Archive | Inclusion RSS feed for this section

Each year, about 250,000 immigrants arrive in Canada. According to Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2009), about one-third of in-coming immigrants consist of youth between the ages of 15 to 25. Approximately 40,000 immigrant youth arrived in BC from 2008 to 2009, representing the second highest migration of youth into Canadian provinces. A little more than half (54%) of those youth came from China, India, and Philippines with the remainder originating from the United States, South Korea, Pakistan, Russia, and the United Kingdom.

As Canada is a diverse country, youth who are new to Canada often face a number of challenges that effect how well they adapt to school, learn a new language, become familiar with Canadian culture, and make new friends. Fitting in is a critical aspect of social integration. Unfortunately, many youth feel they must change who they are in order to fit in. Failing to fit in contributes to lower levels of self-esteem and confidence. Research suggests that immigrant youth who had been in Canada for three years or less were often afraid to speak their minds, in part due to language barriers.

Language

Language fluency is an important factor affecting students’ participation and success in school. The most common non-official languages spoken among new immigrant youth are Mandarin, Punjabi, Arabic, and Spanish.  The ability to converse with fluency in English or French not only enhances likelihood of fitting in but prepares youth for future careers. From 2004 to 2008, approximately 65% of new immigrant youth spoke English or French. Though this was higher than a decade earlier, 60% of immigrant youth stated that language was a significant barrier to obtaining a job, with some adding that prospective employers expected accent-free English.

Poverty

The effect of poverty also contributes to physical and mental health risks, social isolation, and decreased ability to concentrate in class. Though most youth are dependent on their families, parents who are new to Canada may not have the needed skills to find gainful employment.

As part of the migration process, new arrivals are generally classified into one of two categories: Economic Class and Non-Economic Class. Economic Class refers to those who have recognized skills and abilities that contribute to Canada’s economy. Non-Economic Class refers to those who do not meet this criterion. From 2004 to 2008, approximately 52% of youth who were new to BC were from the Non-Economic Class. Of these, 49% also lived in households where the total income fell below the Statistics Canada low-income cut-off level.

Immigrant youth have greater difficulty finding employment compared to non-immigrant youth. In 2009, the unemployment rate of immigrant youth was approximately 19% compared to 15% among Canadian born youth. Furthermore, immigrant youth from single-parent families tended to suffer from poorer health resulting from the effects of poverty.

Social Isolation and Risk for Deviance

In addition to language and poverty barriers, youth who are new to Canada often feel socially isolated. Discrimination may be a daily experience, contributing to feelings of exclusion and alienation. Over time, youth often make friends within their own ethnic group where other are experiencing similar challenges, and where they are more likely to feel respected and understood. However, sustained marginalization and lack of school engagement contributes to unsuccessful integration and places individuals at higher risk for involvement in deviant and criminal behaviors. This includes recruitment into gangs due to the lure of gaining social status and respect.

What programs have been initiated by the provincial government to help new immigrant youth?

Settlement Workers in Schools (SWIS)

SWIS is an outreach program offering guidance to new immigrant students and their families in both elementary and secondary schools. SWIS provides information and support to enhance and understanding of Canadian culture through the following objectives:

• Promoting greater engagement in the school system;
• Providing information about school registration, activities and community resources;
• Offering support in conflict situations; and
• Increasing opportunities for further involvement in the schools and communities.

My Circle Program

Available through Immigration Services Society (ISS) of BC, the goal of My Circle is to promote active participation and positive integration of young newcomers by training them to become peer support group facilitator and young community leaders (ISS, 2010). Following 80 hours of training, young volunteer facilitators return to their communities to recruit and engage other to join activities that support other newcomer youth and their families.

Restorative action is valued in communities that view conflict as a learning opportunity.  It is a practice that helps individuals understand the effect of their actions on others and to build skills for resolving conflicts more peacefully. Restorative action utilizes empathic listening, open-ended questioning, summarizing, paraphrasing, and identifying underlying needs and interests (Gillman and Bowler, 2004). A relationally-based response to undesirable behaviour (Bargen, 2010), restorative action is premised on the principles of restorative justice. Restorative justice is a more inclusive approach from traditional responses to unwanted behaviour. For example, it provides an opportunity for those most affected by an injustice to have a voice in the resolution process (Gilman and Bowler, 2004). Frequently, the victim, offender, family members, and a community member take an active role in the resolution process.

