Education for Syrian refugees in Turkey
Which barriers and facilitators can be found and which considerations follow
Source: trouw.nl
Sam Bulthuis – 10561536 – sjbulthuis@gmail.com
Bachelorscriptie Algemene Sociale wetenschappen – conflict studies Universiteit van Amsterdam
Begeleider: R.J. Schram Tweede lezer: J.J. Rözer 26-06-2017
Index
Foreword ... 5
Abstract ... 6
1. Introduction ... 7
1.1 Picture of the situation ... 9
1.1.1 Three phases ... 9
1.2 Key concepts ... 10
1.2.1 Definition refugee youth ... 10
1.2.2 Universal Declaration of Human Rights ... 10
1.3 Key actors and stakeholders 1.3.1 Governments………. ... 11
1.3.2 Intergovernmental Organisations ... 12
1.3.3 Non-governmental Organisations ... 13
2. Theoretical Framework ... 14
2.1 The iron cage ... 14
2.2 Feasibility ... 15
2.3 Centralized or decentralized educational policy ... 16
2.4 The four A scheme ... 18
3. Problem Definition ... 21 4. Methodology 4.1 Strategy …. ... 23 4.2 Method ... 23 4.3 Operationalization ... 24 4.5 Sampling/population ... 26 4.6 Data analysis ... 26 4.7 Ethical accountability ... 27 5. Results ... 28 5.1 Research process ... 28 5.2 Research findings ... 29 5.2.1 Policy change ... 29
5.2.2 Barriers and facilitators ... 31
5.2.3 Four A scheme ... 40
6. Conclusion ... 42
6.1 Discussion ... 47
7. Bibliography ... 49
8.1 Appendix I: Interview design ... 52
8.2 Appendix II: Coding scheme ... 54
8.3 Appendix III: Respondents overview ... 55
Foreword
For many years I had an interest in conflict. However, this interest always focused on armed or diplomatic conflict. Although this thesis does focus on an armed conflict it focusses on a topic directly related to a conflict were I previously did not know I had an interest in: education. Therefore I had some starters problems. However, the deeper I got into the subject the more it spoke to me. I can honestly say that the loss of education is a horrible effect of armed conflict, and the consequences are enormous. By looking deeper into the question how to better provide education for Syrian refugee youth in Turkey I hope to provide a small contribution to realising their right, their human right, of access to education.
Without a few people this thesis would not have happened and therefore I would like to thank them. Firstly, I would like to thank Meryem without her nothing would have been possible. From arranging my internship in Istanbul to taking care of me while I was in Istanbul, showing me around and having some good discussions about the situation while enjoying delicious food and drinks. Secondly I would like to thank Duygu . She was my main contact person at my internship at IBC, were I was welcomed with open arms and taken care of until the end. She provided me with multiple valuable contacts and help for this thesis. Thirdly I would like to thank my mother and sister, who both helped my tremendously for instance in the form of discussions about this thesis, either in the Netherlands, in Istanbul or whenever needed via a call. Fourthly, I would like to thank all the respondents of this thesis, without whom it literally would not have been possible. The willingness to talk, and their commitment to change the current situation amazed and impressed me. The future of Syrian refugee youth is in good hands. Finally, I would like to thank my teacher Robin for his constructive feedback. I was probably not the easiest student to guide, I appreciate his flexibility and his ability to create clearness and support whenever I needed it.
Abstract
This research presents a case study of providing education to Syrians refugees in Turkey. Three million Syrian refugees live in Turkey and realising the right to education is a huge challenge. Based on policy report analysis and semi-structured interviews, it analyses the barriers and facilitators for providing education to Syrian refugees with an interdisciplinary approach. The provision of education is placed in a larger theoretical framework and the four A scheme. The four A scheme is based on four parameters: availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability. The research found multiple barriers and some facilitators for providing education. The biggest barriers found were economic hardship, language, availability of teachers and quality of teachers. Based on these barriers and facilitators multiple recommendation are made. More training and support for teachers, a bigger focus on language training, a more decentralised approach and a more fruitful long-term vision. Furthermore, some flaws were found in the four A scheme. A context analysis is lacking, the missing of an actor analysis and there interdependence between the determents is not acknowledged. Based on these flaws recommendations are made to strengthen the four A scheme to create a more thorough and complete scheme.
1. Introduction
“The ongoing civil war has made Syria the world’s leading country of forced displacement, affecting more than 11 million people through internal and external population movements” (Memisoglu & Ilgit, 2016, p.1). The Turkish Republic has become one of the largest host countries for these refugees. According to the Turkish government, as of February 2017, they house over 2.9 million refugees from Syria (UNHCR data). Although Turkey has a rich history of taking in refugees; the current Turkish context is quite unique. Turkey is an upper middle income country and has significant geopolitical leverage (UNHCR, 2016). Furthermore, the government initially had an open-door policy for Syrian refugees, while at the same time providing one of the best legal frameworks for hosting refugees (UNHCR. 2016). Currently Turkey host the largest refugee population in the world and is, by far, the largest contributor to refugee response in the region. However, this does not mean that everything runs flawless. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) three key elements can be distinguished which are of great importance for the refugee population: protection, social cohesion and education.
Turkey shows levels of protection, and access to government services, rarely ever seen in first asylum countries (UNHCR, 2016). Syrian refugees, furthermore, benefit from an exceptional welcome; from the Turkish people and from the Government as well. However, one must act carefully and not take this hospitality for granted. The welcoming of refugees is running thin now that it becomes more clear that the refugees will stay for some time (UNHCR,2016). Nevertheless, the current social cohesion is more than can be expected. The flaw can be found in the last key element: education.
While a lot of different actors strive to deliver quality education to school-aged refugees, a report of the UNHCR showed that a low number of refugees are enrolled in school. Only 39 percent of the school-aged refugees are enrolled in primary or secondary education (UNHCR, 2016). Although education is a right on itself it is more than just that. “In the Turkish context, it is clear that education is key to reducing the incidence of early marriage and child labour, to social cohesion, and to sustainable livelihoods, as well as preparing today's youth to eventually return to and participate in the reconstruction of Syria itself” (UHNCR, 2016, p.3). A knowledge gap exist around this topic. It is therefore that this thesis set out to find an answer to the following research question: What are the barriers and facilitators for schooling of Syrian refugee youth in Turkey and which considerations follow, from these barriers and facilitators, to ensure the right to education? A balance should be found between providing immediate access to education and the long term needs of refugee children (Kirişci, 2014). A considerable
political effort should be made in collaboration with a wide range of stakeholder. Together they must ensure that there is no “lost generation” of Syrians (Kirişci, 2014). Using the four A scheme this thesis sets out to develop recommendations. While the social relevance in this thesis is the most interesting at the same time this thesis will be of academic relevance. The four A scheme that will be used is not widely spread in the academic nor in the policy world. So this thesis also sets out to further test the relevance and usability of this scheme and make adjustments and additions where needed.
