Thomas Huddleston
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thomas Huddleston






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 227 227



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Legal integration is only 1 st step in long path to integrated societies (Tampere Conclusions, Stockholm Programme) on policies, changes, trends & international standards
  • Labour market mobility  Do legal third-country nationals have comparable workers’ rights and opportunities like EU nationals/nationals to access jobs and improve their skills?     Family reunion  Do legal third-country nationals have a comparable right to reunite in their families like EU nationals who move from one Member State to another? Education  Are all the children of immigrants encouraged to achieve and develop in school like the children of nationals?   Long-term residence  Do legal third-country nationals have comparable access to a long-term residence permit like EU nationals who move from another Member State?    Political participation  Do legal third-country nationals have comparable opportunities as nationals to participate in political life?   Access to nationality   Are legal immigrants encouraged to naturalise and are their children born in the country entitled to become full citizens?   Anti-discrimination  Do all residents have effective legal protection from racial, ethnic, religious, and nationality discrimination in all areas?  
  • As many opportunities as obstacles Areas of Strength: Basic residence security and rights for workers, families, long-term residents Basic protections against ethnic, racial, and religious discrimination Policies across Europe are more similar and strong where EU law applies PROGRESS ON ANTI-DISCRIMINATION Areas of weakness: Few migrants can participate politically on the issues affecting them daily NEED MAJOR REFORM (GR) HALF OLDEST VOTING RIGHTS, HARD TO OBTAIN, HARDER TO LOSE WITHOUT NEGATIVE AFFECTS WEAK CONSULTATIVE BODIES COME AND GO POLITICAL LIBERTIES Discretionary citizenship procedures discourage many settled residents TRADITIONAL COUNTRIES SLIGHTLY FAVOURABLE 3 TRENDS SHORTER (5-7), DUAL (18, DK, DE, NL), BIRTHRIGHT (14) (NEW COUNTRIES, COMPARED TO IT AND ES, GR MOST, AND PT BEST) ONLY CONFIDENT EUROPEAN COUNTRIES DO BOTH Countries rarely address education needs and opportunities of new generations of diverse students COMPULSORY ALL, HALF ALL LEVELS, DIFFERENT NEEDS (E.G. LANGUAGE NOT UP TO STANDARD), MISS OUT OPPORTUNITIES (LANGUAGE NOT FOR ALL) ANY SYSTEM TO DIVERSIFY CLASSROOMS AND TEACHERS

Thomas Huddleston Thomas Huddleston Presentation Transcript

  • How countries integrate diversityinto education policies
  • MIPEX: Tool to compare, analyse, and improve integration policy• Do all residents have equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities to become equal members of society & citizens?• Benchmark policies and implementation measures, according to European & international standards• Public “Quick Reference Guide”• Strictly scrutinise policy objectives, progress, and results
  • Largest and most rigorous study of its kind (148 policy indicators)7 Policy Areas for immigrants to participate in society:1) Labour market mobility* 2) Family reunion* 3) Education4) Political participation* 5) Long-term residence*6) Access to nationality 7) Anti-discrimination•Covers 27 EU Member States, Norway, Switzerland, Canada,United States of America (now also Australia & Japan)•7 comparative research partners worked on policy indicators•100+ national independent legal experts answer and peerreview, all based on policies passed by 31 May 2010
  • Key FindingsAverage @ ≈50%:Political will counts,more than tradition+1: Slow progressFew fact-based changesMonitor statistics (esp.emp. & edu.), butevaluate policy impact?
  • Key FindingsPolicies moresimilar and strongwith EU law
  • 1) ACCESS • Pre-primary education • Compulsory education as legal right • Assessment of prior learning Education: • Support to access secondary education Indicators • Vocational training • Higher education • Advice and guidance2) TARGETING NEEDS • Induction programmes • Support in language(s) of instruction • Pupil monitoring • Targeted technical and financial assistance • Teacher training on migrants’ needs3) NEW OPPORTUNITIES • Option to learn immigrant languages • Option to learn about immigrant cultures • Promoting social integration & monitoring segregation • Support to parents and communities4) INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION • Inclusion in curriculum • State supports information initiatives • Modifying curricula to reflect diversity • Adapting daily life • Bringing migrants into teaching staff • Teacher training on intercultural education
  • EducationEU Area of Weakness Countries rarely see and address needs & opportunities of new diverse generation
  • EducationCountry comparison • Equal access in compulsory (most) • Equal access in all (1/2) • Few targeted measures re: access • Few legal entitlements & standards re: needs • Immigrant languages, but not for all • Few systems to diversify schools/teachers • Uneven support for intercultural education
  • EducationCountry comparison CA, AU multiculturalism benefits all students USA Targeting Needs
  • Access to compulsory education • Equal access in compulsory (most)
  • Some legal access, few proactive measures • Equal access in all (1/2) • Few targeted measures re: access • e.g. Targeted measures in DK, FI, BE, NL, and PT ACIDI projects
  • Prior learning • Hardly any formal system to recognise children’s previous skills • e.g. CASNAV in FR & LUX
  • Targeting specific needs • Few legal entitlements & standards re: needs • e.g. Nordic mainstreaming
  • Learning the language • Language support not held up to same standard as rest of curriculum
  • Missed opportunities • Most systems missing out on opportunities migrant pupils bring to classroom • Some guidance on immigrant languages • Less on cultures or segregation • e.g. SE, BE, CH
  • Intercultural Education • Few systems to diversify Uneven support for intercultural education schools/teachers • e.g. UK Citizenship Curriculum, NO ‘Equal Education in Practice!’, ES Education for Citizenship & Human Rights
  • Diversify staff • Few systems to diversify schools/teachers