TY - JOUR
AU - Baker,, Sally
AB - Abstract Empirical interest in exploring the settlement experiences of people from refugee backgrounds has long been an area of research interest and advocacy. In particular, there has been significant growth in research that focuses on students from refugee backgrounds as they navigate the education systems of these settlement contexts, with a particular focus on refugee children and youth in schooling contexts. Less is known about the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education. This article speaks to this gap in our collective knowledge, offering a meta-scoping study of 46 papers on students from refugee backgrounds in international higher education contexts. A key contribution of this article is its holistic view of higher education – as it explores higher education in both refugee camp situations in countries of first asylum and countries of settlement – as well as its attention to the theoretical and methodological frames that have been used to make sense of the experiences of these students. From our reading of the field, we offer an analysis of the gaps in the literature, and propose a research agenda for further advancing both our collective understandings and the possibilities for institutional transformation and advocacy with these students. 1. INTRODUCTION Access to education is a fundamental human right.1 However, little research has specifically focused on access to higher education and refugees, whose pursuit of education is contextualised by experiences of persecution, forced migration, and navigating life in a country of asylum or resettlement, often without access to the same rights and opportunities as citizens. Are people with refugee backgrounds restricted from accessing higher education? Moreover, many of the benefits of education are predicated on continued residency. What happens when the society in which they have settled is not of their choosing and does not view them as permanent residents? What is the value of attaining a degree if the student cannot continue towards related employment in or residency in the country of settlement? These are questions that, as we outline in this scoping study, are routinely overlooked in scholarly research. In the context of the highest levels of human displacement since the Second World War, with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimating that at least 65 million people currently live in displacement with over 21 million of those meeting the criteria of refugee status, such questions regarding refugees and access to education cannot continue to be overlooked.2 More than half of refugees and displaced people are under the age of 18.3 Of those refugees who are currently living in camps, just under 4 million have no access to school education; by UNHCR’s estimation, refugee children are five times less likely to go to school, with their disproportionate lack of access to schooling increasing with age.4 The lack of access to education is shown to be highly detrimental to people seeking refuge; without education, refugees are at risk of exploitation, abuse and further disadvantage. The UNHCR report on refugee education succinctly outlines this: The returns on investing in education are immense and far-reaching. There is solid evidence that quality education gives children a place of safety and can also reduce child marriage, child labour, exploitative and dangerous work, and teenage pregnancy. It gives them the opportunity to make friends and find mentors, and provides them with the skills for self-reliance, problem solving, critical thinking and teamwork. It improves their job prospects and boosts confidence and self-esteem.5 The benefits of higher education are just as compelling. Indeed, as the UNHCR points out, highly educated refugees can become leaders in their communities and support the future rebuilding of their countries. In countries of settlement, refugees who have engaged in tertiary education are more likely to find work and contribute to the local economy.6 However, when it comes to higher education, only 1 per cent of refugees can access higher education, compared with 34 per cent of people globally, and when refugees are able to secure access to higher education, there is a small but growing body of literature that consistently suggests there are many challenges to their successful participation, as we elaborate below.7 Rather than continue this frequent, and important, focus on the issues and challenges that students from a refugee background face when attempting to access, participate in, and utilise higher education study, to which we have previously contributed, in this paper we seek to scope the broad landscape of research related to refugees in higher education.8 In doing so, we consider how addressing gaps in the research may offer new ways to frame the topic of higher education for students from a refugee background beyond a lens of issues and problems. We follow the argument of Malcolm Tight that we need “to synthesise and learn the lessons from all of the research that has been done to date through systematic reviews and meta-analyses”, so as to have a clear idea of what we know, what we need to know, and suggest an agenda for future research.9 In examining and synthesising the existing “evidence-base”, we seek to survey where the field of studies into students from refugee background is now, in terms of patterns in thematics, as well as offering analysis of the politics of knowledge in this field. From this analysis, this inquiry also aims to contribute to the shaping of future research in this field. We ask four questions: What is known about the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education? What is known about who is writing about students from refugee backgrounds in higher education, where from and in which publications? What is known about teachers’ experiences of teaching students from refugee backgrounds in higher education? What are the dominant theoretical and methodological framings in this literature? 2. METHODOLOGY: A META-SCOPING STUDY This article offers what we term a meta-scoping study. We are drawing and building on the methodological outline offered by Arksey and O’Malley, who characterise a scoping review as a mapping exercise that takes a broad and exploratory approach to the literature as a way to establish key themes that emerge from it.10 In this way, a scoping review aligns with the underpinning epistemology of meta-ethnography, which views such exploratory accounts of the literature as “interpretive rather than aggregative” and “driven by the desire to construct adequate [rather than exhaustive] interpretive explanations”.11 This methodology offers a particular way of approaching, navigating, and representing the body of texts that constitutes the literature on students from refugee backgrounds in higher education. It takes a meta-view of the literature by asking questions of the literature itself, by which the meta part of the scoping study is an intention to make sense of the underpinning politics of knowledge. That is, who gets to speak, about what, and who is listening. A further distinguishing feature is the consultation undertaken with “stakeholders” – other scholar-practitioners, whose work indicates a level of “expertise” in one or more of the thematic areas identified through the processes of review, synthesis and interpretation. This additional phase of stakeholder validation and consultation can extend discussion and knowledge production beyond the parameters of the academy and into the practitioner community, as was the case with our consultation (see the following section). It is also a key element of Suri and Clarke’s model of Methodologically Inclusive Research Synthesis (MIRS), which they designed “to contest the hegemony of meta-analytic methods by constructing a methodologically inclusive counter-narrative about the advancements of research synthesis methods”.12 The MIRS model is grounded in a reflexive and inclusive approach to reviewing, which is a point of departure from other methods of reviewing literature, which rely on more restrictive selection criteria. Suri and Clarke advance a set of underpinning questions that need to be considered for a review to be methodologically and epistemologically inclusive: “Who is researching? Whose questions are being researched? What are the tools, techniques, and perspectives employed in research? What is the relationship between the researcher and the participants?”13 Suri and Clarke argue that the reviewers’ subjectivities and position in the review process and product, and the relationships between these, need to be explored to “actively take into consideration the varied interests of different stakeholders in the field, including those of oneself”.14 Furthermore, they call for the unpacking of problematic assumptions about what ‘counts’ as legitimate literature, and advocate for close attention of the wording of the review questions to ensure that they will yield the “right” kinds of answers.15 In an attempt to engage with Suri and Clarke’s questions, we are two privileged, white, educated, Anglophone scholars. Both of us have PhDs in critical sociological/anthropological fields, and developed an interest in researching the experiences of people from refugee backgrounds from our practitioner backgrounds – one of us has taught English in adult learning contexts for several years; the other has worked and volunteered in refugee resettlement for many years, including as the coordinator of multiple homework centres that provided educational support to high school students. We have both travelled and have moved to other countries, thus providing a shared experience from which to empathise with (but not understand) the challenges of arriving and settling into a new country. Through our collaboration on a small-scale project at a regional Australian university, we started collecting and annotating literature on students from refugee backgrounds, covering school, adult and higher education; settlement issues; and methodological commentary. From this exploratory foray into the literature, as well as participation in recent meetings with a focus on refugee issues in Australia, the review questions asked in this article emerged: they are our questions, informed by our reading, our being in the world, and our continued interaction with refugee communities. Our tools and techniques include our analytic lenses; we draw predominantly on critical sociological insights to drive our understandings. Our relationships with our “participants” (our colleagues in this community of refugee scholars) are continually developing; we do not seek to speak as “experts” on this issue, or on the experiences of people who have lived through trauma and torture that so often form part of the impetus for refugees to flee their home countries. Instead, we seek to open a space of dialogue with “our ancestors” as well as “our [current] community(ies)” in this field.16 2.1. Methods The stages that guided this meta-scoping exploration of the multiple and overlapping fields of refugee studies, equity and widening participation, and higher education are drawn from Arksey and O’Malley’s framework.17 2.1.1. Stage 1: The review questions The following questions were posed to guide the review process. The first two questions focus on the meta part of the scoping study: What is known about who is writing about students from refugee backgrounds in higher education, where from and in which publications? What are the dominant theoretical and methodological framings in this literature? What is known about the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education? What is known about teachers’ experiences of teaching students from refugee backgrounds in higher education? 2.1.2. Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies The literature included in this review were sourced from a variety of online repositories, including EBSCOhost Education Research Complete, ProQuest databases, the Web of Science database, the University library database and Google Scholar. Other studies were identified via citation reviews (exploring where key literature had been cited by others), and through the hand searching of key journals which emerged through the process of review. The literature relating to students from refugee backgrounds in higher education, was collected, synthesised and interpreted from September 2015 until August 2018. The search terms used included (but were not restricted to): refugee refugee students asylum-seeker(s) migrants higher education university equity participation access aspirations transition These terms were selected to reflect the dominant discourses that shape (and are shaped by) the literature on equity and higher education, reflecting Sally’s research interests. Since we wanted to capture the broadest possible body of literature, we began by searching with more general keyword combinations (for example “refugees” and “higher education”) and then narrowed the search with more specific keyword combinations (for example “refugees,” “higher education,” and “equity”). 