This thesis will firstly lay out a situation sketch, followed by the key concept and an overview of the key actors and stakeholder. Afterwards, a theoretical framework will be set. Thereafter a broader problem definition will be given in which the main and sub-questions will be further discussed. Afterwards, the method that was used to implement the research will be shared and the results following these methods. Finally, the this thesis will end with a conclusion and discussion.
1.1 Picture of the situation
The Syrian conflict is a complex conflict with many parties involved. Because this thesis will not focus on the conflict directly, but more on the refugees caused by this conflict, just a summary will be provided of the three different phases that can be distinguished of the arrival of Syrian refugees in Turkey. These three phases are of upmost importance to get a better understanding of the earlier described problem. Then some elements of the Universal Declaration of Human rights will be shared and the definition of refugee youth, which will be used throughout this thesis, will be presented. The problem around schooling for refugee children involves multiple ‘key actors’. After the definition of refugee youth these key actors will be described.
1.1.1 Three phases
Three phases can be distinguished in the displacement of Syrian refugees to Turkey. Each phase represents the movement of refugees from Syria to Turkey. The first phase started in 2011. The Turkish government welcomed the refugees and treated them as guest (Ackerman, 2015). The Turkish government as well as many analysts predicted that the war would be short-lived. However, by the end of 2013 there were over 20 camps housing the Syrian refugees, in which nearly all children were attending school; provided by the Turkish government in collaboration with the United Nations (UN) (Ackerman, 2015).
In 2014 the second phase started. With borders closing in neighbouring countries of Syria the refugee camps could not handle the number of refugees coming and, the camps hit their final capacity at 200.000 refugees (Ackerman, 2015). The main source of education became Syrian-run schools which were funded with private money from the Gulf states. The Turkish government responded by passing legalisation, on the 22th October of 2014, for the temporary protection of Syrians (Ackerman, 2015). They did this through the UN article 91 of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection. This article states the following: “The regulation on temporary protection defines “temporary protection” as a protection status granted to foreigners, who were forced to leave their country, cannot return to the country they left, arrived at or crossed our borders in masses or individually during a period of mass influx, to seek emergency and temporary protection and who international protection request cannot be taken under individual assessment” (UNHCR, 2015, p1.). By this law the UN was able to build schools outside of the refugee camps and provide education.
By the end of 2014 the refugee crisis entered the third, and most, critical phase (Ackerman, 2015). After the siege of ISIS around 400.000 Syrian residents crossed the border.
Since then the number of refugees that cross the border keeps on rising. At this moment, nearly three million Syrian refugees crossed the border to Turkey (UNHCR data).
1.2 Key concepts
1.2.1 Definition refugee youth
One of the problems with the term refugee youth is the wide variation in which ‘refugee youth’ is defined. “Young people are broadly defined as those transitioning from childhood to adulthood” (Ahmadzadeh, Çorabatir, Hashem, Al Husseini and Wahby, 2014, p.14). This however does not define clearly what is meant with the term refugee youth. Therefore, part of the definition from the World Health Organization will be used throughout this thesis. The World Health Organization defines them as people between 10 and 24 years old (Sommer, 2011). However, this will exclude a large part of the school-aged Syrian refugees and includes a large part that is no longer compulsory to go to school, therefore the age range will be adapted to those between 6 and 18 years old. Furthermore, because this thesis focusses solely on Syrian refugees the following is added: a culturally and ethnically more or less heterogeneous group who identify as Syrian. The full definition of refugee youth that will be used is: a culturally and ethnically more or less heterogeneous group who identify as Syrian people between 6 and 18 years old.
1.2.2 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a declaration adopted by the UN. The Declaration arose directly from the experiences of the Second World War. The Declaration consists of thirty articles (United Nations). For this thesis, especially article 26 is of interest:
1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be
compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made
generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further
the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
2. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
This thesis has a right based approach. Rights-based approaches aim to strengthen the capacity of duty bearers and empower the rights holders” (Gneiting, Bruno-van Vijfeijken & Schmitz, 2011).
1.3 Key actors and stakeholders
1.3.1 Governments
In the task of realising the right to education multiple key actors and stakeholder can be distinguished. A distinction will be made between four different types of key actors: governments, intergovernmental agencies, local NGOs and international NGOs. In this paragraph these key actors and stakeholder will be discussed.
The first group of key actors is the government. In this case it is relevant to distinguish two types of governments: the Turkish government and foreign governments. The Turkish government has a rich history when it comes to receiving refugees. From the 1920’s till the 1990’s Turkey welcomed over one and a half million Muslim refugees from the Balkan (Kirişci, 2014). Not long after 1990 Turkey experienced another influx of refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan; Turkey is no stranger to asylum seekers and refugees (Kirişci, 2014). However, the influx of Syrians into Turkey is unprecedented (Kirişci, 2014). Turkey never experienced an influx so big as the current one. Turkey has implemented an open-door policy which marks a conspicuous break from the past (Kirişci, 2014). This brings many challenges to Turkey, with one of them being the education problem among Syrian refugees.
The second type of governments that can be distinguished are foreign governments. Although a great part of the refugee crisis takes place inside Turkey, a lot of foreign governments have interests in the way the refugee crisis is managed. Although these foreign governments do not have the same amount as interest as Turkey, they do have some influence; two governments certainly. Firstly, the Syrian government. At the beginning of the conflict The Syrian and Turkish government had a well-established and good relationship (Kirişci, 2014). However, due to the increase of violence against civilians by the Syrian government this relationship was broken. “By the end of 2011, the Turkish government had thrown its weight completely behind the Syrian opposition and recognized the then-Syrian National Council as the representative of the Syrian people” (Kirişci, 2014, p.5). As a result, both governments are
at odds with each other; this makes offering aid to Syrian refugees, especially the use of the Syrian education system, a lot harder.
