Communication in Times of Uncertainty and Loss: Refugee Parents in Interaction with Kindergartens and Schools

Abstract

Most refugee parents experience uncertainty and loss transitioning to a new society. In this situation, the family is ascribed an increased value, as a social capital and a point of reference in an unstable world. At the same time, the complexity of the new society creates new hierarchical structures that place the family in a vulnerable position. Educational institutions like kindergartens and schools play a major role in the lives of families, since their practices impact the wellbeing and prospects for the future of the children. This chapter explores how newly arrived refugee parents perceive their interactions with kindergartens and schools in their new context. Data is collected by observations in a group of refugee parents over one year and by individual interviews, using interpreters. The study shows that there are good intentions on both sides, but the complexity of the situation causes misunderstandings, thus creating new instances of uncertainty. There is, however, a good potential for improved communication and better understanding in the relationship between refugee parents and kindergartens and schools.

1. Introduction

In a globalised world, millions of families are on the move and settling in new surroundings. This migration often means major disturbances to family life as well as to the families’ relationship with educational institutions like kindergartens and schools. Migration produces new hierarchical social positions, where parents must re-orient themselves and find new ways of coping with daily life. Families account for between one-fourth and one-half of the migrant population in the OECD countries [1], and forced migration due to war and conflict is part of this picture. Many refugees parents experience uncertainty and loss when transitioning to a new society. They have left behind family and friends, workplaces and social relations, in short, life as they knew it. Different societal norms and regulations may form barriers to integration and inclusion in a new community. There are thus good reasons for municipalities, local authorities as well as teachers and managements in kindergartens and schools to take into consideration how families experience challenges when they are settling into a new local community.

The migration-driven diversification of societies in the Western world has been described as super-diversity [2]. This entails new patterns of inequality and prejudice, racism and segregation ([2], p.2), and the term is widely used across disciplines. This concept is fruitful for shedding light on communication patterns that arise in the interaction between migrant parents and representatives of educational institutions. In such interactions, the uneven distribution of power is noticeable, but may all the same be concealed in subtle ways. Settling into a community that is quite unfamiliar as regards ways of behaving, socialising, interacting and communicating with institutions that have a bearing upon their life as a family, the family is placed in a vulnerable position. In such times of uncertainty, family values, as well as the members of the family itself, are ascribed an increased value, as a point of reference in an uncertain and unfamiliar world [3]. The children in the family represent in this situation a social capital [4], increased in symbolic value, since other forms of social capital in the form of network, education, employment as well as economic capital are diminished or lost. All matters relating to the welfare of their children are therefore of the utmost importance to the refugee parents [3].

This chapter will focus on how refugee parents perceive their relationship with kindergartens and schools in a new community. The research questions guiding this research are: How do refugee parents experience their interactions with educational institutions like kindergarten and schools? What perceptions do they have regarding language and literacy when it comes to their children’s education?

2. Immigration and education policies for refugees in Norway

2.1 Settlement regulations for refugees

Norway is among the 145 countries that have recognised the Geneva Convention of 1951. This convention protects the rights of refugees [5, 6]. Immigration to Norway has increased during the last decades, and especially after the influx of people fleeing from the war in Syria, the number of refugees increased considerably. Many refugees have also arrived from countries in Eastern Africa and have settled in Norway. The pandemic caused a sharp decrease in immigration, but since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine in 2022, nearly 40,000 refugees have sought asylum in Norway. Still, the percentage of people with refugee background is low: while about 15 percent of the Norwegian population have immigrant background, only 4,5 percent have a refugee background [7].

Refugees may come either as asylum seekers, or they may be included as resettlement refugees in a quota agreed upon with the United Nations High Commission for refugees (UNHCR). They are then brought directly to Norway from refugee camps abroad [8]. Refugees are granted a temporary residence permit for one or up to three years. Family members may also be granted a family immigration permit based on certain criteria. It is normally not possible to apply for a permanent residence permit before three years’ stay in the country. Those who are granted a temporary residence permit are settled in designated municipalities, based on a request to the municipality by the Norwegian Directorate for Integration and Diversity. The municipality receives economic support from the government based on the number of refugees received by the municipality, and they must offer an introduction programme including these elements: Norwegian language classes, courses providing knowledge about the Norwegian society, and educational work-related activities. In this study, data was collected among refugee parents who took part in a course on parenting practices, based on the Incredible Years programme.