2.1.3. Stage 3: Study selection Like all literature reviews, this meta-scoping study is not intended to be exhaustive. Nonetheless, we have made a concerted effort to include all relevant literature, within the parameters of in- and exclusion outlined below. The study provides an extensive overview of research related to students from a refugee background and higher education at a particular point in time. We have included research published between 1999 to early 2018 because that period covers enough time to capture longitudinal trends. Significantly, the majority of research was published between 2010 and 2018, with a significant number of contributions published in 2010 (largely due to a Special Issue of Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees on access to higher education). Although we recognise that we can only offer a partial picture, examination of the dates of publication (see Table 1) shows how the number of articles published on issues relating to refugees and higher education have continually grown over the period since 2011. Table 1. The spread of dates for the reviewed articles 1999–2009 4 2010 9 2011 4 2013 4 2014 3 2015 6 2016 7 2017 7 2018 2 1999–2009 4 2010 9 2011 4 2013 4 2014 3 2015 6 2016 7 2017 7 2018 2 Table 1. The spread of dates for the reviewed articles 1999–2009 4 2010 9 2011 4 2013 4 2014 3 2015 6 2016 7 2017 7 2018 2 1999–2009 4 2010 9 2011 4 2013 4 2014 3 2015 6 2016 7 2017 7 2018 2 In total, 46 papers have been included in this review, all of which are peer-reviewed journal articles. We made the decision to exclude contributions from books, conference papers and other “grey” literature for many reasons. Firstly, although we ourselves do not agree that valuable research is confined to peer reviewed journal articles (or that the peer review process itself means unequivocally that research is methodologically and/or theoretically sound), we do recognise the point made by Malcolm Tight, who suggests that “in the contemporary world of performance indicators and rankings, refereed journal articles are the gold standard”.18 Subsequently, for this review we focus explicitly on peer reviewed journal articles since these constitute a distinct field of knowledge production that is oriented through specific relationships and dynamics of power. For example, the majority of refereed journals and especially those that are most prominent and well regarded at disciplinary levels are often managed from institutions in the global North, and the supposed “rigor” that is required of authors attempting to publish within them can mean that research produced outside of elite institutions is often excluded.19 Subsequently, in focusing only on research published through peer reviewed journals we do not mean to reinforce the problematic power hierarchies that may be produced through them, but to instead recognise that these avenues of research dissemination may nonetheless powerfully influence how groups of people come to be approached and represented more broadly. We consider that analysing how the “gold standard” of research approaches and represents the experiences of students from a refugee background in higher education can reveal important underlying power structures and assumptions that implicitly guide such research. We further contend that it is important that future work be conducted in consideration of such findings as those provided through this review. Many articles that came up in the course of the search included peripheral references to the experiences of students from a refugee background in higher education, for example in relation to core topics of universal education in conflict-affected contexts or in regards to internationalisation. Although such topics are important, in this review we have only included articles in which the predominant focus of an article, indicated from the abstract and keywords, is students from a refugee background and higher education. 2.1.4. Stage 4: Charting the data While searching for, collecting and collating the literature, an on-going process of synthesis also took place. This involved the filtering of the literature through the dominant themes that were interpreted as emerging. This thematic alignment was iterative, meaning that already collected texts were revisited to ensure that the dominant theme under which a contribution was listed/archived continued to be the “best fit” in view of new and emergent themes. 2.1.5. Stage 5: Collating, summarising and reporting the results In this stage of the process, the total of 46 articles was split into two and each researcher read half, making extensive notes on each paper and noting key themes before cross validating with each other (Table 2). Our notes/findings were firstly written in narrative form, followed by “basic numerical analysis” (number of studies, distribution of dates and themes etc.). Following principles of qualitative data analysis set out by Charmaz (2014), we then developed a set of shared codes based on the most prominent themes from our dual readings of the literature, and we assigned each article a set of codes that were most applicable to it. We used these codes to organise our analysis, to make links across different articles, and to identify wider trends in the broad body of literature.20 We did not use a formal coding programme for this process, but instead developed our dual analysis and associated coding through tables in shared digital word processing documents. The most prominent codes developed to analyse the data included: “preparation for study”, “social networks/connections”, “financial considerations”, “special access for students from a refugee background”, although within these broader coding categories we developed more specific codes, for example in regards to the “social networks/connections” code we developed sub-categories of “other students from a refugee background”, “other students/peers [broad]”, “parents and siblings”, “wider community groups [neighbourhood level]”, “community organisations”, and “faith-based organisations”. Following this process of co-analysis and coding, we then invited key stakeholders, through the consultation process outlined directly below, to read a table with the data, our analysis, and the key thematic codes in it to give feedback on our readings and to diversify the analysis with practitioner perspectives and the perspectives of other researchers. Table 2. Analysis of the thematic orientations of each article (in alphabetical order) included in the scoping study Author, year, country Publication Theme Anselme & Hands (2010) Protracted refugee situations Baker, Ramsay, Irwin & Miles (2017) Higher education, Support, Teaching and learning, Student experiences Crea (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Development Crea & McFarland (2015) Refugee camps, Higher education Crea & Sparnon (2017) Refugee camps, Higher education, Distance education, Sub-Saharan African, Digital Dahya and Dryden-Peterson (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Pathways Dryden-Peterson (2010) Higher education, Protracted displacement, Refugees, Durable solutions Dryden-Peterson (2016) Education, Refugees, Migration, Low-income countries, Teachers Ferede (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Literature Review Gately (2014) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Gately (2015) Higher education, Student experience, Sudanese refugees Hannah (1999) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Support Harris & Marlowe (2011) Higher education, African refugees, Student experiences, Challenges Harris, Chi & Spark (2013) Higher education, Gender, Female experiences, African refugees Harris, Marlowe & Nyuon (2015) Higher education, Gender, Hegemonic knowledges, South Sudanese refugees Harris, Spark & Watts (2015) Higher education, Gender, Female student experiences, African refugees Hatoss & Huijser (2010) Higher education, Gender, Sudanese refugees Hirano (2014) Refugees, Access, Support, Higher education, Literacies Hirano (2015) Refugees, Higher education, Reading, Academic literacies, Student experiences Joyce, Earnest, DeMori & Silvagni (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Kamyab (2017) Higher education, Syrian refugees, Barriers, Alternative options Kipng’etich & Osman (2016) Teacher training, Refugees, Borderless higher education Kong et al. (2016) Refugees, Higher education, First year, Barriers Lawson (2014) Sudanese refugees, Higher education, Student experience Lenette (2016) Higher education, Refugees, Moral imperative Lenette & Ingamells (2013) Refugees, Higher education, Social work, Pathway to employment MacLaren (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Maringe, Ojo & Chiramba (2017) Refugees, Integration, Higher Education, Disjunctures Morrice (2009) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Student experience Morrice (2013) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Belonging Naidoo (2015) High school, University, Transitions, Refugees students, Teachers Olliff & Couch (2005) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee youth O’Rourke (2011) Refugees, Pathways, Policy context, Barriers, Higher education Perry & Mallozzi (2011) Higher Education, Access, African Refugees, Identity, Discourse Perry & Mallozzi (2016) Refugees, Higher education, Structural barriers, Cultural barriers, Resettlement, Aspirations Peterson (2010) Higher education, Refugees in protracted situations, Resettlement, Barriers Purkey (2010) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee camps Reinhardt, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Deribo, Happ & Nell-Müller (2018) Refugees, Higher education, MOOCs, Integration Shapiro & MacDonald (2017) Refugees, Assets, High school, College Sladek & King (2016) Refugees, Policy, Equity groups, Participation targets Stevenson & Willott (2007) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Barriers, Recommendations Tecle, Ha & Hunter (2017) Newly arrived immigrants and refugees, Teaching, Continuing education, Social Work Vickers, McCarthy & Zammit (2017) Refugees, Higher education, Intercultural peer-mentoring, Belonging Wache & Zufferey (2013) Higher education, Social work, African refugees, Work integrated learning, Challenges Wright & Plasterer (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Zeus (2011) Higher education, Refugee camps, HE in asylum and HE in resettlement Author, year, country Publication Theme Anselme & Hands (2010) Protracted refugee situations Baker, Ramsay, Irwin & Miles (2017) Higher education, Support, Teaching and learning, Student experiences Crea (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Development Crea & McFarland (2015) Refugee camps, Higher education Crea & Sparnon (2017) Refugee camps, Higher education, Distance education, Sub-Saharan African, Digital Dahya and Dryden-Peterson (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Pathways Dryden-Peterson (2010) Higher education, Protracted displacement, Refugees, Durable solutions Dryden-Peterson (2016) Education, Refugees, Migration, Low-income countries, Teachers Ferede (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Literature Review Gately (2014) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Gately (2015) Higher education, Student experience, Sudanese refugees Hannah (1999) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Support Harris & Marlowe (2011) Higher education, African refugees, Student experiences, Challenges Harris, Chi & Spark (2013) Higher education, Gender, Female experiences, African refugees Harris, Marlowe & Nyuon (2015) Higher education, Gender, Hegemonic knowledges, South Sudanese refugees Harris, Spark & Watts (2015) Higher education, Gender, Female student experiences, African refugees Hatoss & Huijser (2010) Higher education, Gender, Sudanese refugees Hirano (2014) Refugees, Access, Support, Higher education, Literacies Hirano (2015) Refugees, Higher education, Reading, Academic literacies, Student experiences Joyce, Earnest, DeMori & Silvagni (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Kamyab (2017) Higher education, Syrian refugees, Barriers, Alternative options Kipng’etich & Osman (2016) Teacher training, Refugees, Borderless higher education Kong et al. (2016) Refugees, Higher education, First year, Barriers Lawson (2014) Sudanese refugees, Higher education, Student experience Lenette (2016) Higher education, Refugees, Moral imperative Lenette & Ingamells (2013) Refugees, Higher education, Social work, Pathway to employment MacLaren (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Maringe, Ojo & Chiramba (2017) Refugees, Integration, Higher Education, Disjunctures Morrice (2009) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Student experience Morrice (2013) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Belonging Naidoo (2015) High school, University, Transitions, Refugees students, Teachers Olliff & Couch (2005) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee youth O’Rourke (2011) Refugees, Pathways, Policy context, Barriers, Higher education Perry & Mallozzi (2011) Higher Education, Access, African Refugees, Identity, Discourse Perry & Mallozzi (2016) Refugees, Higher education, Structural barriers, Cultural barriers, Resettlement, Aspirations Peterson (2010) Higher education, Refugees in protracted situations, Resettlement, Barriers Purkey (2010) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee camps Reinhardt, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Deribo, Happ & Nell-Müller (2018) Refugees, Higher education, MOOCs, Integration Shapiro & MacDonald (2017) Refugees, Assets, High school, College Sladek & King (2016) Refugees, Policy, Equity groups, Participation targets Stevenson & Willott (2007) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Barriers, Recommendations Tecle, Ha & Hunter (2017) Newly arrived immigrants and refugees, Teaching, Continuing education, Social Work Vickers, McCarthy & Zammit (2017) Refugees, Higher education, Intercultural peer-mentoring, Belonging Wache & Zufferey (2013) Higher education, Social work, African refugees, Work integrated learning, Challenges Wright & Plasterer (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Zeus (2011) Higher education, Refugee camps, HE in asylum and HE in resettlement Table 2. Analysis of the thematic orientations of each article (in alphabetical order) included in the scoping study Author, year, country Publication Theme Anselme & Hands (2010) Protracted refugee situations Baker, Ramsay, Irwin & Miles (2017) Higher education, Support, Teaching and learning, Student experiences Crea (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Development Crea & McFarland (2015) Refugee camps, Higher education Crea & Sparnon (2017) Refugee camps, Higher education, Distance education, Sub-Saharan African, Digital Dahya and Dryden-Peterson (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Pathways Dryden-Peterson (2010) Higher education, Protracted displacement, Refugees, Durable solutions Dryden-Peterson (2016) Education, Refugees, Migration, Low-income countries, Teachers Ferede (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Literature Review Gately (2014) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Gately (2015) Higher education, Student experience, Sudanese refugees Hannah (1999) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Support Harris & Marlowe (2011) Higher education, African refugees, Student experiences, Challenges Harris, Chi & Spark (2013) Higher education, Gender, Female experiences, African refugees Harris, Marlowe & Nyuon (2015) Higher education, Gender, Hegemonic knowledges, South Sudanese refugees Harris, Spark & Watts (2015) Higher education, Gender, Female student experiences, African refugees Hatoss & Huijser (2010) Higher education, Gender, Sudanese refugees Hirano (2014) Refugees, Access, Support, Higher education, Literacies Hirano (2015) Refugees, Higher education, Reading, Academic literacies, Student experiences Joyce, Earnest, DeMori & Silvagni (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Kamyab (2017) Higher education, Syrian refugees, Barriers, Alternative options Kipng’etich & Osman (2016) Teacher training, Refugees, Borderless higher education Kong et al. (2016) Refugees, Higher education, First year, Barriers Lawson (2014) Sudanese refugees, Higher education, Student experience Lenette (2016) Higher education, Refugees, Moral imperative Lenette & Ingamells (2013) Refugees, Higher education, Social work, Pathway to employment MacLaren (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Maringe, Ojo & Chiramba (2017) Refugees, Integration, Higher Education, Disjunctures Morrice (2009) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Student experience Morrice (2013) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Belonging Naidoo (2015) High school, University, Transitions, Refugees students, Teachers Olliff & Couch (2005) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee youth O’Rourke (2011) Refugees, Pathways, Policy context, Barriers, Higher education Perry & Mallozzi (2011) Higher Education, Access, African Refugees, Identity, Discourse Perry & Mallozzi (2016) Refugees, Higher education, Structural barriers, Cultural barriers, Resettlement, Aspirations Peterson (2010) Higher education, Refugees in protracted situations, Resettlement, Barriers Purkey (2010) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee camps Reinhardt, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Deribo, Happ & Nell-Müller (2018) Refugees, Higher education, MOOCs, Integration Shapiro & MacDonald (2017) Refugees, Assets, High school, College Sladek & King (2016) Refugees, Policy, Equity groups, Participation targets Stevenson & Willott (2007) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Barriers, Recommendations Tecle, Ha & Hunter (2017) Newly arrived immigrants and refugees, Teaching, Continuing education, Social Work Vickers, McCarthy & Zammit (2017) Refugees, Higher education, Intercultural peer-mentoring, Belonging Wache & Zufferey (2013) Higher education, Social work, African refugees, Work integrated learning, Challenges Wright & Plasterer (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Zeus (2011) Higher education, Refugee camps, HE in asylum and HE in resettlement Author, year, country Publication Theme Anselme & Hands (2010) Protracted refugee situations Baker, Ramsay, Irwin & Miles (2017) Higher education, Support, Teaching and learning, Student experiences Crea (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Development Crea & McFarland (2015) Refugee camps, Higher education Crea & Sparnon (2017) Refugee camps, Higher education, Distance education, Sub-Saharan African, Digital Dahya and Dryden-Peterson (2016) Higher education, Refugee camps, Pathways Dryden-Peterson (2010) Higher education, Protracted displacement, Refugees, Durable solutions Dryden-Peterson (2016) Education, Refugees, Migration, Low-income countries, Teachers Ferede (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Literature Review Gately (2014) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Gately (2015) Higher education, Student experience, Sudanese refugees Hannah (1999) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Support Harris & Marlowe (2011) Higher education, African refugees, Student experiences, Challenges Harris, Chi & Spark (2013) Higher education, Gender, Female experiences, African refugees Harris, Marlowe & Nyuon (2015) Higher education, Gender, Hegemonic knowledges, South Sudanese refugees Harris, Spark & Watts (2015) Higher education, Gender, Female student experiences, African refugees Hatoss & Huijser (2010) Higher education, Gender, Sudanese refugees Hirano (2014) Refugees, Access, Support, Higher education, Literacies Hirano (2015) Refugees, Higher education, Reading, Academic literacies, Student experiences Joyce, Earnest, DeMori & Silvagni (2010) Refugees, Higher education, Student experiences, Barriers to success Kamyab (2017) Higher education, Syrian refugees, Barriers, Alternative options Kipng’etich & Osman (2016) Teacher training, Refugees, Borderless higher education Kong et al. (2016) Refugees, Higher education, First year, Barriers Lawson (2014) Sudanese refugees, Higher education, Student experience Lenette (2016) Higher education, Refugees, Moral imperative Lenette & Ingamells (2013) Refugees, Higher education, Social work, Pathway to employment MacLaren (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Maringe, Ojo & Chiramba (2017) Refugees, Integration, Higher Education, Disjunctures Morrice (2009) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Student experience Morrice (2013) Higher education, Professionals/ highly qualified refugees, Belonging Naidoo (2015) High school, University, Transitions, Refugees students, Teachers Olliff & Couch (2005) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee youth O’Rourke (2011) Refugees, Pathways, Policy context, Barriers, Higher education Perry & Mallozzi (2011) Higher Education, Access, African Refugees, Identity, Discourse Perry & Mallozzi (2016) Refugees, Higher education, Structural barriers, Cultural barriers, Resettlement, Aspirations Peterson (2010) Higher education, Refugees in protracted situations, Resettlement, Barriers Purkey (2010) Pathways, Higher education, Refugee camps Reinhardt, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Deribo, Happ & Nell-Müller (2018) Refugees, Higher education, MOOCs, Integration Shapiro & MacDonald (2017) Refugees, Assets, High school, College Sladek & King (2016) Refugees, Policy, Equity groups, Participation targets Stevenson & Willott (2007) Refugees, Higher education, Access, Barriers, Recommendations Tecle, Ha & Hunter (2017) Newly arrived immigrants and refugees, Teaching, Continuing education, Social Work Vickers, McCarthy & Zammit (2017) Refugees, Higher education, Intercultural peer-mentoring, Belonging Wache & Zufferey (2013) Higher education, Social work, African refugees, Work integrated learning, Challenges Wright & Plasterer (2010) Higher education, Refugee camps Zeus (2011) Higher education, Refugee camps, HE in asylum and HE in resettlement 2.1.6. Stage 6: Consultation with stakeholders This final stage of the process was to ensure that our readings of the literature included in this scoping study both reflect contemporary accounts and debates in the literature, as well as incorporating contributions from colleagues who have helped shape the debates about students from refugee backgrounds in higher education. We recruited “stakeholders” from both within the international academic community, and from “outside” academia in the policy-practice domain, such as colleagues from the Refugee Council of Australia (RCoA) and the Multicultural Youth Advocacy Network (MYAN). We also sought insights from members of the Australian Refugee Education Special Interest Group, which is a collective of students, teachers, practitioners and researchers interested in issues of refugee education across the school, further education, higher education sectors, and community organisations. We directed these stakeholders to respond to the following questions about the article: 1) Do you agree with our interpretations? 2) Are there any parts you disagreed with? 3) Can you see any obvious omissions in the literature we have not included? 4) Were you able to follow our methodology? 5) Are there any areas of future research and advocacy that we have not included/thought of? Overall, the consensus from the generous feedback we received from external readers was overwhelmingly in agreement with our analyses and key themes. Nonetheless, these reviewers encouraged us to extend our analysis in particular areas, specifically in regards to recognising the significance of gender differences, transitions into the workforce following higher education, the problem of continuity in higher education curriculum given the uncertainty of future settlement options for refugees, and, importantly, consideration of authorship in research about refugees, and the absence of people from a refugee background themselves being excluded from opportunities that might enable them to direct these research fields and narratives about displacement. The collection of viewpoints from a variety of perspectives is an important part of our epistemology, and our intention to disrupt the hegemonic politics of knowledge on this issue. The generous “inter-draft” feedback we received helped us to think through the contributions included, to reframe our interpretations, to refine our argument, and to add into the research agenda that we propose at the end of this article. We agree with Arksey and O’Malley that this “adds value” to the process and output of our review.21 3. FINDINGS 3.1. What is known about the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education? Corresponding with the overarching intent of this review, the literature generally concludes that the relationship between refugees and higher education constitutes an under-explored area of research, and that further research is required in this field. Overwhelmingly, the literature argues that supporting refugees to access higher education brings broad benefits across the lives of individual students, their immediate family and friends, and wider society. Although the literature emphasises that “refugees” are not a homogenous group,22 there is general consensus that students from refugee backgrounds have specific experiences that make access to and participation in higher education distinct for them.23 In camp situations in countries of first asylum,24 these factors can include: lack of available options to pursue higher education; lack of resources including internet access and study material to study effectively; difficulty in understanding material and content produced through foreign agencies and delivered by foreign teachers; cultural attitudes towards gender and participation in higher education; and a need to prioritise immediate problems concerning safety, corresponding with agencies to apply for resettlement, working, securing food, and meeting general family responsibilities. 