Secondly the European governments working together in the European Union. Lorenzo Trombetta (2014, p.27) states: “Syrian crisis is the most difficult one the European Union has had to face so far, for the unprecedented scope of the humanitarian catastrophe, its geographic proximity to the Union’s borders, and the difficulties in deciphering a fluid and multi-dimensional conflict”. Although the EU attempts to decrease the conflicts intensity, that is very much informed by their own interest. In March of 2016 the European Union made a deal with Turkey. The deal means the following. Anyone arriving "irregularly" after March 20th 2016 in Greece is returned to Turkey at the expense of the EU. These are people who apply for asylum in Greece or whose asylum application is rejected as inadmissible (Alonso, 2016). Syrians are almost automatically recognized as refugees in Turkey, have some kind of (temporary) protected status and may therefore be returned, according to the EU. In return the talks about Turkey joining the European Union are reopened and fastened, as well as a payment of three million euros from Europe to Turkey to help them deal with the large refugee influx. (Alonso, 2016).
The deal produced a lot of criticism. Panos Navrozidis, the director of the International Rescue committee (IRC) stated: "The EU-Turkey deal is playing roulette with the futures of some of the world's most vulnerable. It has become mission impossible for those who need it most to seek refuge in Europe" (Aljazeera, 2017). Multiple NGOs like Oxfam and Amnesty International agree with this criticism. Furthermore, it influences the education problem. By Turkey hosting so much refugees, and an unequal distribution of refugees between Turkey and Europe, the Turkish education system got saturated rapidly. Multiple governments have multiple interests; which not always align. These geopolitical relations have great impact on the future of refugee youth.
1.3.2 Intergovernmental Organisations
The most active intergovernmental organisation (IO) in Turkey is the United Nations (UN), which was founded after the Second World War in 1945. It promotes international co-operation. For this thesis, the UNHCR is the most relevant UN organisation, it is a key-actor. The agency has the task to lead and coordinate international action to protect refugees. The primary goal of the UNHCR is to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees (UNHCR).
The UNHCR is active in Turkey to assure these rights. They also focus on education. The UNHCR promotes long-term education policies, which build on the education system of
the host country, and it has been pursuing this policy in Turkey. While it also promotes governments to remain prepared for emergency response in case of possible new influxes. UNHCR’s education program is built around three main principles: access, quality and protection. By working together with local and international NGOs the UNHCR sets out to achieve these three main principles.
1.3.3 Non-governmental Organisations
A distinction can be made between International and National Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO). In Turkey national as well as international NGOs are working on education for Syrian refugees. The Turkish government was first sceptic about international Non-Governmental Organisations (INGO). However: “the steady increase of Syrian refugees is resulting in flexibility on the part of the government in acknowledging and recognizing other actors as legitimate players in the humanitarian sphere in Turkey” (Kirişci, 2014, p.39). If well approached, this development should open better cooperation between national and international NGOs.
Local and international NGOs can, and should, complement each other in the current situation. Where local NGOs possess a lot local knowledge INGOs have extensive experience (Kirişci, 2014). Some INGOs do partner with local Turkish NGOs such as Hayata Destek, the HYD and the International Blue Crescent. Yet some local NGOs complain about poor communication and coordination with INGOs and vice versa. “Achieving an improved relationship between Turkish NGOs and their international stakeholders as well as donor governments is going to be critical but also challenging” (Kirişci, 2014, p.39). The Turkish government as well as the UNHCR should help and support further cooperation between local NGOs and INGOs.
2. Theoretical Framework
In this chapter the theoretical background will be provided. First, Weber his concept of the iron cage will be discussed and placed in the context of providing education to Syrian refugees in Turkey. Subsequently, the concept of feasibility of policy will be discussed; to what extend is a state able to facilitate and create policy and what problems does it face when creating these policies. Thirdly, the advantages and disadvantages of a centralized or decentralized educational system will be reviewed. Finally, the four A scheme will be presented.
2.1 The iron cage
When looking at the policy for providing education to refugee youth in Turkey, and looking at policy in general, concepts as rationalisation and bureaucracy are highly associated concepts. To get a better understanding of these two concepts this thesis will make use of Weber’s concept of the ‘iron cage’. Weber argues that society is increasingly dominated by instrumental-rational actions an iron cage of rationality has formed (Weber, 2012/1922). The iron cage is a metaphor for the bureaucratic society in which people are trapped. It is a metaphor for the bureaucratic system in which a totally rationalized society has a central authority which reduces people's freedom so that they are reduced to small subdivisions of a 'bureaucratic machine (Weber, 2012/1922). The fixed rules and structures make values less important. Everything is fixed around efficiency instead. This concept can related to educational policies. When providing education it is of importance to not lose values and get stuck in efficiency instead, this can become counterproductive in the end.
The uprising of bureaucracy can be traced back to the upcoming of Protestantism and later Capitalism. For capitalism to work sufficiently a rationalisation process was needed (Ritzer, 2012). The behaviour of individuals and the society became more and more based on efficiency rather than driven by social action, traditions and values. Behaviour became goal-orientated. It is important to look at providing education with traditions and values and not with a bureaucratic machine.
Bureaucracy started as a mean for solving problems. However, bureaucracy is no longer a mean, but a goal in itself (Weber, 2012/1922). Weber saw this as a trap, a prison; an iron cage. We are stuck in our own use of bureaucracy, we cannot escape it anymore. It has become an inescapable power. “If the ‘inescapable power’ of the bureaucracy’s functionaries reigns, a ‘pacifism of social impotence’, a loss of societal dynamism, and thorough stagnation throughout the society will result” (Kalberg, 2001, p.180). Bureaucracy sets out rules to increase efficiency. In turn, the society will be governed by these rules. These rules can limit
the potential for social interaction and human innovation. These rules, set out by bureaucracy, can confine the society. Therefore the term of iron cage.
2.2 Feasibility
When looking broader at the educational needs of the refugee youth and the scale of the needs, the question of the level of feasibility comes forward. To what extent is the state able to facilitate and create a legitimate, reliable and realistic educational policy for refugee youth and which problems is the state facing in this process. In general states want to make everything as legible as possible in order to control society, and create it to their own wishes (Scott, 1998). However, to establish such control the state needs to have an understanding of the society itself and the territory it occupies. But this process of creating a legible territory to be controlled naturally creates gross simplifications and obscured the complex heterogeneity of society (Scott, 1998). This is not an accusation to the government of wrong doing, however, a way to understand how so many well-intended schemes have failed to increase the human condition. To get a better understanding of this wrongdoing four elements will be discussed.
