M01155
State Policy And English Language Teaching For Refugees
Purwanti Kusumaningtyas
Anita Kurniawati
Faculty of Language and Literature
Satya Wacana Christian University
Salatiga
Abstract
The fact that Indonesia does not ratify The 1951 Convention of Refugee relating to the Status
of Refugees and Protocol 1967 does not seem relevant to English language teaching (ELT)
until it becomes a meaningful media for the NGOs to assist the foreign refugees in Indonesia.
Despite the refugees’ need of learning the language, the policy has indirectly placed English
language teaching in a minor position. This paper will share the cases of English language
teaching offered by two non-government institutions – Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) and
World Relief (WR). It will describe how ELT is used by the institutions as a media of
psychosocial assistant for the refugees. It will view how far ELT principles can be applied
and how much the impact of the state policy relating to the status of refugees influences the
practice of ELT for refugees (ELTR). In conclusion, the paper proposes a model of culturally
responsive teaching for ELTR as teaching in difficult circumstances.
Key words: English Language Teaching for Refugees (ELTR), teaching in difficult
circumstances, state policy
The experience to help Jesuit Refugee Service develop materials of English lessons
for adult refugees revealed a number of problems of English language teaching for refugees
(hereafter ELTR). Firstly, English classes for adult refugees are different from “normal”
English classroom. “Normal” English classrooms set for those who come to learn English,
thus, the participants are ready to learn the subject. The refugees do not come specifically to
learn English. Their stay in Indonesia is only temporary as they are waiting for opportunities
to go to the target country like Australia or Canada or New Zealand. English classes are only
one of the activities they use to kill the time, so it will not interest them when it is
burdensome.
Secondly, the class setting depends on the type of refugee camp and service given by
the refugee service. For example, JRS Yogyakarta has informal English classes that make use
of one room in the refugee camp in Bantul as the refugees live in a building provided by the
Bantul’s Department of Social Affair. Their classes may be conducted indoor or outdoor
depending on the agreement made each day. JRS Bogor conducts what is called home
tutoring, in which the English teachers visits the refugees’ “houses” and have classes there
(Observation in JRS Yogyakarta, July 3 – 6, 2013 and in JRS Bogor, July 25, 2013). WR
offers semi-formal English classes where the participants register like the other students of
formal schools, learn the lessons in classrooms with u-shape chairs, have student’s book each,
have regular learning time, but may discontinue their participation when they have
immigration stuff to do or their time to leave for the target country comes (Observation and
FGD in WR Cisarua, Bogor, July 23 – 24, 2013).
Thirdly, with such condition, the teachers have to adjust their teaching so that it suits
the refugees’ needs. They need activities to kill their time and friends to socialize. With such
condition, English teaching may not be conducted merely to help them master the language,
but it may be a means of psychosocial assistance.
A number of questions related with ELTR in a transit country which does not ratify
the convention and protocol about refugees can be listed as follows. What is the purpose and
focus of ELTR there? Is it for psychosocial assistance of for English learning? If it is the first
and ELT is a media to do it, how should ELTR be conducted? What is the curriculum like?
What is the classroom setting like? What is the role of evaluation? If it is focusing on English
learning, how does the refugees’ difficult condition influence the classroom? And so, how do
the teachers adapt with such situation? What kind of adaptation do they have to make? What
other consideration do the teachers have to include in preparing their lessons?
This paper describes ELTR practices in both conditions, as a media of psychosocial
assistance as it is done by JRS and as pure English learning as it is done by WR. It will show
how ELTR is not free from even seemingly-irrelevant state policy to ELT. Some suggestions
to English teacher education will be proposed at the end of this paper.
Indonesia and Foreign Refugee Management
The word “refugee” is defined by the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees,
1951, Article I, paragraph 2, as any person who
“As a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951 and owing to well-founded
fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a
particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality
and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of
that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his
former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear,
is unwilling to return to it. (Convention, 2010)
The convention lists a set of recommendations that each country which signed it or
ratified it should do to protect refugees, including facilitation of refugee travels, principle of
unity of the family, welfare services, and international co-operation in the field of asylum and
resettlement (Convention, 2010).
Indonesia did not ratify the convention and later the protocol that amended some
points of the convention. The implication is that Indonesia does not have refugee service
management system. The government does not have any official bureau or offices to assist
refugees, as the only available office to deal with migration is the Immigration Office. The
most obvious problem with this is as many refugees cannot show the required papers such as
passports and visas or living or work permit, their arrival is bluntly considered as illegal.
They will be either sent to the immigration detention center (IDC) or imprisoned
(http://www.komnasham.go.id/penelitian-dan-pengkajian/1495-siaran-pers-komnas-hamjangan-kriminalisasi-pencari-suaka; March 22, 2012).
Indonesia cannot hinder the increasing number of refugees who arrive since 2009.
Indonesia, with its location in the middle of countries that provide shelters for asylum seekers
and refugees such as Australia and New Zealand, makes it a good place of mixed population
movements. Indonesia, which does not ratify The 1951 Convention and Protocol 1967, has to
host about 3.230 people escaping from Afghanistan (71%), Myanmar (8%), Sri Lanka dan
Iraq (http://www.unhcr.or.id/id/, March 25, 2012). Nikola Errington and Taya Hunt (2012)
noted that the refugees risked their lives to escape from their home countries with the hope
for a better life in the other countries, but they often had to experience double sufferings in
the transit countries. In Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand, asylum seekers and refugees are
vulnerable to arrest and detention in conditions that do not meet international standards. The
arrest is often without clear reasons if not because of immigration matters, such as visas or
identity papers. Those with papers from UNHCR would be sent back to the organizations
which assist them. But those without papers will be imprisoned.
The Non-Government Organizations, like International Organization for Migration
(IOM), Church World Service (CWS), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS), and World Relief (WR),
are working in cooperation with UNHCR. The works of these organizations range from
giving financial supports to providing assistance to find necessary papers for both the asylum
seekers and refugees. Asylum seekers are those who left their home countries in search for
asylum, and they usually are not equipped with necessary papers to live in foreign countries.
UNCHR will release a certificate notifying their status, either as asylum seekers or refugees.
Refugees are likely to have more chance to transport to the target country. However, not all
of them are patient enough to wait the opportunity. They often believe in the idea that
opportunities are to be sought for, not to be waited for. They will again run away from the
transit country or the refugee shelter by illegal transport, like boats (WR staff and JRS staff,
FGD, July 23, 2013).
The refugees’ first need in transit countries is administrative, practical, and social.
Administratively, those who escaped without proper immigration papers will struggle for
getting the certificates, notifying their status as either asylum seekers or refugees, which are
released by UNHCR. Practically, they will need housing and many of them need financial
supports. They would need to socialize with their neighbors and acceptance and proper
treatment are what they need. During the time waiting for the opportunities to move to the
target country, meaningful activities to kill the time and boredom even to avoid frustration
are necessary. One of the ways to help the refugees reduce their boredom is English lesson.
The refugees’ vulnerability makes English teaching special for them as they are learners with
difficult circumstances.