25 In resettlement situations, these factors can include: interrupted education;26 continuing psychological and emotional effects of experiences of trauma;27 lack of familiarity with the dominant language and writing and literacy demands, and social conventions around higher education study in the host society;28 social detachment and difficulties connecting with other students;29 poverty;30 cultural attitudes towards higher education;31 and general difficulties with balancing family responsibilities and higher education study.32 Recommendations on how to improve how students from refugee backgrounds access and participate in higher education are proposed in a number of the studies. These contributions broadly emphasise: that the distinct experiences of refugees need to be recognised as assets rather than deficits;33 the need to develop and provide refugees with access to tailored academic, social, and practical support throughout the process of applying to and studying in higher education contexts;34 the importance of helping students to learn the tacit norms of university life;35 and the need to provide educators with information and support necessary to provide education that meets the distinct needs of students from refugee backgrounds in a way that is sensitive and which recognises their inclusion in higher education as enriching rather than problematic.36 3.2. What contexts and where is research focusing on the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education coming from? Although the meta-scoping study sought to include research focusing on the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds and higher education from contexts across the world, the studies that fit the inclusion criteria were predominantly based on empirical research conducted in contexts of refugee settlement (32), with significantly fewer based on research conducted in protracted refugee situations (8), and non-empirical studies (6) focusing on broad problematisations of students from a refugee background and higher education across both settings. This discrepancy may reflect that higher education is more accessible in resettlement countries and less so in protracted refugee situations, but is nonetheless important because such a dominant focus on the experiences of refugees who have been resettled inverts the actual concentration of refugees worldwide. The vast majority of refugees reside in what the UNHCR refers to as “protracted refugee situations” – that is, they live in camps or urban settings as peoples with little or no civic rights, which generally means that they have no right to access education.37 In contrast, less than 1 per cent of the entire population of refugees who are identified as being in need of resettlement are selected for resettlement each year.38 Given that the majority of refugees are not situated in contexts of resettlement but reside in protracted refugee situations, future research that focuses on how refugees in protracted situations of displacement aspire to and access higher education is crucial if the fourth goal of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (Quality Education for all) is to be met. 3.2.1. Higher education in (re)settlement contexts The meta-scoping study found that a majority of research with students from refugee backgrounds in higher education is conducted in contexts of settlement, after refugees have been resettled from a protracted refugee situation. The findings from these studies describe: how resettled refugees often have high aspirations to participate in higher education that may not be supported through their settlement experiences;39 that students from a refugee background have specific pre-migration experiences and external post-settlement experiences that impact on their study experiences in unique ways, including distinct gender dynamic;40 how students from refugee backgrounds have specific support needs that may not be met through current formal institutional formats;41 and finally, the need to consider whether students from refugee backgrounds should be approached as a distinct equity group as a result of such problematisations of their experiences.42 Clearly, the bulk of this body of research focuses on evaluating and re-imagining how students from refugee backgrounds are supported to access higher education and throughout their studies. The need for more research exploring the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds, particularly from a qualitative approach, is emphasised by many of these studies.43 As Lenette and Ingamells, Lawson, Gately, and Morrice call attention to, research on experiences of transitioning from higher education study and into further employment, and on the specific ways in which pre-migration and settlement experiences of students from refugee backgrounds impact on accessing and participating in higher education.44 There is a need for research that analyses the particular kinds of support that respond to those specificities.45 We would also suggest that more research connecting the pre-migration experiences of resettled refugees, in terms of aspirations and higher education experiences developed in their home country or country of first asylum, would strengthen this body of literature, since often, pre-migration experiences appear to be glossed over as “disrupted” without attention to the particularities of those experiences. 3.2.2. Higher education in protracted refugee situations Fewer studies focus on the experiences of refugees in protracted refugee situations. As Dryden-Peterson points out in a review article that problematises how higher education is incorporated into the humanitarian system of supporting refugees, this lack of research reflects a tendency to broadly focus on providing primary education to refugees at the expense of resourcing secondary and higher education.46 Therefore, unsurprisingly, opportunities to engage in higher education are limited in protracted refugee situations and consequently there is less research produced which focuses on those experiences. This relative absence in the literature suggests that access to higher education in protracted refugee situations should be a focus of both future research and practical engagement with refugees in those contexts. The studies that do focus on higher education and refugees in protracted situations broadly describe: how the focus on primary education at the expense of secondary and post-secondary education is problematic;47 that higher education is crucial to the capacity of refugees to rebuild their personal lives and public infrastructure in home countries upon return;48 that accessing higher education in protracted refugee situations is challenging for many reasons, including limited spaces, access to technology, and balancing study and family responsibilities;49 that students from refugee backgrounds use innovative methods of study to connect with peers and institutions across the globe.50 What can be drawn overall from these studies is that further infrastructure to support the provision of higher education to refugees in protracted situations is crucial to providing them with opportunities to improve and develop their personal lives, contribute meaningfully to the nations which host their temporary displacement, and also the nations from which they have fled if they do return. Further research that focuses on higher education and people in protracted refugee situations is critical to such processes. 3.3. Which students?: Country of Origin; Gender Dynamics; Urban or Regional; Asylum or Resettlement? 3.3.1. Country of origin The subjects of the studies included in the meta-scoping review included, primarily, refugees from countries such as: South Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Burma, with others including Liberia, Rwanda, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Iran, Nepal, Sierra Leonia, Kenya, Syria, Pakistan, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, Bhutan, Bosnia, Cook Islands, South Africa, Serbia, Korea, and Romania. These national backgrounds of refugees largely reflect conflict situations that arose in the 1990s and 2000s. There is yet to be extensive research with newer populations of refugees who have fled from ongoing conflicts in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and continuing conflicts in South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Burundi, among others. 3.3.2. Gender dynamics Some studies make a point of discussing how gender impacts on the higher education experiences of students from a refugee background.51 However, the way that gender is approached across these studies largely reflects an arbitrary divide between the experiences of men and women, based on an understanding that these differences primarily derive from patriarchal cultural backgrounds. The dynamism and complexity of gender, needs further unpacking, broadly. The specific ways in which gender impacts on how refugees access and experience higher education, in terms of both male and female identifying students, should be usefully highlighted in future research, since in most cases the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds are treated as a homogenous group, and as if the experiences of people from different genders are equivalent. The ways in which age and family context factors into the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds also appears to be under-researched, which is significant given that entering higher education as a teenager transitioning from high school without children differs markedly from entering higher education as an adult with children. Much of the research conducted with refugees resettled in Australia points out that many students from refugee backgrounds enter higher education as mature entry students whose study experiences are impacted by family responsibilities, and it would be useful for future research to further explore how such dynamics interplay with other aspects of forced migration experiences in shaping higher education access and participation for these students.52 3.3.3. Urban or regional? Another factor to consider in future research is how settlement contexts, in either a regional or urban area, impacts on access to and participation in higher education. Although some studies recognise that this is a factor influencing their experiences,53 the meta-scoping review shows that, primarily, the context of the university and settlement setting is not factored into the ways in which students from refugee backgrounds access and experience higher education. Universities and other higher education institutions are not neutral and universal settings of learning, and it would be useful for future research to more directly reflect on the effect of the study context, including whether the university is in a regional/urban location, the backgrounds of the overall student body, and other specificities. 3.3.4. Asylum or resettlement? From 46 articles, 38 were based on empirical research conducted with people from a refugee background in relation to higher education. Of those empirical studies, a majority (29) focused on higher education as experienced in the Global North. This disparity is significant, since the vast majority of refugees do not live in the Global North but are instead living in urban areas or designated settlements/camps in the Global South. One explanation for this relative absence of perspectives that focus on how refugees access and experience higher education in contexts of asylum in the Global South may be that there is less opportunity for people to participate in higher education in such situations, except through programmes offered through partnerships with international institutions or organisations (as some studies included in the review focus on). There may not be an extensive literature on higher education and refugees in situations of protracted asylum in the Global South simply because opportunities to participate in such educational programmes are limited, as some of the papers included in this review suggest. The relative lack of opportunity for people in protracted refugee situations to access higher education emerged from this review as an area of research that requires further attention. In regards to refugee education, the UNHCR prioritises the provision of primary, and to a lesser extent secondary, education, since access to basic education is a fundamental human right. Yet, educational research consistently emphasizes that educational levels across a life course are also key factors towards promoting human development, for both individuals and communities. As such, restricting one significant population from higher education – in this case, refugees – has immensely problematic implications, not just in the immediate period but also over generations. As such, there are many practical questions to be explored around why higher education is not made available to refugees in protracted situations of asylum, particularly around financing and costing of education. Funding basic education may have an immediately visible effect for donors, but overlooking the human cost of forgoing access to higher education may have significantly detrimental long-term implications that should be factored in to asylum policy and planning. Increased scrutiny on the complexity of financially supporting higher education for refugees and the various funding mechanisms in place to do so would be a useful addition to scholarship. 