2.2 Education policy for immigrant children in primary and lower secondary schools

Education for pupils with another language background than Norwegian or Sami (which is an indigenous language in Norway) is regulated by Section 2.8 in the Education Act. This section states:

Pupils attending the primary and lower secondary school who have a mother tongue other than Norwegian or Sami have the right to adapted instruction in the Norwegian language until they are sufficiently proficient in Norwegian to follow the normal instruction of the school. If necessary, such pupils are also entitled to mother tongue instruction, bilingual subject teaching, or both [9].

The Education Act, Section 2.8, also states that the municipality must map the Norwegian language skills of the pupils before it is decided to give them adapted language education. This mapping must continue while they receive adapted Norwegian instruction, to assess whether the pupils are sufficiently skilled in Norwegian to follow the regular teaching in the school. The Norwegian Directorate for Education has developed curricula for adapted instruction in Norwegian and for mother tongue instruction and a tool for mapping of language development for second language learners of Norwegian [10].

It is the municipality, as the owner of the primary and lower secondary schools within their community, who is responsible for providing teaching for pupils who are second language learners of Norwegian. However, even though the Education Act states that mother tongue instruction is among the rights of a pupil who is a second language learner of Norwegian, mother tongue instruction is rarely used in Norwegian classrooms. In fact, even though the number of pupils with immigrant background has increased, the number of pupils receiving adapted instruction in Norwegian and mother tongue instruction has decreased [11]. This development is interesting, since the core curriculum for primary and secondary education states that all pupils “shall experience that being proficient in a number of languages is a resource” [12]. The same positive attitude to different languages is also mentioned in the Framework Plan for Kindergartens, which says that the kindergarten staff should help ensure that “linguistic diversity becomes an enrichment for the entire group of children and encourage multilingual children to use their mother tongue” [13]. The documents giving the mandate for kindergartens and schools thus promote a positive view on multilingualism and diversity, while the Education Act is open for interpretations and gives few directions for implementation.

2.3 Initial literacy and second language learning

International research recommends that initial literacy should be taught in a language that is familiar to the learner [14, 15]. Since reading is to make meaning of written language, the familiarity with the language is crucial. However, many learners around the world receive education in an unfamiliar language [15]. This also applies to Norway, where second language learners of Norwegian rarely receive initial literacy instruction in their mother tongue [11]. As mentioned above, only those pupils who are considered not to be able to follow the regular instruction in the classroom are granted adapted instruction and mother tongue instruction or bilingual subject teaching only when it is considered “necessary”. And when granted, normally only a restricted number of hours per week are allocated.

This means that pupils with another language background than Norwegian will have a different outset for their literacy development than their peers who are first language users of the language of instruction. They have a double learning task in the way that they must learn the language of instruction and the content of the curriculum at the same time. This is a demanding role and requires much support from those around the emergent bilingual pupil.

All children, irrespective of language background, have experiences with written language before they start school [16, 17]. When it comes to second language learners, who are emergent bilinguals, the literacy practices they encounter in their homes form a basis for the continued development in school. But if the literacy instruction rests on a monolingual bias, without any attention to other languages or other literacy practices than those of the language of instruction, the experiences emergent bilinguals bring to school will not be recognised. In such a situation, the second language learners’ experiences will be invisible and an unused resource. To draw on the resources of the emergent bilinguals requires a partnership between the school and the home.

Trends in research on literacy and language learning open for more flexible ways of building emergent bilinguals’ literacy. There are several examples of such partnerships where the school successfully builds bridges to the home and acknowledges the complexity of the situation for migrant families [17, 18, 19]. More flexible ways of drawing on the resources multilingual pupils bring to school can be a potential for a more positive development in the language learning process and for more confident multilingual practices in the family.

