=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1841/P02_114
|storemode=property
|title=MOOCs and Free Digital Learning for the Inclusion of Migrants and Refugees: A European Policy Study
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1841/P02_114.pdf
|volume=Vol-1841
|authors=Elizabeth Colucci,Jonatan Castaño Muñoz,Axelle Devaux
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/emoocs/ColucciCD17
}}
==MOOCs and Free Digital Learning for the Inclusion of Migrants and Refugees: A European Policy Study==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1841/P02_114.pdf
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
MOOCs and Free Digital Learning for the Inclusion
of migrants and refugees: A European policy study
Elizabeth Colucci1, Jonatan Castaño Muñoz2, Axelle Devaux3
1
Higher Education Consultant/Adviser for the European University Association, Seville, Spain
elizabeth.colucci@eua.be
2
European Commission Joint Research Centre (*), Seville, Spain
jonatan.castano-munoz@ec.europa.eu
3 RAND Europe, Brussels, Belgium
adevaux@rand.org
(*)The views expressed in this article are purely those of the authors and should not be regarded
as the official position of the European Commission.
Abstract. MOOCs and free digital learning (FDL) are among the tools used to
respond to the education needs of migrants and refugees in Europe. However,
there is little guidance on how to design institutional initiatives and supporting
policies in this area. This paper presents the main findings of a study exploring
the potential of MOOCs and other FDL offers for the integration, inclusion and
further learning of migrants and refugees in Europe and in neighbourhood regions
in conflict. The MOOCs4inclusion study was designed and financed by the Joint
Research Centre of the European Commission and carried out between July-De-
cember 2016. Drawing from a literature review, focus groups with migrant/refu-
gee learners in Europe and interviews with representatives of selected FDL initi-
atives, the study maps FDL initiatives, proposes a categorisation of them, and
assesses both success factors and barriers to achieving the objective of mi-
grant/refugee inclusion. Key to success in this area was found to be a combination
of ‘targeted’ (aimed at migrants and refugees needs), ’blended’ (mixing online
and face-to-face instruction) ’and facilitated’ (offering support services and men-
toring) approaches. The study subsequently provides recommendations on how
policymakers can support the design of FDL offers for migrants/refugees in the
future.
Keywords: MOOCs, OER, Free Digital Learning, Migrants, Refugees.
1 Introduction
The European Commission's overall Europe 2020 strategy [1] and the "Rethinking Ed-
ucation" Communication [2] signal that the modernisation of the European Education
and Training system is vital for increasing EU competitiveness and sustainable and in-
clusive growth. The Communication “Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and
learning for all through new technologies and Open Educational Resources” [3] sets
96
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
out an agenda for stimulating high quality and innovative ways of learning and teaching
through new technologies and digital content (ibid). More recently, “open innovative
education and training, including by fully embracing the digital era” has been con-
firmed as one of the six priorities for the strategic framework for European cooperation
in Education and Training (ET2020) for the 2016-2010 period [4].
In the last years the number of refugee asylum applications in EU has grown expo-
nentially. Consequently, the role of education for the integration and acquisition of
skills for migrants and refugees has become a priority in the European and national
policy agendas. In this context, the potential use of MOOCs and free digital learning
for developing the skills needed by migrants and refugees in host countries has been
the target of great interest. The accompanying document to the New Skills Agenda for
Europe states that “besides meeting refugees’ most urgent needs, such as accommoda-
tion and food, there is a need to help improve their long-term situation, including by
helping them to quickly improve their skills in the language of their host countries, in
order to integrate into society, and to find employment” [5]. This vision is reinforced
by the 2016 Communication “Lives in Dignity: from Aid-dependence to Self-reliance”
[6], where the EC highlights the role of education “to gradually end dependence on
humanitarian assistance in existing displacement situations and by fostering self-reli-
ance and enabling the displaced to live in dignity as contributors to their host societies,
until voluntary return or resettlement”. In this same communication, the use of “tech-
nological advancements, such as the internet, smartphones and interactive learning, to
make integration and learning easier” is specifically recommended. In addition, the
communication also promotes actions aimed at facilitating access of migrants and ref-
ugees to universities “putting in place higher education distance learning and certified
education programmes which provide flexible accreditation” (p14).