3.4. What themes are overlooked in the research? Student identity and diasporic lives; university-workforce transitions; economy, livelihoods, and education; teacher experiences 3.4.1. Student identity and diasporic lives In a context where the identity of higher education students is increasingly being corporatised and collapsed into the highly individualised idea of student-as-consumer across the globe, it is refreshing that the papers included in this review consistently emphasised that experiences of students from a refugee background have complex familial and community lives and multi-faceted identities. Much of the research included in our review points to the need to recognise that experiences of higher education can involve often complex social roles and responsibilities. For refugees, these roles may be negotiated not only at the immediate scale of their local lives, but across transnational networks of sociality in relation to friends and kin who remain in a country of origin or who have sought asylum elsewhere. Given that there is a burgeoning corpus of scholarship on the unique dynamics of refugee diasporas, it would be useful for future research to connect higher education to such questions and consider how aspirations for and experiences of higher education impact on transnational refugee diasporas. 3.4.2. University-workforce transitions There is little research that considers experiences of transitioning out of university, and structures (or lack of) in place to support and guide students into post-degree employment. The research that does refer to post-degree experiences recognises that this is a problematic aspect of their experiences in academia, suggesting that many students face, at least according to anecdotal reports, discrimination upon attempting to enter the post-degree workforce. It would seem that assumptions of deficiency attached to refugee backgrounds can continue to affect their opportunities to apply their qualifications in employment markets.54 Yet, this aspect of students’ experiences continues to be underexplored. Future work must consider not only their equitable access and meaningful participation across diverse global contexts of forced migration, but also consider the ways that these students will transition into the post-degree workforce. 3.4.3. Economy, livelihoods, and education Relatedly, a growing area of research in the broader field of refugee studies focuses on new models of refugee care and protection in protracted situations of asylum, which have, in recent years, shifted from direct aid and encampment to economic empowerment and self-reliant livelihoods. Across many different situations of protracted asylum, for example in Turkey, Uganda, and Jordan, policy pertaining to the protection and asylum refugees has promoted economic integration, including providing rights to work. Despite strong links between higher education and employment opportunity, access to higher education is primarily excluded or peripheral to research and policy initiatives around the development of self-sustainable livelihoods for refugees in situations of protracted asylum, which was emphasised by the overall lack of such connections between policies of economic integration and educational attainment in the papers that formed part of this review. This could be a useful avenue of exploration for future research, connecting studies of the livelihoods of refugees to their educational aspirations and opportunities. 3.4.4. Teacher experiences Unlike the literature that speaks to the experiences of refugee youth in schools, there is relatively little on higher education educators’ experiences of teaching students from refugee backgrounds. Notable exceptions in the 46 papers included for review are the contributions by Kipng’etich and Osman, who reflect on the Borderless Higher Education for Refugees (BHER) initiative, which is offering teacher education and training to volunteer teachers in Dadaab refugee settlement schools in Kenya. BHER – run by an international consortium of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and higher education institutions – is the first programme of its kind, offering “innovative, equitable and internationally accredited university education to encamped refugees”.55 In resettlement contexts, Harris and Marlowe and Kong et al. both interviewed university staff in their studies.56 Harris and Marlowe interviewed 10 teaching staff, focusing on their perceptions of students from refugee backgrounds and the potential barriers to learning they had observed, and how staff responded to such challenges and met the needs of these students. Harris and Marlowe point to the strong sense that they were “setting them up to fail”, with language difficulties as the most significant obstacle to success; as one participant was reported saying, “I can bring them from here to here [indicating with hand gestures] but if they don’t even meet that basic standard [I can’t get them there]”.57 Harris and Marlowe further point to challenges for teachers in supporting these students, such as insufficient time and resources allocated to aiding students with their learning, “giving a significant portion of their own time at the expense of a multitude of other tasks such as research and writing”.58 They also described how these pressures are amplified for casual staff, who are rarely paid for additional time spent with students outside of their allocated tutorial hours. Time is a scarce resource for both tenured and casual staff, with the time allotted to marking insufficient to attend to language disfluencies that impede meaning making and lead to lesser (and disappointing) grades for students. Similarly, Kong et al. interviewed 12 members of university staff (five teachers, five professional staff members, and two senior managers) as well as eight students from refugee backgrounds.59 The educators comment on how language created challenges for students, and raised questions of how under-preparation intensified these difficulties. Other comments made by staff is related to a need for universities to respond better to cultural challenges, such as developing flexibility for students’ faith-based practices (for example those of Islamic faith wanting to pray on Fridays or take time off for significant religious events such as Eid, which can fall during teaching time). Such obliviousness to the sociocultural/religious practices of culturally and linguistically diverse students exposes the hegemonic influence of Christianity on educational timetables and practices, which implicitly disadvantage students with other faith commitments. Kong et al. also point to how digital technologies can be prohibitive for some students from refugee backgrounds, both in terms of proficiency level and cost. In addition to these two explorations that directly sought to gather data from university educators, other contributions in this scoping study indirectly speak to the experiences of teachers. For example, Naidoo’s paper focused on data gathered from both high school and university students, but reports on a broader project which had explicitly sought insights from both school and university teachers.60 She argues that teachers working at all educational levels need to be offered training to help them develop understandings “of the cultural dimensions of the lives of students with refugee experience and the impact this may have on their learning and transition at school and university”.61 Although, many others have made similar arguments, there is little in the literature to suggest that this recommendation has been implemented.62 A second reflection on the experiences of teachers in higher education is offered by Baker et al., who categorise some teachers as a form of “warm” support, or “trusted people”.63 Drawing on a small-scale study with undergraduate students from refugee backgrounds in a regional Australian university, they argue that many students tend to eschew formal (“cold”) forms of support because it is viewed as “not for us”, which means that trusted people (who offer navigational or linguistic brokerage, and may represent the institution) undertake a disproportionate amount of the emotional labour involved in supporting students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and refugee students in particular. Similar to the argument extended by Harris and Marlowe, Baker et al. highlight how this often happens in addition to the formal workload of staff, creating inequities and additional pressures at the staffing level. What is also interesting to note is that the limited attention to teacher experiences of higher education in relation to students from a refugee background is compounded by the dominance of perspectives of teaching in the context of the global North, in situations of refugee resettlement, rather than in contexts of protracted asylum. Only the contribution from Kipng’etich and Osman focuses on teaching higher education in a country of asylum, suggesting again that further work needs to draw attention to the specificities of educational experiences in situations of protracted asylum.64 3.5. What is known about who is writing about students from refugee backgrounds in higher education, where from and in which publications? Education research is not isolated from broader global power hierarchies. The theories and approaches applied to education research are most often implicitly based on and serve to reinforce perspectives from the global North, and denying and invalidating perspectives from the global South.65 To develop a stronger understanding of the emerging “field” of refugee and higher education studies, it is necessary to get a sense of who the key thinkers and speakers are, and what constitutes the public dissemination field of this nascent area of inquiry. By engaging in analysis beyond the thematics of the literature – by tracking who is speaking and from where – we are seeking to develop a meta-understanding of the politics of knowledge and representation, one which we speak into and dialogue with, in our attempt to build on this work to start a conversation about where to next. Given this wider scope of hegemonic power relations that are reproduced in education research, it is perhaps not surprising that a rigorous review of research on the experiences of students from refugee backgrounds reveals similar silences and gaps that reflect the continuing dominance of perspectives in education research from the global North. Primarily, as described below, most research that focuses on the experiences of refugees in relation to higher education stems from work conducted with students from refugee backgrounds who are attending higher education institutions in the global North, specifically from countries that resettle refugees such as Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US). In addition, the research that does focus on the experiences of students (or potential students) from refugee backgrounds in situations of protracted asylum in the global South is often focused on educational experiences that are informed by interventions from institutions or organisations from the global North. 