The first element is the administrative ordering of nature and society (Scott, 1998). The earlier described simplifications the state applies to society. By itself these simplifications can be seen as the tools of modern statecraft. However they undergird the complex concept of citizenship and furthermore the provision of social welfare. These simplifications go hand in hand with the earlier described concept of the iron cage. It is a case of over rationalisation with a loss of grasp of the reality as a result.
The second element is the high-modernist ideology. “It is best conceived as a strong, one might even say muscle-bound, version of the self-confidence about scientific and technological progress, the expansion of production, the growing satisfaction of human needs, the mastery of nature (including human nature) and, above all, the rational design of social order commensurate with the scientific understanding of natural laws” (Scott, 1998, p. 4). The carriers of this high-modernist ideology tended to see everything in a rational order and in remarkably visual aesthetic terms. “For them, an efficient, rationally organized city, village or farm was a city that looked regimented and orderly in a geometrical sense” (Scott, 1998, p. 4). Once again the parallel with the Iron cage can be formed. The over rationalisation does not create realistic views, the opposite it loses the difficult concept of society. Education cannot be organized in a geometrical sense. The needs are diverse and depend on many variables. The third element only becomes lethal when it is combined with the two, earlier described, elements. The third element is: “an authoritarian state that is willing and able to use the full weight of its coercive power to bring these high-modernist designs to being”(Scott,
1998, p.5). This element typically finds extra soil when the country is in a state of war, revolution or depression and struggle for national liberation. In these situations the state grands themselves emergency powers to handle the emergency conditions: a state of emergency. A state in which Turkey finds itself right now. However, the third element gets troublesome when the fourth element is added: “a prostrate civil society that lacks the capacity to resist these plans” (Scott, 1998, p.5). Even more, war, revolution or depression often weaken the civil society and makes the population more receptive to a new and further dispensation.
In summary: “The legibility of a society provides the capacity of large-scale social engineering, high-modernist ideology provides the desire, the authoritarian state provides the determination to act on the desire, and an incapacitated civil society provides the levelled social terrain on which to build” (Scott, 1998, p.5). It is of high importance however to see this not as an attack against the imperialism of high-modernist planned social order. It should be seen as: “a case against an imperial and hegemonic planning mentality that excludes the highly necessary role of local knowledge and know-how” (Scott, 1998, P.5).
2.3 Centralized or decentralized educational policy
The earlier described iron cage and the problems of feasibility can also be found in educational policy. When looking at rationalisation, centralisation is a concept that comes forward, as earlier described in the iron cage. Because education is mostly top-down regulated, they tend use a centralised vision to implement this policy. When looking at systematic educational policy implementation two paths can be followed: centralized or decentralized. A centralized strategy means: “A centralized strategy of mandatory curriculum frameworks, high-stakes student assessments, and coordinated teacher training” (Clune, 1993, p.233). On the other hand, a decentralized strategy means: “A decentralized alternative involving local choice of curricula, technical assistance, and professional development” (Clune, 1993, p.233). You can state that in centralisation, the earlier described over rationalisation, the iron cage, comes forwards. Therefore, the differences and the consequences that follow from both systems of a centralized and decentralized educational policy will be discussed.
The first problem that comes up that with a centralized educational system is that a standard curriculum is adopted, however diverse needs among the students can be found. Furthermore, state adoption of a standard curriculum it not required to assure an aspiring curriculum available for a wide range of schools and teachers (Clune, 1993). Additionally, “If the effort to standardize curricula succeeds in the face of strenuous resistance, it will inevitably block a vital process of matching curricula with local needs and diverse student population”
(Clune, 1993, p.234). Uncertainty also exists about how much acceleration of learning is possible within any particular centralized model for students of various groups, like low-income students, uneducated, immigrants and so forth (Clune, 1993). Different needs can be found within classrooms, schools and districts. To set up one centralized educational policy will prohibited these schools, classrooms and districts to adapt to the specific needs of their students. As earlier described by Weber a loss of ‘societal dynamism’ follows this rationalisation and centralisation process.
The challenge in adopting a standard curriculum by the national government is troublesome enough. However, the adoption problems is dwarfed by an even bigger problem: implementation. “Whatever is adopted at the top is filtered unpredictably through multiple intermediate layers of discretion shaped by pre-existing cultures and agendas” (Clune, 1993, p.234). A governance problem can be found here. But, at the same time, this governance problem can be seen as a delivery problem in disguise. Because the only way to escape the unmanageability of the top-down construction is to create a customized coherence at the lower level, schools and local districts. Therefore, the following challenge arrives: “to design policies that combine the high standards of systemic policy with a broad diversity of curricular options and a powerful local delivery system” (Clune, 1993, p.234).
Although decentralisation has many advantages a fully decentralized system has many disadvantages at the same time. The decentralization of educational policy implementation goes against the main reason of centralized educational policy: standardization. “Curricula, qualifications, and examinations need to be reasonably similar across the national or subnational unit so as to facilitate mobility, the exchange of personnel, and the mutual recognition of diplomas across different regions ” (Weiler, 1989, p. 33). Furthermore, decentralisation can worsen the provision of public goods (Galiani et all., 2012). On a financial level decentralisation can have negative effects. Because on financial level resources in certain locations might not be sufficient, an unfair distribution of resources might take place. Therefore a combination between centralisation and decentralisation should be found.
In general decentralisation can: “alleviate problems of information asymmetries over heterogeneous preferences, collective decision making, and accountability in controlling political agent” (Galiani et all, 2002, P. 278). Centralization, on the other hand has its own advantages. Some similarity must be found between curriculum to facilitate mobility of students and teachers, especially in Turkey. Furthermore, centralisation ensure for a viable distribution of public goods and financials. A balance should be made between centralisation and decentralisation. To resolve barriers sometimes a decentralised vison suits best, while other
times a centralised vision might suit best. By combining the best of both, adequate policy regarding education can be formed.
2.4 The four A scheme
The AAAQ, or AAAA framework can be seen as the first set of socio-economic human right law standards that is exceptionally relevant for essential public services provision, like education (Hesselman, de Wolf, Toebes, 2016). The framework find its roots in the work of the UN committee on Economic Social and Culture Rights. This committee set out parameters for availability, accessibility, acceptability and adoptability or in some frameworks quality (Hesselman, de Wolf, Toebes, 2016). Briefly, these parameters define the normative and expectations of full and adequate human rights fulfilment. However, with a few exceptions, the framework has received little to no attention in the academic and policy practice world (Hesselman, de Wolf, Toebes, 2016). This can be seen as remarkable because most human right fulfilments refer to the, earlier named, parameters.
