Teaching for the Future: National Teachers’ Perspectives on Language of Instruction in Refugee Education

• In Event: Multilingual education in diverse contexts: reading, achievement, assessment, identity, and policy analysis

Proposal

There are more people displaced today than ever before. Among these are the approximately 13 million children who have fled their countries of origin and pursue education as refugees in host countries (UNHCR, 2017). At school, these young people encounter a constellation of unfamiliar languages, including the language(s) of instruction used in the classroom. My research explores this linguistic unfamiliarity and its implications for the teachers who strive to instruct refugees children integrated into national schools.
Language of instruction policies and practices for refugee students fall at the intersection of contradictory bodies of research in the fields of language and literacy, and international education and refugee studies. On the one hand, research in the fields of language and literacy supports the use of home languages in the early years of schooling, with a deliberate transition to additional languages like French or English thereafter, as required by the policy. This research also reveals the negative outcomes for learning and school persistence, as well as for identity development and a sense of belonging, for students who are “submerged” at school in languages they do not understand (Benson, 2002).
On the other hand, research and policy work in the fields of international education and refugee studies highlights the benefits to refugee learners of being integrated into national school systems in the host country. Scholars and policymakers site increased access and sustainability of schooling for refugees integrated into national systems, and the related long-term barriers that refugee learners face if segregated into refugee-only schools (UNHCR, 2016). Yet this integration into national schools usually requires that refugees attend school in unfamiliar languages (Dryden-Peterson, 2016), a practice that has been shown to be harmful to children (Shin, 2013; Valenzuela, 1999). My research explores this tension between two bodies of literature, calling into question the idea that access to school through national education systems is enough to ensure wellbeing for refugee students and seeking to understand in particular the implications of this policy for language instruction.
My presentation draws on field work conducted in Kampala, Uganda. In Uganda, I have purposively sampled three schools that serve refugee and national students together—one public, one private, and one a school that merges public and private funds. In each of these schools, I have conducted twelve weeks of data collection including classroom observations of lessons focusing on English, local language, and literacy, which I have recorded and analyzed using tools that I have designed to ensure my data is aligned with my research questions. I have also conducted interviews with Ugandan teachers who instruct refugee children, asking them about their own experiences with language, strategies they employ in multilingual learning environments, and the barriers and opportunities they see for their students. I find that teachers’ attitudes toward language instruction and learning varies depending on school environments, with some teachers articulating home language use among refugees as a human right and others expressing an “English only” philosophy toward language learning for all students, including refugees.

Author

• Celia Reddick, Harvard Graduate School of Education