ELTR as English Teaching in Difficult Circumstances: WR Case
WR is a Christian organization, headquartered in Bali. Eva Simarmarta, WR’s Project
Coordinator in Bogor, wrote that WR’s vision is “In community with the local church, WR
envisions the most vulnerable people transformed economically, socially, and spiritually.”
And WR has a mission “to empower local church to serve most vulnerable” (email
communication, July 31, 2013). As stated in their slogan which says “stand/for the
vulnerable,” WR concerns with empowerment.
WR conducts classes in their office in Cisarua. Refugees would come and register to
the staff for joining English classes. They would get schedule for their classes and they had to
follow the institution’s regulation. There are dos and don’ts posted in the office and the
classrooms for reminder. Limited room availability makes strict scheduling helpful. Classes
are set like ordinary classrooms, with a teacher responsible for one class (Eva and Ika,
interview, July 23, 2013; observation, July 23 – 24, 2013)
WR views education as “Holistic Development" that means education aims at
transforming individuals spiritually, mentally, emotionally, socially, and psychologically.
WR is thus develops its educational ways and standards based on the principles of holistic
development (Simarmarta, email, July 30, 2013).
WR views education as centered on the teacher. It has a set of standard for volunteers
who would apply for English teaching position. They name the position TESOL Tutor that
requires personnel who can
“conduct English assessment for Children and Adult creatively and Fun Learning both
group classes and one on one tutoring in an interesting way,
develop lesson plans for ESL tutoring sessions both for one-on-one and group
sessions
assess the participants on English language abilities (pre-test)
develop with creatively English visual aid for teaching.
make lesson learn for teaching purposes.
teaching English for children, women and men with creativity, material and Fun
Learning.
assist the refugee/asylum seeker to able communicate Basic English.
(Simarmarta, email, July 30, 2013)
A set of curriculum and materials are prepared the Project Coordinator for the
teachers to use. The teachers are allowed to add materials whenever necessary. The
participants also get the materials from the teachers. The teachers plan their lessons and they
have full authority to decide what to learn on the day and what materials to use. After
teaching, the teachers would record their class activities into a table of classroom report. As
the classes are conducted like a school, teacher-student relation is built on the basis of
conversation and discussion about the lessons, not personal matters (Eva and Ika, interview,
July 23, 2013; observation, July 23 – 24, 2013).
Test is given to assess the participants’ achievement and certificates will be released
to notify the participants’ achievement. However, the institution also realizes that the
refugees may not be able to complete their English lessons as they can leave the place at any
time (FGD with WR staff, July 24, 2013). ELTR is conducted just like the other ordinary
school. Simarmarta explicitly stated that their English classes are just a school without
uniform (interview, July 23, 2013).
ELTR as English Teaching in Difficult Circumstances: JRS Case
As a humanitarian organization, Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Indonesia Foundation,
which was founded on November 14th, 1980, as a response to the plight of Vietnam “boat
people” in Galang Island, has accompanied, served, and advocated the rights of refugees in
the refugee camps, urban areas, as well as in immigration detention centers for over the last
30 years. It cooperates with all who share the same concern. Since 2009, JRS Indonesia has
also accompanied refugees and asylum seekers, including Rohingya asylum seekers in Aceh
and North Sumatera, asylum seekers in Medan Immigratrion Detention Center (2009),
asylum seekers in Cisarua (2010) and asylum seekers in Surabaya Immigration Detention
Center (2012) as well as in Yogyakarta refugee community housing. The organization’s
vision is to build “a world which is free of boundaries, separation, and forced displacement; a
world where people were able to travel freely and safely; and, a world living the value of
hospitality to anyone.” With the vision, the organization has a mission “to accompany, serve,
and advocate the rights of refugees and those who are forced to be displaced.”
(http://jrs.or.id/en/about-us/).
JRS offers English classes to refugees in Bantul and Bogor. They recruit volunteers
who can speak English from English Teacher Education (ETE) institutions, School or Faculty
of Letters and from International Relation Department. They do not have a set of standard for
their English teaching volunteers. The most important thing is that the volunteers have a
sense of mission to serve others in need.
They give a short orientation to the volunteers before they meet the refugees to teach.
The volunteers are introduced to the organization’s vision and mission as well as the nature
of their works. They should perceive refugees as their “family” (in the notion of extended
family) or friends, so whatever they do to assist them, they will keep this in mind (JRS Bantul
volunteers, FGD, July 6, 2013; JRS Bogor volunteers, FGD, July 25, 2013).
Based on JRS’s vision and mission, ELTR is used as a media for psychosocial
assistance. IOM defines psychosocial as
“relates to the interrelation of behavioral and social factors, and, more widely, to the
interrelation between mind and society. Psychosocial describes the dynamic
relationship between psychological, social and cultural elements informing human
development (IOM, 2009c). Psychosocial activities therefore focus on the
interconnectedness of social-collective issues, individual-personal internalized states,
and the cultural and anthropological constructs around the relation, and not merely on
the social implications of mental care, or on the psychological implications of social
needs and related responses.” (Thaepant, 2010)
ELTR does not aim at English mastery, but at interrelation of mind and society.
English lesson helps them with topics to talk about, with the hope that the volunteers will
befriend with the refugees.
The refugees in Bantul are all holding “refugee” status from UNHCR and IOM
supports them with housing and financial as well as administrative assistance (discussion
with JRS staff, July 23, 2013). IOM rents two big buildings from the Department of Social
Affairs for those refugees to live.
ELTR in Bantul is held in one of the smaller room which is like a classroom and it is
set informal, where the participants can sit in circular arrangement on the floor. It helps
reduce the participants’ tension of learning (JRS Bantul’s volunteers, FGD, July 5 & 6,
2013).
Refugees in Bogor consist of both with asylum seeker status and refugee status.
Unlike those in Bantul, they live in houses in kampong. A house can be used for a family or it
can be a shared house for a number of refugees. With this condition, ELTR is conducted in
home tutor model, in which the teachers would visit the refugees’ house and have classes
there.
Classes are divided into two major levels, Basic and Intermediate. Each level is
divided into three sub-levels: one, two, and three. The number of groups will depend on how
many refugees are interested in joining the classes. Placement test is conducted in a less
serious setting. It can be a completion of a test sheet or mere light conversation with the
refugee(s) (JRS Bantul volunteers, FGD, July 5, 2013).
JRS does not have specific curriculum for their English classes. They have books to
guide the lessons, but they do not stick to the materials. They do not stick to a strict lesson
plan, either. The volunteers would have plans but they are also ready for sudden changes in
their teaching sites. Usually they have a number of plans and bring a number of sets of
materials. When changes happen, they have a set of back-up plans ready at hand.
The classes are very flexible. In Bantul, when there are only a few participants
coming to join the classes, the classes will be combined. That is because sometimes they have
to go for administrative matters such as renewing their refugee certificate or going to the
immigration office for visa matters. The class flexibility appears differently in Bogor. As the
class type is home visit, the class situation will have to tolerate disturbances such as
neighbors peeping or joining the conversation (observation, July 25, 2013).
