Hamilton, Richard and Moore, Dennis. (Editors). (2004). Educational interventions for refugee children. Theoretical perspectives and implementing best practice. London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Pp. x + 144
ISBN 0-415-30825
Reviewed by Ruth Rees
Queen’s University (Canada)
October 28, 2004
This book began as a research project in 1999 for the New Zealand Ministry of Education to evaluate the educational services to Kosova refugees entering into the country. Its purposes, according to the editors, are threefold: one, to describe school-based interventions to help refugee children; two, to present a framework that integrates psychological, cultural, and educational perspectives to assess the efficacy of such interventions; and three, to inform future best practice and research. I believe that all three objectives are accomplished exceedingly well.
The book is structured into eight chapters. The first chapter, written by A. Anderson, R. Hamilton, D. Moore, S. Loewen, and K. Frater-Mathieson, is entitled ‘Education of refugee children. Theoretical perspectives and best practice.’ This chapter provides the overall theoretical framework of the book. Hence it merits some discussion because of its contribution to the literature and because this framework is applied in every chapter following. The authors recognize that a variety of factors impact upon a refugee who is a student, particularly psychological factors of the person, cultural factors of the student and the family, and various factors associated with the student’s schooling. They start with Bronfenbrenner’s (Note 1) ecological model: human development occurs in various contexts, and can only be properly understood in those contexts. This model separates the environments according to their immediacy with which they impact on the developing child. It includes four different levels of immediacy: one, the microsystem, the immediate environment (to include the psychological factors consisting of the state of mind of the refugee student, degree of trauma, the age, the degree of resiliency, as examples); two, the mesosystem, e.g., the school (the kinds and degrees of accommodations provided by the school and the teacher); three, the exosystem, the home and parents’ work, level of support from the parents and economic status; and four, the macrosystem consisting of the broad ideology, laws, norms, and customs of the specific society. The authors contend, however, that refugee children are impacted by, not one, but rather three ecosystems: pre-migration, transmigration, and post-migration ecosystem that they have progressed through. Moreover, the impact of each of the three ecosystems could be different or they could be compounded. For example, if the pre and trans-migration ecosystems were both war fraught, the impact on the state of fear of the student may be higher than if only the pre-migration ecosystem. These “points” (authors words) (or are they really phases or transitions?) are potential disruptions in addition to the typical stages of child development and their ecological changes occur, e.g., entering into school, adolescence, etc.
The intention of the book then, based on the literature, is to identify the array of factors within this three-phased framework that may impact on the refugee child’s ability to manage their transition into a new host country and, in particular, into a new school environment. These factors are a combination of psychological, cultural, and educational factors; moreover, some of these factors have more of an impact than others. Generally speaking, refugee children adapt to their new host country and school environment based on themselves (their attributes such as degree of trauma, resiliency, abilities, language skills); the degree of support from their parents; and as a function of how well the school and the refugee student adapt to each other.
Chapter two, by K. Frater-Mathieson, is entitled ‘Refugee trauma, loss and grief, Implications for intervention.’ I found this chapter to be quite daunting; it portrays the wide range of threats to a stable mental state that is in part labeled as post-traumatic stress disorder. Post-traumatic stress disorder encompasses four distinct types of symptoms: affective indicators (fear, pessimism, depression, anxiety, guilt, anger, often profound grieving, nostalgia, alienation, detachment); physical indicators (nightmares, heightened arousal, sleep disorders, headaches, fatigue); cognitive distortions (to include negative perceptions, re-experiencing of the trauma in some form, alternating with numbness, self-blame, loss of interest, impaired memory, suicidal ideas, poor concentration); and behavioral indicators (regressive behaviours such as clinginess, withdrawal, agitation, isolation, repetitive play, startled reactions.). In addition, newcomers represent different cultures and hence have norms and expectations of teachers and schools. Their ability to learn in the new country may be impeded by their mental state. But their ability to learn could also be exacerbated by an unknown or unidentified learning exceptionality, the level of literacy, language skills, and economic status.
While the chapter may be daunting to a teacher, it focuses on the child’s needs, something that every educator must keep in mind. All children need a sense of security, a supportive social network, and opportunities to flourish and develop. The authors then proceed to offer some very explicit suggestions to educators, many of which are addressed in the multicultural and antiracist literature: have students work in small groups, provide them with opportunities to communicate, to talk about and validate their experiences, discuss with the whole class about human rights’ issues and the experiences of refugees, and involve the parents in the educational process, as examples.
