Assignment 1

This essay will seek to explore the proposition that Refugees in Australia experience lack of
equity and social justice leading to educational disadvantage, which may thereby lead to
negative consequences on their educational and life aspirations. The nature and impact of
the dominant discourse surrounding Refugees will be examined based on Foucault’s concept
of discourses. (Ferfolja, T. Diaz, Criss Jones. Ullman,J. 2015 ) . A precis (Ullman 2015) of
Bourdieu’s propositions regarding capital, habitus and field, provides a lens through which
to identify the dynamics of power, or powerlessness that may be experienced by Refugees
in Schools. Whilst Bourdieu’s theories on power or its absence, along with his concepts of
field and habitus provide insights into the educational challenges faced by refugees. It will
be argued that it is necessary to promote a teacher habitus, and pedagogies, that responds
to the particular circumstances that Refugees experience. National and State educational
policies are examined in order to establish their relevance, along with any specific guidance
for the teaching of refugee children and adolescents.

The dominant discourse regarding refugees in Australia is one characterised by negativity.

This has been highly politicised over many years, and more recently has been conflated with
the discourse on national security in an age of terrorism. The use of phraseology such as
“queue jumpers” and “Illegal Maritime Arrivals”, even though not supported by laws or
facts, enhances the negative connotations regarding Refugees. Julian Burnside stated
(Burnside. Julian, 2014 Sydney Peace Prize Lecture.) “That both major political parties
sought political favour in the 2013 Federal election by promising cruelty to refugees who
came by boat.” The effect of this discourse is to demonise Refugees in general, and in
particular those who came by boat as “criminals “and “illegals”, and who, by implication, are
a threat to the safety of the Australian population. MacDonald has analysed the media
reporting of one particular case regarding a refugee in Melbourne, which provides an
example of the overall negativity deployed by the media in relation to reporting matters
associated with refugees, (Macdonald. Fiona, 2017). It is critical is to understand that
discourse is political; it constitutes knowledge about people, groups, and phenomena; some
discourses have more power than others resulting in unequal power relations among
people. (Ullman et al 2015). Therefore it can be posited that the dominant discourse in
relation to Refugees results in them being disempowered. In addition the strength and tone
of this discourse firmly positions Refugees as “others”. Teachers are not immune to the
impacts of this discourse.