The ups and downs of the mood of the refugees often become the reason of class
modification. In Bantul, the refugees’ bad mood can change the class into a meeting for
sharing. The teachers still consider this an English class as they communicate in English. The
unstructured-ness of the class, where conversations just flow, following what the participants
want to talk about, requires the teachers’ high capability to improvise. Sofie said that in such
condition, the refugees’ change from gloom to smile at the end of the session was the success
of the class (FGD, July 6, 2013). English is just the means of communication. In Bogor, the
refugees’ mood will be easily recognized because of the fewer number of participants.
English lesson can turn up into a discussion of politics of any other topic and it does not
matter because it is not really a class, but a visit.
With such high flexibility, it is hard to set a well-structured curriculum with set
materials. The English book is used as a ready set of materials for the participants to choose.
The teachers usually have additional materials ready in their bags, so they are ready to
accommodate the refugees’ wants (JRS Bantul’s volunteers, FGD Bantul, July 5, 2013; JRS
Bogor’s staff and volunteers, FGD Bogor, July 25, 2013).
JRS’ classes are also inclusive, meaning that whoever comes to visit the classes is
involved in the teaching-learning process. In Bantul’s classes, visitors would sit together with
the refugees in the circle and be invited to share their opinion or be involved in the
conversation with the class participants. In Bogor’s home tutor, any visitors are involved to
the conversation as they are considered as the refugees’ guests (Observations in Bantul, July
3 - 6, 2013; observation in Bogor, July 25, 2013).
Test is conducted very informally and the purpose is to monitor the participants’
improvement. It is used to recommend the participants to move to the higher level. Uniquely,
it is possible to happen that a participant refuses to move to another group because he feels
secure and comfortable with the group he is in now. When it happens, the teachers would not
push them to move, but would talk about this to understand what he feels and why he feels
so. When it is possible, the teachers would strongly recommend the participant to move, but
they would not force him (FGD with volunteers in Bantul, July 5, 2013).
The way the test is conducted is also to help reduce the refugees’ tension.
Nevertheless, the refugees feel responsible to perform well. If they come to the session
without knowing if it was a test time, they would complain and ask for remedy.
ELTR and The State’s Immigration Policy
The experience of the two organizations tells how the principles of ELT need
modification to adjust the difficult circumstances. The state’s immigration policy has made
ELTR a type of teaching in difficult circumstances. As has been discussed above, the
problems with the refugees’ status and floating-ness in this transit country make their life
unpredictable and therefore, English learning for them is more a thing to kill the time than
one of the attempts to prepare to live in the target country.
ELTR hardly implements any of the hypothetical approaches of Second Language
Acquisition (SLA) that Krashen (1982) listed. Some believe that SLA works like how a child
acquires language, where truth values are more emphasized than the language forms. WR’s
English class does not seem to believe in this as the teachers, who are in favor of nativespeakerism (a belief that native speakers – American / Australian / British English – is the
“right” English), try their best to teach “standard” English to the participants. The materials
they use are taken from books from the “native-speaker” countries. The sharing session in
JRS class when the participants feel inconvenient to learn indicates that grammar and
structure are not emphasized. JRS’ mission considers SLA a bonus for the refugees.
WR and JRS seem to believe in the second approach that believes that form is
automatically acquired by language learners, including second language learners (Krashen,
1982). While WR views that classroom activities would help them learn English form (as
seen from the materials they use), JRS may view that the participants’ English would
improve no matter how small through the demand to the production of the language in
various activities they do, including their sharing sessions.
The third belief says that second language learning, which puts monitor to the process
of using the language, requires enough time, mastery of the form, and knowledge of the rules
to monitor the language they produce (Krashen, 1982). In a way, JRS classes may give the
participants enough time to monitor their language production, but they would need more
emphasis on the activities to help their mastery of the form and the knowledge of the rules.
WR classes stress on the mastery of the last two, but the process of monitoring their language
production is more done by the teachers as the classes are fully teacher-centered.
The fourth hypothesis which suits best for beginner to intermediate level of second
language learners believes that learners have to get enough comprehensible input of the
language in class time before they are ready to produce it. And for beginners, it is best done
in class as the real world does not provide comprehensible input, especially for the adult
learners. JRS’s Basic classes give fair input, but cultural background often interferes with
their understanding of the information. For example, to understand time, some refugees from
Myanmar may take a long time to comprehend how to read time in English as their language
grammar uses a different way of reading time (observation, Bantul, July 26, 2013). The
organizations should really make use of the English classes to provide as much
comprehensible input to the participants as outside the class, they speak either their mother
tongue or even Bahasa Indonesia – as they have to communicate and socialize with
Indonesian people outside the classes.
Lastly, some believe that affective factors, which include motivation, self-confidence,
and anxiety, play a great influence to the success of language acquisition. Language
performers with high motivation and self-confident as well as low anxiety will perform better
in second language acquisition. Motivation may not be a problem for the participants as they
come to WR’s office to register. JRS’s participants read English materials in their spare time,
even once one shared that he learned English even before JRS’s English lessons were offered
(Observation, Bantul, March 2012). Self-confidence does not seem a big problem either as
can be seen among JRS’s participants who would enthusiastically do all the tasks given by
the teachers. On the contrary, the last aspect – anxiety – can be the biggest problem. It is not
about their English lessons, but it is more about their lives in general: their refugee status,
their visas, the news of being accepted in the target country, and their memory of their family
in their home countries. JRS’s participants show that their up-and-down mood interferes
much with their English lessons. It often changes the class setting that the teachers have
prepared.
Problems can also be found in the effective-ness of the language lessons. Richard and
Bohlke (2011) call a language lesson effective when it reflects professional standards and
principles of language teaching, address meaningful learning outcomes, provides
opportunities for the learners to take part in extended practice with using language in a
meaningful way, manages the classroom in such a way that provides supportive and positive
learning environment, coherently arranges the activities into a whole, encourages the
students’ motivation and gives opportunities to the students to reach success, and reflects
individual teacher’s personal philosophy.
Regarding the professional standards, it is likely to cause fundamental problem in the
teachers’ professional qualities. Starting from the recruitment that will be open for anybody
interested to be the organizations’ volunteers, ELTR classes are taught by those who may not
have English Teacher Education (ETE) background. It means that the professional standard
of the organizations for ELTR teachers does not “reflect the methodology that language
teachers should know, the teaching skills they should possess, and the behavior they are
expected to exhibit in their classrooms” (Richard and Bohlke, 2011). It leads to the next
principle that is inapplicable in ELTR classes, in which the lesson does not reflect “solid
understandings of the nature of language, of second-language learning and teaching, and of
his or her learners – taking into account their needs as well as their learning styles and
preferences” (Richard and Bohlke, 2011).
Generally, ELTR classes provide supportive and positive learning environment where
the students are focused and relaxed and work together as a group or a community, but they
have difficulties in maintaining the coherency of the arrangement of the activities from
opening, sequencing, and closings, especially if the class is conducted as what JRS has done.
The available ELTR classes may be motivational and give opportunities to the success
of the students. Unfortunately, there is no indication that the teachers reflectively ask
themselves these questions: if they varies the way of teaching the lessons, if they include
activities that primarily there are to maintain motivation, if they can find ways to make the
tasks more interesting, if they can increase the personal value of the lesson to the learners,
and if they can build in more opportunities for success in the lessons. In WR classes, it is not
easy to evaluate the voluntary teachers’ personal philosophy as reflected in the lesson as their
teachings are more purely about the language whereas JRS’s classes may indicate the
volunteers’ philosophy that has been influenced by the institution’s vision and mission.
