 154–56, 161, 163, 166, 173, 175, 181, 191 RESPONSE Campaign, 52–53, 55 Rhodes, A., 36 safe and caring environments, 91 SAP. See Student Assistance Program (SAP) SAT, 39, 85, 158, 159, 161 scholarships, 132–37; fellowships, 136; financial support, 136–37; information sharing, 133–35; sources of, 135–36 schools, recommendations for, 101–2 school staff, 80–81 SDGs. See Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Secondary Newcomer Literacy Program, 84

SHC. See Solutions in Hometown Connections (SHC) SIFE. See students with interrupted formal education (SIFE) social isolation, 120, 122, 123 Solutions in Hometown Connections (SHC), 172 standardized testing, 38–40 Student Assistance Program (SAP), 90 Student Conduct Code, 93 students with interrupted formal education (SIFE), 84 study-abroad opportunities, 145–47 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 30; SDG4, 5 Syria, 29 TANF. See Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) teachers: inclusive education, 81–84 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), 61 Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), 37, 38, 158, 161 TOEFL. See Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) Tran, N., 94 transportation, 35, 53, 60, 61, 64, 84, 97, 98, 160, 166–68, 170–71, 175, 183 Trump, D. (2017–2021), 19–22; “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), 19 UDL. See Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Ukraine, 173 Ukraine–Russia war, 2, 21 UMD. See University of Maryland (UMD) UN. See United Nations (UN) Unangst, L., 78 UNHCR. See United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

Index

United Nations (UN): 1951 Refugee Convention, 1, 2; 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2; capacity building, definition of, 153; Leaders Summit on Refugees, 19; Sustainable Development Goals, 5, 30 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 2, 21, 49, 159, 160 United Nations Refugee Agency, 56 United States (U.S.), 1; Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, 59; Congress, 13; Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy (DACA), 20; Department of Education (DoE), 59, 63, 170; Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 17; Department of State, 13, 17, 161, 171, 173, 181; Global War on Terror, 17; Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), 17; Immigration and Nationality Act, 14; International Refugee Assistance Project, 52; International Rescue Committee, 15; Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, 14; National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), 59; Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), 14, 161, 192; Office of the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs, 14; Operation Iraqi Freedom, 18; Orderly Departure Program (ODP), 17–18; Refugee Act of 1979, 14; refugee policy, four decades of, 13–23; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), 17 United States Agency for International Development (USAID), 76 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): Article 26, 133 Universal Design for Learning (UDL), 86–101; classroom discipline, 94–95; family and community engagement, 95–101; health and wellbeing,

201

88–91; peer interactions, 92–94; safe and caring environments, 91 university admissions, 38–40 University of Maryland (UMD), 174; admissions, 39; MLaw Migrant Assistance Program (MMAP), 172 University of Virginia: admissions, 39; financing higher education, 40 university sponsorship, 52–55 U.S. See United States (U.S.) USAID. See United States Agency for International Development (USAID) USRAP. See U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), 59, 62–63, 165 VDSS. See Virginia Department of Social Services (VDSS) Veck, W., 88 Venezuela, 29 Vietnam War, 14, 18 VIEW. See Virginia Initiative for Education and Work (VIEW) Virginia Department of Social Services (VDSS), 61 Virginia Initiative for Education and Work (VIEW), 61 Warner, M., 55 Welcome Corps, 181 WES. See World Education Services (WES) Wharton, J., 88 WIDA. See World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium, 116–18 World Education Services (WES), 162; “Recognizing Refugee Qualifications: Practical Tips for Credential Assessment,” 158–59

202

World University Service of Canada (WUSC), 183

Index

WUSC. See World University Service of Canada (WUSC)

‌‌About the Authors

THE LAB This book is a collaborative effort from the members of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL) at the George Washington University in Washington, DC. The lab is a student-faculty collaboration that is focused on researching and analyzing educational access for refugees and at-risk migrants. The lab is composed of a faculty advisor, undergraduate, and graduate students studying education, international affairs, and politics, among other areas. The lab was founded to facilitate the involvement of undergraduate and graduate students and other scholar-practitioners at the university to collectively learn, research together, co-publish, and gain the skills to help support refugees and at-risk migrants in their educational aspirations, wherever they may be. The lab aims to shed light on a range of issues related to refugees in education through its research and advocacy projects. The lab’s projects are locally, nationally, and globally focused on migration crises happening throughout the world. The lab focuses on research at all levels of education, from primary and secondary education, to higher education and lifelong learning. Through research projects, ongoing review of current scholarship, and the analysis of data collected from original research, lab members seek to “serve as change agents and [be] a touchpoint for stakeholders, research and advocacy organizations, policymakers, and other interested parties.”1 THE EDITORS Bernhard Streitwieser (PhD, Columbia University) is Associate Professor of International Education & International Affairs at George Washington University (GWU) in Washington, DC. He is also the founding Director of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), and co-chair of the UNESCO Chair in International Education for Development at GWU. His 203