Many immigrant parents want their children to maintain the language(s) of their family, while they at the same time are dedicated to their children’s learning of the language of instruction. Making visible the language resources of an emergent bilingual pupil also confirms the identity of the family [17, 18]. To open up for a view on multilingualism as a resource requires competence among teachers in kindergartens and schools and is ultimately the responsibility of the municipality.

3. Research design

The research design for this study was an exploratory qualitative case study [20]. Qualitative research seeks to explore and understand “the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem” [21], which describes well the aim of this research. Data was collected in a group of refugee parents who took part in an introduction course in a semi-rural municipality in Norway. Data consisted of observations in classes when the participants talked about their family, by semi-structured interviews individually and in pairs and by reflection notes collected in a meeting towards the end of the school year. The data was analysed by a thematic analytical approach, developing codes to look for emerging themes.

The group consisted of six mothers and three fathers, representing six different families. Three couples came from an Arab-speaking country, two mothers came from East African countries, and one single mother came from an Asian country. All participants except two were newly arrived in Norway with less than 8 months’ stay. Their education varied between six and twelve years, whilst one had professional training.

Since all the participants were newly arrived in Norway, the interviews were conducted by help from interpreters. The topics for the interviews were: Experiences from their interactions with the teachers in their children’s kindergarten or school, and their hopes and expectation for their children’s future, including their education. The interviews were recorded and transcribed by the author. The participants were given pseudonyms to preserve anonymity, and all recordings were deleted after the transcription.

3.1 Limitations of the study

This study is an observation and interview study of refugee parents, where the main purpose was to bring forth the voices of the parents. The school management and the teachers have not been involved in the study. This means that statements about the schools’ teaching practices come solely from the parents, and the intentions behind the choices the schools have made will remain unknown to the researcher. This must be taken into consideration when interpreting the data. Furthermore, the number of participants is low, so findings from this study cannot be generalised to the wider population. However, this study may give a deeper understanding of how refugee parents experience their interactions with institutions that are of vital importance for their children’s well-being and future in the new country.

Another limitation is that all communication between the researcher and the participants has been conducted with interpreters as mediators. This means that nuances and even important information in the participants’ statements may have been lost. However, to capture the perceptions from newly arrived refugee parents who have not yet learnt the Norwegian language, the use of interpreters is indisputably necessary. The interpreters were experienced and knew the Norwegian school system well, which was an asset given the topic of this study.

Last, but not least, it is a limitation to the study that the researcher was an ethnic Norwegian and as such a representative of the new society. Even though the researcher came from the outside and had no links to the parenting programme nor to the kindergartens and schools in the municipality, this fact may have led to restraints in criticism or misplaced praise. The longitudinal design of the study, with frequent meetings over one year, was intended to counteract this tendency and build trust between the partners, but it must nevertheless be considered in interpreting the responses from the parents.

3.2 Ethics approval and consent

Newly arrived refugee parents, not yet proficient in the majority language, must be considered a vulnerable group ([21], p. 95). Their situation must therefore be taken into account when doing research of this kind that will involve talking about private matters like family and children. This topic could also increase the parents’ sense of loss and cause difficult feelings. Ethics approval was obtained from the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD), including approval of interview guides and information letters. The interpreters read the information letter to the participants in a meeting, and the researcher was available to answer questions. It was made clear that participation in the research was voluntary and that the parents could withdraw from the study at any time, without any repercussions for themselves. The participants signed the consent form in the first meeting. No one wanted to withdraw during the period of data collection or afterwards. On the contrary, it seemed that they appreciated having the opportunity to talk about their children and to vent issues regarding their children’s schooling.

4. Results and discussion

Three themes emerged from the coding of the data: Communication in a mode of friendliness and trust; the complexity of the language policy; the value of education.