Birch (2009) wrote that teachers are in a strategic position to influence infrastructure,
to invest in their social capital, and to construct what Anderson (1991) calls moral
imagination. Teachers of effective language lessons must have solid general education
background, a deep knowledge of their subject matter, familiarity with numerous pedagogical
approaches, strong communication skills, and effective organizational skills (Nieto, 2010;
Vilegas& Lucas, 2002). In response to the refugees’ needs for psychosocial assistance, the
voluntary English teachers must hold these additional qualities; they are a sense of mission,
solidarity with, and empathy for, their students, the courage to challenge mainstream
knowledge, improvisation, and a passion for social justice (Nieto, 2010).
The first five may hardly be fulfilled when the volunteers are not from English
education background. It can only be assumed that when the volunteers hold English teacher
education certificate or are still studying at ETE institution, then they should meet those first
five qualities. The additional five are hardly found among those holding formal ETE’s
certificates. The difficulties that WR or JRS faced in finding volunteers indicate that a sense
of mission is hard to find. Even if those volunteers have a sense of mission, empathy and
solidarity with the participants may need to be more polished. ELTR like what JRS conduct
will show that ELTR teachers have sufficient ability to improvise the materials and teaching
setting to face any possible situation in the classroom. In the student-centered classes,
awareness of the participants’ vulnerability helps the teachers be more courageous to
challenge mainstream and passionate for social justice than in the teacher-centered practice.
A Proposed Model: Culturally Responsive ELTR
English class for refugees is a meeting of people of different backgrounds where
mixed cultural relation cannot be avoided. A culturally responsive approach is needed to
make the class a meaningful and effective one. In this case, culture is not limited only to
rituals and dances and songs and products, but it is widely defined as
“the ever-changing values, traditions, social and political relationships, and worldview
created, shared, and transformed by a group of people bound together by a
combination of factors that can include a common history, geographic location,
language, social class, and religion.” (Nieto, 2010).
Teachers have to keep in their mind two important principles of the important
integration of culture in teaching. Firstly, they should think of culture in unsentimental way.
It means that they should refer to the complete situation and not simplistically refer to the
mythical belief or stereotypes. Secondly, they have to acknowledge the sociopolitical context
of culture, which means that particular historical, social, political, and economic conditions
shape culture and therefore they are “influenced by issues of power.” (Nieto, 2010)
Principles of culturally responsive pedagogy that Richards, Brown and Forde (2007)
suggest for inclusive education can be adopted to develop ELTR which can accommodate the
refugees’ needs and modify the principles of effective language learning. Culturally
responsive pedagogy includes three components to reform. The institutional dimension
should reflect the administration and its policies and values. This includes the administrative
structure and the way it relates to diversity and the use of physical space in planning schools
and arranging classrooms. Institutional reformation into a multiculturalist “learning
community” (Zepeda, 2004) is necessary to initiate.
Institutional reformation will enable the development of personal dimension, in which
teachers engage in the cognitive and emotional processes to become culturally responsive.
The institution should encourage the volunteers to engage in reflective thinking and writing,
explore personal and family histories, acknowledge membership in different groups, learn
about the history and experiences of diverse groups, befriend with the participants, visit or
read about successful teachers in diverse settings, develop an appreciation of diversity, and
participate in reforming the institution (Richards, Brown and Forde, 2007).
The teacher’s personal processes to be more culturally responsive will reform the
instructional dimension. The materials, strategies, and activities that form the basis of
instruction are reformed into culturally responsive ones. Here are some possible actions that
are modified from Richard, Brown, and Forde’s suggestion (2007). First, teachers should
acknowledge the participants’ differences as well as their similarities. The validation of
participants’ cultural identity in classroom practices and instructional materials is necessary.
It can be done through the use of textbooks and the implementation of classroom activities
that are culturally supportive of the participants. To be more specific, Bank stated that
“Foundational to a culturally responsive pedagogy implemented by teachers who have
English language learners (ELL students) in their classrooms is the teacher’s ability to
recognize and draw on students’ native languages and cultures” (in Taylor and Sobel,
2011).
Teachers educate about the diversity of the world around them. In attempt to promote
equity and mutual respect among the participants, all participants have to feel the fair and
respectful treatment. Standard of behavior that require respectful treatment of all needs to be
established and maintained by the teacher as the role models who always demonstrate
fairness and remind participants that difference is normal.
Evaluative and descriptive assessment of the participants’ ability and achievement
will be less burdensome for the participants as long as their status in the transit country is
uncertain. ELTR is more useful for the participants to build bond among themselves to
reduce anxiety. The teachers should foster a positive interrelationship among the participants
and their environment. If possible, community events are conducted to help the participants
socialize.
Conclusion
The state’s policy of refugee management makes the life of the refugees harder. As
they stay in Indonesia until the target country can accept them, they may be a floating society
that is the most vulnerable socially and politically. This does not seem relevant to the
educational world until education is used as a media for psychosocial assistance. JRS and
WR cases tell that ELTR puts English teachers in a position effective to contribute to the
social relation in the place where the refugees stay.
What JRS and WR have done to the refugees deserves honest appreciation. To
improve what they have initiated, teacher education needs to take part in this philanthropic
work. Teacher education can introduce their students to different setting of classes, including
those of difficult circumstances, especially refugee service. The other important thing is the
reformed teacher education that is aware of the political position of education can promote a
more socially just state and society.
References
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread on
nationalism. London: Verso.
Birch, B. M. (2009) The English Language Teacher in Global Civil Society. New York:
Routledge.
Convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees. (2010). UNHCR. The UN
Refugee Agency.
Errington, Nikola and Hunt, Taya. (2012). The Search. Protection Space in Malaysia,
Thailand, Indoneisa, Cambodia, and the Philippines. Bangkok: JRS Asia Pacific
Nieto. Sonia. (2010). Language, Culture, and Teaching. Critical Perspective. Second Edition.
New York & London; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Richards, Heraldo V., Brown, Ayanna F, and Forde, Timothy B. (2007). Addressing
Diversity in Schools: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. Teaching Exceptional
Children. Volume: 39. Issue: 3. January/February.
Taephant, Nattasuda, Phd. (2010). IOM Training Manual on Psychosocial Assistance for
Trafficked Persons. Bangkok: International Organization for Migration.
Taylor, Sheryl V. and Sobel, Donna M. Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Teaching Like Our
Students’ Lives Matter. United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Villegas, Ana Maria and Lucas, Tamara. (2002). Preparing Culturally Responsive Teachers:
Rethinking the Curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education. Volume: 53. Issue: 1.