S. Loewen writes the third chapter, entitled ‘Second language concerns for refugee children.’ The author points out that pre-migration information is important: what education or literacy levels do the refugee students have. While many will have a disrupted education, some refugee children may have had no formal educational experiences. The author reiterates what should now a common practice of teachers: to allow students to use their first language in their learning, to encourage students to express themselves in the new language, and to provide opportunities to learn content within an appropriate context. The author emphasizes the need for planned immersion consisting of refugee students being pulled out of the mainstream class for specific purposes and of specific duration.
The fourth chapter by A. Anderson should, in my opinion, be placed before the previous chapter, as it is on ‘Resilience,’ another psychological factor of the refugee student. Anderson defines resilience as a process of, capacity for, or outcome of successful adaptation. She reminds the reader that schools are one of the more consistent points of contact with the host culture. As such, schools and especially teachers and classmates are in a powerful position to impact positively on the lives of refugees. Suggestions are provided that are aimed at ensuring that the school climate is nurturing, accepting and caring, characterized by tolerance and acceptance, and one that facilitates opportunities for social interaction (e.g., peer support programs) to maximize opportunities for newcomers to make friends, to develop self-esteem, and to broaden their knowledge of and interaction with members of the local social community.
The fifth chapter, entitled ‘Issues of migration’ is written by the same author. Here Anderson addresses the pre and post-migration situations impacting on refugee as students: displacement on the one hand, a need for some degree of acculturation on the other hand, with potential conflict due to different educational and cultural/family traditions. The need for families to become involved in the student’s schooling is underscored here. But the macrosystem is also specifically referred to for the first time: there is a need for a nation to have tolerance and respect for cultural diversity and whose laws, practices, and even curriculum in schools reflect that policy. This chapter underscores the broad reach of the framework that the authors of this book proposed: how can an educator/teacher control what is outside of the mesosystem?
Chapter six, ‘Schools, teachers, and education of refugee children,’ written by one of the authors, R. Hamilton, is foolishly what I had thought that the entire book was about when I first picked it up. This chapter summarizes the general literature on school and teacher effects on students, then identifies those specific effects within the refugee education context, and finally discusses implications for better preparing schools and teachers for teaching refugee children. Hamilton describes the four factors that he considers the most important for impacting upon the education of refugee children: the role of the principal, the degree of parental involvement in education, expectations of teachers of the refugee student, and the school environment. Each of these four factors is clarified with detailed points that are too numerous to mention here but bear reading on one’s own. All the points are worthwhile, but I think that the structuring of this section could be improved to have greater impact. I consider the second, third, and fourth factors all to be dependent upon the first one, the role of the principal. For example, it is the principal’s role in creating and sustaining a safe school environment for every pupil, and to carry out the government’s anti-bullying policy. Similarly, the promotion of an inclusive school climate is very much part of the principal’s role, whether it involves developing the school policy, helping to implement that policy through inclusive practices, facilitating the professional development of teachers, or monitoring the behaviours in the school. Other books have similarly argued that teachers should find out about the backgrounds, cultures, migration histories of their students, yet I contend that the principal is the pivotal figure who can oversee how, when, and even if this does occur. As well, the principal is the person to facilitate the recommended parental education program and the outreach programs. Moreover, these recommendations plus that of having an on-site refugee support teacher have to be first encouraged and financially supported at the district and government levels. I reiterate my point that I think that the potential impact of this chapter would be greater if a clearer differentiation was made among pedagogical and curricular strategies (i.e., the role of the teacher), vs. the role of the principal, vs. the role of the state/school district.
He does, however, make several important points and I want to underscore to of them. One, the principal acts as a gatekeeper and facilitator for the use and integration of community and agency helping services. Two, communication between school and parents must be bilateral: while parents need to be informed about the school and school/education protocol, schools must need to become aware of the concerns and expectations of the parents and try to meet those needs. Again, these points are closely connected. Several schools in Canada have actually changed their name to ‘community school’ to reflect the multiplicity of services and agencies daily interacting with both students and parents. Several schools provide translator and child-care service on the premises for parents so that discuss issues with the teacher; another suggestion is for the school to go to the parents, having meetings at their home or at a neutral site with all communications being home and school being translated. The point that I am making through these examples is that while the recommendations are good, they are quite general at times, and lose their potential impact. The more pragmatic that the suggestion is, in my opinion, the more useful it becomes to the practitioner.