4.1 Communication in a mode of friendliness and trust

The parents all expressed appreciation of their children’s teachers, some more explicitly that others. Several of the families came from refugee camps in Lebanon, where the children were assigned to classes in the afternoon, after the resident children had left. This experience of a non-inclusive practice seemed to have left its mark on one of the parents, who saw the Norwegian school system in a stark contrast: “It is first of all a good and nice system, and I am so grateful there is no discrimination nor racist attitudes. My children can attend school in the morning and not in the afternoon, like in Lebanon”. Given the huge pressure on the education system in Syria’s neighbouring countries, the comparison may seem quite unfair; however, the experience of inclusion of their children in the mainstream classroom obviously meant a lot. The parents also mentioned that the teachers did not allow bullying, and that instances of unacceptable behaviour were sanctioned quickly. were sanctioned quickly. The teachers were described as “humane” and friendly towards the children.

The parents conveyed appreciation of this friendliness and positive interest from the teachers. Some of the teachers obviously tried to draw on the linguistic diversity in the classroom. One of the mothers described her daughter’s teacher in this way: “For example Sylvia (pseudonym), who is the teacher in my daughter’s class, I love her so much. She has learnt a lot of words, like ‘good morning’ and ‘good day’ and such things, she has learnt these words in all the languages of the children”. The parents also mentioned teachers in their own language classes for adults who showed interest and a positive attitude towards their mother tongues.

Schools are required to have individual meetings with the parents of each pupil twice a year. These meetings focus on the child’s individual progress in all areas, as well as the child’s social adaptation to other pupils and to the school as a whole. The parents told that in these meetings, an interpreter was always present and available for them. The parents appreciated this practice. One couple mentioned, however, that in meetings with the whole class (parents’ meeting), which are not mandatory, there were no interpreters available. When asked what he felt about being in such a situation, one father said: “It was like being inside a black bag”. This lack of opportunity to talk with the other parents made him feel left out of the group.

Through the parents’ descriptions, the teachers put much emphasis on friendly relations with the pupils and the parents. In the mandatory individual meeting with the parents twice a year, the school provides interpretation for the parents. But this does not take place in social arrangements and meetings that are not mandatory, which indicates that there are limits to the inclusiveness. The friendliness and inclusive attitude seem to be a widespread but individual practice that was not yet fully institutionalised.

4.2 The complexity of the language policy

The parents were asked whether their children received any mother tongue instruction, cf. 2.2 above. One of the mothers responded that there was an Arabic teacher in the school and that there were four pupils in his class, but her daughter was not among those who were assigned to his class. She said that she had asked why her daughter was not included, but she did not receive an answer, or at least not an answer that she could make sense of. Her interpretation of the situation was that her daughter first should focus on learning Norwegian, and then, she could have classes in Arabic. This misconception was corrected by the interpreter, who asked if he could explain to this mother. He told her that the case was that her daughter was considered too proficient in Norwegian to receive mother tongue instruction. This was obviously new information to the mother, so the communication from the school seemed not to have fulfilled its purpose.

A report from another mother demonstrated that the mother tongue instruction was not always given under conducive circumstances. Her son received some help in the mother tongue from an interpreter who explained the teaching to him in class. He was placed at the back of the classroom, probably to avoid disturbances. Her son had told her that the class teacher sometimes said “Please don’t disturb” to the interpreter, since the help was given in the same classroom. The mother was obviously frustrated by this practice. “How can my boy learn if the teacher says, ‘Please don’t disturb’? And he is the weakest, and he is placed in the back of the classroom!” The mother also wondered why her son was put at the back of the classroom the whole day, while the interpreter was there with him only for a few hours. She had tried to ask the school about it but did not receive an answer that made this practice clear to her.

Since the provision of mother tongue instruction was relatively scarce, some of the parents tried to teach their children themselves. One of the mothers described how she tried to support her child at home: “I try to be the teacher myself, but it is hard. I have to learn Norwegian myself”. It is time-consuming to learn a new language, and the parents’ capacity is naturally stretched, when they try to do two quite difficult tasks at the same time.