Ullman (2015) provides a view of Bourdieu’s theories, and his concepts of ‘capital’,
’habitus’ ,and ‘field’, and how they are widely used in educational research to study
multiple aspects of educational practice, and pedagogies, and how they impact on power,
and equity within schools. The concept of capital having three dimensions, namely
economic, cultural and social can be used to assess how these manifest themselves in
relation to Refugees. Given that refugees, for the most part, arrive in Australia with little to
no capital, be it economic, social, or cultural, and though they will have cultural capital
based on their previous lives, this might be judged to have little value in their new
homeland. This dearth of the various forms of capital translates into an absence of power.
For the purposes of this essay the most relevant ‘fields’ to consider are those of schools and
the various levels of educational policy. These fields have been constructed over long
periods of time, and are unknown to refugees on their arrival. The habitus of refugee
students is generally unsuited for negotiating the complexities of schooling in Australia. The
other areas of habitus’ that are of major importance to educational equity, and social
justice, are those of the teaching staff, administrators and managers. Fraser, (Fraser. Nancy,
2008) enunciated a principle of Parity of Participation in relation to justice. She states that
“according to this principle, justice requires social arrangements that allow all to participate
as peers in social life”. Fraser (2008) suggests that there are three barriers to participatory
parity that are required to be removed, namely un-economic structures, institutionalised
hierarchies of cultural value, and rules that deny participants a voice. It can be argued that
refugee students are likely to experience injustice in their educational experiences due to
such barriers, since they have deficits in all three dimensions. Keddie’s (2011) research and
study of three schools in Queensland, found that they had made significant progress in
addressing issues of educational equity for minority groups of students including refugees
and Indigenous girls (Keddie. Amanda, 2011). The three schools are recognised as exemplary
in supporting equity for marginalised students. Keddie (2011) commences her article by
summarising the Principal of one of the schools views on what just and equitable schooling
means to the Principal: “as being to remove the barriers in students’ lives that prevent them
being all they can be”. Keddie (2011) found this view was reflected in each of the study’s
three schools. The study found that teachers’ own raised awareness of the ways in which
schooling (such as white/western driven advocacy) can mute the voices of marginalised
groups, resulted in them devising ways of dismantling some of the social patterns that
distort and under value marginalised student’s culture. Keddie (2011) reports that she found
that all three schools shared Fraser’s (2007) view on ‘participatory parity’, and all have taken
initiatives to remove barriers such as patterns of disrespect and non-recognition in order to
address cultural injustices. Keddie (Amanda Keddie 2012) carried out further research into a
single school called ‘Blackberry’ primary school. Keddie (2012)reports that the Schools’
Principal attributed great importance to the School’s vision and values framework, which is
explicitly focused on creating and maintaining a socially cohesive climate , through an
emphasis on diversity. Based on interviews with the Principal, Keddie (2012) observes that
the Principal identified cultural domination, disrespect and non-recognition as matters that
can prevent refugees achieving parity in their education. The Principal also noted the
discriminatory nature of NAPLAN type testing in relation to marginalised students. Watkins
and Noble’s (Watkins, Megan. Noble, Greg. 2016) article enquires into whether multicultural
education addresses the current range of dynamic complexities experienced in education.
Based on both quantitative and qualitative research they argue that the current underlying
approach to cultural recognition is based on a view of culture as ‘difference’, and is
inadequate in relation to the more complex and dynamic identities of students and their
communities, that are driven by globalisation. In doing so they postulate that a discourse of
tolerance and respect, may in fact be an unreflexively civility that actually continues a
politics of identity. They argue that it is necessary for teachers to: “engage with these critical
perspectives in order to move beyond them, and towards a post-critical pedagogy and
curriculum relevant to contemporary schooling systems” They note that this requires
teachers to develop the intellectual capacities in order to critique and construct new
pedagogies that reflect and address the ever changing dynamics of culture within society. A
similar stance is articulated by Geneva Gay in her article (Gay. Geneva, p146. 2010) where
she states that: “Learning to read scholarship about cultural diversity should be a prominent
part of teacher education, especially that produced by scholars of colour who deliberately
embed cultural nuance in their writing…”.
The migration and, pre-migration experiences of refugee families may often include time
spent in refugee camps, violence, and abuse by authorities and non-state actors. Thus many
may be suffering from trauma and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, all of which adds a
further degree of complexity to establishing policies and pedagogies that work to deliver
equitable educational results. Failure to deliver equity and social justice to refugee students
will result in them achieving educational results below what they might otherwise achieve
with all the long term adverse consequences that follow. It must be stated at this point that
such issues of social justice and equity apply equally to other students from marginalised
groups such as indigenous, same-sex attracted, transgender, gender non- conforming, and
other minorities who are judged to be “others”. It could be suggested that the development
and establishment of a ‘teacher’ and ‘school’ habitus that moves to address justice and
equity for refugees, will also improve the situation for other minority groups of students and
vice versa.

The ‘2008 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians’, produced by
the Ministerial Council on Education Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, is the
overarching policy statement adopted by the various levels of Government in Australia. This
declaration committed to the development of the national curriculum, and whilst it makes
numerous commitments to improving the education of Indigenous young people; it is
however silent in relation to the education of Refugees. A review of the National Curriculum
(ACAR, 2013) does acknowledge refugees as one of the groups of student experiencing
educational disadvantage, but then makes no specific recommendation regarding their
particular requirements. Research by Sidhu and Taylor (Sidhu, Ravinder; Taylor, Sandra;
2007.) sought to research how the Commonwealth and State Governments were seeking to
address the issue of equity in education for refugees. The data used was publically available
information such as policies, and specific teacher assistance material from the various
Governments’ web sites. They analysed in detail the material available from these sources
and reported three key observations. First that in general refugee students were treated as
invisible. Secondly that there was not a coherent agenda for educational equity using the
accepted supporting concepts. Finally that the current educational environment works
against providing a caring, and welcoming environment for refugee students. In order to
establish whether the same situation prevails 10 years after this research, a cursory high
level examination was undertaken of a number of these web sites. It was found that whilst
the State Governments of NSW, Victoria and Queensland explicitly acknowledged the
special needs of refugee youths, and provided a significant range of teacher support
resources, along with other initiatives. An example being the Victorian Department of
Education’s web page’s introduction relating to refugees education, which notes that
refugee students will require additional support in the areas of English language, and issues
relating to how the deal with their migration and pre-migration experiences as they
progress to mainstream education. This captures at a high level the broader range of issues
that refugee students may have to cope with, rather than just a deficit in the English
language. However the Governments of SA and WA, NT, ACT, and the Commonwealth
Government generally grouped refugees along with EAL/D learners in relation to their
educational needs. The Refugee Council of Australia have advocated for a range of reforms
to address the visa and financial impediments that act to limit access to education for
Refugees. (Refugee Council of Australia, 2015). The above examples can be viewed as
advocacy in favour of attempting to address some of the capital deficits experienced by
refugees and modification of the “fields” they encounter in relation to education.