D. Moore writes chapter seven entitled ‘Conceptual and policy issues.’ The thesis of the chapter is that refugee children are an identifiable group of student with special educational needs. Their pre, trans and post-migration and their own individual differences have impacted upon their learning. However, the task of educators is not to treat them psychologically, but to change the treatment of teaching and learning (page 98), i.e., to alter, adapt, and improve educational organizations and environments to meet the needs of not just this group of students, but all students. Moore illustrates this policy perspective by examining the New Zealand educational system. Two points that he makes bear mentioning here. One, the assessment/categorizing processes while necessary to ‘identify’ students, may disadvantage students, particularly those from culturally and linguistically different homes. Not only might the tests not apply (i.e., they norm-referenced to another group), but also the resultant labeling can be confining and reduce the student’s already low self-esteem. If an assessment is to provide the basis for effective intervention, it requires an analysis of the student behaviours within different contexts (both home and school). This reinforces the thesis of the book -- educators must investigate and take into account the impact of the migration experiences (i.e., involving three stages). The second point is that regular classroom teachers need support to provide refugee children with both psychological and linguistic interventions. “Mentioning strategies is not enough. Teachers much have clear example of how strategies work for different types of students and how to orchestrate the whole.” This point again reiterates the role of the principal in providing the support (logistical and climatic) for ensuring that this type of professional development does occur and that the teachers develop appropriate pedagogical strategies for providing a caring yet appropriately challenging environment to its newcomers.
The final chapter, chapter eight, by Hamilton and Moore, the two editors, is titled ‘Education of refugee children. Documenting and implementing change.’ This chapter summarizes the multitude of suggestions made in the previous chapters under the following six headings: national (government and district) educational policy and initiatives, school structure and policy, school-family-community interface, classroom environment and instruction, principal leadership, and teacher professional development. Six tables are provided and each of the points is elaborated upon, often for the second or third time in the book. While I like the summary tables, I do not consider it necessary for the detailed explanations to be provided over again. Furthermore, as mentioned previously, I believe (as does Moore in chapter seven) that the role of the principal is broader than the points under ‘principal leadership;’ somehow it should be made clear that it is the principal’s challenge to ensure that the interactions among the school-family-community and teachers’ professional development do occur and are ongoing, and that the school is filled with inclusive and welcome classrooms. I would therefore suggest a re-structuring and rewording of these suggestions given that reality. Teachers are the ones who implement the change, but when they are guided and supported by their principals, and the educational/policy systems in which they are embedded. Finally, I would also suggest that teachers should be directed to the multicultural and antiracism literature to provide more concrete examples of pedagogy other than collaborative learning strategies and having books available in the first language of the students be included, directed specifically to teachers. The policy issues that are raised in this book, I argue, will only work if the means of implementing them are clearly understood by all those involved in the delivery of education.
I return to the authors’ first two purposes, albeit in a different order (the theoretical framework does come first in the book). They are: one, to present a framework that integrates psychological, cultural, and educational perspectives of possible educational interventions for refugee children; and two, to describe school-based interventions to help refugee children in their learning and acculturation process. The conceptual framework and theories provided in this small book offer a paradigmatic shift in how educators could look at the teaching of refugee children. The strategies that they offer to support this framework are broad, reasonably well structured, and quite clear. They do not, however, go far enough, in my opinion. On the one hand, the authors do not differentiate the levels within education that impact upon the policymaking and policy implementation; on the other hand, more strategies need to be voiced specifically for the teachers, those within the mesosystem who interact most frequently with refugee students.
I want to end by making two final points. One, I thoroughly enjoyed the book; it made me pause, think, and question some of my own assumptions and practices. Few books impact upon me to this extent. Second, the font size, especially of those invaluable tables in chapter eight, is far too small for my aging eyes. Just as the authors are asking that teachers make accommodations for all their students, I ask that the publishers make this small accommodation so that more people can take full advantage of the useful information inside the book! Refugee students are now a reality in schools in industrialized countries all around the world; we have a moral responsibility to reach and to teach them in a supportive manner.
Note 1. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
About the Reviewer
Ruth Rees
Associate Professor
Faculty of Education
Queen’s University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Email: reesr@educ.queensu.ca
~
ER home |
Reseņas Educativas |
Resenhas Educativas ~
~
overview | reviews | editors | submit | guidelines | announcements
~