The school seemed to strive for an inclusive practice and had allocated mother tongue instruction to some of the newly arrived second language learners. However, when it came to the realisation of this practice, there were obviously pitfalls. For instance, it was not clear whether the pupils actually met a qualified mother tongue teacher, and the use of the word “interpreter” indicates that the school might have opted for mother tongue support rather than mother tongue instruction or bilingual subject teaching. In this regard, the limitations of this study must be taken into account. It is also a fact that many schools struggle to find qualified mother tongue teachers. However, it seems quite clear that communicating the specific rights of pupils with another language than Norwegian and Sami, laid down in the language policy, seemed to be a challenge. Considering the somewhat complicated regulations and the rather unclear indicators of what is “sufficiently proficient”, it is not surprising that the school seemed to have a difficult task in explaining these features of the language policy to newly arrived refugee parents.

4.3 The value of education

The parents were overall very proud of their children’s progress in learning to speak the new language. They expressed no concern when it came to their children’s progress in learning spoken Norwegian. However, when it came to basic literacy skills, like reading and writing, some of them expressed worries, like this mother, speaking about her 7-year old son: “He can speak Norwegian, but he struggles with reading and writing”. When they were asked whether they had been given any advice as to how they could support their children’s literacy development, one mother said that the teacher had asked them if they had audio books or a laptop or a computer. This made her feel uncomfortable, since she herself had very little experience with digital tools. In the meetings, the parents told that they had been strongly encouraged to visit the library and borrow books to read to their children. One mother confirmed that there were books in many languages in the school library, and her daughter had borrowed a book with Arabic letters. The book turned out to be written in Farsi, a language they did not know, and the mother laughed at the mix-up. But she clearly expressed her willingness to read to her daughter, if only the school could provide her with books an Arabic.

The parents put strong emphasis on the value of education in more general terms. One of the fathers explained in this way how he encouraged his children to work hard in school: “You must read, you must learn, you must just go on and work hard, we expect that you are doing your best”. And he continued: “We tell them that being able to read and write is equal to seeing”. In the final meeting in the group, the parents were asked to express their hopes for their children, and one of them wrote: “I want my children to have a good education and find a job, but first and foremost I want them to have a good and happy life in a peaceful society”.

By the parents’ accounts, there is an awareness among teachers in kindergartens and schools of the value of other languages than Norwegian. The encouragement the parents receive to visit the library and read books to their children points towards an interest in the language resources in the family. The school had also acquired books in many languages in the library, to be available for the newly arrived pupils. In the conversations about the children’s education, there was a clear concurrence of values between the parents and the school.

5. Conclusion

Refugee parents meet many challenges when transitioning to a new society. The transition is mostly involuntary and includes many experiences of loss. They have nevertheless proved great strength in enduring difficult circumstances and mastered the transition. In their new community, they want the best possible future for the children and show positive attitudes towards their children’s teachers. However, they meet many expectations and regulations related to kindergartens and schools, which implies adjusting to new social complexities [2].

Findings in this study show that parents expressed trust in the teachers in the kindergartens and schools and experienced a warm and friendly attitude in their communication with the teachers. They encouraged their children’s education and wanted to support the school. The concurrence of values as regards education can have a great potential in building a strong relationship between the home and the school.

However, there are challenges to the relationship. The communication gaps in explaining the language policy as well as the lack of a systematic support to the children’s multilingual development put strain on the family. The parents felt that it was hard for them to really contribute, since they were unfamiliar with the language of instruction, and some of them did not have much education themselves. But there are bright spots also to this picture. Some of the teachers practice an openness to the linguistic diversity in the class, and the schools have multilingual books in the library and encourage pupils and parents to borrow books. By the parents’ report, the school seems to be interested in the parents’ literacy practices, though this is probably not communicated in the best possible way to the parents.

Communication with refugee parents can be difficult for many reasons [17]. These difficulties can be mitigated by good preparation of the kindergarten and school staff, including capacity building, and to establish educational partnerships with parents.

In communication with refugee parents, it is important to be aware of the special circumstances surrounding their life in the new country. The underlying imbalance of power requires a sensitive approach in the interactions. Good intentions are important, but not sufficient in securing full understanding of the educational offer to second language learners of Norwegian, given the complexities of the language policy. Empowering the parents by acknowledging their resources and finding ways of how they can support their children will build their partnership with the educational institutions and give better prospects for their hopes and dreams for their children in a new society.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.