3.5.1. Institutional and disciplinary locations of authors The majority of literature included in this scoping study is affiliated exclusively with institutions located in high-income countries, which are dominantly Anglophone and resource rich (see Table 3). Although the primary focus of 14 of 46 contributions is on the experiences of people in refugee camps that are located in what is termed the global South – meaning nations that are low income and/or industrialised at low levels – these projects are nonetheless predominantly affiliated with or originating from institutions located in the global North, meaning nations that are high income and highly industrialised. The country with the most prolific output is Australia (17 contributions), followed by the US (12) and the UK (4). Table 3. The distribution of authored contributions by the place of author at point of publication Country of Main author/s Number of Papers Australia 17 The United States of America 12 The United Kingdom 4 Canada 3 Germany 3 New Zealand 1 South Africa 1 Kenya 1 ‘International’ 2 Unknown 2 Country of Main author/s Number of Papers Australia 17 The United States of America 12 The United Kingdom 4 Canada 3 Germany 3 New Zealand 1 South Africa 1 Kenya 1 ‘International’ 2 Unknown 2 Table 3. The distribution of authored contributions by the place of author at point of publication Country of Main author/s Number of Papers Australia 17 The United States of America 12 The United Kingdom 4 Canada 3 Germany 3 New Zealand 1 South Africa 1 Kenya 1 ‘International’ 2 Unknown 2 Country of Main author/s Number of Papers Australia 17 The United States of America 12 The United Kingdom 4 Canada 3 Germany 3 New Zealand 1 South Africa 1 Kenya 1 ‘International’ 2 Unknown 2 Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the focus on academic publications in this study, academics and practitioners working in the higher education space wrote the majority of the papers included in this study (41/46). One of these was written as a partnership between a NGO and an academic, two of the publications were written by people working for NGOs, and two were written by independent researchers. In terms of disciplinary location of the 78 authors who have contributed towards the literature included in this study, nearly half were located in Education-related fields (such as Schools and Colleges of Education, Access Education, Enabling Education, Higher Education-focused research centres); nine were writing from Social Science-related fields (such as Schools of Social Work, School of Social and Cultural Studies), and seven were writing from Health-related fields, such as Schools and Colleges of (Public) Health, Centre for International Health and Health-related research centres. The diversity of these disciplinary locations tells a powerful story about the interdisciplinary nature of the field; despite being nominally concerned with education, the intersections with related applied disciplines that connect with human services are clear. Education cannot be understood as a silo; rather, it is deeply interwoven into the broader fabric of re/settlement and processes of belonging and integrating that refugees are subjected to. 3.5.2. Where are these contributions published? Similar to the analysis of the disciplinary location of the authors contributing to this topic, examination of the locations of publications echoes the inter-disciplinarity of the field. As can be seen in Table 3, almost half of the contributions included in this study (23/46) were published in journals that have a targeted audience of educationalists and people working in the broad field of education. Drilling down further into this pattern of publication, these education-focused publications were concerned with more niche fields, such as teaching and learning in higher education (3), comparative and intercultural education (5), lifelong and adult education (2), and higher education studies (4). The next most prominent field of inquiry is Refugee Studies, with nine publications included in this study in two journals: Refuge and the Journal of Refugee Studies. Publications targeted at particular applied disciplinary and professional/academic audiences also feature often – Social Work academics and practitioners (4/46), English Language Teaching scholars and teachers (3/46), Youth Studies (1/46) – with publications focused on academic disciplines featuring less frequently (see Table 4). Table 4. The distribution of the articles according to their primary disciplinary area Target Audience of the Journal Number of publications Education (inc. comparative and international education) 23 Refugee studies 9 Social work 4 English language teaching 3 Gender studies 2 Social sciences 2 Youth studies 1 Sociology 1 African studies 1 Target Audience of the Journal Number of publications Education (inc. comparative and international education) 23 Refugee studies 9 Social work 4 English language teaching 3 Gender studies 2 Social sciences 2 Youth studies 1 Sociology 1 African studies 1 Table 4. The distribution of the articles according to their primary disciplinary area Target Audience of the Journal Number of publications Education (inc. comparative and international education) 23 Refugee studies 9 Social work 4 English language teaching 3 Gender studies 2 Social sciences 2 Youth studies 1 Sociology 1 African studies 1 Target Audience of the Journal Number of publications Education (inc. comparative and international education) 23 Refugee studies 9 Social work 4 English language teaching 3 Gender studies 2 Social sciences 2 Youth studies 1 Sociology 1 African studies 1 The publications that have produced the most contributions in this study are all based in the Western, Anglophone world (mostly from Australia, the UK and Canada), which corresponds with Malcolm Tight’s meta-analysis of higher education publications from 2000 to 2010.66 This pattern is representative of the broader politics of knowledge in the domain of academic publication.67 As Canagarajah argues,68 peer-reviewed journal articles hold a “central place” (or a “stranglehold”, according to Kampmark)69 in knowledge production and academic culture. Indeed, publication in academic journals “is a vital activity” for researchers.70 The dominance of this form of representation is a result of the collective legitimacy given to academic journal publications, used for acceptance and demonstration of value within the academic community. However, as Randy Schekman laments,71 the manner in which academic journals “aggressively curate their brand” and police the content accepted – via what Lillis and Curry call “academic brokers” (editors and other journal gatekeepers) – is “deeply flawed”.72 The systems and practices of publication permit an exclusive, inequitable and highly profitable industry to flourish, while simultaneously serving to perpetuate marginalisation and diminishment of particular forms of knowing and writing. One such dominant form of exclusion happens at the linguistic level, with English used to enact deeply hegemonic forms of knowing, with other language publications attracting smaller audiences and are seen as having lower “value”, which is increasingly measured through numerical distillations.73 The dominance of publications originating from the UK, the US, Canada and Australia, is therefore unsurprising. This dominance relies of the tacit normalisation of academic publication practices, such as investing in the system of rankings and competition (by writing for the journals, acting as reviewers or editors, supporting the institutional purchasing of licences, reading and citing such work), and most academics are (un)wittingly complicit in this academic hegemony. Similarly, the voices present in this literature – our own included – rarely represent lived experiences of forced displacement; rather, there are a number of (arguably intelligent, learned and well-meaning) privileged voices, predominantly located in privileged institutions such as universities with few examples of people representing their own or similar experiences. Although there is a methodological reason behind this in terms of the selection criteria for review excluding grey literature and book chapters, this silence is significant and we need to ask questions of why there are not more people from refugee backgrounds authoring their own stories in the powerful academic literature, and not necessarily in English.74 3.6. What are the dominant theoretical and methodological framings in this literature? The scoping study suggests there is a strong commitment to qualitative inquiry in the field of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education. Of the 46 papers included, the majority (32) report on empirical projects. The empirical projects are all broadly qualitative, with some articles drawing on data collected via mixed methods (most commonly a combination of demographic survey and individual interviews or focus group interviews), and the remaining articles drawing on data collected via interviews or focus groups (or a mixture of both). Where numerical data have been collected via surveys, this data is rarely subjected to statistical analysis. Within the broad methodological orientation toward the qualitative, interpretive paradigm, there is variation in the epistemology of the studies discussed, and many overlap: ten of the papers are described as case studies (of organisations, or students), two are narrative inquiries, with one undertaking discourse analysis on the narratives; two draw on longitudinal project data. The projects described in this literature are almost exclusively small-scale inquiries, with participant numbers ranging from 175 to 4276 young people. However, the articles that report on empirical work undertaken in camp contexts in countries of first asylum contradict this pattern, such as the research reported in Crea, and Crea and McFarland, which interviewed 122 refugee students in camps in Kenya, Malawi and Jordan;77 and Dahya and Dryden-Peterson’s research, with over 250 people interviewed in Kenya’s Dabaab camp.78 Students are the primary participants in 26 of the empirical papers, with one paper reporting on data collected with service providers in refugee camps,79 and only one paper from a settlement context including data collected from service providers.80 As signalled above, only two papers reported on data collected from university staff.81 In sum, there is a distinct preference for small-scale, qualitative inquiries in the extant literature included in this scoping study of students from refugee backgrounds in higher education. 4. DISCUSSION: SETTING A RESEARCH AGENDA Apart from a general need for more research in this area, our review of literature has suggested specific areas of attention that warrant future research: more work that recognises the intersectional factors that cause educational disadvantage; more work that explores the experiences of higher education educators working with students from refugee backgrounds; and more work from people with lived experience of seeking refuge. Furthermore, in view of the relative consensus in the literature with regard to the language, culture and psychosocial barriers to participation, our scholarly attention now needs to shift to focus on the enablers and support mechanism that exist and ask questions of what needs to be created to facilitate success. As such, we could disrupt the pathologizing gaze on the “resilient individual”, and focus more attentively on how the system can be adapted to better meet the needs of the diverse student body. Moreover, in order to develop better teaching approaches and supports (for both students and teachers), the relative silence of teacher voices in the literature suggests we need to develop better understandings of educators’ experiences of teaching students from refugee backgrounds. Higher education experiences are often approached in this body of literature as if these are isolated from broader social, cultural, economic, and structural factors. Future research would benefit from recognising how crucial factors such as gender, age, institutional location, social relations with other students and educators, and external support mechanisms impact on the higher education experiences of students from refugee backgrounds. Significantly, although recognising that pre-migration experiences impact on the higher education access and participation for students from refugee backgrounds, there is little sense of what these experiences entail aside from being “disrupted” – as such, it would be useful for future research to pull out specificities of pre-migration education experiences, and consider how their settlement journeys interact with their education. It would also be useful to develop more detailed understandings of students’ movements out of their studies, both in terms of completion and attrition. Relatedly, the primary gap highlighted in the review is the lack of research that focuses on the higher education experiences of students from refugee backgrounds in countries of first asylum, which speaks more broadly to dominance of educational research from the Global North. Few refugees experience resettlement, yet it is from contexts of refugee settlement that a majority of research in this field derives. In particular, although there is growth of scholarship programmes and initiatives to provide higher education in camp contexts, the academic literature offers few examples of how these work in practice, and how to respond to the challenges, such as technological impediments (access to equipment and the Internet, experience of using digital technologies). Further research in this area could both enhance our understanding of how higher education can work in camp contexts, and can also provide a fruitful space for advocacy and support in the academic community. Our