Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Strength through Diversity:
The Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Education and Training Systems
Santa Cruz de Tenerife
15-16 November 2018
Francesca Borgonovi - OECD
• In the first phase the project aimed to: – identify a new set of indicators to examine how societies have
responded and are responding to the challenges to social cohesion posed by large scale international migration;
– create improved data infrastructure that supports the development of strong evidence;
– identify policy responses that have been pursued by countries and their results;
– collect evidence on the conditions under which such policies achieve or do not achieve their objectives; and
– stimulate a discussion among key stakeholders to support peer learning and strengthen collaboration.
Aims and Objectives
2nd Thematic Policy Forum
Teachers in Diverse Societies21-22 September 2017 Paris, (France)
3rd Thematic Policy Forum
In Collaboration with the GEM (UNESCO) Learning from Data
12-13 February 2018 Paris, France
Collaboration with Department of Education and Early Childhood
Development (New Brunswick) and CMEC (Canada)
Social Emotional Learning to Foster a Sense of
Belonging for Immigrant and Refugee Learners
31 May - 1 June 2018
Fredericton, New Brunswick (Canada)
4th Thematic Policy Forum Meeting
Spotlight Report for Sweden: Key Messages and
Outline
Sweden is experiencing a substantial increase in the share of newcomer students with different needs
Summary & Context
Newcomer students are mostly concentrated in municipal public schoolsSchool choice
• Promote lightly controlled school choice• Provide clear criteria for weighted funding programmes to support schools with high concentrations
of disadvantage
Training new and practicing teachers for diverse classrooms in the context of increasing student numbers and teacher shortages is key
Building teaching capacity
• Provide specific diversity training to new and practicing teachers• Adapt recruitment and teaching programmes for teachers with an immigrant background• Offer support to teachers through comprehensive mentorships and expert teams to respond to
additional needs of newcomer students
Spotlight Report for Sweden: Key Messages and
Outline
Language support for non-native Swedish speakers is an important challenge
Language training
• Promote specialised language courses by developing knowledge-based standards in the curriculum
• Expand mother tongue tuition and tutoring, also through greater use of technology • Offer language camps and access to leisure centres to all levels of students
School communities need to respond to more diverse classrooms and promote inclusive education to all learners
Managing diversity
•Implement a diversity-conscious curriculum•Develop active citizenship education in schools•Reinforce a whole-school approach to foster an inclusive school climate and culture
Migration flows are changing the
composition of classrooms
Trends in the prevalence of students without an immigrant
background
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Ko
rea
-
0.9
9
Po
lan
d
-1.6
3
Jap
an
-
1.7
1
Tu
rke
y
Me
xic
o
Chile
Slo
va
k R
ep
ub
lic
Hun
ga
ry
-
3.7
7
Czech
Rep
ublic
-2
.77
Fin
land
-
6.4
2
Slo
ve
nia
Italy
-9.5
7
Ice
lan
d
-
6.8
9
Sp
ain
-
10.2
8
Neth
erl
an
ds
Latv
ia
8
.92
Gre
ece
-
7.3
1
Esto
nia
Den
ma
rk
-
8
OE
CD
avera
ge
-6.4
4
Norw
ay
-
9.4
3
Po
rtug
al
-8
.92
Fra
nce
Ge
rma
ny
-
7.3
3
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m
-8.7
5
Au
str
ia
-
12
.37
Isra
el
Sw
ed
en
-
9.3
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
-
10
.14
Be
lgiu
m
-
9.4
4
Ire
lan
d
-
15
.91
Can
ad
a
-1
0.8
2
Au
str
alia
New
Zea
land
-
7.1
3
Sw
itze
rlan
d
-1
5.7
7
Luxe
mb
ourg
-
19.7
PISA 2015 PISA 2003%%
On average across OECD countries 77% of students in 2015 did not have an immigrant background. In 2003
this figure was 83%.
Migration phenomena affect urban centres in
particularAverage percentage of students enrolled in urban schools (in communities with more than 100 000 citizens)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Au
stra
lia
3
1
Tu
rke
y
23
Ca
na
da
4
1
Ch
ile
New
Zea
lan
d
2
9
Ja
pa
n
Hu
ng
ary
2
1
Bel
giu
m
37
Net
he
rla
nd
s
36
Au
stri
a
2
7
Isra
el
19
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
19
Fin
lan
d
23
OE
CD
av
era
ge
1
7
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m
30
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
c
22
Lu
xe
mb
ou
rg
3
Sw
ed
en
1
9
Ice
lan
d
16
Fra
nce
17
Ge
rma
ny
2
1
Est
on
ia
17
Slo
ven
ia
16
La
tvia
1
5
Sp
ain
No
rwa
y
2
2
De
nm
ark
23
Ita
ly
Gre
ece
Me
xic
o
Irel
an
d
Sw
itze
rla
nd
9
Native students Immigrant students%
How many students have an immigrant background?