Zepeda, Sally J. (2004). Leadership to Build Learning Communities. The Educational
Forum; Winter 2004; 68, 2; ERIC® pg. 144
http://jrs.or.id/en/about-us/
http://www.komnasham.go.id/penelitian-dan-pengkajian/1495-siaran-pers-komnas-hamjangan-kriminalisasi-pencari-suaka; March 22, 2012
Purwanti Kusumaningtyas
Anita Kurniawati
Faculty of Language and Literature
Satya Wacana Christian University
Salatiga
Abstract
The fact that Indonesia does not ratify The 1951 Convention of Refugee relating to the Status
of Refugees and Protocol 1967 does not seem relevant to English language teaching (ELT)
until it becomes a meaningful media for the NGOs to assist the foreign refugees in Indonesia.
Despite the refugees’ need of learning the language, the policy has indirectly placed English
language teaching in a minor position. This paper will share the cases of English language
teaching offered by two non-government institutions – Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) and
World Relief (WR). It will describe how ELT is used by the institutions as a media of
psychosocial assistant for the refugees. It will view how far ELT principles can be applied
and how much the impact of the state policy relating to the status of refugees influences the
practice of ELT for refugees (ELTR). In conclusion, the paper proposes a model of culturally
responsive teaching for ELTR as teaching in difficult circumstances.
Key words: English Language Teaching for Refugees (ELTR), teaching in difficult
circumstances, state policy
The experience to help Jesuit Refugee Service develop materials of English lessons
for adult refugees revealed a number of problems of English language teaching for refugees
(hereafter ELTR). Firstly, English classes for adult refugees are different from “normal”
English classroom. “Normal” English classrooms set for those who come to learn English,
thus, the participants are ready to learn the subject. The refugees do not come specifically to
learn English. Their stay in Indonesia is only temporary as they are waiting for opportunities
to go to the target country like Australia or Canada or New Zealand. English classes are only
one of the activities they use to kill the time, so it will not interest them when it is
burdensome.
Secondly, the class setting depends on the type of refugee camp and service given by
the refugee service. For example, JRS Yogyakarta has informal English classes that make use
of one room in the refugee camp in Bantul as the refugees live in a building provided by the
Bantul’s Department of Social Affair. Their classes may be conducted indoor or outdoor
depending on the agreement made each day. JRS Bogor conducts what is called home
tutoring, in which the English teachers visits the refugees’ “houses” and have classes there
(Observation in JRS Yogyakarta, July 3 – 6, 2013 and in JRS Bogor, July 25, 2013). WR
offers semi-formal English classes where the participants register like the other students of
formal schools, learn the lessons in classrooms with u-shape chairs, have student’s book each,
have regular learning time, but may discontinue their participation when they have
immigration stuff to do or their time to leave for the target country comes (Observation and
FGD in WR Cisarua, Bogor, July 23 – 24, 2013).
Thirdly, with such condition, the teachers have to adjust their teaching so that it suits
the refugees’ needs. They need activities to kill their time and friends to socialize. With such
condition, English teaching may not be conducted merely to help them master the language,
but it may be a means of psychosocial assistance.
A number of questions related with ELTR in a transit country which does not ratify
the convention and protocol about refugees can be listed as follows. What is the purpose and
focus of ELTR there? Is it for psychosocial assistance of for English learning? If it is the first
and ELT is a media to do it, how should ELTR be conducted? What is the curriculum like?
What is the classroom setting like? What is the role of evaluation? If it is focusing on English
learning, how does the refugees’ difficult condition influence the classroom? And so, how do
the teachers adapt with such situation? What kind of adaptation do they have to make? What
other consideration do the teachers have to include in preparing their lessons?
This paper describes ELTR practices in both conditions, as a media of psychosocial
assistance as it is done by JRS and as pure English learning as it is done by WR. It will show
how ELTR is not free from even seemingly-irrelevant state policy to ELT. Some suggestions
to English teacher education will be proposed at the end of this paper.
Indonesia and Foreign Refugee Management
The word “refugee” is defined by the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees,
1951, Article I, paragraph 2, as any person who
“As a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951 and owing to well-founded
fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a
particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality
and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of
that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his
former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear,
is unwilling to return to it. (Convention, 2010)
The convention lists a set of recommendations that each country which signed it or
ratified it should do to protect refugees, including facilitation of refugee travels, principle of
unity of the family, welfare services, and international co-operation in the field of asylum and
resettlement (Convention, 2010).
Indonesia did not ratify the convention and later the protocol that amended some
points of the convention. The implication is that Indonesia does not have refugee service
management system. The government does not have any official bureau or offices to assist
refugees, as the only available office to deal with migration is the Immigration Office. The
most obvious problem with this is as many refugees cannot show the required papers such as
passports and visas or living or work permit, their arrival is bluntly considered as illegal.
They will be either sent to the immigration detention center (IDC) or imprisoned
(http://www.komnasham.go.id/penelitian-dan-pengkajian/1495-siaran-pers-komnas-hamjangan-kriminalisasi-pencari-suaka; March 22, 2012).
Indonesia cannot hinder the increasing number of refugees who arrive since 2009.
Indonesia, with its location in the middle of countries that provide shelters for asylum seekers
and refugees such as Australia and New Zealand, makes it a good place of mixed population
movements. Indonesia, which does not ratify The 1951 Convention and Protocol 1967, has to
host about 3.230 people escaping from Afghanistan (71%), Myanmar (8%), Sri Lanka dan
Iraq (http://www.unhcr.or.id/id/, March 25, 2012). Nikola Errington and Taya Hunt (2012)
noted that the refugees risked their lives to escape from their home countries with the hope
for a better life in the other countries, but they often had to experience double sufferings in
the transit countries. In Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand, asylum seekers and refugees are
vulnerable to arrest and detention in conditions that do not meet international standards. The
arrest is often without clear reasons if not because of immigration matters, such as visas or
identity papers. Those with papers from UNHCR would be sent back to the organizations
which assist them. But those without papers will be imprisoned.
The Non-Government Organizations, like International Organization for Migration
(IOM), Church World Service (CWS), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS), and World Relief (WR),
are working in cooperation with UNHCR. The works of these organizations range from
giving financial supports to providing assistance to find necessary papers for both the asylum
seekers and refugees. Asylum seekers are those who left their home countries in search for
asylum, and they usually are not equipped with necessary papers to live in foreign countries.
UNCHR will release a certificate notifying their status, either as asylum seekers or refugees.
Refugees are likely to have more chance to transport to the target country. However, not all
of them are patient enough to wait the opportunity. They often believe in the idea that
opportunities are to be sought for, not to be waited for. They will again run away from the
transit country or the refugee shelter by illegal transport, like boats (WR staff and JRS staff,
FGD, July 23, 2013).
The refugees’ first need in transit countries is administrative, practical, and social.
Administratively, those who escaped without proper immigration papers will struggle for
getting the certificates, notifying their status as either asylum seekers or refugees, which are
released by UNHCR. Practically, they will need housing and many of them need financial
supports. They would need to socialize with their neighbors and acceptance and proper
treatment are what they need. During the time waiting for the opportunities to move to the
target country, meaningful activities to kill the time and boredom even to avoid frustration
are necessary. One of the ways to help the refugees reduce their boredom is English lesson.
The refugees’ vulnerability makes English teaching special for them as they are learners with
difficult circumstances.