Despite the purported use of MOOCs and FDL to enhance access to education, there
is little information on how they can be better adapted to the specific needs of migrants
and refugees. Studies examining this field are starting to emerge. Two recent studies
include Moser-Mercer [7] [8], which focused on the provision of MOOCs in emergen-
cies and in refugee camps, and the World Bank report, which analysed the use of ICT
in education in the Middle East and North Africa [9].
The MOOCs4inclusion project contributes to this research, approaching the issue
from a different angle. Its objective was to assess the potential of MOOCs and FDL
offers for the integration, inclusion and further learning of migrants and refugees in
Europe and in neighbourhood regions in conflict. The aim of the project was to formu-
late policy recommendations for policy-makers, international organisations and other
investors who design and implement policies or programmes supporting migrant and
refugee learning and integration, using MOOCs or FDL. A five-month study (July-De-
cember 2016) covering a fast-changing field, MOOCs4inclusion was designed by the
Human Capital and Employment unit of the Joint Research Centre of the European
Commission (JRC) and commissioned to a team of researchers headed by Elizabeth
Colucci. The final report [10] can be found here: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/re-
pository/bitstream/JRC106146/jrc106146.pdf This paper presents the main findings of
the project.
97
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
2 Problem description / challenges
The specific dimension of ICT, MOOCs and refugee/migrant inclusion has generated
renewed interest since the start of what is referred to as the refugee crisis in Europe,
notably when the number of asylum applications hit 1.3 million in 2015 [11], three
times what it was in 2013 and twice what it was in 2014. Many countries are scrambling
to put in place rapid response solutions and educational access is seen as an important
piece of the puzzle. EC communications [6] and other international organisations [12]
highlight the fact that education is of the utmost importance for refugees who on aver-
age spend 20 years in exile. Only half have access to primary education, compared with
a global level of more than 90 per cent. Eighty-four percent of non-refugee adolescents
attend lower secondary school, but only 22 percent of refugee adolescents have that
same opportunity. At the higher education level, just one per cent of refugees attend
university compared to 34 per cent globally [12].
The MOOCs movement, amongst other reasons, was developed to maximise access
to education. However, the inclusion of vulnerable groups (e.g. migrants and refugees)
into this movement has generally been neglected, which risks creating unbalanced ef-
fects between vulnerable and non-vulnerable learners [13]. Evidence also shows that
MOOCs users are not necessarily disadvantaged [14], but often have a high level of
education, digital skills and are usually working [13] [15]. Recent JRC research also
shows that, in Europe, MOOCs are more likely to be taken by unemployed people and
workers with these characteristics, who lack access to more formal ways of professional
development [16]. This may indeed be the case for some privileged migrants and refu-
gees, who enter their host countries with higher education qualifications and higher
digital literacy, but do not (yet) have access to the labour market. Another caveat of
the use of MOOCs and FDL for migrant and refugee education is the lack of recognition
by formal learning providers and/or acknowledgement by employers [17] [18].
However, given that many international donors concur that digital learning offers
great promise for migrants and refugees [12] and that there is significant NGO and
private-sector interest in this field, a plethora of new initiatives have either been devel-
oped or are under development. Given their novelty, there is a lack of public, coordi-
nated information about such initiatives and also very little evidence about their impact
at this stage. The JRC thus commissioned MOOCs4Inclusion to map and analyse the
potential of MOOCs and FDL specifically for the inclusion of migrants and refugees in
Europe, examining not only the perceptions of potential learners, but the practices of
existing initiatives.
In order to assess the adequacy of FDL for developing the skills needed by migrants
and refugees and shed light about good design principles, the methodology for
MOOCs4Inclusion included:
• a literature review on this area;
• a mapping of relevant initiatives featured in a searchable website (see:
http://moocs4inclusion.org); and,
• a SWOT analysis based on twenty-five semi-structured interviews with key in-
formants from ten different FDL initiatives (Edraak, Funzi, Information Sweden,
98
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
InZone, Jamiya project, KIRON Open Higher Education, LASER – Language, Ac-
ademic Skills and E-learning Resources, MEET – Meeting the Health Literacy
Needs of Immigrant Populations, Ready for Study, and Welcomm!) and four focus
groups with 39 migrants/refugees in different situations and with different profiles
(in Brussels, Nicosia, Berlin and Trollhattan).