Percentage of students with an immigrant background, by group
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Lu
xe
mbo
urg
Sw
itzerl
and
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Austr
alia
Ca
nad
a
Irela
nd
Belg
ium
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Sw
ede
n
Isra
el
Austr
ia
Un
ite
d K
ing
dom
Germ
any
Fra
nce
Port
ug
al
No
rwa
y
OE
CD
avera
ge
De
nm
ark
Esto
nia
Gre
ece
La
tvia
Ne
therl
and
s
Spain
Icela
nd
Ita
ly
Slo
ven
ia
Fin
land
Czech R
epu
blic
Hu
nga
ry
Slo
vak R
epub
lic
Ch
ile
Me
xic
o
Turk
ey
Japa
n
Pola
nd
Second-generation immigrant students Native students of mixed heritage First-generation immigrant students Returning foreign-born students%
On average across OECD countries: 5% of students were first-generation immigrant students
7% of students were second-generation immigrant students
2% of students were returning foreign-born students9% of students were native students of mixed heritage
Resilience and a whole child perspective
• Academic – reaching PISA level 2 in reading, mathematics and science
• Social – reporting feelings of belonging at school
• Emotional – reporting high satisfaction with life and low school-work related anxiety
• Motivational – reporting high motivation to achieve
Academic and well-being outcomes of immigrant
students (OECD average)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Academic under-performance
Weak sense of belonging at school
Low satisfaction with life
High schoolwork-related anxiety
Poor achievement motivation
Students without an immigrant background Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students Native students of mixed heritage Returning foreign-born students
Percentage of students
Academically sound and socially and emotionally
well-adapted students, by immigrant backgroundPercentage of students who attain baseline academic proficiency, report a sense of belonging at school and being satisfied with life
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Esto
nia
Hu
ng
ary
Ire
lan
d -
8
Ne
the
rla
nd
s -
26
Po
rtu
ga
l -1
5
La
tvia
Sw
itze
rla
nd
-
25
Sp
ain
-
24
Slo
ve
nia
-
16
Un
ite
d S
tate
s -
13
Fin
lan
d -
33
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m -
12
Ge
rma
ny -
23
OE
CD
ave
rag
e -
17
Czech
Re
pu
blic
Lu
xe
mb
ou
rg -
23
Au
str
ia
-
25
Be
lgiu
m -
12
Ita
ly -
14
Fra
nce
-
12
Gre
ece
-
21
Ch
ile -
14
Ice
lan
d -
32
First-generation immigrant students Native students%
Differences in the percentage of academically sound and socially
and emotionally well-adapted students, by immigrant group
Difference between students with an immigrant background and native students in the percentage of students who attain baseline academic proficiency, report a sense of belonging at school and being satisfied with life
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Po
rtu
ga
l
Hu
ng
ary
Tu
rke
y
Ita
ly
Ch
ile
Spain
Gre
ece
La
tvia
Ire
lan
d
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m
Czech
Re
pu
blic
Ice
lan
d
Be
lgiu
m
Fra
nce
OE
CD
avera
ge
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Slo
va
k R
ep
ub
lic
Slo
ve
nia
Au
str
ia
Fin
lan
d
Ne
the
rla
nd
s
Me
xic
o
Esto
nia
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Lu
xe
mb
ou
rg
Ge
rma
ny
Native students of mixed heritage Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant studentsPercentage point difference
d
Difference in attaining baseline academic proficiency, by
age at arrival
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
Can
ada 1
1
New
Zea
lan
d 1
4
Austr
alia
1
1
Ire
lan
d
United K
ingd
om
23
Port
ugal
Czech R
ep
ublic
Chile
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Isra
el
37
Spain
3
0
OE
CD
avera
ge 1
5
Luxem
bo
urg Italy
1
6
Norw
ay 1
8
Sw
itzerland
Belg
ium
2
0
Den
mark
Slo
ve
nia
3
2
Fra
nce 1
9
Germ
any
27
Austr
ia
Sw
ed
en 2
1
First-generation immigrant students Arrived at or after the age of 12 Arrived before the age of 12Percentage-point difference compared to native students
Difference in sense of belonging at school, by age at arrival
Difference between native and first-generation immigrant students in the percentage of students who reported a sense of belonging at school
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Au
str
alia
1
5
Ne
w Z
ea
land
8
Ca
na
da
Ch
ile
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m20
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
Slo
ve
nia
Fra
nce
Ire
lan
d 1
4
Fin
lan
d
Ge
rma
ny 4
5
OE
CD
ave
rag
e 1
2
Ita
ly
No
rwa
y 1
6
Czech
Re
pu
blic
Po
rtu
ga
l
Au
str
ia 1
8
De
nm
ark
Sp
ain
1
8
Be
lgiu
m
Sw
ed
en
2
6
Sw
itze
rla
nd
First-generation immigrant students Arrived at or after the age of 12 Arrived before the age of 12Percentage-point differencef
• Country of origin (and destination)
• Gender
• Working (paid and unpaid work)
• Enrolment in ECEC
• Language spoken at home
• Family socio-economic condition
• Parental involvement
• School choice
Individual and household factors that shape vulnerability
The role of schools and teachers
Immigrant students are more likely to be the
victims of frequent bullying
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Slo
va
k R
epu
bli
c
23
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
c
13
La
tvia
Me
xic
o
13
Est
on
ia
8
Ch
ile
Tu
rke
y
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m
Gre
ece
7
OE
CD
av
era
ge
3
Hu
ng
ary
New
Zea
lan
d
-7