In conclusion it may be stated with some confidence that the dominant discourse in
Australia results in multiple negative impacts on Refugees, and their education. Utilising
Bourdieu’s theory of ‘capitals’, ‘fields’ and ‘habitus’ confirms the deficits in economic and
cultural capital experienced by refugees. Nancy Fraser’s (2008) concepts of ‘parity of
participation’ also provided a useful lens through which to examine the injustice in
education for marginalised groups, and the barriers they face. The research by Keddie
(2011) identified three schools where the ‘habitus’ had been consciously changed to address
the disadvantage experienced by refugees and other minority groups, and thereby improve
the justice and equity of the educational experience for these groups of students. The
research by Sidhu et al (2007) concluded that the educational policy frameworks in 2007
were deficient in specifically identifying and addressing the educational needs of refugees. A
cursory examination of their previously used data sources indicated that a number of
educational authorities had developed more appropriate and directed policies, and
guidance, regarding the education of refugees, but that in many other cases refugee
students were merely grouped with other EAL/D students. It is therefore concluded that
Refugee students in Australia continue to experience educational disadvantage, and
inequity which will lead, in many cases to negative consequences on their life aspirations.

Reference List

1. Burnside, J. (2014) “Without Justice there will not be peace”. Sydney Peace Prize Lecture
2014

2. Fraser, N. (2008). "Abnormal Justice." Critical Inquiry 34(3): 393-422.The University of

Chicago Press

3. Gay, G. (2010). “Acting on Beliefs in Teacher Education for Cultural Diversity”. Journal of
Teacher Education 61(1-2):143-152

4. Keddie, Amanda. “Educating for Diversity and Social Justice”, P27-30. Taylor and
Francis, 2011.

5. Keddie, A. (2012). "Pursuing justice for refugee students: addressing issues of cultural
(mis)recognition." International Journal of Inclusive Education 16(12): 1295-1310.

6. MacDonald, F. (2017). "Positioning young refugees in Australia: media discourse and social
exclusion." International Journal of Inclusive Education: 1-14.

7. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training, and Youth Affairs, (2008).

Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians

8. Refugee Council of Australia, (2015). “Barriers To Education For People Seeking Asylum and
Refugees On Temporary Visas”

9. Sidhu, Ravinder., Taylor, Sandra. (2007). “Educational provision for refugee youth in
Australia:left to chance?”. Journal of Sociology 2007 The Australian Sociological Association,
Vol 43(3): 283-300

10. Watkins, M. Noble, G. (2016). “Thinking beyond recognition: Multiculturalism, cultural

intelligence, and professional capacities of Teachers”, Review of Education, Pedagogy, and
Cultural Studies”, 38:1, 42-57.

11. Ferfolja, T. Diaz, Criss Jones. Ullman,J. 2015. “Understanding Sociological Theory for
Educational Practices”. Cambridge University Press.
12. Government of Victoria Department of Education
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/support/diversity/eal/Pages/ealsupportr
efugee.aspx#link60
13. ACT Government Department of Education
https://www.education.act.gov.au/publications_and_policies/publications_a-
z/annual_report/annual_report_2011-
2012/section_c/c22_act_multicultural_strategy_2010-2014

14. Government of NSW Department of Education https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-

library/policies/multicultural-education-policy

15. Government of Queensland Department of Education

http://education.qld.gov.au/schools/grants/state/targeted/refugee-program.html
http://education.qld.gov.au/schools/inclusive/cultural-linguistic-diversity.html

16. Refugee Council of Australia

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/publications/barriers-education-seeking-asylum/