Emphasis was placed on Europe and current migrants/refugees in Europe, though
initiatives and examples were also taken from the Middle East and the Southern Medi-
terranean region. This approach embraced the diversity of the FDL initiative landscape,
as the initiatives selected were of different natures, investment levels and often entailed
different usage and types of FDL (for example, KIRON is a higher education initiative
that utilises existing MOOCs and provides a segue into physical university programmes
whereas Information Sweden is an only online platform that aggregates FDL resources
for integration purposes). The focus groups reflected the needs of different migrants
and refugees, depending on their background and where they stand in their migration
journey.
3 Overview of FDL initiatives targeted at migrant or refugee
learning, their effectiveness and implications for policy
making
MOOCs4inclusion demonstrated that there is a plethora of new FDL initiatives for mi-
grants and refugees that vary in nature, design and purpose. The landscape is changing
almost daily, which makes it difficult to pinpoint how effective they are. It must also
be remembered that most initiatives have yet to produce data which assesses their im-
pact. According to our mapping of FDL initiatives, they can be compared/categorised
according to their design:
• fully online/mobile versus ‘blended’ (a mix of online and face-to-face learning);
• targeted to migrants/refugees versus general (for any public or user); and,
• facilitated (providing support services and guidance to the learner) versus non-
facilitated.
The research found that targeted and blended approaches are the most effective way
to engage migrant/refugee learners, at least in formal education, but also to some extent
in language learning and civic integration-related FDL. This is true both inside and
outside refugee camps, though initiatives that deliver FDL inside camps have additional
considerations, such as the quality of the learning environment, connectivity and secu-
rity.
In terms of purpose, the majority of the initiatives identified for the study were online
or digital language courses (of which there are many) and civic integration-related
online courses and digital projects (on topics ranging from democratic participation to
understanding the local social security system). A number of higher education initia-
tives were also identified, which were experimenting with approaches that involved
partnering with European universities to develop FDL content or re-appropriating ex-
isting MOOCs. Some of these initiatives employed displaced scholars to help develop
99
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
online course content and teach/mentor and assist refugee students with their entry into
higher education, even if their documentation was not yet in order.
It was found that language learning is a first-priority intervention for the general
migrant and refugee community. Language learning and civic integration-related initi-
atives are commonly linked and the concept of ‘Content and Language Integrated
Learning’ (CLIL) is gaining momentum. Furthermore, the largest growth area identi-
fied was mobile Apps for language learning and integration purposes.
The FDL landscape is developing fast. A number of competitions (‘hackathons’ and
‘innovation labs’) and open funding calls are being generated, and will continue to gen-
erate, which will help develop innovation in this field. The tech sector has taken a keen
interest and, in some cases, refugees themselves are being empowered to develop their
own solutions.
4 Recommendations
The MOOCs4inclusion study indicates that FDL for refugees and migrants has the po-
tential to be a tool for integration and inclusion. The fact that 90 per cent of the world’s
population own mobile phones, which this including migrants and refugees inside and
outside of refugee camps and across different age groups, is a clear enabler. That being
said, the one major take-away from MOOCs4inclusion is that research, awareness, co-
ordination and impact assessment on this topic has only just begun and must be en-
hanced. Europe is in a transition period in many different ways and digitalisation is
transforming the way we learn and communicate. At the same time, people themselves
are on the move and the myriad of initiatives that are being developed can be an oppor-
tunity if good practices are shared and adopted. MOOCs4inclusion gives some recom-
mendations to move in this direction.
4.1 Recommendations for designing and investing in FDL initiatives
It is clear that the FDL for the migrant/refugee field is ripe with new initiatives. Based
on the findings of MOOCs4inclusion, designing an efficient and effective FDL offer or
initiative for the inclusion of migrant and refugee target groups should consider the
following:
Design
Formal versus non-formal learning and stand-alone versus structured (with student
intake) offers. Initiatives for formal education may require different investments than
those intended for non-formal or informal education. Notably, it must be decided to
what extent the initiative intends to target a specific learning group, via a student intake
in a structured learning offer, or rather provide a FDL resource that can be broadly
utilised in a non-formal way. Objectives and subsequent considerations for impact as-
sessment may vary accordingly.