204

About the Authors

research looks at access and integration of refugees and migrants into higher education; internationalization of higher education and global competition; and student exchange and study abroad. In 2016 he established the Berlin Refugee Research Group, and in 2017 he joined the steering committee of the U.S. University Alliance for Refugees and at-Risk Migrants. Dr. Streitwieser has written over 70 articles and book chapters and five edited books. His most recent book is Higher Education in the Era of Migration, Displacement and Internationalization (Routledge).‌‌ Katharine Summers graduated with her Master’s of Arts in International Development Studies, with a focus on migration and education in Latin America, from the George Washington University Elliott School of International Affairs. Katharine is currently working as an international development practitioner and researcher focused on supporting migrants and refugees in Latin America and the Caribbean. Previously, she worked as an international development consultant for a variety of non-profit and international organization clients. She has substantial experience living and working in Latin America, including spending a year in Honduras. Katharine was one of the founding members of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), where she has served as an editor, researcher, and lab leader. Katharine’s research is focused on education in emergencies for refugee and migrant students, specifically at the K–12 level. She has been published in Revista TRACE, the Journal on Migration and Human Security, and the International Policy Digest. She has also co-authored book chapters that will be published in a handbook produced by Ben-Gurion University and in The Global Forces and Local Responses Shaping Education and Development in Central America and the Latin Caribbean: Challenges to Equality, Inclusion, and Transformation, published by Bristol University Press. Katharine has presented her research at the Comparative and International Education Society Annual Conference in 2019, 2022, and 2023, as well as at the Latin American Studies Association in 2019, and has guest lectured at the George Washington University.‌‌ Jessica Crist graduated with her Master’s of Arts in Education and Human Development, focused on International Education, from the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Jessica received the 2022 Nakyuin Shin International Education Award for her academic and professional contributions to the field. Jessica is currently working as an Education Manager for the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and has previous experience in admissions and recruiting at various higher education institutions in the U.S. and Mexico as well as English teaching experience in Santiago, Chile. As a founding member

About the Authors

205

of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), Jessica serves as an Editor and has taken a leadership role in the development of the lab. Jessica’s research is focused on higher education access for refugee background students. She has been published in University World News, the Journal on Migration and Human Security, the REAL blog, and currently has a publication in the International Affairs Review in press. Jessica has presented her research at the Comparative and International Education Society Annual Conference in 2022 and 2023 as well as the Washington Consortium for Comparative and International Education Student Research Conference Spring 2021 and is awaiting the publication of a chapter in a handbook produced by Ben-Gurion University. THE AUTHORS Olufikayo Abiola Akintola graduated with a MA in education and human development, focusing on international education, from the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development (GSHED). Abiola also received the 2023 Nakyuin Shin International Education Award for his academic and professional contributions to the field. As a founding member of George Washington’s Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), Abiola contributes to the lab’s various research projects. His areas of interest include education in emergencies, migration issues, educational technology, post-colonialism, and diaspora communities. As a Summer 2022 UNESCO Fellow, Abiola assisted George Washington’s program chair with research relating to digital authoritarianism, the use of ICT by migrants and the intersection of both with Global Citizen Education. During his eight years in the US Army National Guard, Abiola supported the NATO peacekeeping mission in Kosovo (KFOR) and a contingency mission during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Upon returning from Iraq, he completed a BA in history at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC).  Alexander Erickson graduated with his Master’s of Arts in International Education and Human Development from George Washington University’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development (GSEHD). On campus, he was the Co-President of the International Education Association and a Student Senator representing GSEHD in the George Washington University Student Association. Currently, he works in the field of international development, serves as the Co-Web Manager for the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), and is a mentor for two doctoral

206

About the Authors

refugee students through the Kaldor Center for International Refugee Law’s Displaced Scholars Mentorship Program, based in Sydney, Australia. He has previous experience teaching international and refugee students as a high school social studies teacher and has regional interest in Eastern Europe and former Soviet States. His research is focused on immigration policy and its effects on refugee education, the internationalization of U.S. schools, and conflict prevention and peacebuilding. Alexander presented research at the Comparative and International Education Society’s Annual Conference in 2023 and at the Refugee and Migrant Education Network’s International Conference in Rome, Italy, in 2022. He is currently awaiting the publication of a book review for the Journal of International Students.‌‌ Isabelle Hoagland is a Master’s student in the International Education program at the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Isabelle has worked to directly support refugees and asylum seekers at both a refugee resettlement center and an immigration law firm, and has experience teaching English as a Second Language virtually to preschool students. She is interested in Education in Emergencies and Early Childhood Education, particularly in Latin America. Isabelle’s research focuses on Early Childhood Education interventions for Venezuelan refugees in Colombia.‌‌ Ciara Hoyne graduated with her masters degree in international education from the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development in 2023. Previously, Ciara has experience studying and teaching English as a foreign language in Latin America. As a founding member of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), Ciara has served as an outreach coordinator and researcher. She is interested in international student exchange, study abroad, and community based education. Ciara’s research focuses on funds of knowledge and asset- based approaches to education for refugees, especially in higher education. Currently, Ciara works as operations coordinator with the Education Abroad office at the University of Maryland, College Park. Olivia Issa serves as Program Lead for the National Association of System Heads’ (NASH) Refugee Resettlement Initiative (RRI), where she works with public university systems to promote scholarships and on-campus sponsorship of refugees and other forced migrants. Olivia has been engaged in migrant-advocacy and resettlement work in the U.S. across Chicago, Maryland, and Washington, DC, since 2015, working with a range of nonprofits and government agencies. Olivia served as co-chair of the Steering Committee for the University Alliance for Refugees and At-Risk Migrants: Student