ELTR as English Teaching in Difficult Circumstances: WR Case
WR is a Christian organization, headquartered in Bali. Eva Simarmarta, WR’s Project
Coordinator in Bogor, wrote that WR’s vision is “In community with the local church, WR
envisions the most vulnerable people transformed economically, socially, and spiritually.”
And WR has a mission “to empower local church to serve most vulnerable” (email
communication, July 31, 2013). As stated in their slogan which says “stand/for the
vulnerable,” WR concerns with empowerment.
WR conducts classes in their office in Cisarua. Refugees would come and register to
the staff for joining English classes. They would get schedule for their classes and they had to
follow the institution’s regulation. There are dos and don’ts posted in the office and the
classrooms for reminder. Limited room availability makes strict scheduling helpful. Classes
are set like ordinary classrooms, with a teacher responsible for one class (Eva and Ika,
interview, July 23, 2013; observation, July 23 – 24, 2013)
WR views education as “Holistic Development" that means education aims at
transforming individuals spiritually, mentally, emotionally, socially, and psychologically.
WR is thus develops its educational ways and standards based on the principles of holistic
development (Simarmarta, email, July 30, 2013).
WR views education as centered on the teacher. It has a set of standard for volunteers
who would apply for English teaching position. They name the position TESOL Tutor that
requires personnel who can
“conduct English assessment for Children and Adult creatively and Fun Learning both
group classes and one on one tutoring in an interesting way,
develop lesson plans for ESL tutoring sessions both for one-on-one and group
sessions
assess the participants on English language abilities (pre-test)
develop with creatively English visual aid for teaching.
make lesson learn for teaching purposes.
teaching English for children, women and men with creativity, material and Fun
Learning.
assist the refugee/asylum seeker to able communicate Basic English.
(Simarmarta, email, July 30, 2013)
A set of curriculum and materials are prepared the Project Coordinator for the
teachers to use. The teachers are allowed to add materials whenever necessary. The
participants also get the materials from the teachers. The teachers plan their lessons and they
have full authority to decide what to learn on the day and what materials to use. After
teaching, the teachers would record their class activities into a table of classroom report. As
the classes are conducted like a school, teacher-student relation is built on the basis of
conversation and discussion about the lessons, not personal matters (Eva and Ika, interview,
July 23, 2013; observation, July 23 – 24, 2013).
Test is given to assess the participants’ achievement and certificates will be released
to notify the participants’ achievement. However, the institution also realizes that the
refugees may not be able to complete their English lessons as they can leave the place at any
time (FGD with WR staff, July 24, 2013). ELTR is conducted just like the other ordinary
school. Simarmarta explicitly stated that their English classes are just a school without
uniform (interview, July 23, 2013).
ELTR as English Teaching in Difficult Circumstances: JRS Case
As a humanitarian organization, Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Indonesia Foundation,
which was founded on November 14th, 1980, as a response to the plight of Vietnam “boat
people” in Galang Island, has accompanied, served, and advocated the rights of refugees in
the refugee camps, urban areas, as well as in immigration detention centers for over the last
30 years. It cooperates with all who share the same concern. Since 2009, JRS Indonesia has
also accompanied refugees and asylum seekers, including Rohingya asylum seekers in Aceh
and North Sumatera, asylum seekers in Medan Immigratrion Detention Center (2009),
asylum seekers in Cisarua (2010) and asylum seekers in Surabaya Immigration Detention
Center (2012) as well as in Yogyakarta refugee community housing. The organization’s
vision is to build “a world which is free of boundaries, separation, and forced displacement; a
world where people were able to travel freely and safely; and, a world living the value of
hospitality to anyone.” With the vision, the organization has a mission “to accompany, serve,
and advocate the rights of refugees and those who are forced to be displaced.”
(http://jrs.or.id/en/about-us/).
JRS offers English classes to refugees in Bantul and Bogor. They recruit volunteers
who can speak English from English Teacher Education (ETE) institutions, School or Faculty
of Letters and from International Relation Department. They do not have a set of standard for
their English teaching volunteers. The most important thing is that the volunteers have a
sense of mission to serve others in need.
They give a short orientation to the volunteers before they meet the refugees to teach.
The volunteers are introduced to the organization’s vision and mission as well as the nature
of their works. They should perceive refugees as their “family” (in the notion of extended
family) or friends, so whatever they do to assist them, they will keep this in mind (JRS Bantul
volunteers, FGD, July 6, 2013; JRS Bogor volunteers, FGD, July 25, 2013).
Based on JRS’s vision and mission, ELTR is used as a media for psychosocial
assistance. IOM defines psychosocial as
“relates to the interrelation of behavioral and social factors, and, more widely, to the
interrelation between mind and society. Psychosocial describes the dynamic
relationship between psychological, social and cultural elements informing human
development (IOM, 2009c). Psychosocial activities therefore focus on the
interconnectedness of social-collective issues, individual-personal internalized states,
and the cultural and anthropological constructs around the relation, and not merely on
the social implications of mental care, or on the psychological implications of social
needs and related responses.” (Thaepant, 2010)
ELTR does not aim at English mastery, but at interrelation of mind and society.
English lesson helps them with topics to talk about, with the hope that the volunteers will
befriend with the refugees.
The refugees in Bantul are all holding “refugee” status from UNHCR and IOM
supports them with housing and financial as well as administrative assistance (discussion
with JRS staff, July 23, 2013). IOM rents two big buildings from the Department of Social
Affairs for those refugees to live.
ELTR in Bantul is held in one of the smaller room which is like a classroom and it is
set informal, where the participants can sit in circular arrangement on the floor. It helps
reduce the participants’ tension of learning (JRS Bantul’s volunteers, FGD, July 5 & 6,
2013).
Refugees in Bogor consist of both with asylum seeker status and refugee status.
Unlike those in Bantul, they live in houses in kampong. A house can be used for a family or it
can be a shared house for a number of refugees. With this condition, ELTR is conducted in
home tutor model, in which the teachers would visit the refugees’ house and have classes
there.
Classes are divided into two major levels, Basic and Intermediate. Each level is
divided into three sub-levels: one, two, and three. The number of groups will depend on how
many refugees are interested in joining the classes. Placement test is conducted in a less
serious setting. It can be a completion of a test sheet or mere light conversation with the
refugee(s) (JRS Bantul volunteers, FGD, July 5, 2013).
JRS does not have specific curriculum for their English classes. They have books to
guide the lessons, but they do not stick to the materials. They do not stick to a strict lesson
plan, either. The volunteers would have plans but they are also ready for sudden changes in
their teaching sites. Usually they have a number of plans and bring a number of sets of
materials. When changes happen, they have a set of back-up plans ready at hand.
The classes are very flexible. In Bantul, when there are only a few participants
coming to join the classes, the classes will be combined. That is because sometimes they have
to go for administrative matters such as renewing their refugee certificate or going to the
immigration office for visa matters. The class flexibility appears differently in Bogor. As the
class type is home visit, the class situation will have to tolerate disturbances such as
neighbors peeping or joining the conversation (observation, July 25, 2013).
