Education International Research
In all empirical examples, the unions are primarily devoted to one task: Attempts to influence policy makers regarding the migration status of asylum-seeking children (in particular, unaccompanied minors) and regarding the allocation of additional resources to the education of migrant students (more support, more teachers, more professional development). The methods used are presentations of unions’ own reports, press conferences, and dissemination of information through other media statements. There is little evidence yet of how successful these actions have been, but undoubtedly an example from Germany stands out. According to Vogel and Stock, in October 2017, one of the largest unions (Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft [GEW]) launched a report, “Education cannot wait”, urging regional and national governments to invest in employing teachers at a cost of €3 billion per year. The report also advocated strongly for unrestricted access to education for refugee and asylum-seeking children. The next day, the standing conferences of education ministries (KMK) from 16 Länder endorsed the unrestricted access policy and even confirmed the need for new resources. Whether the resources were allocated and to what extent remains unclear. Nevertheless, this example shows that education unions have a strong role to play, to remind policy makers about basic legislation and what it takes to live up to the task of providing meaningful and equal education to refugee and asylum-seeking children. Similar examples of attempts to influence policy makers could be found in contributions from Italy, Spain and Sweden. Another interesting example from Germany is that the education unions seem to have recognised knowledge production as a vital contribution. Thus, the unions have been active in partly supporting research on the educational conditions experienced by newly-arrived children. In Italy and Sweden, unions have been active in providing information about the right to education in minority languages on their websites and brochures. Italian unions have also carried out locally based training initiatives for teachers in intercultural education. In addition, the unions in Germany, Spain, and Sweden have been actively involved in discussing the issue of education for migrant children, intercultural education, and the challenges and benefits of working in multicultural classrooms. One particularly interesting initiative in Sweden is aimed at supporting migrant teachers on their path back to the teaching profession (see Bunar in this volume). Even in Germany, the union has established local programmes for the professional integration of refugee teachers, for example, the “Here to participate” programme in Hamburg and “Peer-Up” in Berlin (see Vogel & Stock, p. 32, in this volume). What distinguishes Sweden in this context is that support to migrant teachers through two comprehensive programmes – Fast-track for newcomers and Further education of migrant teachers for those with Swedish language proficiency and eligibility to higher education – is a matter of national policy and conducted by universities. Education unions have been one of the driving forces and active participants in devising and launching the policy, but 14