findings from the review also suggest a number of ways to strengthen future research in terms of methodology and approach. The bulk of research in this area derives from qualitative methodologies, and further quantitative work may supplement and provide insight into this field in future work, although we would suggest that qualitative methodologies, which privilege the voice of students themselves and reflexive and co-constituted research agendas, are particularly suited to work in this area. A notable absence from the literature included in this study was work that is participatory in nature. Future research would benefit from incorporating participatory approaches, including consultation with peoples from the relevant communities involved in the study and other key stakeholders, into the development of research agendas and critical reflection on research outcomes. We ourselves remain committed to an ongoing process of challenging the politics of knowledge production in regards to students from a refugee background and higher education. We intend to disseminate the findings of the project to public audiences. Indeed, the primary intention of the project of which this article is an outcome is to produce an open-access and ongoing annotated bibliography of scholarly work on refugees and higher education that can be a resource for practitioners and other stakeholders. In addition, the authors have co-published, both together and with other researchers, in public forums on topics arising from this project. Ultimately, however, our goal, and our directive, is to contribute to a process of reducing the dominance of our own voices by ensuring opportunity for people from a refugee background themselves to take up the positions of experts in this field. Doing so requires a commitment to multi-layered advocacy work to open educational pathways for students from a refugee background as well as rethinking conventional processes of knowledge production that so often privilege the voices of established researchers, and leaving little space for the participatory inclusion and co-authorship of people from the very communities that are the focus of study. This is our “moral imperative”;82 to use our powerful positions as scholars to disrupt the dominance of Global North and privileged (albeit caring) voices. By doing so we might respond to Larson’s call to collectively change our representational practices to disrupt the hegemonic grip on the “discursive world system”.83 Footnotes 1 A. Sen, Development as Freedom, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999. 2 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Figures At A Glance, Geneva, UNHCR, 2017, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/en-au/figures-at-a-glance.html (last visited 10 Dec. 2018). 3 Ibid. 4 UNHCR, Missing Out: Refugee Education in Crisis, Geneva, UNHCR, 2016. 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 G. Ramsay, S. Baker, L. Miles & E. Irwin, “Reimagining Support Models for Students from Refugee Backgrounds: Understandings, Spaces and Empowerment”, in M. Davis & A. Goody (eds.), Research and Development in Higher Education: The Shape of Higher Education, Vol. 39, Refereed Papers from the 39th HERDSA Annual International Conference, 2016, 279–288; S. Baker, G. Ramsay, E. Irwin & L. Miles, “‘Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports: Towards Theorising Where Refugee Students Go for Assistance at University”, Teaching in Higher Education, 23(1), 2018, 1–16. 9 M. Tight, “Higher Education Research 2000–2010: Changing Journal Publication Patterns”, Higher Education Research & Development, 31(5), 2012, 723–740. 10 H. Arksey & L. O’Malley, “Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 2005, 19–32. This work is purposefully not positioned as a systematic review, following concerns levelled elsewhere about underpinning positivistic undertones and assumptions (e.g. R. Andrews, “The Place of Systematic Reviews in Education Research”, British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 2005, 399–416; H. Suri & D. Clarke, “Advancements in Research Synthesis Methods: From a Methodologically Inclusive Perspective”, Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 2009, 395–430; D. Gough & J. Thomas, “Systematic Reviews of Research in Education: Aims, Myths and Multiple Methods”, Review of Education, 4(1), 2016, 84–102). 11 G. Noblit & R.D. Hare, Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies, Newbury Park, Sage, 1988, 11. See also Suri & Clarke, “Advancements in Research Synthesis Methods”, 395–430; K. Borgnakke, “Meta-Ethnography and Systematic Reviews – Linked to the Evidence Movement and Caught in a Dilemma”, Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 2017, 194–210. 12 Suri & Clarke, “Advancements in Research Synthesis Methods”, 396. 13 Ibid., 412. 14 Ibid., 408. 15 See also Andrews, “The Place of Systematic Reviews in Education Research”, 399–416; Gough & Thomas, “Systematic Reviews of Research in Education”, 84–102. 16 A. Montouri, “Literature Review as Creative Inquiry: Reframing Scholarship as a Creative Process”, Journal of Transformative Education, 3(4), 2005, 374–393. 17 Arksey & O’Malley, “Scoping Studies”. 18 M. Tight, “Higher Education Journals: Their Characteristics and Contribution”, Higher Education Research & Development, 37(3), 2018, 607–619. 19 A.S. Canagrarajah, “‘Nondiscursive’ Requirements in Academic Publishing, Material Resources of Peripheral Scholars, and the Politics of Knowledge Production”, Written Communication, 13(4), 1996, 435–472. 20 K. Charmaz, Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., Los Angeles, Sage, 2014. 21 Arksey & O’Malley, “Scoping Studies”. 22 Refugees are not homogenous population: rather, the term “refugee” is a legal umbrella term that is applied to a diverse group of people who have been displaced from contexts of conflict and persecution across the globe and have sought asylum in another country. Despite the heterogeneous backgrounds of refugees, the studies included in the meta-scoping review focused predominantly on the experiences of refugees from specific countries of origin, particularly South Sudan, Afghanistan, and Burma. These findings reflect broader patterns of conflict and the backgrounds of refugees prioritised for resettlement by host nations, which is the context in which the majority of studies were conducted. 23 K. Perry & C. Mallozzi, “‘Are You Able To Learn?’: Power and Access to Higher Education for African Refugees in the USA”, Power and Education, 3(3), 2011, 249–262; A. Harris, M. Chi & C. Spark, "‘The Barriers that Only You Can See’: African Australian Women Thriving in Tertiary Education Despite the Odds”, Generos: Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies, 2(2), 2015, 182–202; K.E. Entigar, “The Limits of Pedagogy: Diaculturalist Pedagogy as a Paradigm Shift in the Education of Adult Immigrants”, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(3), 2017, 347–356; J. Bajwa, S. Couto, S. Kidd, R. Markoulakis, M. Abai & K. McKenzie, “Refugees, Higher Education, and Informational Barriers”, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 33(2), 2017, 56–65. 24 By “country of first asylum” we are referring to the country in which a person has sought and attained refugee status, and where they reside with the protection of that status. 25 B. Zeus, “Exploring Barriers to Higher Education in Protracted Refugee Situations: The Case of Burmese Refugees in Thailand”, Journal of Refugee Studies, 24(2), 2011, 256–276; L. Wright & R. Plasterer, “Beyond Basic Education: Exploring Opportunities for Higher Learning in Kenyan Refugee Camps”, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 27(2), 2010, 42–54; T. Crea & M. McFarland, “Higher Education for Refugees: Lessons from a 4-Year Pilot Project”, International Review of Education, 61, 2015, 235–245; S. Dryden-Peterson, “Refugee Education in Countries of First Asylum: Breaking Open the Black Box of Pre-Resettlement Experiences”, Theory and Research in Education, 14(2), 2016, 131–148; T. Crea, “Refugee Higher Education: Contextual Challenges and Implications for Program Design, Delivery, and Accompaniment”, International Journal of Educational Development, 46, 2016, 12–22; S. Kamyab, “Syrian Refugees Higher Education Crisis, Journal of Comparative & International Education”, 9, 2016, 10–14; K. Kipng’etich & A. Osman, “Role of Borderless Higher Education for Refugees Programme in Offering High Quality Teacher Education and Training for Refugees in Dabaab Settlement in Kenya”, Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 3(2), 2016, 9–19; N. Dahya & S. Dryden-Peterson, “Tracing Pathways to Higher Education for Refugees: the Role of Virtual Support Networks and Mobile Phones for Women in Refugee Camps”, Comparative Education, 53(2), 2017, 284–301; T. Crea & N. Sparnon, “Democratizing Education at the Margins: Faculty and Practitioner Perspectives on Delivering Online Tertiary Education for Refugees”, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(43), 2017, 1–19. 26 A. Harris, C. Spark & M. Watts, “Gains and Losses: African Australian Women and Higher Education”, Journal of Sociology, 51(2), 2015, 370–384; E. Hirano, “Refugees in First-Year College: Academic Writing Challenges and Resources”, Journal of Second Language Writing, 23, 2014, 37–52; S. Shapiro & M. MacDonald, “From Deficit to Asset: Locating Discursive Resistance in a Refugee-Background Student’s Written and Oral Narrative”, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 16(2), 2017, 80–93. 27 J. Stevenson & J. Willott, “The Aspiration and Access to Higher Education of Teenage Refugees in the UK”, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 37(5), 2007, 671–687; J. Earnest, T. Housen & S. Gillieatt, Adolescent and Young Refugee Perspectives on Psychosocial Well-Being, Perth, Centre for International Health, Curtin University of Technology, 2007; J. Earnest, G. De Mori & G. Timler, Strategies to Enhance the Well-Being of Students from Refugee Backgrounds in Universities in Perth, Western Australia, Perth, Centre for International Health, Curtin University of Technology, 2010; A. Joyce, J. Earnest, G. DeMori & G. Silvagni, “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia: Reflections on the Social, Emotional, and Practical Challenges”, Journal of Refugee Studies, 23(1), 2010, 82–97. 28 D. Wache & C. Zufferey, “Connecting with Students from New and Emerging Communities in Social Work Education”, Advances in Social Work and Welfare Education, 15(1), 2013, 80–91; L. Naidoo, J. Wilkinson, K. Langat, M. Adoniou, R. Cuneen & D. Bolger, Case Study Report: Supporting School-University Pathways for Refugee Students’ Access and Participation in Tertiary Education, Penrith, University of Western Sydney, 2015; E. Kong, S. Harmsworth, M. Rajaeian, G. Parkes, S. Bishop, B. AlMansouri & J. Lawrence, “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds: A Case Study from an Australian Regional University”, Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 56(2), 2016, 170–197; R. Sidhu, “Navigating Unfreedoms & Re-Imagining Ethical Counter-Conducts: Caring about Refugees & Asylum Seekers”, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(3), 2017, 294–305. 29 G. Onsando & S. Billett, “African Students from Refugee Backgrounds in Australian TAFE institutions: A Case for Transformative Learning Goals and Processes”, International Journal of Training Research, 7, 2009, 80–94; L. Olliff, Finding the Right Time and Place: Exploring Post-Compulsory Education and Training Pathways for Young People from Refugee Backgrounds in NSW, Syndney, Refugee Council of Australia, 2010; I. Correa-Velez, R. Spaaij & S. Upham, “‘We Are Not Here To Claim Better Services Than Any Other’: Usion among Men from Refugee Backgrounds in Urban and Regional Australia”, Journal of Refuge Studies, 26(2), 2012, 163–186; L. Lawson, ““I Have to Be my Own Mother and Father’: The African Student Experience at University, a Case Study Using Narrative Analysis”, The Australasian Review of African Studies, 35(1), 2014, 59–74; M. Vickers, F. McCarthy & K. Zammit, “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding: Support for Refugee-Background and Immigrant Students Beginning University Study”, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 60, 2017, 198–209; F. Maringe, E. Ojo & O. Chiramba, “Traumatized Home and Away: Toward a Framework for Interrogating Policy-Practice Disjunctures for Refugee Students in Higher Education”, European Education, 49(4), 2017, 210–230. 30 M. Anselme & C. Hands, “Access to Secondary and Tertiary Education for all Refugees: Steps and Challenges to Overcome”, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 27(2), 2010, 89–96; Crea & McFarland, “Higher Education for Refugees”; D.E. Gately, “Becoming Actors of their Lives: A Relational Autonomy Approach to Employment and Education Choices of Refugee Young People in London, UK”, Social Work and Society, 12(2), 2014, 1–14; Bajwa et al., “Refugees, Higher Education, and Informational Barriers”. 