The ups and downs of the mood of the refugees often become the reason of class
modification. In Bantul, the refugees’ bad mood can change the class into a meeting for
sharing. The teachers still consider this an English class as they communicate in English. The
unstructured-ness of the class, where conversations just flow, following what the participants
want to talk about, requires the teachers’ high capability to improvise. Sofie said that in such
condition, the refugees’ change from gloom to smile at the end of the session was the success
of the class (FGD, July 6, 2013). English is just the means of communication. In Bogor, the
refugees’ mood will be easily recognized because of the fewer number of participants.
English lesson can turn up into a discussion of politics of any other topic and it does not
matter because it is not really a class, but a visit.
With such high flexibility, it is hard to set a well-structured curriculum with set
materials. The English book is used as a ready set of materials for the participants to choose.
The teachers usually have additional materials ready in their bags, so they are ready to
accommodate the refugees’ wants (JRS Bantul’s volunteers, FGD Bantul, July 5, 2013; JRS
Bogor’s staff and volunteers, FGD Bogor, July 25, 2013).
JRS’ classes are also inclusive, meaning that whoever comes to visit the classes is
involved in the teaching-learning process. In Bantul’s classes, visitors would sit together with
the refugees in the circle and be invited to share their opinion or be involved in the
conversation with the class participants. In Bogor’s home tutor, any visitors are involved to
the conversation as they are considered as the refugees’ guests (Observations in Bantul, July
3 - 6, 2013; observation in Bogor, July 25, 2013).
Test is conducted very informally and the purpose is to monitor the participants’
improvement. It is used to recommend the participants to move to the higher level. Uniquely,
it is possible to happen that a participant refuses to move to another group because he feels
secure and comfortable with the group he is in now. When it happens, the teachers would not
push them to move, but would talk about this to understand what he feels and why he feels
so. When it is possible, the teachers would strongly recommend the participant to move, but
they would not force him (FGD with volunteers in Bantul, July 5, 2013).
The way the test is conducted is also to help reduce the refugees’ tension.
Nevertheless, the refugees feel responsible to perform well. If they come to the session
without knowing if it was a test time, they would complain and ask for remedy.
ELTR and The State’s Immigration Policy
The experience of the two organizations tells how the principles of ELT need
modification to adjust the difficult circumstances. The state’s immigration policy has made
ELTR a type of teaching in difficult circumstances. As has been discussed above, the
problems with the refugees’ status and floating-ness in this transit country make their life
unpredictable and therefore, English learning for them is more a thing to kill the time than
one of the attempts to prepare to live in the target country.
ELTR hardly implements any of the hypothetical approaches of Second Language
Acquisition (SLA) that Krashen (1982) listed. Some believe that SLA works like how a child
acquires language, where truth values are more emphasized than the language forms. WR’s
English class does not seem to believe in this as the teachers, who are in favor of nativespeakerism (a belief that native speakers – American / Australian / British English – is the
“right” English), try their best to teach “standard” English to the participants. The materials
they use are taken from books from the “native-speaker” countries. The sharing session in
JRS class when the participants feel inconvenient to learn indicates that grammar and
structure are not emphasized. JRS’ mission considers SLA a bonus for the refugees.
WR and JRS seem to believe in the second approach that believes that form is
automatically acquired by language learners, including second language learners (Krashen,
1982). While WR views that classroom activities would help them learn English form (as
seen from the materials they use), JRS may view that the participants’ English would
improve no matter how small through the demand to the production of the language in
various activities they do, including their sharing sessions.
The third belief says that second language learning, which puts monitor to the process
of using the language, requires enough time, mastery of the form, and knowledge of the rules
to monitor the language they produce (Krashen, 1982). In a way, JRS classes may give the
participants enough time to monitor their language production, but they would need more
emphasis on the activities to help their mastery of the form and the knowledge of the rules.
WR classes stress on the mastery of the last two, but the process of monitoring their language
production is more done by the teachers as the classes are fully teacher-centered.
The fourth hypothesis which suits best for beginner to intermediate level of second
language learners believes that learners have to get enough comprehensible input of the
language in class time before they are ready to produce it. And for beginners, it is best done
in class as the real world does not provide comprehensible input, especially for the adult
learners. JRS’s Basic classes give fair input, but cultural background often interferes with
their understanding of the information. For example, to understand time, some refugees from
Myanmar may take a long time to comprehend how to read time in English as their language
grammar uses a different way of reading time (observation, Bantul, July 26, 2013). The
organizations should really make use of the English classes to provide as much
comprehensible input to the participants as outside the class, they speak either their mother
tongue or even Bahasa Indonesia – as they have to communicate and socialize with
Indonesian people outside the classes.
Lastly, some believe that affective factors, which include motivation, self-confidence,
and anxiety, play a great influence to the success of language acquisition. Language
performers with high motivation and self-confident as well as low anxiety will perform better
in second language acquisition. Motivation may not be a problem for the participants as they
come to WR’s office to register. JRS’s participants read English materials in their spare time,
even once one shared that he learned English even before JRS’s English lessons were offered
(Observation, Bantul, March 2012). Self-confidence does not seem a big problem either as
can be seen among JRS’s participants who would enthusiastically do all the tasks given by
the teachers. On the contrary, the last aspect – anxiety – can be the biggest problem. It is not
about their English lessons, but it is more about their lives in general: their refugee status,
their visas, the news of being accepted in the target country, and their memory of their family
in their home countries. JRS’s participants show that their up-and-down mood interferes
much with their English lessons. It often changes the class setting that the teachers have
prepared.
Problems can also be found in the effective-ness of the language lessons. Richard and
Bohlke (2011) call a language lesson effective when it reflects professional standards and
principles of language teaching, address meaningful learning outcomes, provides
opportunities for the learners to take part in extended practice with using language in a
meaningful way, manages the classroom in such a way that provides supportive and positive
learning environment, coherently arranges the activities into a whole, encourages the
students’ motivation and gives opportunities to the students to reach success, and reflects
individual teacher’s personal philosophy.
Regarding the professional standards, it is likely to cause fundamental problem in the
teachers’ professional qualities. Starting from the recruitment that will be open for anybody
interested to be the organizations’ volunteers, ELTR classes are taught by those who may not
have English Teacher Education (ETE) background. It means that the professional standard
of the organizations for ELTR teachers does not “reflect the methodology that language
teachers should know, the teaching skills they should possess, and the behavior they are
expected to exhibit in their classrooms” (Richard and Bohlke, 2011). It leads to the next
principle that is inapplicable in ELTR classes, in which the lesson does not reflect “solid
understandings of the nature of language, of second-language learning and teaching, and of
his or her learners – taking into account their needs as well as their learning styles and
preferences” (Richard and Bohlke, 2011).
Generally, ELTR classes provide supportive and positive learning environment where
the students are focused and relaxed and work together as a group or a community, but they
have difficulties in maintaining the coherency of the arrangement of the activities from
opening, sequencing, and closings, especially if the class is conducted as what JRS has done.
The available ELTR classes may be motivational and give opportunities to the success
of the students. Unfortunately, there is no indication that the teachers reflectively ask
themselves these questions: if they varies the way of teaching the lessons, if they include
activities that primarily there are to maintain motivation, if they can find ways to make the
tasks more interesting, if they can increase the personal value of the lesson to the learners,
and if they can build in more opportunities for success in the lessons. In WR classes, it is not
easy to evaluate the voluntary teachers’ personal philosophy as reflected in the lesson as their
teachings are more purely about the language whereas JRS’s classes may indicate the
volunteers’ philosophy that has been influenced by the institution’s vision and mission.
