Syrian Refugees and the Politics of Education Governance in Lebanon
A look inside a classroom at a national public school in Lebanon. Taken February 2020. Photo provided courtesy of authors.
By Jo Kelcey and Samira Chatila
23 November 2020
The “global” refugee crisis has had a disproportionate impact on Lebanon. But even before the arrival of large numbers of Syrian refugees, Lebanon had a long and complex history hosting other displaced populations. The country’s public education sector was also chronically underfunded and stark inequalities existed between public and private schooling outcomes. In this blog, we discuss the importance of examining how refugee responses, like the one in Lebanon, interact with system level challenges around the governance and funding of education.
Whereas much research on refugee education focuses on access and learning outcomes, we are concerned with the broader issue of educational governance. Governance refers to the ways in which power is exercised to manage economic and social resources for development. However, aid agencies are often concerned with the more subjective issue of “good governance.” According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, good governance is:
“…the process whereby public institutions conduct public affairs, manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption, and with due regard for the rule of law.”
Good governance, therefore, is essential to realizing the right to education for refugees and citizens. As we describe next, however, in Lebanon, the refugee response led by international agencies was built on bad governance practices and may also have exacerbated them.
Inconsistent education data
One of the most striking features of educational governance in Lebanon is the fragmentation and inconsistency of publicly available statistics and data. Through the Educational Center for Research and Development, the Lebanese Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) publishes annual statistics concerning access to education and indicators related to the quality of education. This data is often reported by a governorate (the official administrative unit of analysis in Lebanon). Sometimes, however, additional geographic breakdowns are included in data reporting, without explanation.
Moreover the MEHE statistics do not include Syrian refugees who attend public schools during the second (afternoon) shift. That data is instead managed by the MEHE’s Program Management Unit (PMU). The data published by the PMU is highly aggregated (it does not include breakdowns by gender for example) and focuses on expenditures, only sporadically reporting statistics on enrollment and students’ performance. The lack of consistency around data makes it difficult to compare how different groups of learners are faring and to judge the effectiveness of policies and programs. It also inhibits the ability of practitioners and policymakers to design equitable education interventions. As one commentator notes, the lack of reliable statistics on socio-economic and education indicators is “a recipe for policy failure.”
The importance of accurate, disaggregated, and transparent education data is further highlighted by recent corruption allegations. In May 2020, Lebanese media reported that since 2014, MEHE has claimed 9 million dollars annually from the United Nations (UN) to fund education for Syrians who were not actually attending Lebanese schools. The current Minister of Education also admitted on television that corruption in his Ministry is endemic. Although the UN has largely stayed quiet regarding the allegations of misappropriated funds, it has become abundantly clear that the lack of robust and available data on education needs and outcomes in Lebanon obscures transparency and undermines the accountability of funds that were intended to support education for refugees.
Bureaucratic proliferation
Problems of education governance also manifest through the proliferation of bureaucracy. In research we conducted for the Centre for Lebanese Studies, a research center with a strong focus on education policy and practice in Lebanon, school principals told us that they received tens of different (and at times contradictory) memos and directives from MEHE in a single month. They felt that these policy decisions were ad hoc and detached from school level realities.
Principals handled this bureaucratic proliferation differently. Some adopted an inflexible stance towards refugee students’ enrollment and registration. Others ignored official policy altogether, seemingly making decisions that aligned with their own personal and political interests. The result was almost always additional barriers to education access for Syrians. For instance, we found that, in spite of official policy to the contrary, several school principals decided to limit their school’s morning shift to Lebanese students only.[1] In justifying this decision, principals would often cite particular stipulations made in MEHE memos or directives, highlighting the inherent policy contradictions.
The influx of international aid into Lebanon didn’t create the lack of transparency and accountability in the education sector nor its bureaucratic inefficiencies. However, it has enabled and entrenched them. In interviews, Lebanese and international policy actors told us that the main concern of western donor governments was to contain Syrian refugees in Lebanon, including through education programs. The assumption these donors are making is that access to education will mitigate the likelihood of refugees’ onwards migration to Europe, while inflows of money to support an ailing public system would incentivize the Government of Lebanon to allow Syrians to remain in the country (albeit deprived of many rights).
To achieve this, many donors are seemingly willing to overlook longstanding concerns regarding corruption, mismanagement, and ineffectiveness within Lebanese ministries. The aid agencies managing these funds need to understand, however, that integrating refugees into a broken system does nothing to fix that system. In fact, it will make these problems worse. In this way, the Lebanese case underscores the importance of tackling both the immediate needs of refugees and the systemic inequities that affect host country nationals.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this publication belong solely to the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of REACH or the Harvard Graduate School of Education.
About the Authors
Jo Kelcey holds a Ph.D. in International Education from New York University and is a post-doctoral researcher at the Lebanese American University in Beirut, Lebanon. Her research focuses on the intersections of humanitarianism and education and examines whether and how education systems respond to the challenges experienced by people living in transnational situations, including conditions of exile, protracted displacement, and statelessness. Follow Jo on Twitter (@JoKelcey).
Samira Chatila is a doctoral student in the Comparative and International Development Education program at the University of Minnesota (UMN), Twin Cities, and is a fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Global Change at UMN. Her research interests include education policies, language and identity, forced migration and integration, and Southern knowledge systems in education. Follow Samira on Twitter (@SamiraChatila).