Ja
pa
n
Au
stra
lia
-
7
Fra
nce
De
nm
ark
Sw
itze
rla
nd
4
Bel
giu
m
Au
stri
a
Fin
lan
d
Ice
lan
d
Sp
ain
5
Ca
na
da
-
3
Ge
rma
ny
Irel
an
d
4
Lu
xe
mb
ou
rg
5
Slo
ven
ia
Sw
ed
en
No
rwa
y
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
-4
Po
rtu
ga
l
Net
he
rla
nd
s
Native students Immigrant students%
Immigrant students are more likely to be asked
to repeat grades
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Slo
vak R
epu
blic
Me
xic
o
Tu
rkey
Italy
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
Austr
ia
Sw
ede
n
Gre
ece
Spa
in
Port
ug
al
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Fin
land
Belg
ium
OE
CD
ave
rag
e
Hung
ary
Slo
ven
ia
Denm
ark
Ire
land
United
Kin
gd
om
Icela
nd
Austr
alia
Germ
any
Ne
the
rla
nds
Luxe
mb
ou
rg
Cana
da
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
Latv
ia
Esto
nia
Chile
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Isra
el
Fra
nce
after, nonsig Before accounting for socio-economic status and performance in PISA core subjectsPercentage-point difference
Teacher's report needing professional development to
deal with multicultural classrooms
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Ne
ther
lan
ds
Be
lgiu
m (
Fle
mis
h)
Ca
na
da
(A
lbe
rta
)
Au
stra
lia
Ne
w Z
ea
lan
d
La
tvia
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Cze
ch R
epu
bli
c
Fin
lan
d
Po
lan
d
Den
ma
rk
En
gla
nd
No
rwa
y
Slo
va
k R
ep
ub
lic
Icel
an
d
Est
on
ia
Ja
pa
n
OE
CD
TA
LIS
sy
ste
ms…
Sw
ed
en
Fra
nce
Isra
el
Po
rtu
ga
l
Ko
rea
, R
epu
bli
c o
f
Sp
ain
Ch
ile
Ita
ly
Mex
ico
%
TALIS 2013
Most students with an immigrant background and their parents are highly motivated to achieve and see education
as a springboard for social mobility
The share of migrants varies widely across countries
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
%
Proportion of foreign-born among the 16-65 years old population
The share of migrants in the population is very small (less than 3%) in Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Turkey.
On average, migrants have lower skills proficiency than
natives
Migrants are less proficient in literacy, numeracy and problem solving thannative-born adults in all participating countries, except for Chile
Wide cross-country differences are driven by differences in thecomposition of the migrant populations between countries.
Literacy proficiency, by place of birth
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
Foreign-born Native-born
score points
Migrants are a very heterogeneous group
Migrant’ skills proficiency vary greatly both within and across countries: they depend strongly on
the place where they acquired their qualifications, the age of arrival in the host country, the
duration of stay and the languages they speak
Literacy proficiency of migrants, by personal characteristics
Need for countries to adopt a tailor-made approach in terms of skills, training and
integration programmes.
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
All foreign-born Native-born average Foreign-born who are native speakers in the host-country languagescore points
Migrants and host country langage: variation
across countries
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Share of immigrants who speak the host country language (%)%
• Gaps in literacy skills between migrants and natives are on average 25 points…… but are down to only 13 points if migrants are native speakers!
• Language proximity between the migrant’s mother tongueand the host country language also matters
• Language penalty is related to the age at arrival, but not to the length of stay in the host country
Language matters!
Literacy gaps between natives and migrants
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Migrant gap Migrant gap adjusted for age, education and genderMigrant gap adjusted for age, education, gender and languageScore-point difference
Language distance in PIAAC participating
countries
0
20
40
60
80
100
120Language distance
Average language distance Interquantile range (75th minus 25th percentile)
• Adult training particularly important for migrants
• Differences in participation rates within-countries are small. What matters are between-country differences
• Migrants do express higher demand for training, and face higher barriers => higher unmet demand
Migrants and lifelong learning
Rates of participation in lifelong learning
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Participation rate (in %)
Foreign-born Native-born
Light grey bars/diamonds indicate countries for which the unadjusted difference in participation ratesbetween natives and migrants is not statistically significant
Barriers to participation
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Too expensive No employersupport
Too busy at work Inconvenientschedule
Family responsibility
Percentage
Foreign-born Native-born
• How education systems can support the learning and well-being outcomes of diverse populations and make systems more inclusive?
• How education systems can support all individuals so that they are able to engage with others in increasingly diverse and complex societies?
• Dimensions of Diversity:– Migration– Cultural/linguistic minorities – Special needs– Gender
Education for Inclusive Societies
Thank you!
For more information:
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/strength-through-diversity.htm