100
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
‘Targeted’, ‘blended’ and ‘facilitated’. Though this can be done in different formats,
targeted, blended and facilitated approaches are unanimously seen as a means to en-
hance the success rate of any FDL initiative. The importance of mentorship and support
should not be underestimated, as some learners are unfamiliar with digital learning and
with the cultural learning environment in which they find themselves.
Co-development and communication. FDL initiatives can benefit from engaging the
learners in development. Reaching out to potential learning groups via social media and
in-conjunction with partners present in camps, for example, are two paths.
Embedding language learning into targeted interventions. Blending language training
with content acquisition (and vice versa) can not only support civic integration and
employability, but may also enhance the efficacy of formal education initiatives. The
importance of mobile language learning through different media, such as Apps, plat-
forms, YouTube videos, etc., should not be underestimated. These can be particularly
useful to support the blended learning context.
Cooperation with other initiatives and sharing of good practice should be an integral
part of FDL design. There is much experimentation in the FDL field for migrants and
refugees at present. This must be further studied and leveraged. Investments should not
be afraid of experimenting and testing through pilot initiatives.
Recognition, quality assurance and accreditation
Using Bologna tools. The Bologna architecture (recognition, quality assurance and
qualification frameworks) and transparency tools (learning agreements, learning out-
comes and ECTS) will be essential to facilitating the recognition of FDL initiatives and
to align them to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). In particular, FDL offers
in higher education should consider employing these tools from the start, and working
with partner universities and national authorities to do so.
European accreditation practices regarding FDL. The FDL HE initiatives generally
have a high focus on quality assurance for quality enhancement. Where necessary, it
would be important for the European quality assurance (QA) agencies to be able to
accredit FDL, which would heighten the awareness of FDL among recognition author-
ities and employers.
Funding and sustainability
Generating income through small fees for certification and ‘badges’. Innovative mod-
els can help learners cover costs, such as engaging employers in the FDL offer. How-
ever, even though fees may be integral to the business model and sustainability, the
FDL should be as free as possible to the leaner.
Promoting cross-sectorial, dynamic partnerships, engaging the public and private sec-
tor, European universities and migrant/refugee networks. Resource pooling, as well as
public-private endeavours, will create a more solid financing structure and may be the
basis for sustainability.
The EU role in supporting the development of initiatives. EU project and grant funding
may be a useful tool to support bottom up solutions, such as dynamic partnerships of
101
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
NGOs, public, private actors, educational institutions and tech developers. For exam-
ple, the Erasmus+ programme, the Madad Fund, and European projects (Erasmus+) can
be useful tools and favour the use of European tools, structures and frameworks for
recognition.
Avoiding fragmentation
The EC role in coordination, particularly in the European context. The risk of frag-
mentation of information, sources and initiatives has been identified throughout
MOOCs4inclusion. The EC could play a role in uniting different actors, creating and
supporting practice sharing forums. Coordination should be sought with other ‘unify-
ing’ initiatives and platforms.
The EC role in communication. There is clearly a need to find collective ways to com-
municate the possibilities for FDL to refugees and migrants. Transparency and com-
munication around the different initiatives is lacking and more must be understood
about communication campaigns for the target groups. The EC would have clear added-
value in supporting such transparency and communication.
Sharing data/Collaborative impact studies. There is clear will of a number of initiatives
to share data and enhance transparency around impact assessment. The Platform of Al
Fanar Media and ‘research.edraak’ should be noted. The EU and other actors in this
field should consider joint impact assessment reports that incorporate and draw upon
these initiatives.
References
1. European Commission (2010): Europe 2020 A European strategy for smart sustainable and
inclusive growth.
2. European Commission (2012): Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socio-
economic outcomes.
3. European Commission (2013): Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for
all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources.
4. European Commission (2015) Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the im-
plementation of the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training
(ET 2020). New priorities for European cooperation in education and training .
5. European Commission (2016a): Analytical underpinning for a New Skills Agenda for Eu-
rope.