In contrast, traditional responses tend to be adversarial in nature; placing a central focus on the rule that has been broken, along with the consequent punishment that the rule-breaker must face. Traditional forms of justice are generally administered by an authority figure (eg. Judge or school principal) who ‘imposes’ punishment for certain behaviours. This suggests that the rule-breaker is not required to take responsibility for their actions. Traditional discipline methods can also be a more an alienating response for all involved because they do not offer an opportunity for those negatively affected by anothers’ actions to have direct input in the resolution process. In effect, adversarial and alienating methods of problem solving generally fail to make use of real life opportunities where individuals can learn problem solving skills and practice them in the presence   of skilled mediators.

This means that in school settings, name-calling, harassment, exclusion, physical fights, threats, and bullying can be responded to more effectively using restorative processes such as mediation, group conferencing, talking circles, and peace circles (see descriptions) in most cases. Not only is a restorative approach an effective tool for “granting justice, closure, restoration of dignity, transcendence of shame, and healing for victims” (Braithwaite, 2002: 69), over time, they are a more socially and cost effective way to prevent future crime (Strang and Braithwaite, 2001). Although the term restorative action is often used in place of restorative justice when working in school-based settings, this is done to avoid a negative association with law-breaking (Bargen, 2010).

Key Features of a Restorative Process:

-          Participation should be voluntary

-          The person who caused the harm must be willing to take ownership for actions

-          Face to face mediation is not always appropriate

-          When student mediation teams are used, adult support is important

-           Staff/adult team must be used in more serious or sensitive cases

-          All participants should feel empowered through the process

-          The mediation environment must be one of respectful inclusion

What evidence is there to show that restorative practices work? 

A growing international body of research demonstrates that restorative action-based practices in schools contribute to safer and more productive learning environments for both staff and students. In 2004, The Youth Justice Board for England and Wales evaluated a large-scale pilot restorative justice project designed to reduce unwanted behaviors (eg. bullying and victimization, poor attendance) and school suspensions. The comparison study utilized surveys and interviews with 5,000 students, 1,150 staff members, and 600 outside participants. Schools that used restorative action reported:

• Fewer students who felt that bullying was a problem in their school, and
• Fewer instances of racist name-calling and bullying, such as hitting, kicking, theft, verbal threats, and skipping class to avoid bullies.

When comparing staff and teacher survey responses between restorative schools and non-program schools, adults reported:

• Overall improvements in student behaviors, and
• Decreases in the number of staff who felt suspensions were the best way to deal with behavioral problems.

In addition, 89% of students who participated in the restorative process reported a high level of satisfaction, and 93% felt the program was fair and ‘just’.  After three months, a follow-up study found that only 4% of the resolution agreements had been broken or remained incomplete.  Further information about the National Evaluation of the Restorative Justice in Schools Program can be found here.

In Scotland, a similar study reviewed 18 pilot schools two years after the initial implementation of restorative action programming (McCluckley, 2008). After surveying 627 staff members and 1,163 elementary and secondary students, conducting interviews and focus groups, observing staff, students, and parents, and conducting an analysis of school and government policy, the findings were substantial. All but one of the elementary schools, and the majority of the secondary schools, reported significant changes in their schools. The study reported improvements in morale among staff, and more positive views by students about their overall school experience. Additionally, attendance rates among students increased, while expulsions decreased. Many schools reported a reduction in playground incidents, referrals for discipline, and suspensions. For more detailed information, read the journal article.

In both studies, schools noted that, although positive outcomes resulted from shifting toward a restorative action-based approach; the process of implementing this new approach required a significant commitment of time. It was also noted that larger gains were anticipated with continued commitment to the restorative action process.

In Canada, Nova Scotia appears to be making substantial strides in this area through government, community, and university partnerships. In fact, these partnerships and commitments have led to successes similar to those reported in England, Wales, and Scotland. A cultural shift is being enjoyed in which a “more positive and collegial environment among staff [is occurring], resulting in fewer staff absentee days, a higher level of student involvement in school life, and dramatic reductions in discipline referrals” (p.1). To read more about these developments, click on a 2011 bulletin or visit the Safer Saner Schools website.