The framework is most prominently recognisable in the right to health. However a transformation to education can easily be made. In health they mostly refer to the scheme with AAAQ (availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality). In education they refer to the scheme with AAAA (availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability). The latter one will be used throughout this thesis. In figure 1 the four parameters are displayed (Tomaševski, 2001).
This thesis will make use of this conceptual framework to uncover the barriers and facilitators in the system targeted at providing education for Syrian refugees. The basis of this conceptual framework is that there could be no right to education without the corresponding obligations for governments (Tomaševski, 2001). However, the state is not the only investor, as shown in the actor analysis earlier. On the other hand: “International human rights law obliges it to be the investor of last resort” (Tomaševski, 2001, p. 17). Ensuring education revolves rarely only on founding. To create a deeper understanding, in the following paragraph, the four elements will be discussed.
Figure 1: four A scheme
Availability
“Availability means that the object of the right, in other words the goods or services such as education, food or health care, have to be available in sufficient quantity, including
operational aspects such as buildings, facilities and materials” (UNESCO, 1999, p. 5). Functional educational institutions have to be available in sufficient quantity. What these institutions require to function depends on multiple factors. However, in general all institutions and programs require buildings, sanitation facilities safe drinking water and trained teachers (UNESCO). The element availability can be split up in two factors: schools and teachers. Without these two factors, the availability will not be fulfilled.
Accessibility
The element accessibility can be described in short as following: ”educational institutions and programmes have to be accessible to everyone, without discrimination” (UNESCO, 1999, p.6). It is about three overlapping dimensions: non-discrimination, physical accessibility and economic accessibility (UNESCO, 1999). The first dimension, non-discrimination, states that education must be accessible for all. Especially the most vulnerable groups, in this thesis Syrian youth, must have access to education. The second dimension, physical accessibility, states that access to education must be within safe physical reach. This can be by a reasonable geographical location or via modern technology. The last dimension, economic accessibility, states that education has to be affordable to all. However, a distinction is made between the multiple levels of education. Primary education must be available free to all, secondary and any higher education does not have to be free. But ”states parties are required to progressively introduce free secondary and higher education” (UNESCO, 1999, p. 6). However, the struggle does not end at free education. Multiple other economical factors can withheld students from accessing educaiton. These factors diverse from school books and uniforms to transportation from and to school. All costs, that attending school entails, should be within affordable range.
Acceptability
Acceptability is about: “the form and substance of education, including curricula and teaching methods, have to be acceptable” (UNESCO, 1999, p.6). With acceptable meaning: relevant, culturally appropriate and of good quality. The language of instruction is also of high relevance (Tomaševski, 2001). When the language is foreign to young children, and/or teachers, it makes the education unacceptable. The final part of acceptability is censorship (Tomaševski, 2001). Censorship of school textbooks is no different than any other censorship, Adaptability
Adaptability means: “education has to be flexible so it can adapt to the needs of changing societies and communities and respond to the needs of students within their diverse social and cultural settings” (UNESCO, 1999, p. 6). Education needs to be able to evolve with the changing needs of society and contribute to solving challenges. This also mean that education sometimes needs to be adopted locally to suit specific contexts. “The system of education is required to adapt to each individual child, against the historical heritage of excluding all the children who were deemed not to be able to adapt to the system of education as it was ” (Tomaševski, 2001, p. 31).
Rationalisation, bureaucracy and centralisation risk having a negative influence on adaptability. The educational system needs to be able to adjust to the needs of the students within their diverse social and cultural settings. Centralisation, rationalisation and
bureaucracy could hinder this. Even more, they could create the opposite: one educational system for all, a fully centralised educational system applies a one size fits all vision. Within a centralised educational system the iron cage of Weber can be found. The top-down regulated structure can be seen as the fence that withholds schools and districts to adapt to the needs of their students and to tailor the educational system to those specific needs.
3. Problem Definition
Only 39 percent of the Syrian refugee youth is enrolled in school. This lack of education can be seen as dramatic. Education is not only a human right supported by multiple international treaties, without education the future of many Syrian refugees is uncertain. The lack of education also restrains the possibility of a good future for many Syrian refugees and is in the end the risk of a lost generation. When many young people do not have a future, it can undermine the social cohesion in the society and can create all sorts of tensions. While multiple actors are seeking to provide education, they are not achieving this goal for all school-aged refugees. Therefore, the main question of this thesis will be: ‘What are the barriers and facilitators for schooling of Syrian refugee youth in Turkey and which considerations follow, from these barriers and facilitators, to ensure the right to education?’ By answering this question this thesis will come with recommendations to key actors on how to address the lack of education of refugee youth. Before answering the main question three sub-questions will be formulated
As mentioned in the theoretical framework four elements are essential for access to education. In these four elements barriers and facilitators should be distinguished. Where the barriers should be extinguished and facilitators empowered. However, before the barriers can be extinguished and facilitators can be empowered both should be isolated per element. Therefore these thesis will set out the following sub-question: Which barriers and facilitators can be found in the parameters availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability of the four A scheme in schooling of Syrian refugees?
At the same time the adequateness will be examined of the four A scheme. Out of the theoretical framework comes forward that the model in question has received little to no attention by academics nor by policy makers. By using this model to determine the barriers and facilitators within providing education for Syrian refugee youth this thesis sets out to test the model, and where needed make suggestions for adjustments or amendments. Therefore the second sub-question will be: How adequate is the four A scheme to determine the barriers and facilitators of providing education for Syrian refugees in Turkey?
Finally this thesis will look deeper into the possible recommendations that can be made in order to better provide education to Syrian refugee youth in Turkey. Therefore the final sub-question will be: Which recommendations can be made in order to improve schooling for Syrian refugees in Turkey? By answering these sub-questions, ultimately an answer on the main research question can be found.
for Syrian refugee youth the social relevance is high. It is an urgent issue affecting many young people now and it will have huge impact for their future and the wider society. Young people that started their life extremely difficult in a country in war, quite often with traumatic experiences, fleeing into Turkey. The Turkish educational system and the teachers are faced with a huge challenge to make quality education available, for Syrian refugees. This thesis sets out to provide insights that can enable key actors, like the Turkish government and NGOs, to address this major challenge. Therefore, this thesis is of high social relevance. This thesis also hopes to provide scientific added value. A lot of research on providing education to refugees has been done already. However, the current situation in Turkey is quite unique with a very complex political situation. By using the four A scheme, a scheme that is not widely used, this thesis will also set out to test this if this scheme helps to find further recommendations in this unique case. Very little to no research has been done into this four A scheme, this thesis will therefore also set out to test this scheme and make adjustments were needed which makes this thesis also scientific and academic relevant.