6. European Commission (2016b): Lives in Dignity: from Aid-dependence to Self-reliance.
7. Moser-Mercer, B. (2014): MOOCs in fragile contexts. In: Proceedings of the second Euro-
pean MOOC Stakeholder Summit, pp. 114–121, Lausanne (2014). Retrieved from:
https://www.emoocs2014.eu/sites/default/files/Proceedings-Moocs-Summit-2014.pdf, last
accessed 2017/04/27.
8. Moser-Mercer, B., E. Hayba and J. Goldsmith. (2016): Higher education spaces and pro-
tracted displacement: How learner-centered pedagogies and human-centered design can un-
leash refugee innovation. In: 2016 UNESCO Chair Conference on Technologies for Devel-
102
Proceedings of EMOOCs 2017:
Work in Progress Papers of the Experience and Research Tracks and Position Papers of the Policy Track
opment: From Innovation to Social Impact, Lausanne (2016). Retrieved from: http://coop-
eration.epfl.ch/files/content/sites/cooperation/files/Tech4Dev%202016/1216-Moser-Mer-
cer-SE03-HUM_Full%20Paper.pdf, last accessed 2017/04/27.
9. Lewis, K.; and Thacker, S. (2016): ICT and the Education of Refugees: A Stocktaking of
Innovative Approaches in the MENA Region. Lessons of Experience and Guiding Princi-
ples. World Bank Education, Technology & Innovation: SABER-ICT. Technical Paper Se-
ries (17). Washington, DC: The World Bank
10. Colucci, E; Smidt, H; Devaux, A; Vrasidas, C; Safarjalani, M; and Castaño Muñoz, J.
(2017): Free digital learning opportunities for migrants and refugees. An analysis of current
initiatives and recommendations for their further use. EUR 28559 EN. Retrieved from:
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC106146/jrc106146.pdf, last ac-
cessed 2017/04/27.
11. Eurostat (2016): Asylum quarterly report. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/sta-
tistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_quarterly_report, last accessed 2017/04/27.
12. UNHCR. (2016): Missing Out: Refugee Education in Crisis. Retrieved from:
http://www.unhcr.org/57d9d01d0, last accessed 2017/04/27.
13. de Waard, I; Gallagher, M.S; Zelezny-Green, R. Czerniewicz, L; Downes, S; Kukulska-
Hulme, A; and Willems, J (2014): Challenges for conceptualising EU MOOC for vulnera-
ble learner groups. In: Proceedings of the second European MOOC Stakeholder Summit,
pp. 33–42, Lausanne (2014). Retrieved from: https://www.emoocs2014.eu/sites/de-
fault/files/Proceedings-Moocs-Summit-2014.pdf, last accessed 2017/04/27.
14. Gaebel, M; Kupriyanova, V; Morais, R; and Colucci, E. (2014): E-learning in European
Higher Education Institutions - Results of a mapping survey. European University Associa-
tion Publication. Retrieved from: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publication/e-learning_sur-
vey.pdf?sfvrsn=2, last accessed 2017/04/27.
15. Liyanagunawardena, T; Williams, S; and Adams, A. (2013): The Impact and Reach of
MOOCs: A Developing Countries’ Perspective. E-learning papers, 33. Retrieved from:
https://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/sites/default/files/legacy_files/asset/In-
depth_33_1.pdf, last accessed 2017/04/27.
16. Castaño Muñoz, J; Kreijns, K; and Kalz, M. (2017): Does digital competence and occupa-
tional setting influence MOOC participation? Evidence from a cross-course survey. Journal
of Computing in Higher Education, 29 (1). Retrieved from: http://rd.springer.com/arti-
cle/10.1007/s12528-016-9123-z, last accessed 2017/04/27.
17. Devaux, A. and M. Souto. (2016): Validation of open educational resources (OER). The-
matic report for the 2016 update of the European inventory on validation. Retrieved from:
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publica-
tions/4149?src=email&freq=weekly , last accessed 2017/04/27.
18. Witthaus, G., Inamorato dos Santos. A., Childs, M., Tannhäuser, A., Conole, G.,
Nkuyubwatsi, B., Punie, Y. (2016): Validation of Non-formal MOOC-based Learning: An
Analysis of Assessment and Recognition Practices in Europe (OpenCred). EUR 27660 EN
Retrieved from: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bit-
stream/JRC96968/lfna27660enn.pdf, last accessed 2017/04/27.
103