Feature The Educational Resettlement of Refugee Children Examining Several Theoretical Approaches Amy B. Lerner Introduction Second Language (ESL) assistance, which and challenges that Brofenbrenner’s eco- many schools lack the resources to provide logical model of development helps to clari- Each year, approximately 100,000 (Roxas, 2008). fy” (p. 242). Lustig explains that “aspects of refugees arrive in the United States (Refu- Research has shown that educational the refugee experience may vary widely…. gee Council USA). Nearly half of these ar- resettlement in the U.S. is, for the most but are characterized in all cases by certain rivals are children. The number of refugees part, far from successful. Why, then, have chaos-generating physical and emotional worldwide has more than sextupled since we yet to institute policies and practices universals: deprivation, upheaval, fear, the 1950s, and according to the United that address issues pertaining to the edu- uncertainty, and loss” (p. 242). States Committee for Refugees & Immi- cational integration of refugee children? Research has helped demonstrate grants (USCRI) this number is expected to What new knowledge and perspectives these “chaos-generating” effects on the continue to grow in coming years (Szente, would help researchers and educators ap- psychological development of refugees, Hoot, & Taylor, 2006; United States Com- proach this problem? particularly with regard to academic mittee for Refugees & Immigrants, 2009). achievement and psychopathology. For Despite this recent history and future Developmental Niche Theory example, Leavey, Hollins, King, Barnes, expectations and predictions, no formal Papadopoulos, and Grayson (2004) found framework currently exists for integrating Super and Harkness’s (1986) develop- mental niche theory suggests that culture that refugee children are likely to have refugee children into American schools. many risk factors for academic failure and Commonly, refugee children entering intersects with child development in three systems: the child’s physical and social psychological distress, while researchers the school system in this new country are Beiser, Dion, Gotowiec, Hyman, and Vu placed either in first grade (regardless of settings, the customs and patterns of child- care, and the psychology of the caretakers. (1995) and Kinzie, Sack, Angell, Manson, their age) or in a class that corresponds to abd Rath (1986) discovered that behavioral their chronological age (Szilassy & Arendas, With the refugee child in mind, all three of these systems merit consideration. problems, depression, and post-traumatic 2007). Both options present problems. stress disorder (PTSD) are all common When refugee children are placed with As issues of acculturation are central to challenges of resettlement, we ought then among refugee students. younger classes they may experience social Similarly, Roxas (2008) found that and emotional difficulties because of the to look at the educational resettlement of refugee children from the perspective of the refugee students often experience rejec- differences that exist in the development of tion, isolation, lower achievement scores children of unlike age groups (e.g., physical developmental niche as well as related theo- ries. The purpose of the following discussion on standardized tests, and higher dropout and cognitive development). When refugee rates. While the existing research is rife children are placed with children of a dif- is to examine several culturally informed frameworks that may be applied to issues with Western psychological perspectives, ferent peer group these dissimilarities can there has been very little investigation of exacerbate resettlement stress (Szilassy & surrounding the education resettlement of refugee children in America. cultural issues surrounding the resettle- Arendas, 2007). ment of refugee children. On the other hand, those refugee chil- In this article I seek to shed light on the implications of these perspectives for dren placed in classes with students their Ecological Systems Theory own age are unlikely to be able to keep policy and practice, and to bring forth new up with schoolwork without intervention, questions that challenge the ways in which Again referencing Brofenbrenner’s as refugee students typically do not have researchers currently view the develop- (1979) ecological systems theory, Lustig the “prerequisite academic experience in ment of refugee children. concludes that “the upheaval and uncer- the course subject matter” (Roxas, 2008, tainty of the refugee experience fundamen- p. 6). Further, the vast majority of refugee The Nature tally threaten the microsystem” (p. 240). children do not speak the language of their of the Refugee Experience The microsystem, involving those closest new country and thus require English as a to the child, encompasses structures and The first step in examining education people with whom the child has direct con- resettlement issues is to ask what, pre- tact. Lustig further explains that refugee Amy B. Lerner is a Ph.D. student cisely, we mean by “the refugee experience.” children’s parents “may be compromised in the School of Education Lustig (2010) answers this from an ecologi- in their caretaking abilities, proximal at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, cal perspective: “the refugee experiences a processes may be diminished in numbers Chapel Hill, North Carolina. series of interrelated events, interactions, and effectiveness” (p. 240). FALL 2012 9 Feature This is just one example of the many unique defining characteristics of refugee take place. “Such role reversals between ways in which “refugee-ness” means inter- children—their backgrounds and the cul- children and parents create identity confu- ferences in the bi-directional influences tural identities they bring with them—are sion and conflict between the generations” of the microsystem and, consequently, in not typically appreciated in American (McBrien, 2005, p. 330; Zhou, 2001). healthy development overall for children. schools (Malkki, 1996; Moselsson, 2011). According to Quinn (2005), one of the In many ways we can see how “key aspects Refugee children are expected to leave be- universals of child rearing is for caretakers of development, such as education, work, hind their past lives, to shed memories of to establish experiential consistencies. In or interactions with family, are sacrificed their previous experiences, and to quickly the case of refugee parents, this universal to stay alive” (p. 243). assimilate into American culture (Suárez- may not always be possible. Acculturation, This claim by Lustig is further sup- Orozco & Suárez-Orozco, 2001; McBrien, for refugee families, may mean the disrup- ported by LeVine’s (1974) model, which 2005). Yet, as experience demonstrates, tion of child-rearing practices. Quinn dis- suggests a hierarchy of goals in which assimilation is not the most appropriate cusses the notion of a child-rearing model survival and physical well-being are first acculturation process for refugee children. that, like cultural knowledge, is “deeply in- and foremost. LeVine argues that only grained, indeed embodied, in us” (p. 488). after these basic life needs are met can Integration as Optimal Acculturation Quinn describes, as well, a communal further personality development, such as In order to examine approaches to phenomenon in many cultures, a “pattern self-fulfillment, occur. This process may the educational resettlement of refugee of child rearing to which a child is exposed significantly impact the development of children and suggest changes to practice [that] is even more regular because it ex- refugees who have endured—and may still and policy it is useful to first understand tends beyond the primary caretakers and be undergoing—experiences of struggling processes of acculturation. Resettlement beyond the household to a larger commu- for survival. takes many forms. nity of child rearers, all of whom share, to Others have argued that culture and Cross-cultural psychologist John Ber- a great extent, a common cultural model child development are intertwined. In a ry (1974) has developed a widely accepted for child rearing and common strategies recent interview, psychologist Barbara strategies model that examines such for its implementation” (p. 488). Again this Rogoff said, “The study of culture and processes (McBrien, 2005). In his model, communal pattern may be problematic in development go together: Culture is best Berry labeled four types of acculturation: the case of refugee children in the U.S., understood historically… Development assimilation, separation, marginalization, as the culture of the refugee child’s home is best understood culturally; all people and integration. Assimilation occurs when environment is likely incompatible with develop in the context of particular times immigrants openly embrace their new the American culture of the child’s school and places” (Glaveanu, 2011, p.410). If culture and reject their previous culture; community. we accept Rogoff’s argument, what does separation is evident when the opposite Quinn also presents vignettes from this mean for refugee children and their takes place, i.e., when immigrants entirely several cross-cultural studies of child de- development post-resettlement? reject their new culture and embrace their velopment that “illustrate how child-rear- previous culture. Marginalization occurs ing practices are engineered to make the Upended Cultural Environment when the refugee