31 L. Morrice, “Learning and Refugees: Recognizing the Darker Side of Transformative Learning”, Adult Education Quarterly, 63(3), 2012, 251–271; L. Morrice, “Refugees in Higher Education: Boundaries of Belonging and Recognition, Stigma, and Exclusion”, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32(5), 2013, 652–668; K.H. Perry & A. Mallozzi, “‘We Have Education, I Can Say That’: Worldview and Access to Education for Adult Refugees”, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 2017, 491–513; Shapiro & MacDonald, “From Deficit to Asset”. 32 L. Morrice, “Journeys into Higher Education: The Case of Refugees in the UK”, Teaching in Higher Education, 14(6), 2009, 661–672; V. Harris & J. Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes: The Educational Challenges of African Refugee University Students in Australia”, International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 239(3), 2011, 186–196; Harris, Spark & Watts, “Gains and Losses”; Kong et al., “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 33 Naidoo et al., Case Study Report; Shapiro & MacDonald, “From Deficit to Asset”. 34 J. Stevenson & J. Willott, “The Aspiration and Access to Higher Education of Teenage Refugees in the UK”, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 37(5), 2007, 671–687; Joyce et al., “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia”; C. Lenette, “University Students from Refugee Backgrounds: Why Should We Care?”, Higher Education Research and Development, 35(6), 2016, 1311–1315; Baker et al., “’Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”; Ramsay et al., “Reimagining Support Models for Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 35 Vickers et al., “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding”. 36 M. Ferede, “Structural Factors Associated with Higher Education Access for First-Generation Refugees in Canada: An Agenda for Research”, Refuge Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 27(2), 2010, 79–88; L. Naidoo, “Educating Refugee-Background Students in Australian Schools and Universities”, Intercultural Education, 26(3), 2015, 210–217; J. McWilliams & S. Bonet, “Continuums of Precarity: Refugee Youth Transitions in American High Schools”, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 35(2), 2016, 153–170; Bajwa et al., “Refugees, Higher Education, and Informational Barriers”; Vickers et al., “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding”; Baker et al., “’Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”. 37 UNHCR, Figures at a Glance. 38 UNHCR, Missing Out: Refugee Education in Crisis. 39 Gately, “Becoming Actors of their Lives”; D.E. Gately, “A Policy of Vulnerability or Agency? Refugee Young People’s Opportunities in Accessing Further and Higher Education in the UK”, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 45(1), 2015, 26–46; A. Hatoss & H. Huijser, “Gendered Barriers to Educational Opportunities: Resettlement of Sudanese Refugees in Australia”, Gender and Education, 22(2), 2010, 147–160; G. Peterson, ““Education Changes the World’: The World University Service of Canada’s Student Refugee Program”, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 27(2), 2010, 111–121; Stevenson & Willott, “The Aspiration and Access to Higher Education of Teenage Refugees in the UK”; A. Tecle, A.T. Han & R. Hunter, “Creating a Continuing Education Pathway for Newly Arrived Immigrants and Refugee Communities”, Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 37(2), 2017, 171–184. 40 Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”; Harris, Spark & Watts, “Gains and Losses”; Harris, Chi & Spark, "‘The Barriers that Only You Can See’”; Perry & Mallozzi, “‘We Have Education, I Can Say That’”. 41 Baker et al., “’Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”; Shapiro & MacDonald, “From Deficit to Asset”; Vickers et al., “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding”; Lenette, “University Students from Refugee Backgrounds: Why Should We Care?”; Kong et al. “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”; Naidoo, “Educating Refugee-Background Students”; E. Hirano, “‘I Read, I Don’t Understand’: Refugees Coping with Academic Reading”, ELT Journal, 69(2), 2015, 178–187; Hirano, “Refugees in First-Year College”; Lawson, ““I Have to Be my Own Mother and Father”; Wache & Zufferey, “Connecting with Students from New and Emerging Communities in Social Work Education”; Morrice, “Learning and Refugees”; Morrice, “Refugees in Higher Education”; Joyce et al., “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia”; L Olliff & J. Couch, “Pathways and Pitfalls: The Journey of Refugee Young People in and around the Education System in Greater Dandenong, Victoria”, Youth Studies Australia, 24(3), 2005, 42–46; J. Hannah, “Refugee Students at College and University: Improving Access and Support”, International Review of Education, 45(2), 1999, 153–166. 42 R. Sladek & S. King, “Hidden from View? Bringing Refugees to the Forefront of Equity Targets in Australian Higher Education”, International Studies in Widening Participation, 3(1), 2016, 68–77; D. O’Rourke, “Closing Pathways: Refugee-Background Students and Tertiary Education”, Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 6(1–2), 2011, 26–36. 43 Hirano, “‘I Read, I Don’t Understand’”; Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”; Ferede, “Structural Factors Associated with Higher Education Access for First-Generation Refugees in Canada”; Joyce et al., “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia”. 44 C. Lenette & A. Ingamells, “From “Chopping up Chicken” to “Cap and Gown”: A University Initiative to Increase Pathways to Employment for Skilled Migrants and Refugees”, Advances in Social Work and Welfare Education, 15(1), 2013, 64–79; Lawson, ““I Have to Be my Own Mother and Father’”; Gately, “Becoming Actors of their Lives”; Gately, “A Policy of Vulnerability or Agency?”; Morrice, “Refugees in Higher Education”; Morrice, “Journeys into Higher Education”. 45 Naidoo, “Educating Refugee-Background Students”; Joyce et al., “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia”; Vickers et al., “Peer Mentoring and Intercultural Understanding”. 46 S. Dryden-Peterson, “The Politics of Higher Education for Refugees in a Global Movement for Primary Education”, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 27(2), 2010, 10–18. 47 Ibid.; Anselme & Hands, “Access to Secondary and Tertiary Education for all Refugees”. 48 Zeus, “Exploring Barriers to Higher Education in Protracted Refugee Situations”; D. MacLaren, “Tertiary Education for Refugees: A Case Study from the Thai-Burma Border”, Refuge, 27(2), 2010, 103–110; Wright & Plasterer, “Beyond Basic Education”. 49 Crea, “Refugee Higher Education”; Crea & McFarland, “Higher Education for Refugees”; M. Purkey, “Paths to a Future for Youth in Protracted Refugee Situation: A View from the Thai-Burmese Border”, Refuge, 27(2), 2010, 97–101; F. Reinhardt, O. Zlatin-Troitschanskaia, T. Deribo, R. Happ & S. Nell-Müller, “Integrating Refugees into Higher Education – the Impact of a New Online Education Program for Policies and Practices”, Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 2(2), 2018, 198–226. 50 Dahya & Dryden-Peterson, “Tracing Pathways to Higher Education for Refugees”. 51 Ibid.; V. Harris, J. Marlowe & N. Nyuon, “Rejecting Ahmed’s “Melancholy Migrant”: South Sudanese Australians in Higher Education”, Studies in Higher Education, 40(7), 2015, 1226–1238; Harris, Spark & Watts, “Gains and Losses”; Hatoss & Huijser, “Gendered Barriers to Educational Opportunities”; Peterson, ““Education Changes the World’”. 52 Kong et al., “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”; Naidoo, “Educating Refugee-Background Students”; Harris, Spark & Watts, “Gains and Losses”; Hatoss & Huijser, “Gendered Barriers to Educational Opportunities”; Joyce et al., “The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds at Universities in Australia”. 53 Baker et al., “’Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”; Kong et al,. “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 54 W. Abur & R. Spaaij, “Settlement and Employment Experiences of South Sudanese People from Refugee Backgrounds in Melbourne, Australia”, Australasian Review of African Studies, 37(2), 2016, 107–128; V. Colic-Pesiker & F. Tilbury, “Employment Niches for Recent Refugees: Segmented Labour Market in Twenty-First Century Australia”, Journal of Refugee Studies, 19(2), 2006, 203–229. 55 Kipng’etich & Osman, “Role of Borderless Higher Education for Refugees Programme”. 56 Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”; Kong et al., “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 57 Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”, 189. 58 Ibid., 190. 59 Kong et al., “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 60 Naidoo, “Educating Refugee-Background Students”. 61 Ibid., 216. 62 E.g. Hannah, “Refugee Students at College and University: Improving Access and Support”; Olliff, Finding the Right Time and Place; Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”; S. Yohani, “Educational Cultural Brokers and the School Adaptation of Refugee Children and Families: Challenges and Opportunities”, International Migration & Integration, 14, 2013, 61–79; Baker et al., “‘Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”; D. Mangan & L. Winter, “(In)validation and (Mis)recognition in Higher Education: The Experiences of Students from Refugee Backgrounds”, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 36(4), 2017, 486–502. 63 Baker et al., “‘Hot’, ‘Cold’ and ‘Warm’ Supports”. 64 Kipng’etich & Osman, “Role of Borderless Higher Education for Refugees Programme”. 65 R. Connell, Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in Social Science, Crows Nest, NSW, Allen & Unwin, 2007. 66 Tight, “Higher Education Journals”. We acknowledge that our methodological decision to only include Anglophone literature has contributed to this finding. 67 E. Rata, “The Politics of Knowledge in Education”, British Educational Research Journal, 38(10), 2012, 103–124; Connell, Southern Theory; J. Larson, “Other Voices: Authors’ Literary-Academic Presence and Publication in the Discursive World System”, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 2017. 68 A.S. Canagarajah, “‘Nondiscursive’ Requirements in Academic Publishing, Material Resources of Periphery Scholars, and the Politics of Knowledge Production”, Written Communication, 13(4), 1996, 435–472. 69 B. Kampmark, “Breaking the Academic Stranglehold: Repudiating Science, Nature and Cell”, Dissident Voice: A Radical Newsletter in the Struggle for Peace and Social Justice, 13 Dec. 2013, available at: https://dissidentvoice.org/2013/12/breaking-the-academic-stranglehold/ (last visited 20 Feb. 2018). 70 M. McGrail, C. Rickard & R. Jones, “Publish or Perish: A Systematic Review of Interventions to Increase Academic Publication Rates”, Higher Education Research & Development, 25(1), 2006, 19–35. 71 R. Scheckman, “How Journals like Nature, Cell and Science are Damaging Science”, The Guardian, 10 Dec. 2013, available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/09/how-journals-nature-science-cell-damage-science (last visited 20 Feb. 2018). 72 T. Lillis & M.J. Curry, “Professional Academic Writing by Multilingual Scholars: Interactions with Literacy Brokers in the Production of English-Medium Texts”, Written Communication, 23(1), 2006, 3–35. 73 Canagarajah, “‘Nondiscursive’ Requirements in Academic Publishing”; Lillis & Curry, “Professional Academic Writing by Multilingual Scholars”; M.J. Curry & T. Lillis, “Strategies and Tactics in Academic Knowledge Production by Multilingual Scholars”, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(32), 2014; Larson, “Other Voices”. 74 Baker, Ramsay & Lenette (forthcoming). 75 Shapiro & MacDonald, “From Deficit to Asset”. 76 Gately, “Becoming Actors of their Lives”; Gately, “A Policy of Vulnerability or Agency?”. 77 Crea, “Refugee Higher Education”; Crea & McFarland, “Higher Education for Refugees”. 78 Dahya & Dryden-Peterson, “Tracing Pathways to Higher Education for Refugees”. 79 Wright & Plasterer, “Beyond Basic Education”. 80 Olliff & Couch, “Pathways and Pitfalls”. 81 Harris & Marlowe, “Hard Yards and High Hopes”; Kong et al., “University Transition Challenges for First Year Domestic CALD Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 82 Lenette, “University Students from Refugee Backgrounds”. 83 Larson, “Other Voices”. © Author(s) [2019]. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - Higher Education and Students from Refugee Backgrounds: A Meta-Scoping Study
JF - Refugee Survey Quarterly
DO - 10.1093/rsq/hdy018
DA - 2019-03-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/higher-education-and-students-from-refugee-backgrounds-a-meta-scoping-AVYP0DEI2W
SP - 55
VL - 38
IS - 1
DP - DeepDyve
ER -