Inclusion and exclusion within a policy of national integration: refugee education in Kenya’s Kakuma Refugee Camp

Abstract

This paper explores the impact of global policy shifts toward 'national integration' on schooling for refugee youth in Kenya. Based on interviews and classroom observations in Kakuma Refugee Camp, we theorize that integration manifests in a multidirectional, hierarchical manner as few refugees integrate up into government schools, while most integrate down into segregated camp schools. We examine how youth interpret and navigate these oppositional paths, imbued with assumptions about quality and status. We argue that global policy can foster structures for physical integration; however, social integration, integrally connected to protection and opportunity, depends on local strategies and practices, encompassing formal decisions about adapting policy, as well as embedded beliefs about the purposes of educating refugees and their long-term inclusion in host societies. This study responds to calls for deeper sociological attention to education and global migration, as states expand educational opportunities for refugee populations while negotiating educational rights amongst citizens.

The Purposes of Refugee Education: Policy and Practice of Including Refugees in National Education Systems

“…Inclusion in national education systems enables refugees to access schooling at higher rates by addressing common barriers such as lack of infrastructure and limited numbers of teachers (Mendenhall, Russell, and Buckner 2017). Yet even when inclusion is mandated by policy, access can be limited when national systems already struggle to meet nationals' needs or when refugees live in educationally marginalized areas of host countries (Bellino and Dryden-Peterson 2018). At the time of our study, for example, only 41.5 percent of national children were enrolled in primary education in South Sudan Access to quality education expands economic, social, and civic opportunities (Hanushek and Woessmann 2015), which could enable a future of integration in the country of exile.…”

“…Recognized certification could facilitate post-school opportunities within the nation-state of exile, and possibly in the country of origin or transnationally (Kirk 2009). On the other hand, if the quality of education within a national system is low, as in many refugee-hosting countries, then inclusion in the system would not mean access to quality education (Bellino and Dryden-Peterson 2018;Buckner, Spencer, and Cha 2017;Dryden-Peterson 2016). For example, Turkana County in Kenya, where Kakuma refugee camp is located, ranked 45 out of 47 counties in learning outcomes at the end of lower primary (Uwezo 2016).…”

Education, merit and mobility: Opportunities and aspirations of refugee youth in Kenya’s Kakuma refugee camp

“…The prospect of introducing a university in the camp (which was instituted during year 2 of this study, although financially inaccessible to most youth) was a positive development in the abstract, but youth rejected it as a structural response to their individual aspirations. There was consensus that education outside the camp would always be of higher quality, thereby elevating the status of a credential that was less accessible to them by nature of its exclusionary character (also see Bellino & Dryden‐Peterson, 2019). Underlying these statements is an assumption that formal educational opportunities need to be limited in order to translate into meaningful credentials, and eventually into socioeconomic returns.…”

Increasing Inclusion or Furthering Fragmentation? How the Global Strategy to Include Refugees in National Education Systems Has Been Implemented in Lebanon.

“…Similarly, in their examination of the gap between refugee education policy and education provisions for refugees in Lebanon, Buckner, Spencer, and Cha (2017) stress the need to understand the competing authorities that affect local decision making. In another study that examines inclusion in the Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya, Bellino and Dryden-Peterson (2019) argue that inclusion is multi-directional and that for most refugees, inclusion entails "integrating down" into poorly resourced camp-based schools where they are segregated from their Kenyan peers. The authors underscore the need to distinguish between the physical and social dimensions of inclusion: the latter depends on local strategies, resources, and relationships.…”