The inherent complexity of this problem, providing education to Syrian refugee youth, and the need to find recommendations to solve such a problem add to the need for an interdisciplinary approach. By using multiple disciplines and by integrating these different perspectives with each other this thesis will be more holistic. This interdisciplinary approach combines multiple disciplines. The discipline of education is of upmost important. However it is not education alone. Education is part of a broader development policy. Subsequently, the discipline conflict will be used in this thesis. It is of critical importance to merge all disciplines. This thesis is not solely focused on education nor development nor on conflict, but rather a combination of all: the development of education within conflict. A single-disciplinary research, therefore, will not be sufficient to get to the bottom of this issue. This research will combine several disciplines to find out what the barriers and facilitators are in providing education to Syrian refugees.
4. Methodology
4.1 Strategy
To conduct the research and find an answer to the question what the barrier and facilitators are for providing education to Syrian refugee youth and to come with recommendations to improve access to education, a qualitive Strategy has been chosen. A qualitive design is chosen because it lends itself better for the exploratory questions and allows to go more into depth in order to find the barriers and facilitators. Furthermore, it enables a participatory approach which will help to establish a policy with input from people who will benefit from it and play an active role in providing education; as a qualitative research strategy emphasizes understanding human behaviour and interpret the meaning and perception of the respondents (Bryman, 2008) Furthermore an interpretive epistemology and constructionist ontology are used (Bryman, 2008). An interpretive epistemology is used because the thesis is aimed at explaining social behaviour in a specific time-frame and location. The goal is not to generalize, because the thesis is a case study. A constructionist ontology is used because the situation, lack of schooling for Syrian refugee youth in Turkey, can be seen as a social reality, which is not definitive. Through the use of in-depth interviews the situation will be described.
A qualitative case-study design was chosen for this research, or the intensive examination of a specific case (Bryman, 2012). This design provides tools for the thesis to study the complex phenomena within the context. This thesis focuses on a single event, the lack of schooling for Syrian refugee youth, therefore a case study lends itself good for this thesis (Bryman, 2008). The case-study in this case is on Syrian refugee youth in Turkey. So it focuses on a specific group and location.
4.2 Method
To conduct the research for this case-study in-depth interviews have been carried out with expert in the field of providing education for Syrian refugees. These experts can be found in multiple types of organisations, and are described in the earlier chapter of key actors and stakeholders. In-depth interviews are a qualitative data collection method. The in-depth interviews are carried out by semi-structured interviewing, and are carried out face to face. This way of interviewing offers the capture of rich and descriptive data about people’s behaviour, but also of attitudes and perceptions of complex processes (Bryman, 2008). The guidelines used for the questioning in the interviews can be found under Appendix I. The reasons behind these guidelines will be further explained in the Operationalisation sector. However, the interviews have been without a fixed structure. The structure depended on the answers that were given by
the respondents. As a result, the interviews have been flexible to ensure insight in the different opinions of the respondents (Bryman, 2012). Besides interviews, afterwards policy reports are analysed. These reports focussed on providing education for Syrian refugees. By analysing these reports a deeper understanding of the data was gathered. And additions can be made to the data collected by interviews. The combination of both methods ensures viable data.
4.3 Operationalization
In order to conduct the research the four main concepts have been operationalised, availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability. For each concept an operationalisation figure has been made.
The element availability is split up in two factors: schools and teachers. Without these two factors, the availability will not be fulfilled. Schools are further operationalised into the establishments of schools and funding for schools. Teachers are further operationalised into fitness for teaching and criteria for recruitment. The operationalisation is shown in figure 2.
Accessibility is operationalised in three dimensions: non-discrimination, physical accessibility and economic accessibility. When looking at non-discrimination it is further operationalised into the different dimensions of preferential access and bullying. Physical is further operationalised into geographical location of schools and other physical obstacles. Finally, economic is further operationalised into costs for schooling, child labour and financial obstacles. The operationalisation of the three dimensions can be further operationalised as shown in figure 3.
Figure 3: operationalization scheme
Acceptability is very diverse and is operationalised in five elements: language, censorship, relevant, culturally appropriate and quality. Although all the elements are of influence, some are more important than others. The elements language and quality are of more importance to acceptability. The further operationalisation is shown in figure 4.
Finally, adoptability is operationalised into two elements: flexible and solving challenges. Education needs to be adaptable and evolving to the local needs of society and students. Furthermore it needs to be able to responds to those needs. The operationalisation is shown in figure 5.
Figure 5: operationalization scheme
4.5 Sampling/population
The research population of this thesis exists of 10 respondents. These respondents are active in different organisation involved with providing education. The different organisations are NGOs, INGOs, think-thanks, IGOs and foundations. Because this thesis is based on qualitative research, generalizing will not be possible. Therefore, there is no need of random sampling. Instead this thesis made use of snowball sampling. Through two persons this snowball sample started. Firstly, through an employee of the NGO International Blue Crescent. Secondly through an employee of Oxfam in Turkey. Both persons are currently working in Turkey and focussing, fully or partly, on the lack of education of Syrian refugee youth and therefore have many contacts in the field. Through these ‘key contacts’ the first two respondents were contacted. From there on, by using snowball sampling, eight more respondents were interviewed.
4.6 Data analysis
All interviews were analysed by coding. Through coding, the content in transcripts of the interviews have been labelled, distinguished, assembled and ordered (Bryman, 2012). The interviews first have been iteratively coded by using the method of open coding. Open coding is performed by attaching tentative labels for chunks of data. This labels are concepts related to the operationalization. Thereon axial coding was used. Axial coding consists of identifying
relationships between the previously mounted open codes. With these axial codes the data has been analysed. An overview of the used open and axial codes can be found in Appendix II.