About the Authors

207

Voices for Refugees (UARRM SVR) in 2020 and 2021. From there, she held the title of Program Infrastructure Co-Chair, where she co-authored the 2021 report, “University Sponsorship of Refugee Students: Initiative on Increasing U.S. Education Pathways for Refugee Students,” also known as the RESPONSE Campaign: a national initiative across resettlement agencies, universities, and nonprofits to build infrastructure to increase refugee access to higher education. As a college student, Olivia served as Executive Director of No Lost Generation GWU 2020–2022, and founded the Welcoming Campus Initiative in the spring of 2021, a program to increase inclusion of refugee-background students on the George Washington University’s campus through a scholarship, mentorship program, and revised admissions practices.‌‌ Ashley J. Mitchell graduated with her Master's of Arts in education policy studies from the George Washington University's Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Previously, Ashley studied at California State University of Fullerton, where she received her elementary teaching credential and her Master's of Science in Curriculum and Instruction. She has followed her passion for working with students in the classroom as a public school teacher for nearly a decade while pursuing her research interests on the side. Her research interests include teacher education, education reform, and English language learner education in K-12 schools. Caroline Rakus-Wojciechowski is a Master of Arts candidate in the International Education program at the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development. She currently serves as the Co-Lab Manager of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), a position she has held since 2022. Caroline is cultivating her work experience in Education in Emergencies and the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning spaces through various research and diplomacy projects. In the future, she hopes to pursue an Ed.D. In addition, she serves as a board member for Empowered Sapiens Mulier International 501(c)3, a nonprofit dedicated to empowering women and girls. Caroline is an avid public speaker and advocates for youth empowerment, climate action, and gender inclusion through education. Her research focuses on refugee inclusion in career and technical education and challenges policies rooted in colonialism. She holds a B.A. in Anthropology from Harvard University, a Writing Persuasive Public Policy credential from the Harris School at the University of Chicago, and a language citation in Spanish from Harvard University. She is an alumna of the Global Policy, Diplomacy, and Sustainability; U.N. Experiential; Emerging Leaders Fellowships, and a Global Goals Ambassadorship.‌‌ Caroline was a 2023 GW UNESCO Fellowship in the UNESCO Santiago regional bureau.

208

About the Authors

Haley Skeens is a Master’s student in the International Education program at the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Haley is a professional in the field of international development and education, and has prior experience teaching internationally in Tarbes, France, and working at several higher education institutions. Her research focuses on global exchange as well as inclusive education for refugee students and the ways in which intersectionality influences the student experiences at all levels of education. As a member of the Refugee Educational Advancement Laboratory (REAL), she serves as the Co-Web Manager and a member of the Grants Committee.‌‌ Savannah Smith graduated with her Master’s of Arts in Education and Human Development, focused on International Education, from the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development. She currently works in research and program evaluation. Her research specifically within the refugee space focuses on the barriers refugee background students face when accessing higher education in the U.S. and historical trends in U.S. refugee policy.‌‌ ‌‌Brittany Troupe is a Bachelor of Science candidate studying Public Health and Economics at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health. As an undergraduate, Brittany led various organizations on campus beyond REAL, serving as an Executive Director of No Lost Generation GWU 2022–2023 and Co-President of the Milken Undergraduate Student Association 2021–2022. Brittany is interested in global health and economic development opportunities for refugees and has published a blog combining these topics on the REAL website. She currently works in monitoring, evaluation, and learning regarding global vaccine acceptance and demand. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FROM THE EDITORS The editors would like to thank Jud-Ann Geneus and Alison Grausam for their assistance in organizing interviews, analyzing interview data, and collaborating on the writing process. We would also like to thank Brittany Troupe for creating the coding tool for the interview data. Thank you to all REAL members past and present for their constant support and encouragement of this book project. 1. Refugee Educational Advancement Lab (REAL), n.d., “About Us,” Accessed September 25, 2022, https:​//​blogs​.gwu​.edu​/gsehd​-real​/about​-us​/.