Birch (2009) wrote that teachers are in a strategic position to influence infrastructure,
to invest in their social capital, and to construct what Anderson (1991) calls moral
imagination. Teachers of effective language lessons must have solid general education
background, a deep knowledge of their subject matter, familiarity with numerous pedagogical
approaches, strong communication skills, and effective organizational skills (Nieto, 2010;
Vilegas& Lucas, 2002). In response to the refugees’ needs for psychosocial assistance, the
voluntary English teachers must hold these additional qualities; they are a sense of mission,
solidarity with, and empathy for, their students, the courage to challenge mainstream
knowledge, improvisation, and a passion for social justice (Nieto, 2010).
The first five may hardly be fulfilled when the volunteers are not from English
education background. It can only be assumed that when the volunteers hold English teacher
education certificate or are still studying at ETE institution, then they should meet those first
five qualities. The additional five are hardly found among those holding formal ETE’s
certificates. The difficulties that WR or JRS faced in finding volunteers indicate that a sense
of mission is hard to find. Even if those volunteers have a sense of mission, empathy and
solidarity with the participants may need to be more polished. ELTR like what JRS conduct
will show that ELTR teachers have sufficient ability to improvise the materials and teaching
setting to face any possible situation in the classroom. In the student-centered classes,
awareness of the participants’ vulnerability helps the teachers be more courageous to
challenge mainstream and passionate for social justice than in the teacher-centered practice.
A Proposed Model: Culturally Responsive ELTR
English class for refugees is a meeting of people of different backgrounds where
mixed cultural relation cannot be avoided. A culturally responsive approach is needed to
make the class a meaningful and effective one. In this case, culture is not limited only to
rituals and dances and songs and products, but it is widely defined as
“the ever-changing values, traditions, social and political relationships, and worldview
created, shared, and transformed by a group of people bound together by a
combination of factors that can include a common history, geographic location,
language, social class, and religion.” (Nieto, 2010).
Teachers have to keep in their mind two important principles of the important
integration of culture in teaching. Firstly, they should think of culture in unsentimental way.
It means that they should refer to the complete situation and not simplistically refer to the
mythical belief or stereotypes. Secondly, they have to acknowledge the sociopolitical context
of culture, which means that particular historical, social, political, and economic conditions
shape culture and therefore they are “influenced by issues of power.” (Nieto, 2010)
Principles of culturally responsive pedagogy that Richards, Brown and Forde (2007)
suggest for inclusive education can be adopted to develop ELTR which can accommodate the
refugees’ needs and modify the principles of effective language learning. Culturally
responsive pedagogy includes three components to reform. The institutional dimension
should reflect the administration and its policies and values. This includes the administrative
structure and the way it relates to diversity and the use of physical space in planning schools
and arranging classrooms. Institutional reformation into a multiculturalist “learning
community” (Zepeda, 2004) is necessary to initiate.
Institutional reformation will enable the development of personal dimension, in which
teachers engage in the cognitive and emotional processes to become culturally responsive.
The institution should encourage the volunteers to engage in reflective thinking and writing,
explore personal and family histories, acknowledge membership in different groups, learn
about the history and experiences of diverse groups, befriend with the participants, visit or
read about successful teachers in diverse settings, develop an appreciation of diversity, and
participate in reforming the institution (Richards, Brown and Forde, 2007).
The teacher’s personal processes to be more culturally responsive will reform the
instructional dimension. The materials, strategies, and activities that form the basis of
instruction are reformed into culturally responsive ones. Here are some possible actions that
are modified from Richard, Brown, and Forde’s suggestion (2007). First, teachers should
acknowledge the participants’ differences as well as their similarities. The validation of
participants’ cultural identity in classroom practices and instructional materials is necessary.
It can be done through the use of textbooks and the implementation of classroom activities
that are culturally supportive of the participants. To be more specific, Bank stated that
“Foundational to a culturally responsive pedagogy implemented by teachers who have
English language learners (ELL students) in their classrooms is the teacher’s ability to
recognize and draw on students’ native languages and cultures” (in Taylor and Sobel,
2011).
Teachers educate about the diversity of the world around them. In attempt to promote
equity and mutual respect among the participants, all participants have to feel the fair and
respectful treatment. Standard of behavior that require respectful treatment of all needs to be
established and maintained by the teacher as the role models who always demonstrate
fairness and remind participants that difference is normal.
Evaluative and descriptive assessment of the participants’ ability and achievement
will be less burdensome for the participants as long as their status in the transit country is
uncertain. ELTR is more useful for the participants to build bond among themselves to
reduce anxiety. The teachers should foster a positive interrelationship among the participants
and their environment. If possible, community events are conducted to help the participants
socialize.
Conclusion
The state’s policy of refugee management makes the life of the refugees harder. As
they stay in Indonesia until the target country can accept them, they may be a floating society
that is the most vulnerable socially and politically. This does not seem relevant to the
educational world until education is used as a media for psychosocial assistance. JRS and
WR cases tell that ELTR puts English teachers in a position effective to contribute to the
social relation in the place where the refugees stay.
What JRS and WR have done to the refugees deserves honest appreciation. To
improve what they have initiated, teacher education needs to take part in this philanthropic
work. Teacher education can introduce their students to different setting of classes, including
those of difficult circumstances, especially refugee service. The other important thing is the
reformed teacher education that is aware of the political position of education can promote a
more socially just state and society.
References
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread on
nationalism. London: Verso.
Birch, B. M. (2009) The English Language Teacher in Global Civil Society. New York:
Routledge.
Convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees. (2010). UNHCR. The UN
Refugee Agency.
Errington, Nikola and Hunt, Taya. (2012). The Search. Protection Space in Malaysia,
Thailand, Indoneisa, Cambodia, and the Philippines. Bangkok: JRS Asia Pacific
Nieto. Sonia. (2010). Language, Culture, and Teaching. Critical Perspective. Second Edition.
New York & London; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Richards, Heraldo V., Brown, Ayanna F, and Forde, Timothy B. (2007). Addressing
Diversity in Schools: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. Teaching Exceptional
Children. Volume: 39. Issue: 3. January/February.
Taephant, Nattasuda, Phd. (2010). IOM Training Manual on Psychosocial Assistance for
Trafficked Persons. Bangkok: International Organization for Migration.
Taylor, Sheryl V. and Sobel, Donna M. Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Teaching Like Our
Students’ Lives Matter. United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Villegas, Ana Maria and Lucas, Tamara. (2002). Preparing Culturally Responsive Teachers:
Rethinking the Curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education. Volume: 53. Issue: 1.
Zepeda, Sally J. (2004). Leadership to Build Learning Communities. The Educational
Forum; Winter 2004; 68, 2; ERIC® pg. 144
http://jrs.or.id/en/about-us/
http://www.komnasham.go.id/penelitian-dan-pengkajian/1495-siaran-pers-komnas-hamjangan-kriminalisasi-pencari-suaka; March 22, 2012