4.7 Ethical accountability
The data collected for this thesis contains sensitive information, not directly the information might be sensitive. However, in the current political climate some of the statements from the respondents can be perceived as sensitive. The respondents represent a NGO, think tanks or other organisations. In the recent years multiple NGO’s have been closed down by the Turkish governments. Although these closedowns may not have been directly associated to statements about education for Syrian refugees, caution is needed. For this reason the real names of the respondents are not used throughout this thesis, the real names, however, are known. This also complies for the organisations name, permission is asked to use the name of the organisation they represent. However when this permission is not granted, strict anonymity will be handled. Subsequent, permission to record the interviews has been asked and received from all respondents. Although permission is given, the recording will never be used for any other purpose than this particular research and after transcription will be deleted.
5. Results
In this chapter, the research process and the founded result of the interviews will be displayed. The result will be discussed according to the subjects of the sub-questions. Firstly, the research process will be discussed. Followed by the result regarding the sub-questions: the barriers and facilitators, the four A scheme and finally the considerations.
5.1 Research process
During this thesis I was an intern at the Turkish NGO International Blue Crescent. This internship gave me access to two key persons. These two key persons were standing in the middle of a network of NGO’s, national and international, think tanks and IGO’s. With the help of the two key persons possible respondents were contacted. After the key persons brought me in contact with multiple persons, typical snowball sampling was started. The people interviewed referred me to new possible respondents, and so forth. This led to a total of 10 interviews. After the seventh interview saturation was reached. However, to assure nothing was missed another three interviews were carried out. After 10 interviews it can be fully stated that saturation of the information regarding the topic of this thesis has been reached and no further interview were necessary.
Each of the ten interviews lasted from 30 to 75 minutes. The location of the respondents was either Istanbul or Ankara. Because few people reacted or declined to the request of being interviewed, a trip to Ankara was made to contact and meet respondents there in person. A total of two respondents were interviewed in Ankara, six in Istanbul and two over skype. The interviews took place in different locations; from coffee shops to offices. After the trip to Ankara the snowball sampling really started to roll. The respondents can be classified in five groups: NGO (national and international), IGO, think tank, university and foundations. So nearly all the actors and stakeholder, as described in the chapter key actors and stakeholder, have been interviewed. However one big actor is missing out: the Turkish government. Although several attempts were made to come in contact with the Turkish government, especially the ministry of national education, these attempts did not work out. To strengthen this thesis, next to interviews, two policy reports were analysed. The first report is a report from Education Reform Initiative, an independent and non-profit “think-and-do-tank”. The second report is from Open Society Foundation the foundation aims to create a more open society in Turkey with improved responsiveness to human rights, democracy, and universal values. Both reports focus on the current educational problems for Syrian refugees in Turkey. By analysing these two reports, in combination with the ten interviews this thesis find
itself confident in having enough data to answer the sub- and research question of this thesis. Because the topic of this thesis, education for Syrian refugees, falls into a sensitive political and social debate multiple contacts refused to talk about this topic. Furthermore, all of the respondents who did agree, requested to be anonymous. Because all of the respondents will be anonymous, they have been given the following fake names, followed by the name or type (some organisation also prefer to stay anonymous) of the organisation they work for: Acar (AÇEV), Aylin (NGO), Ediz (UNICEF), Meryem (ERG), Yavuz (university), Batur (IBC), Remco (foundation), Sabri (NGO), Mehtap (NGO) and Sezen (NGO). All the respondents were working in some way on education for Syrian refugees. The type of position differed from senior positions within the organisation to field workers. An overview of all the respondents is given in Appendix III. Because of this diverse mix of different positions and organisations a more clear and not one-sighted vision was created.
5.2 Research findings
After conducting the interviews and analysis of the policy reports, the results can be analysed. The findings are divided into 3 themes: policy change, barriers and facilitators and the four A scheme. The four A scheme will only be briefly discussed because the respondents nor the policy analysis had any influences on the results. The fitness of the four A scheme was tested by doing this research. In the conclusion the result of the four A scheme will be further expanded. In the chapters below, these three themes will be described. Before looking deeper into the barriers and facilitators and the four elements of the A scheme an outline of the recent policy change by the Turkish government will be discussed. This policy change is of great influence on education for Syrian refugees.
5.2.1 Policy change
At the start of the Syrian conflict a distinction could be made between two types of schools. Firstly, there is the Turkish public schools and secondly, there are temporary education centres (TEC). According to the respondents they were both accepted forms of education, however, a big distinction should be made between the two. The Turkish public schools are monitored and governed by the Turkish Ministry of National Education, it is the Turkish education system. It has a “4+4+4 system”: four years of primary education, four years of secondary education and four years of middle school education. All of which are mandatory. The system was just recently installed, in 2012. On the other side you have TECs. This temporary education system is set up for Syrians only. The locations are diverse; respondents told about locations inside Turkish public schools, refugee camps, empty buildings or community centres. The biggest
difference is the curriculum. According to all respondents TECs handle a Syrian curriculum. Although through the years this curriculum has been adjusted and monitored by the Turkish Ministry of National Education, it was more or less the same as in Syria. This also applies for the language, students were taught in their mother tongue: Arabic. Sabri, educational specialist at an INGO, said the following about the differences between TECs and Turkish public schools:
“The main thing is that the curriculum is in Arabic, and it is the Syrian curriculum, but it is adapted Syrian curriculum. The Turkish government adapt the curriculum. But in every school there was a Turkish coordinator. So in every TEC there is a control by the Turkish government in order to make sure that what is
being taught to the kids is accurate.” (Sabri, NGO)
According to most respondents the system seemed to be working fine, however, a change in policy has been made by the Turkish government. Among the respondents two different versions were told about how the TECs are being closed down; either directly, or they are not allowed to take in new students anymore. The policy report of ACEV states that TECs will be closed down gradually. Remco, who’s foundation was funding and supporting multiple TECs, said the following about this process:
“So the children who were going to this TECs they were taken to a public school. They are now continuing their education there but we now no longer fund TECs because they are being closed down.”
(Remco, Foundation)
Although not all respondents agreed with the closing down of TECS, the reason behind it they did all agree on. According to the respondents the reason of the Turkish government for shutting the TECs down is simple. The Syrian refugees no longer are in Turkey in a state of temporality. The conflict has been going on for over 7 years. Although these TECs assure the right to education, they prohibit proper integration of the Syrians. Because the TECs stick to Syrian curriculum and Arabic language the integration of Syrians is more difficult. Therefore, many organisations understand the point of view. For example, Remco stated the following:
“I mean it is a correct decision, from a integration point of view. Because these children will stay here, have to learn Turkish ,won’t go back to Syria and will have their jobs here. So they have to integrate them to the Turkish society. I mean in a way, in EU it is the same. They do not open TECS. ” (Remco,
Foundation)
One respondent told that integration was not the only reason for shutting the TECs down. According to Batur the controllability of the TECs were also low, and furthermore there were security problems. Batur, vice-president of a Turkish NGO, stated the following regarding the reasons of closing down TECs:
“The first subject is integration than security than controlling and quality.” (Batur, IBC)
Although many respondents agreed with the decision of closing down TECs, the way it was done many disagreed with. According the respondents in the beginning the idea was to close down these TECS step-by-step by not accepting any new students anymore, and in this way the TECs would dissolve by themselves. At the end the TECs were forced to close. This got much criticism from most of the respondents. The main reason being that the Turkish public education was not ready to absorb this influence of Syrian refugees. The biggest fear of this transition was that a lot of students would dropout. Remco stated the following about this transition:
“We are supporting this view, we believe that the TECS were temporary but the transition should have been smoother and better planned because now there is danger of drop outs.” (Remco)
Though many respondents agreed with the policy change, the way it was carried out was not delicate and smooth enough. Therefore creating multiple barriers. In the following chapter the barriers and facilitators for providing education to Syrian refugees will be discussed.
5.2.2 Barriers and facilitators
In the following chapter the findings about the barriers and facilitators will be presented They will be presented in the order of the four A scheme: availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability.
Availability
As shown in the operationalisation availability depends on two key elements: schools and teachers. In the following paragraph firstly the barriers within the availability of schools will be discussed followed by the availability of teachers.
According to the respondents the policy change of closing down TECs was of great negative influences on the availability of schools. The amount of available schools dropped significantly, and will drop even further in the process of closing down TECs. Remco, program officer at a foundation, states the following about the availability of schools:
“Where we have again problems because we have not enough schools […]. So, by the end of this education year there will be no more TECS in Turkey that is the plan. Which will increase this problem
even more.” (Remco, Foundation)
Although most of the respondents found the decision to close down TECs understandable, they agreed that it creates a barrier: the lack of schools. However, most of the respondent found that this problem should not be exaggerated. The Turkish government has been working around the clock in building more schools. Meryem, working for an Education Reform group, says the following about the Turkish government:
“So the government, the Turkish government, had the most difficulties among availability among schools. They have been building a lot of schools using a lot of funds to build schools it is an important
step.” (Meryem, ERG)
So the Turkish government is in the process of building schools. However, this process started too late. According to a few respondents this problem could have been solved way earlier. Because in the beginning the Turkish assumed a state of temporality of the Syrian refugees, it did not start building school immediately. They thought the TECs would be a sufficient solution. However, they changed their vision and policy. Aylin, working for a local Turkish NGO, states the following about this process:
“All of the sudden they found it is like hundred thousands of Syrians, it is like you know need education. And the main problem there is that they did not know what to do. So first they said you have
TECS, but then they changed it resulting in a slow start of the process.” (Aylin, NGO)
In general the respondents agreed that, although there is a lack of schools, the problem should not be inflated. It is one of the more easy barriers to overcome, and the Turkish government, in combination with a lot of organisation, is working on solving it. It is just a matter of time until the lack of school buildings is solved. Aylin states the following:
“Three years ago the building is a problem, but now it is less.” (Aylin, NGO)
So although the lack of schooling can be seen as an barrier, the facilitator is already there, according to the respondents it is just a matter of time. Both analysed policy reports support this, although the creating of new schools is highly important, at the moment more pressing issues need to be addressed.
The other part of availability is teachers. The availability of teachers can be split into two dimensions. Are there enough teacher and are they qualified. Both can be seen as a barrier. All but one respondent agreed that here are, at the moment, simply not enough teachers. Only Batur, vice-president at IBC, stated that there are enough teachers. The respondents stated this results in huge classrooms with too many children, if they are even able to follow education. As a result of the lack of teachers children are not able enrol, because there is no one to teach them. However, nearly all respondents pointed to an even a bigger problem. Besides the lack of teachers, low quality of the available teacher could be seen as a problem . Remco states the following:
“We still do not have enough teacher and also even if we have the teachers, they do not have the necessary qualifications, this doesn't mean that they are bad teachers but they do not have the necessary
Multiple respondents stated that most of the time these teachers did not receive any form of extra training. They do not know how to handle children which such diverse backgrounds, who are sometimes traumatized by their experiences in war. Meryem states the following:
“So there are Turkish teacher but they are also not qualified, they do not know how to uhm teach or form a relationship with the students. They are not trained or qualified enough and you do not know how to deal with
the classroom with children coming from such diverse backgrounds” (Meryem, ERG)
Both policy reports enforce this vision. The policy report of Open Society foundation stating: “Recruiting and retaining high quality and skilled teachers is particularly important for the quality of
education children receive.” (Policy report, Open Society Foundation)
Both the reports highlight the lack and the quality of teachers. Which they urge to address According to the respondents in the element availability (teachers) two barriers can be found: there is a lack of teachers and low quality of available teachers . When looking at how to solve this problem, according to the respondents, two facilitators arise on the horizon. First of all, a great group of teachers is not being used: Syrian teacher, a hidden gem. Multiple respondents state that Syrian teachers bring multiple advantages with them. They speak the language of the Syrian children, they understand their backgrounds and experienced the same experiences as the children themselves. However, the respondents also saw some troubles with hiring Syrian teachers. To be able to make use of this group of teachers they need to be reschooled. They will not be only teaching Syrians but also Turkish. Therefore, the language needs to be learned and the curriculum adopted. Furthermore, a lot of respondent saw problems with accreditation of these teachers, how do we know if they are/were teachers. However, according to many respondents the Turkish government has started these trainings. The scale of these trainings is too small, Meryem states the following:
So, like the government also have been doing teacher trainings and they have been, I think, doing teachers trainings for Syrian teachers as well. […] There are two training's in different cities. But it is
very like few teachers, well it was about like 500. (Meryem, ERG)
Secondly, teacher training programs for Turkish teachers should be given according to respondents. Most of the respondents stated that in these trainings there need to be a focus on how to handle kids with different cultural backgrounds and kids with traumatic experiences. According to a few respondents these trainings have started. However, the scale of these trainings is too small. Meryem states the following about reschooling and supporting Turkish teachers:
