6. Integration of young people with migrant parents in Flanders

Abstract

This chapter starts with an overview of the size and composition of young people with migrant parents in Flanders and takes stock of the main challenges that still stand in the way of their long-term integration. In a second part, it focuses on their education integration outcomes in more detail, from pre-school through primary and secondary education. Special attention is then paid to youth born abroad that transit from reception education. The chapter ends by reviewing the school-to-work transition of youth with migrant parents, giving attention to the difficulties they face and evaluating both mainstream and targeted programmes that account for the particular needs of this group.

Youth with migrant parents – a benchmark for integration policy

How well youth with migrant parents are integrated into the education system and the labour market is one of the best measures of the long-term success or failure of a country’s integration policy.1 As children of immigrants have been raised and educated in the country, they should not, in theory, encounter the same difficulties as migrant adults who have often obtained their skills in a different context. The outcomes of youth with migrant parents could be expected to be similar to those of native-born children of native-born parents. However, integration failures among immigrants that are left unaddressed risk leaving a lasting impact on the integration outcomes of their children. Indeed, previous OECD work has shown that young people with migrant parents often face persistent disadvantages in the education system and labour market of OECD countries, with long-term consequences for the individuals concerned and for wider society (OECD, 2017[1]; Liebig and Widmaier, 2009[2]).

The population of youth with migrant parents is rapidly increasing and diversifying

Ensuring that youth with migrant parents can reach their full potential in the education system and the labour market is all the more important given their rapidly rising share among the youth population. This is also the case in Flanders. In 2020, 17% of young people aged below 15 had two foreign-born parents, another 12% were of mixed parentage, and 7% were born abroad (see Figure 6.1). In 2010, the same figures for Flanders stood at 10%, 11% and 5%, respectively. The share of young people with migrant parents is relatively high in international comparison, and considerably higher than in France and in the Netherlands. Furthermore, growth in the population of native-born youth with two foreign-born parents over the past decade has been among the fastest in the OECD.

Figure 6.1. Youth with migrant parents account for close to 35% of the population aged below 15

Native-born children with migrant parents living in Flanders are still relatively young. In 2020, one in two children with foreign-born parents were aged under 15, compared to 34% of the children with mixed parentage. Due to their young age distribution, most of the native-born with migrant parents are still in the education system or have recently entered the Flemish labour market.

Concerning the regions of parental origin, in 2020, 65% of native-born children with migrant parents had parents born in Morocco, Türkiye or countries that composed the EU prior to 2004 (see Figure 6.2). However, in line with the characteristics of more recent immigration to Flanders (see Chapter 2 for further discussion), the origin of youngsters is rapidly diversifying, with growing shares of children with parents born in sub-Saharan African and other Asian countries, and in countries that joined the EU after 2004.

Figure 6.2. The population of native-born youth with migrant parents is diversifying

Young people with migrant parents face challenges in the education system…

Youth with migrant parents face many challenges in the Flemish education system, and gaps in educational performance already manifest themselves at an early age (Vanduynslager, Wets and Noppe, 2013[4]; Boone and Van Houtte, 2013[5]). At the age of ten, the gap in mathematics performance between native-born children with migrant parents and children with native-born parents was – together with Finland – the largest among the EU countries that participated in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, 2019[6]).

At the age of 15, native-born children of migrant parents in Flanders were on average two years of study behind children of native-born parents in terms of their reading skills, which is more than twice as high as the average EU performance gap (see Figure 6.3). What is more, the gap in school performance of youth with migrant parents vis-à-vis youth with native-born parents in Flanders has hardly changed over the past 15 years. The reasons for this gap are manifold, but socio-economic characteristics play a particularly important role in explaining why school performance among native-born children with migrant parents is lower (Danhier and Jacobs, 2017[7]). When accounting for the family’s socio-economic characteristics, the reading score gap between native-born children of migrant parents and children of native-born parents is reduced by approximately a third, one of the largest contributions across European OECD countries (see Figure 6.3). However, even after controlling for socio-economic background, native-born children of migrant parents still lag behind by over one year of schooling.

Figure 6.3. Socio-economic background explains close to one-third of the reading score gap between immigrant and native-born offspring

Lower performance and reading levels put pupils with migrant parents at an over-proportionate risk of leaving school early. Furthermore, despite high education aspirations, those who successfully complete secondary education often struggle to enter further education pathways. As a result, in most of the European OECD countries, native-born adults with migrant parents have lower educational outcomes than their peers with native-born parents (OECD, 2021[9]).

The educational attainment gap between native-born adults with migrant parents and adults with native-born parents is more pronounced in Flanders than in many other European OECD countries. In 2020, the share of adults with at most a lower secondary education degree was more than twice as high among native-born with migrant parents (18%) than among native-born with native-born parents (7%). The difference between the two groups was only wider in Belgium, Austria, Finland and Germany. In the same year, 33% of the native-born adults with migrant parents had attained a tertiary education degree, compared to 56% of the adults with native-born parents (see Figure 6.4). Nowhere was the tertiary education gap more pronounced than in Flanders. Notably, however, the educational outcomes of native-born children with mixed parentage were much closer to those of children with native-born parents in Flanders and compare more favourably to other European OECD countries.

Figure 6.4. Educational gaps between native-born youth with and without migrant parents are large

…and in the labour market

Entering the labour market also constitutes a challenge for youth with migrant parents in Flanders. In 2020, the employment rate of native-born children with migrant parents lagged almost 24 percentage points behind native-born children with native-born parents, for both genders (see Figure 6.5). The employment rate of children with mixed parentage was also lower than that of children with native-born parents, though by smaller margins.

While employment gaps extend to native-born children of immigrants in most European OECD countries, Flanders’ performance falls far short of countries like Sweden and the Netherlands, where adult immigrants nevertheless face similar integration challenges (see Chapters 2 and 4 for further discussion). In fact, of the countries considered in Figure 6.5, Flanders had the most pronounced employment gap between native-born children with and without migrant parents for both men and women, stressing the persistent nature of integration challenges in the region.

Figure 6.5. The employment rate of native-born children of immigrants is poor in Flanders

What is more, while the employment rate of young adults who are foreign-born showed a strong positive trend between 2016 and 2020, that of native-born adults with migrant parents remained largely stable (see Figure 6.6). The economic growth and growing imbalance between labour supply and demand in Flanders thus seem to have provided more chances on the labour market for the foreign-born than for the native-born with foreign-born parents (see Chapter 2 for further discussion). Figure 6.6 additionally shows that the employment rate of native-born adults with migrant parents was more adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, the employment rate of native-born adults with migrant parents lagged 6 percentage points behind that of their foreign-born peers in 2021, which is a worrisome finding.

According to research for Flanders and Belgium, native-born adults with migrant parents experience very different labour market outcomes depending on where their parents are born. A recurring finding is that native-born adults with parents born in Türkiye or North Africa have a much harder time in the Flemish labour market compared to native-born adults with parents born in the EU or other non-EU countries (Corluy et al., 2015_[9]; Piton and Rycx, 2021_[10]; Maes, Wood and Neels, 2019_[11]).

Figure 6.6. While the employment rate of young people who are foreign-born increased since 2016, that of their offspring saw a standstill

The remainder of this chapter focuses in more detail on how challenges for youth with migrant parents develop in the Flemish education system and the labour market. It reviews the mainstream programmes for all youth in need of support, and targeted programmes that account for the particular needs of youth with migrant parents.

Integrating native-born youth with migrant parents into the school system

Since the reforms of 1989, the Flemish Community has had its autonomous education system. It finances and subsidises all education provided with Dutch as the instructional language in the Flemish and Brussels Capital Region. The Flemish Government has its own Education Administration, consisting of one Department, three Agencies, and the Education Inspectorate. Headed by the Minister of Education, the Administration supervises education policy for all levels of education: pre-primary, primary, secondary, and tertiary, for both initial and adult education.

The Federal Government is only responsible for determining the duration and age range of compulsory education, the conditions for delivery of recognised qualifications, and the retirement regulations for teachers and educational staff. Since September 2020, education is compulsory from the age of 5 to 18 (before, the starting age was set at 6 years), a relatively long length of obligatory education in international comparison (Nusche et al., 2015[10]). The school system is organised in four main stages (primary education and first, second and third stages of secondary education) and preceded by a non-compulsory offer of pre-primary education. Until 16 years, there is full-time compulsory education; from 16 years, there is part-time compulsory education.

Flanders has one of OECD’s most devolved education systems (Nusche et al., 2015[10]; Shewbridge, Fuster and Rouw, 2019[11]). Schools have a high degree of autonomy, grounded in the principle of “freedom of education”. The Flemish Government defines the attainment targets (i.e. minimum goals to be reached; developmental objectives for pre-primary education) but does not regulate education processes and methods. The responsibility for the quality of education lies mainly with each school and its teachers. Yet, the Education Inspectorate carries out audits, provides reference framework for quality in education and interacts with the educational institutions and school advisory services. Schools are organised by different sectors (private/public, confessional/not), yet all those which are officially recognised are funded by the Flemish Government.

Despite an overall decline over the past decade, Flanders still ranks among the “top levels” in the OECD in terms of average performance in secondary education (Danhier and Jacobs, 2017[7]). However, international assessment also confirms the persistence of large inequalities in pupils’ school trajectories and achievements in Flanders (Nusche et al., 2015[10]; Clycq et al., 2014[12]). These inequalities are primarily related to so-called background characteristics of pupils: their socio-economic status, parentage, and home language. In addition, schooling disadvantages tend to be reproduced across generations. Flanders shows one of the strongest correlations in the OECD between children’s and parents’ years of schooling. Flemish schools offer one of the lowest levels of social mobility at school among the 27 OECD countries that have participated in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) since 2003 (OECD, 2022[13]).

Against this backdrop, this section presents the performance of native-born youth with migrant parents at school and discusses the extent to which the Flemish education system is equipped to address the current challenges.

From a targeted policy towards an equal opportunities policy

Flanders progressively moved from a targeted policy for pupils with migrant parents towards an integrated approach (Flemish Educational Council, 2013[14]). From the beginning of the 1990s, the Flemish Community conducted the “Educational priorities policy” to enhance the educational chances of pupils with migrant parents. Schools counting at least 10% of pupils of foreign-born parentage (e.g. having a grandmother from mother’s side born abroad or with a foreign nationality) were granted extra support. Most schools almost exclusively implemented measures to encourage pupils’ Dutch language development.

The “Educational priorities policy” was followed by the “Non-discrimination policy” in 1993. Different measures were set up to actively prevent discrimination and combat school segregation. Schools voluntarily signed a declaration to fight against discrimination in their school, and in return, they received extra resources. Despite these policy measures, the Flemish education system hardly managed to improve the performance of students with migrant parents, nor, overall, to narrow the performance gap associated with students’ socio-economic background (Van Petegem et al., 2004[15]).

For those reasons, the Flemish Government has elaborated from 2002 onwards the “Equal Educational Opportunity” (EEO) policy (Gelijke Onderwijskansen, GOK). The EEO policy proposes a more inclusive approach that benefits the entire school instead of focusing on the problems of individual students that are potentially educationally at risk. These “disadvantaged students” include students with a home language other than Dutch, who have the right to receive a school allowance, whose mother does not hold a diploma of secondary education, who are living temporarily or permanently out of the own family, and whose parents are part of the travellers’ population. Schools with relatively many students meeting these criteria receive extra support to work in an integrated way towards a structural improvement of the educational opportunities of all their pupils. Additional teaching hours in mainstream preschools and primary education is an integral part of schools’ basic funding since 2012. In secondary education, additional funds are allocated to schools based on a complex weighting algorithm (see Box 6.1). Particularly noteworthy is the degree of autonomy enjoyed by Flemish schools when using additional funding to implement specific support measures (Shewbridge, Fuster and Rouw, 2019[11]).

An important implication of the EEO policy is that, since 2002, Flanders stopped collecting data that allows identifying pupils with migrant parents (i.e. country of birth of pupils and their parents) in the statistical data that the government asks directly from the schools. Instead, schools produce more integrated statistics on the EEO indicators, including pupils’ home language, which this report uses as a proxy for youth with migrant parents. The students’ home language is non-Dutch if the pupil speaks Dutch in the family with no one, or with maximum one family member, in a family with at least four members. This is to be kept in mind in particular when analysing the drivers of educational gaps between different population groups as it may overestimate the importance of language spoken at home versus unobservable variables linked to parents’ origin.

Box 6.1. The revision of the Equal Educational Opportunities policy

Since 2002, the Equal Educational Opportunities (EEO) Policy aims at offering all pupils equal opportunities from preschool to secondary education. The integration of youth with migrant parents (either native-born or those that arrived during childhood) falls under this mainstreamed policy. The EEO includes three pillars. First, in a context of freedom of choice for schools, additional support is provided to guarantee that disadvantaged pupils can enrol in the school of their choice. Second, additional human and financial support (mainly in the form of teaching hours) is provided to preschools, primary and secondary schools depending on the number of disadvantaged children they have registered. Third, local consultation platforms are developed to guarantee equal educational opportunities.

In 2012, a new framework system in ordinary preschools and primary education was implemented, replacing the system with SES teaching periods and cycles. Since then, the SES teaching periods are part of the annually allocated basic funding at preschool and primary education levels. Teaching periods are allocated per pupil who meets the pupil characteristic “mother’s education”, “home language not the language of instruction” or “school allowance”.

Guaranteeing freedom of school choice for all

Freedom of choice and autonomy are structural features of the Flemish school system. In contrast to many OECD countries where children are assigned to schools based on certain criteria (e.g. pre-enrolment tests, the student’s residence, their parents’ income level, class size or simply through a lottery system), children have the full right to enrol in their preferred school in Flanders. Only two exceptions allow Flemish schools to refuse an enrolment: when the school has reached its full capacity or when the student has already been sanctioned and forced out of the school. A mainstream school can refuse to enrol a student with special needs if required adaptations are not manageable by the school. In all these cases, however, schools have to offer a “document of refusal” indicating the reason of refusal.

Consequently, the enrolment system is designed to respond favourably to parents’ school preferences. However, parents are encouraged to choose many schools to increase their children’ chances to get enrolled. The Flemish Government offers additional support to guarantee that families from a weaker socio-economic background can access the school of their choice. This support consists in providing information on enrolment through the website of the Department of Education and Training and through local consultation platforms (see below).

Revision of the double-quota system

The double quota allocation system was introduced in 2012 to improve the social mix in schools. It entailed that schools’ social mix of the neighbourhood had to be reflected in the school population. Two groups of pupils were identified (socially disadvantaged pupils on the grounds of their mother’s education and reception of school allowance vis-à-vis other pupils) and a ratio of places had to be kept available for socially disadvantaged pupils in these schools. The Flemish Parliament approved a new Enrolment Act that came into force in September 2022 for the 2023-24 enrolment phase. The double quota system is abandoned (as announced in the 2019-24 Governmental coalition agreement) in order to reinforce the principle of freedom of school choice (European Commission, 2022[16]). The new Act still provides for the possibility of keeping up to 20% of the available places in schools free for “underrepresented groups” but leaves the specific elaboration to the local authorities.

A digital registration system must be used if a school expects a shortage of capacity. Regulation stipulates that the random allocation of pupils in highly demanding secondary schools should account for parents’ preferences (ranking of schools) to the extent possible. In pre-primary and primary schools, distance from home to school is an additional criterion that can be used. In Antwerp, Brussels and Ghent, all schools must use a digital registration system and the Ministry of education developed a digital system which is at local authorities’ disposal.

Allocating EEO funds

Additional funds are provided to schools that receive more disadvantaged pupils. Since the inception of the EEO policy, the allocation mechanism and criteria have been revised several times. Now, additional resources per school are calculated according to the number of pupils falling into at least one of the following situations:

In preschools and primary education, four indicators are considered to determine the overall school’s operating fund: not speaking Dutch at home, receiving a school allowance, having a low-educated mother and the neighbourhood (since 2008).
In secondary education, two additional indicators are considered: living temporarily or permanently out of the own family and having parents who are part of the travellers’ population (e.g., Roma). As opposed to preschools and primary education, these indicators are used to fix a number of additional teaching hours.

Since 2021-22, in pre-school and primary schools, more attention is paid to the use of additional teaching hours allocated in the context of the SES policy and conducted in conjunction with the care policy. These periods can only be used as part of an equal educational opportunities policy and priority must be given to optimal learning and development opportunities for students. Schools must include their equal education policy in their work plan, and external evaluations of the policy, including the use of SES teaching periods, are conducted during regular school inspections. Positive evaluations result in continued SES teaching hours, while negative evaluations require remediation. If the next evaluation is negative, their SES teaching periods are reduced by half until the following positive evaluation, and a new evaluation is planned within the same year. This change in policy is too recent to be evaluated in the context of this report.

Secondary schools must have a minimum share of disadvantaged students in order to claim additional teacher hours: at least 10% in the first stage of secondary education, and at least 25% in the second and third stages of secondary education. Conversely, there is no more such thresholds imposed to preschools and primary schools.

In secondary education schools, if the threshold is met, a complex algorithm calculates the number of additional teaching hours per school. Different weights are associated to each of the EEO indicators, ranging from 0.18 point to 0.8. In particular, 0.11917, 0.2671 and 0.29116 additional teaching hours are allocated per pupil meeting the following characteristics, respectively: receiving a school allowance; having a low educated mother; not speaking Dutch at home. Points per pupil are cumulative but a cap is set at 1.2 points per pupil. Teaching hours are derived by multiplying the total number of points (sum of individual weights allocated to each disadvantaged student) by 0.2916 for students in the first stage and by 0.1225 for students in the second and third stages of secondary education. Teaching hours are not allocated to the school if the total is below six hours. Due to its set-up, the EEO fund allocation may result in fragmentation of support due to threshold effects (see below for further discussion).

From the 2021-22 school year onwards, a number of adjustments have been implemented to the EEO policy in secondary education. The main change is that there are no longer three-year cycles of successive initial situation analysis, interim self-evaluation and external quality control. Instead, there is more local autonomy in the EEO policy, annual calculation of resources and monitoring integrated in the regular school audit.

Local Consultation Platforms (LOP)

The Local Consultation Platforms (LOP) gather local partners (e.g. representatives of teachers, parents, pupils, migrant associations, local partners, and integration agencies) with the objective of facilitating the integration of disadvantaged pupils at school. Around 70 LOPs are spread across Flanders and co-ordinated by AGODI.

The LOP support parents and children with weaker socio-economic status to enrol in the school of their choice. To that end, the LOP system manages the local registry system which centralises the subscriptions of children by their parents’ top preferred schools in cities and local municipalities where there is a capacity shortage. After the registration period, parents still need to personally contact the school to formally enrol their child. Furthermore, the LOPs are in charge of the protection of students’ equal rights. They are supposed to prevent discrimination, exclusion and segregation and to promote social cohesion within schools. Yet, they have no legal responsibility in this regard. One tool to meet this aim is having a complaints office for parents who believe their child’s enrolment was wrongfully denied. Since 2022-23, this tool became mandatory in each school that uses a digital registration procedure. Ultimately, parents can also contact the Commission for Pupils’ rights (Commissie Leerlingenrechten) if they consider that their child’s school enrolment is not fair.

High enrolment in early childhood education but limited focus on language acquisition

It is well established that language acquisition before starting compulsory education is essential for future success in school. In fact, children with migrant parents usually benefit even more from participation in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) than other young children (OECD, 2021[9]) (Hulpia and Peeters, 2014[17]). Across the OECD, policies to ensure all children acquire the necessary language skills before starting school can be grouped into two approaches: increasing the participation of children with migrant parents in ECEC and providing language screening and where necessary language support (OECD, 2021[9]).

In Flanders, pre-primary education (accessible for children from the age of 2.5 to 6) is not obligatory, but almost all children (98%) participate (Statistics Flanders, 2022[18]). Although native-born children with migrant parents participate slightly less than other toddlers, their enrolment rate is high in international comparison. Pre-schools are not covered by the EEO policy, but steps have been taken since 2007 to support ECEC teachers, especially since the Action Plan for Toddler Participation in 2016.

With regard to language screening, a language test in Dutch (the KOALA test) was introduced at the age of five in 2021 and is now mandatory in all pre-primary schools, with the exception of newly arrived children who receive systematic linguistic support. For pupils with low test scores, the school must set up language integration programmes, consisting of additional individual guidance or language immersions. Each school has received a free practice guide offering inspiration on how to design these language integration pathways. While such a mandatory test is a good practice, introducing the test at age five is quite late in international comparison. In Denmark, for example, this is done at the age of three, and in Luxembourg at the age of 2.5.

Pre-primary schools have a lot of autonomy and can choose their pedagogical projects, staffing levels, and teaching strategies. Although the Flemish Government strongly encourages and supports language projects, it is up to the schools to decide how these are structured and organised, leading to a great deal of variety in language support. Notably, Peleman and colleagues (2019[19]) highlighted a limited emphasis on language acquisition in pre-primary education as well as low verbal interactions between teachers and young non-Dutch speaking students, which they attributed to teachers’ lack of awareness and time, associated with large numbers of toddlers per teacher. This will become even more of a challenge in the context of increasing numbers of children under the age of five with a home language other than Dutch. In the school year 2020-21, 26% of pupils in pre-primary education did not speak Dutch at home, up from 18% a decade before (Statistics Flanders, 2022[20]).

The Flemish secondary educational system is highly stratified and tracks children early

In the Flemish secondary educational system, track choice (and therefore often school choice) plays a decisive role in the organisation of schooling. The secondary education system consists of three stages within six school years (see Figure 6.7).

The first two years in secondary education, when students are typically between 12 and 14 years old, are organised in two streams (A and B) depending notably on children’s school performance at the end of primary school. Pupils need to obtain a certificate of primary school to access the A stream. Moving to the B stream for those who obtained this certificate is conditional on getting a consensus from the parents, the school board as well as the Pupils Guidance Centre. Most students follow the A stream (87%). A considerable share of the most disadvantaged pupils and those with grade retention in primary education tend to be sorted into the B-track, a track that almost inevitably leads them to the (part-time) vocational track (Van Praag et al., 2017[21]). Measures have been taken recently to increase possibilities to move to the A-stream after a first year in the B-stream. However, it is still rarely the case in practice, and most pursue a second year in the B-stream. In fact, it is much more frequent that pupils move to the B-stream after one year in the A-stream. A qualitative survey conducted by (Juchtmans et al., 2020[22]) showed that some primary schools use their additional Equal Education Opportunity teaching hours (see Box 6.1) to prepare disadvantaged students to enrol in the less prestigious B-track or to organise a kind of ‘early tracking’ via homogeneous level groups, which is in contradiction with what the policy is aiming for.

At the end of the first stage, usually at the age of 14, pupils are grouped into four tracks, each of which comprises particular fields of study. The second and third stages of secondary education, when students are between 14 and 18 years old, usually last for two years each. Moving from the second to the third stage, the education and training provided is more and more targeted to adapt to students’ further education plans.

the general track (ASO) offers a broad general education programme preparing students for tertiary education.
the technical track (TSO) offers a mix of general, technical, theoretical, and practical subjects that prepares for a technical occupation or for tertiary education.
the arts track (KSO) combines a broad general education with active arts practice.
the vocational track (BSO) prepares students for entry into the labour market. A 7^th year used to be necessary to get an upper secondary diploma although this is not any more an obligation.

Although an upper secondary diploma allows students to access tertiary education, regardless of the educational track they graduated from, it is especially the academic track (as well as some study fields in the technical track) that prepares students for higher education.

The general track is perceived and represented as the most prestigious track and the vocational track is located at the bottom of the hierarchy (Van Houtte, Demanet and Stevens, 2012[23]). Moreover, and given this hierarchy, the Flemish educational system is also known for its frequent down-streaming and the absence of upstreaming students. Mobility between the different tracks almost only occurs in one direction and once students end up in the vocational track, they can almost never climb up this hierarchy and change tracks. Students who move to a different track often have to change schools and build new connections with teachers and other students (Van Praag et al., 2017[21]).

Figure 6.7. Early sorting and “waterfall” tracking system limit educational upward mobility

In principle, students (and their parents) are not only free to choose their school, but also to select which track they enrol in for their first year of secondary school, and then continue or “stream down” based on their school performance. However, studies show that, even when their educational performance is the same, school staff orient students with migrant parents much more often to lower-status tracks than their peers with native-born parents (Unia, 2018[24]). Similar practices occur along lines of students’ socio-economic characteristics (Boone and Van Houtte, 2013[5]). As a result, the segregation between tracks is at the same time a segregation along students’ socio-economic background and parentage.

Figures from the Department of Education and Training for the 2020-21 academic year confirm that many students tend to gradually move towards the vocational track over the course of the three secondary school stages, but that this is especially true for students with a home language other than Dutch (see Figure 6.8). Already at the start of secondary school, one in five pupils with a home language other than Dutch were in the B-track, compared to 11% for other pupils. While pupils can in theory freely move from one stream to the other, in practice, again, mobility only happens in one direction towards less prestigious, vocational, streams. By the third stage of secondary education, when pupils are between 16 and18 years old, almost four in ten pupils with a home language different from Dutch were in the vocational track, compared to 25% for other pupils.

As a result, in the third stage of secondary education, when pupils are typically between 16 and 18 years old, those who do not speak Dutch at home are strongly overrepresented in the vocational track and underrepresented in the general and technical tracks (see Figure 6.8).

Figure 6.8. Pupils who do not speak Dutch at home increasingly “end up” in the vocational track

Youth with migrant parents are often concentrated in the same secondary schools

Flemish schools are typically organised around specific tracks and provide most of their education within either the academic or the technical and vocational tracks. At the same time, the free school choice principle guarantees (to a certain extent) that students or their parents can select (or avoid) certain schools. As a result, the segregation between tracks also becomes apparent in the segregation between schools along socio-economic background and parentage (Van Caudenberg, Clycq and Timmerman, 2020[25]).

A key challenge for school allocation in Flanders is the strong parental involvement in school choice. In case of shortage in secondary school capacity, a registration system is used and parents are asked to rank their preferred schools. This puts migrant families who are more likely to have limited knowledge of the Flemish educational system at a disadvantage. In addition, schools have the legal obligation to communicate to parents how the enrolment process works. They also must report on the places they have available. However, not all schools have social mix policies in place, and some do not communicate widely to reach all families. As a result, information on school enrolment procedures is often provided informally and families with more resources frequently fill up available spots in the most sought-after schools while some immigrant parents have trouble finding their way. Finally, the cost of more privileged schools is often an obstacle for lower-income families.

Although the situation has evolved favourably since the implementation of the EEO policy in 2002, the educational landscape in Flanders remains very segregated compared to peer educational systems (Havermans, Wouters and Groenez, 2018[26]). Figure 6.9 compares the distribution of students with a home language other than Dutch across the 970 secondary schools with the distribution of all students in those schools in school years 2010-11 and 2021-22. It shows that students with a home language other than Dutch are more concentrated in the same schools than other students. In the school year 2021-22, nearly 40% of the students with a home language other than Dutch were concentrated in 10% of the secondary schools. This share is nearly twice as high than for all students. This represents however an improvement over the situation in 2010-11, when around half of students with a home language other than Dutch were enrolled in 10% of the schools.

Figure 6.9. Pupils with a home language other than Dutch are heavily concentrated in the same schools

Additionally, research for Flanders shows that school segregation has a negative impact on school performance through peer effects (e.g. stimulating environment, motivation, discipline and school climate), the adaptation of teachers’ pedagogical methods to their expectations of students, and the quality of the school and its organisation (e.g. teacher absences, staff turnover, type of leadership). Harker and Tymms (2004[27]), Thrupp (2002[28]), Danhier and Jacobs (2017[7]) and Agirdag, Van Houtte and Van Avermaet (2011[29]) also demonstrate that socio-economically disadvantaged students in segregated schools were more prone to develop a culture of futility, which was averse to their school performance.

Figure 6.10 shows that the school performance gap between native-born students with migrant parents who are educated in highly concentrated schools and those who are educated in less concentrated schools is larger in Flanders than in many other European OECD countries. The penalty extends to nearly two years of schooling for pupils in the highest quartile of concentration, the highest gap in OECD comparison. The education of the individual pupils’ mother and the language spoken at home explain only 25% of this penalty. However, as in most countries, the penalty disappears once accounting for the overall higher proportion of low-educated mothers in schools where pupils with migrant parents are most concentrated. This finding suggests that it is rather the overall concentration of socio-economically disadvantaged pupils that matters, rather than the individual characteristics of pupils, such as the language they speak at home or their mother’s level of education.

Figure 6.10. High concentration of native-born pupils with migrant parents in the same schools is negatively correlated with their school performance in reading

Box 6.2. Flanders’ local initiative “School in sight” aims to bring more middle-class families into concentrated schools

The Flemish project “School in sight” (School in Zicht) aims at supporting middle-class parents (both native-born and immigrant) who deliberately choose to enrol their children in a “concentration school”, i.e. a school with a large share of disadvantaged students which is nearby their home. The project starts from the premise that there are many open-minded, middle-class parents who would like to enrol their children in such local schools but are hesitant to do so out of concern that their children will be isolated. “School in sight” attempts to reassure parents by providing ample information about these schools and by facilitating the opportunity for middle-class parents to enrol their children together with other middle-class families. There are six medium-sized Flemish cities where the project is active (Mechelen, Hasselt, Lokeren, Molenbeek, Tienen, and Zele).

Source: OECD field mission; https://www.schoolinzicht.be/.

The quality of the part-time vocational track is poor, and a reform of the dual learning programme is ongoing

Students who have completed the first two stages of secondary education can transition to part-time education and work-based learning starting at the age of 16. Despite a drastic reform in 2008, the Learning and Working programme continues to be perceived as the least prestigious option within the secondary education system, the one where pupils end up rather than deliberately choose to be enrolled (Broek, 2020[31]). Although designed for an immediate entry into the labour market, the programme shows poor outcomes. The three options are:

i. part-time vocational secondary education (Deeltijds beroepssecundair onderwijs, DBSO), which combines two days of schooling in one of the Centres for Part-time education and three days in a company. They lead to an upper secondary education diploma including a VET qualification.
ii. apprenticeship (leertijd) organised by the regional Syntra Vlaanderen training centres, composed of one schooling day and three to four working days. Graduates receive a vocational qualification and an upper secondary education diploma. These programmes are also accessible to young adults up to 25 years old.
iii. part-time training programmes (duaal leren) have been implemented from September 2019 and will progressively replace the two current apprenticeship schemes described above. Selected professional fields are now covered in technical and vocational upper secondary education programmes.

The secondary vocational education was reformed with the objective of progressively moving to a full dual learning system. After a three-year pilot partially financed by ESF, dual learning has been implemented since 2019-20. Despite a slow down as a cause of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is still planned that it will progressively absorb the existing Learning and Working programmes by 2026-27. Previous programmes were merely designed to support particularly disadvantaged pupils. In 2020-21, DBSO still represented 75% of the Learning and Working options, and Dual Learning accounted for 15% of the total (Flemish Department of Work and Social Economy, 2021[32]).

The new Dual Learning Programme (duaal leren) gained some popularity with 2 800 students taking dual learning courses in 2021-22 (compared with 2 300 the previous year). Unfortunately, the Flemish Department of Work only publishes statistics by nationality, showing an underrepresentation of foreigners in Dual Learning.

While Dual Learning offers an interesting setting to improve the quality of vocational education, uncertainties remain about the ability of the most vulnerable students to benefit fully from this programme. The shift from traditional vocational training, such as DBSO and apprenticeships, to dual learning carries the risk that some students may face difficulties entering the introductory phase of dual education due to insufficient Dutch language or soft skills. Consequently, these students may find themselves in a precarious position, unable to pursue mainstream secondary education and yet not fitting into the dual education system. Ultimately, this may raise the likelihood of early school dropout if support is not provided to alleviate these obstacles.

Finally, there are still remaining challenges. In particular, additional funds received by the school to scale up the new Dual learning programme are only a fraction of the global budget, without control over its use or earmarking to specific needs. It is therefore possible that some schools, in particular those which do not have well developed social policies, use it for other purposes.

Repeating a grade is a common practice that does not help performing at school

In Flanders, a relatively high share of students repeats a grade. In 2018, 23% of the 15-year-olds reported that they repeated a grade at least once, compared to 15% on average for the countries included in Figure 6.11. Although grade repetition is most common in primary education, it also occurs regularly in lower and upper secondary education, partly due to the relatively long length of compulsory education in Flanders (5 to 18 years old) (Nusche et al., 2015[10]).

Native-born students with migrant parents are more likely to have repeated a grade than their peers with native-born parents in Flanders, as is the case in the majority of European OECD countries. However, the gap in the retention rate between students with and without migrant parents is nowhere as large as in Flanders (except in Belgium). In 2018, the retention rate at school was more than twice as high for native-born students with migrant parents than for their peers with native-born parents. Although grade repetition is intended to offer students additional time to catch up with their peers, in reality, there is no evidence that it results in reducing the educational gap between the two groups.

Figure 6.11. Native-born children with migrant parents are much more likely to repeat a grade

Overall, those who repeated a grade are more likely to drop out from school early and achieve lower levels of formal education. While less than 1% of students who never repeated a grade drop out of school, this is the case for more than 11% of those who repeated once and 32% for those that repeated twice and 46% who repeated more than twice (Statistics Flanders, 2022[33]). Grade repeating students are also less likely to access tertiary education. While more than three in five adults who never repeated a grade were highly educated, this is only the case for 27% of those who repeated at least once (FPS Employment and Unia, 2022[34]).

Native-born youth in Flanders who repeated a grade have lower employment rates than their peers who did not repeat a grade, irrespective of their parents’ place of birth (FPS Employment and Unia, 2022[34]). This finding is potentially related with them struggling in the education system in the first place. However, the group of native-born youth with Sub-Saharan-born parents deserves attention in this respect. The employment rate of those aged 25-34 years old who are tertiary educated but had repeated a grade is very low – at only 60%, a full 15 percentage points below their peers who did not repeat a grade. It also stands out against a still very high employment rate of 92% of their likewise tertiary educated peers with native-born parents who also repeated a grade.

Figure 6.12. Youngsters who repeated a grade are less likely to be employed

Teachers are not prepared for teaching in a multicultural setting

Nearly 50% of lower secondary school teachers in Flanders work in classrooms where more than 10% of the students have a home language other than Dutch (OECD, 2019[35]). Only Sweden and Austria record higher shares in this respect.

Since 2013, Flanders has made attempts to increase participation of teachers in professional training initiatives aimed at strengthening teaching in multicultural or multilingual settings. Indeed, according to the TALIS survey, the share of Flemish teachers who had recent training for teaching in a multicultural setting has increased from 8% in 2013 to 18% in 2018. Yet, participation in such training remains well below the OECD average (22%), and according to the same survey, only 17% of the Flemish teachers reported feeling (very) well prepared for teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting in 2018 (OECD, 2019[35]).

In international comparison, the preparation to teach in (pre-)primary and lower secondary is relatively short. As is the case in other OECD countries, a master’s degree is required for teaching at upper secondary schools. However, for (pre-)primary to lower secondary education, a three-year bachelor programme is the norm in Flanders, which is short in international comparison. Flanders is also one of the few OECD countries that allows a short-cycle tertiary qualification for prospective teachers of vocational subjects (1.5 years for both lower secondary and upper secondary vocational subjects).

In addition, there is no general requirement to become a teacher and each school is free to define its own recruitment criteria, creating some disparity in teacher skills. Support for beginning teachers as well as part of the content of the training (inclusion of educational science studies and child/adolescent development studies) are left at the discretion of individual schools. This set-up also makes the teaching profession less attractive to high achieving students potentially interested to become a teacher. These challenges, combined with additional elements such as a heavy administrative burden and high job insecurity at the outset of the professional career, help explain why Flanders experiences a severe teacher shortage. According to data from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), a third of principals in lower secondary schools in Flanders report that the shortages of qualified teachers hinder the school’s capacity to provide quality instruction, which is a high share in international standards (see Figure 6.13.).

Figure 6.13. Flanders experiences a shortage of teachers

Along with the lack of qualified teachers, there are also challenges with how teachers are distributed across schools, with schools with a high concentration of disadvantaged students – especially in the Flemish centre cities – encountering more difficulties in recruiting qualified and experienced teachers (Nusche et al., 2015[10]). Overall, two-thirds of lower secondary teachers in Flanders have at least ten years of teaching experience. However, the share of experienced teachers is 14 percentage points lower in schools with a high concentration of disadvantaged students than in schools with a low concentration of such students (OECD, 2019[35]).

Other OECD countries have faced similar challenges in attracting and retaining qualified teachers to schools with a high concentration of disadvantaged students. Some OECD countries introduced incentives such as higher salaries or more attractive working conditions. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of such schemes is mixed. Evidence from the United States suggests that if salary increases are substantial, they can make a difference: in North Carolina, a USD 1 800 retention bonus for certified teachers who work in concentrated schools reduced teacher turnover by 17%. Korea also offers teachers a higher wage to entice them to work in schools with a high concentration of disadvantaged students (OECD, 2021[9]).

Yet, such policy incentives are only effective if teachers are confident working with pupils whose parents are migrants. In the United Kingdom, the Department for Children, Schools and Families introduced in 2004 a professional development programme to provide teachers in primary education with more knowledge and confidence to meet the needs of bilingual students. The scheme produced promising results in terms of students’ second language skills but did not affect their math and science test results.

Early school leaving is less of a problem in Flanders

The proportion of early school leavers in Flanders 2 is low when compared to other European OECD countries. In 2021, only 5% of the 18-to-24-year-olds reported being low-educated and not currently in education, compared to 10% on average in the EU. The fact that compulsory education ends at 18 in Flanders and that vocational education allows getting an upper secondary degree are the main factors that contribute to the overall positive outcome.

However, native-born students with migrant parents are more likely than their peers with native-born parents to leave school early, even after controlling for socio-economic background characteristics. In 2020, one in five students in secondary education who do not speak Dutch at home left school early, compared to 6% of those who speak Dutch at home (Statistics Flanders, 2022[33]). Several factors help explain the higher risk for immigrant offspring to leave school early. Van Praag and colleagues (2020[36]) show that pupils at risk of dropping out have often followed complex and erratic educational trajectories, lacked guidance at school and made orientation choices heavily driven by short-term financial and living conditions constraints. Van Praag and Clycq (2019[37]) additionally find that the decision to leave school and search for work was in some cases fuelled by the idea that work experience was equivalent to an educational qualification. Many of the youth realised after some time in often instable employment that work experience could not make up for the lack of educational credentials, and some decided to re-enter the formal schooling system. This research shows that informing youth with migrant parents about the importance of educational attainment is indeed crucial.

Many initiatives have been launched in Flanders to reduce the share of early school leavers. As part of the Action Plan on Early School Leaving (Actieplan Samen tegen Schooluitval), the Flemish Government developed in 2016 a comprehensive strategy to tackle school absenteeism and early school leaving. The Department of Education and Training has since launched other initiatives. To assist students (and their parents) in locating comprehensive information on education programmes and institutions, a website called Onderwijskiezer was developed. It has a section built especially for people without a diploma that offers details on all viable study paths for second-chance education. Already established in 2000, “Pupil Guidance Centres” also help to prevent early school leaving and create more equal educational opportunities (see Box 6.3).

Another way to inform youth with migrant parents about the importance of formal education is to connect them with other youths from similar backgrounds. A project from Austria focuses on this link. The so-called Integration Ambassadors are part of the broader “Together Austria” initiative, and the scheme encourages successful youngsters with migrant parents to become “ambassadors of integration”. They visit schools to motivate other youth to see education as an opportunity and to make full use of the existing career options (OECD, 2021[9]).

Box 6.3. How Pupils’ Guidance Centres support disadvantaged pupils

Pupils Guidance Centre setting

The Flemish Parliament Act of 27 April 2018 reformed the policy on student guidance, with the term “pupil guidance” now referring to the specific responsibilities of schools and Pupil Guidance Centres (CLB). Additional funds were allocated to CLBs in September 2022 to strengthen their core services.

Each school is responsible for developing its own policy on pupil guidance, which must address four areas of counselling: educational career, learning and studying, psychological and social functioning, and preventive healthcare. The school also appoints a pupil counsellor and is supported by its local CLB.

CLBs assume the responsibility of pupils’ guidance and guidance throughout their entire school career, ensuring a comprehensive approach to pupils’ well-being. There are 72 such centres in Flanders, providing quality pupil guidance services to foster the complete development of all pupils, prevent early school leaving, and create equal education opportunities.

CLBs support schools, parents, and pupils through a signaling function, consultative pupil guidance, reception, question clarification, and guidance. They perform action-oriented diagnostics to gather more information about a pupil’s needs, provide action-oriented advice, counsel pupils themselves, or refer pupils to school-external organisations.

To ensure that pupils’ diverse needs are met, schools and pupil guidance centres work within the framework of the “continuum of care”. Broad basic care (level 0) is given to all pupils, with increased care (Level 1) and elaboration of care (Level 2) provided to those who need it. A customised curriculum in a school for mainstream education or a report that grants access to a special educational needs school (Level 3 IAC) may result from elaboration of care.

Schools are required to register pupils’ absenteeism and pay special attention to problematic absence, adopting a school-wide approach to this issue. If a pupil misses five or more half days of school for no legitimate reason, the school must follow the guidelines laid down by the Flemish Government, informing its CLB and co-operating with it to provide further guidance to the pupil. However, the end responsibility for following up on absenteeism and guiding pupils lies with the school.

Finally, CLBs help establish connections with appropriate support organisations. They co-operate closely with the Integrated Youth Assistance, a system of co-operation between different sectors of youth care to ensure well-aligned and efficient assistance to students in need. When pupils leave school, with or without a diploma, CLBs are not authorised to provide them with further guidance. They can, however, help identify adult learning options.

(Van Avermaet et al., 2017[38]) noted a deficient involvement of CLB in the area of study choice and orientation towards mainstream education. (Kis, 2010[39]) showed that quality of guidance varied greatly across CLBs and that staff was overall lacking skills on career prospects and learning opportunities.

A reform of educational guidance services came into force in September 2022. These services received additional funds to reinforce the professional competence of the staff members of the educational institutions and CLBs. It is also planned to better target CLB that need additional support.

Sources: Nusche et al. (2015[10]); Background report of Belgium/Flemish community (2015), https://www.oecd.org/education/school-resources-review/; Flemish Educational Council (2013[14]), Analytical report: Education for pupils with a migrant background in Flanders, https://eunec.eu/sites/www.eunec.eu/files/members/attachments/analytical_report.pdf.

The Equal Educational Opportunity policy hardly compensates for socio-economic disadvantages

The effectiveness of the EEO policy has long been a concern in Flanders. Recent evaluations show non-significant or only minor effects of the EEO policy on the impact of socio-economic background as a determinant for pupils’ outcomes within and across schools. (De Witte, Smett and Van Assche, 2017[40]) looked at problematic absenteeism, school performance and grade retention and did not find any significant effect of the EEO funding on the observed outcomes. (Tierens, Smet and De Witte, 2020[41]) examined whether the effect of the proportion of disadvantaged pupils in a (primary) school on educational outcomes differed before and after the introduction of the EEO policy in 2012. They found that it reduced the effect of concentration of disadvantaged pupils in schools on the likelihood for students to repeat a grade, but that this trend had already started before the introduction of the new policy and continued after its introduction. They also investigated the transition from primary to secondary school as measured by the transition to the academic A stream – first and then second year – (versus the less prestigious B stream) without repeating a grade and found no improvement after 2012. This research has also shown that the introduction of the EEO policy had only a small effect on pupils’ school performance and did not succeed in reducing the gap between disadvantaged pupils and other pupils. One of the issues mentioned by the authors is the difficulty for schools with very high concentrations of disadvantaged students to effectively implement EEO measures. They observed that certain schools and teachers lowered their expectations for these disadvantaged students and frequently employed extra teaching hours to prepare students for the B stream in the first year of secondary education, which typically leads to the vocational track. (Juchtmans et al., 2020[22]) found similar results.

Stricter control over the use of additional SES teaching hours was implemented from 2021-22 in preschools and primary schools (see Box 6.1). The impact of this recent policy change could not be evaluated in the context of this review. In secondary education, several features can explain the low impact of the EEO policy. As discussed above (see Box 6.1), additional teaching hours are only allocated to secondary education schools if the proportion of disadvantaged students reaches a certain threshold (10% in first stage of secondary education and 25% in second and third stages of secondary education). It is noteworthy that there is no such allocation of additional teaching hours in part-time vocational secondary education (DBSO). In the school year 2019-20, 16 628 additional hours were allocated to 669 secondary schools, or less than 2% of the total number of teaching hours in all schools. This means that eligible schools received on average 25 additional hours. However, support is primarily focused on primary education and the first stage of secondary education, while less teaching hours are allocated to the second and third stages of secondary education and only schools registering at least 25% of disadvantaged students are eligible. While stronger support at a young age makes sense, lowering support from the second stage of secondary education (from the age of 14, if no grade repetition) may result in fragmented support for students that most need it.

In addition, the fact that additional teaching hours in secondary education schools are strictly proportional to the number of disadvantaged pupils combined with the absence of guidance provided to schools by the government, results in complex implementation issues. For instance, additional teaching hours may not be sufficient to recruit a full-time additional teacher. Attracting part-time qualified staff may be difficult in a context of shortage in teachers. Allocating extra hours to teachers in place may not be optimal, notably if the teacher has not received a proper training. Finally, the weight per individual disadvantaged pupil ranges from 0.18 to 1.2 (capped). Previous section has demonstrated that segregation in schools was particularly detrimental to native-born pupils with migrant parents in secondary education. Further analysis would be needed to check whether capping the weight at 1.2 per individual disadvantaged pupil is not associated with insufficient language support in segregated schools.

Furthermore, the EEO policy’s lack of specific objectives and standards for evaluation is problematic. Little guidance is provided by the government to secondary education schools regarding how and why they should use the additional resources. There is no guarantee that all schools will use the additional funds in the best way possible without explicit guidelines, objectively stated goals, and clarity regarding expected outcomes. In their report for the Flemish Parliament, The Court of Auditors (2017[42]) notes that school-specific actions based on the additional EEO resources are frequently not appropriately targeted. Whereas in the first three EEO cycles (2002-12), a school specific EEO policy had to be developed within prescribed themes, since 2012, schools are free to choose their strategy (providing it aims at realising “equal educational opportunities”). Heterogeneous and non-optimal use of additional resources has resulted from the autonomy of school staff combined with a lack of insight on goals and sometimes not enough policy-developing ability (notably in more disadvantaged school contexts). In particular, (Groenez et al., 2015[43]) noted that schools and school boards do not necessarily use additional funding for strictly pedagogical purposes. Possible factors at play are again the lack of government guidance in the use of additional resources; the unequal starting position of schools, the inequalities in the policy-making capacity of schools as well as the limited support from some parents.

While the Flemish education system is characterised by a large extra investment in schools with an underprivileged public in the form of additional teaching hours, teachers in underprivileged schools tend to be significantly less educated and/or less experienced (see above).

Providing flexible education pathways for youth born abroad

In most OECD countries, young people who arrive in the country past the start of primary education face a higher risk of falling behind in the school system compared to their native-born peers and those who arrive at a younger age. As students who migrate at compulsory school age need to adapt to a new language of instruction immediately, they need flexible education pathways and elaborate language support (OECD, 2021[9]). To ensure that new arrivals have sufficient time to adapt to their new school environment and catch up with the demands of the new education system, Flanders has since 1995 established reception education. Reception education in primary and secondary education is a specific and temporary kind of education provision that aims to teach newly arrived minors without any knowledge of the Dutch language – the language of instruction – as soon as possible and promote their integration into the Flemish school system.

The demand for reception education increased over recent years

Newly arrived youth make up a large share of the total migrant inflow in Flanders. Between 2010 and 2020, the region registered an average of 10 000 minors (aged between 2 to 17) each year, accounting for close to one fifth of the total migrant inflow. The age composition of newly arrived minors was relatively constant over the past decade: roughly one-third was aged between 2 and 5, another third was aged between 6 and 11, and a final third was aged between 12 and 18. In 2022, Flanders received a record number of newly arrived minors due to the large inflow of Ukrainian refugees (see Box 6.5).

Primary schools are largely autonomous in how to organise reception of non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived pupils. Within 60 days after being registered in a Flemish municipality, newly arrived migrants under the age of 12 must register at a primary school. Primary schools can then either integrate them into mainstream classes through extra (language) support and flexible programmes, or they provide short-term separate reception classes of maximum 5 weeks (wereldklasjes) which focus on introducing the Dutch language and improving the children’s well-being and independency. Most primary schools integrate non-Dutch-speaking newcomers in existing classes as it is often presumed that children easily learn a new language at a young age. Moreover, schools often lack a critical mass of new arrivals to organise separate welcome classes. Indeed, only from a certain number of non-Dutch-speaking new arrivals (from four pupils for pre-primary schools and from six pupils for primary schools), can schools apply for additional teaching hours. Once this threshold is reached, schools receive one and a half teaching hours per non-Dutch-speaking pupil, and four additional teaching hours per primary school that offers reception classes.3 Primary schools can apply to extend this setting to pupils who arrived in Flanders the previous year and already benefitted from reception education.

In March 2022, there were 3 554 non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived pupils in primary education and 572 different schools shared 5 640 extra teaching hours – or 235 FTE teachers – to organise extra support for these pupils.4 As evidenced by the OECD field mission, partnership between primary and secondary schools located in the same area, are promising. Taking non-Dutch speaking newly arrived pupils in their final year of primary education out of the World class allows them to benefit from the OKAN offer in secondary education and smoothens their transition to secondary education.

In secondary education, non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived migrant students participate in full-time separate reception classes (OnthaalKlas voor Anderstalige Nieuwkomers, OKAN), organised within mainstream secondary schools spread across Flanders. Students can enter a reception class when they are between 12 and 18 years old, have not been in Belgium longer than one year, have not Dutch as their mother tongue, and have not mastered the Dutch language sufficiently enough to enter mainstream secondary education, and have not been enrolled in a Dutch-speaking school for more than 9 months. Still, the Class Council can also deviate from the conditions regarding age, length of stay and school career. Secondary schools that offer OKAN classes are entitled to a specific package of 2.5 teaching hours per non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived migrant student. Although there is no regulation to limit the duration of the OKAN programme, in practice, pupils generally follow this programme over a school year and eventually benefit from a one-year extension. Schools generally aim for enrolment in mainstream education as soon as possible, preferably after one full academic year of reception education. The weekly schedule in OKAN classes consists of a minimum of 28 slots of 50 minutes, of which at least 22 slots need to be spent on learning the Dutch language (with a strong focus on reading skills and vocabulary) and 2 hours dedicated to philosophical subjects. That means that schools are free to determine the content of at least six slots with other school subjects. Over the 2017-21 period, the number of schools that offered OKAN classes increased from 86 to 94. The number of non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived migrant students in Flemish secondary education also rose significantly, from around 4 300 in 2017-18 (0.87% of the total student population) to around 5 400 in 2020-21 (1.14% of the total).

Reception education is rather fragmented…

Newly arrived migrant students come from a variety of backgrounds. In the school year 2019-20, 38% had a nationality from either Afghanistan (17%), Somalia (8%), Syria (6%), Palestine (4%) or Iraq (3%). Another 13% had a Bulgarian, Romanian or Spanish nationality. Newly arrived migrant students often have a relatively weak socio-economic background. In the school year 2020-21, 64% had a low-educated mother, compared to 23% in the total student population. At the same time, 58% lived in a neighbourhood where at least 25% of the 15-year-olds had a school retention of two years or more, compared to 25% in the total student population.

Secondary schools that offer OKAN classes are hence confronted with the situation of having to prepare newly arrived migrant students who differ greatly in socio-economic background, do not yet understand the complex Flemish education system and who often have high educational aspirations (Pulinx et al., 2017[44]).This situation is set in a context where schools have few legislative guidelines on how to organise reception education (Kemper et al., 2022[45]). Legislation explicitly states that reception classes are aimed “at the widest possible audience while at the same time offer the possibility to differentiate according to individual needs” (Kemper et al., 2022[45]). Many schools have therefore developed their own classification approach. Most of the time, schools make use of “ability groups” in which students are supposed to stay in until the end of the OKAN programme. The highly diverse group of students is allocated into groups after only a couple of weeks in reception education. In practice, the “ability groups” lead to different tracks, and this is anticipated by differentiating the pace, academic standards, and curricula between the groups. The most important factor that is looked at when dividing the students is how quickly they are expected to learn Dutch. Furthermore, the Flemish hierarchical education system with early tracking clearly affects the orientation of OKAN students, whereby the highest ability group is reserved for students who are expected to progress to general or technical secondary education (Emery, Spruyt and Van Avermaet, 2021[46]).

The classification of students based on their estimated capacities hence becomes a very determining factor in the educational career of OKAN students. Yet typically very little is known about these students’ educational background and abilities. In addition, few formal assessment tools are available to teachers to assist them in allocating newly arrived students to groups. Both factors imply that the uncertainty typically associated with the classification is large. The fact that this classification is mainly based on non-standardised tests and teacher assessments which are designed unilaterally to gauge how quickly students learn Dutch, means that the potential of students who need more time to master the language of instruction is systematically underestimated. This helps to explain why the diverse group of OKAN students has a very homogeneous orientation towards more professionally oriented fields of study in secondary education (Pulinx et al., 2017[44]; Kemper et al., 2022[45]).

Another challenge takes place when non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived migrant students switch to another school because of relocation. Schools often lack detailed follow-up files on OKAN students’ progress, such as the competences that the student has already acquired. OKAN schools often work in a completely different way, which makes switching to another school very difficult. Finally, the evaluation systems and reporting differ greatly from school to school, so that the new school often has difficulties in interpreting the reports from the previous school.

…and embeddedness in mainstream education remains a challenge…

The embeddedness of reception education in the educational system is also a challenge. Reception programmes often operate as an entity on their own, isolated from the “main school” (i.e. the part of the school that is responsible for mainstream education), sometimes even physically. The responsibility to incorporate newly arrived migrant students in the educational system is almost solely assigned to reception education, without asking major adjustments from the secondary education system itself. This is reflected in the fact that the responsibility for the formal support for former OKAN students throughout their whole school career lies with further education coaches (vervolgschoolcoaches), who belong to the staff of reception education.5 Few secondary schools have, for example, developed a clear language policy and structural accommodation for newly arrived migrant students, even though these could boost the students’ chances for succeeding, especially in the more academic tracks (Pulinx et al., 2017[44]).

A valuable tool to increase the interaction between reception and mainstream education is the so-called “sniffing internship” (snuffelstage), during which OKAN students can experience the life and ways of the regular school. Some secondary schools have also started to integrate OKAN students with other students during music or sport classes or have allowed students to follow classes in mainstream education after being in reception education for a certain period. Other schools encourage teachers from mainstream education to take on a few teaching hours in reception education, during which expertise on teaching multilingual students is actively shared between teachers in reception and mainstream education. Nevertheless, such initiatives remain the exception to the rule (Kemper et al., 2022[45]).

…leading to poor transitions from reception to mainstream education

At the end of the school year, non-Dutch-speaking migrant students who have attended the reception year as a regular student receive a certificate confirming their attendance. The class council of the reception education then gives an advice considering the transition of the student to further education. No specific level of competency in the Dutch language is required to make the transition to mainstream education: OKAN teachers and the class council decide when the student is ready to make the transition, taking account of the admission requirements. In practice, this will primarily mean that entry into regular education takes place either based on a decision by the class admissions council or based on age. The admissions council must consider the advice from the class council of the reception education. Every decision that diverges from this advice must be justified in detail.

Not all secondary schools offer reception education, so students often change school when they transition from OKAN into mainstream secondary education.

As discussed before, regular secondary education in Flanders is characterised by early tracking, which implies that the study choice migrant students make after reception education is decisive for their educational career. Newly arrived migrant students can transfer into any grade of any track after reception education but are strongly overrepresented in the vocational track. Table 6.1 provides an overview of the general distribution of newly arrived students after they have followed one or two school years of reception education, for school year 2017-18. As newly arrived students can start reception education at any time during the school year, a considerable proportion of them (36%) follow a second year of reception education. About 26% enter the first stage where there is no formal tracking. Of those who enter regular education in the second or third stages, approximately 17% enrol in the most prestigious track (i.e. general education). The majority (51%) enrol in vocational education (compared with 24% for students who are not newly arrived migrants). Completing a second year of reception education does not change the distribution of OKAN students across tracks.

The main criterion for assigning ex-OKAN students to education tracks is their level of Dutch language skills. Due to this role of Dutch as the de facto entry ticket into regular education and because Dutch is often viewed as the most important key to school success, the acquisition of Dutch becomes conflated with students’ general academic ability. High aspirations are only realistic when students easily acquire Dutch. In addition, as OKAN mainly focuses on Dutch language acquisition, the set-up allows little to no time for classes in French, mathematics, science, English, and digital skills, despite these competencies being essential to enable a transition to the general or technical track. As a result, despite migrant students’ great intrinsic motivation and existing competencies, they often end up in part-time education, vocational education or leave without a qualification. Newly arrived students also often face a double disadvantage of coming from migrant and socio-economically disadvantaged families. Specifically, newly arrived migrant students are often one or two school years behind compared to their age cohort when they enter secondary education; have a higher chance of having to repeat a year; are greatly over-represented in the vocational track and are more likely to leave secondary education early and unqualified. School absenteeism is also a serious problem among former OKAN students. This picture contrasts with research showing that newly arrived migrant students often have high educational aspirations (Pulinx et al., 2017[44]).

Table 6.1. Newly arrived migrant students are strongly overrepresented in the vocational track
Distribution of non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived migrant students over different tracks in percentage, school year 2017-18, secondary education, Flanders
	Non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived students		Other students
	After first year of reception education	After second year of reception education	Other students
Second year of reception education	36
First stage	26
Second and third stages	37
Of which:
General track (ASO)	17	17	43
Technical track (TSO)	30	30	31
Artistic track (KSO)	2	2	2
Vocational track (BSO)	51	51	24
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on data from the Department of Education and Training.

Some vulnerable groups require specific attention going forward

Many children and youth are not prepared for immediate schooling when they arrive in Flanders. Some need psychosocial support to overcome their difficulties before joining the educational system. Refugee students, who drove the recent increases, often experienced trauma and an interrupted school career which makes their integration into education even more challenging. Among this group, non-accompanied minors are most vulnerable.

Initiatives on having psychological and social support at school are underdeveloped in Flanders. As was evidenced by the OECD field mission, some cities, like Mechelen, set an example by employing education assistants to help vulnerable students both in and outside the school context. However, there are no region-wide structures or policies to ensure psychological and social support in schools. Instead, in most cases, OKAN-teachers have to deal with these vulnerable youth, in addition to their already high work pressure and fluctuating hours of support. This situation adds to the challenge of retaining qualified OKAN teachers and results in high staff turnover. Teachers also report a challenge to set realistic goals and find a way to smoothen the transition to school. While guardians and authorities want the youth to start with school as quickly as possible, many teachers feel that many young refugee arrivals are not ready for school.

Particularly challenging is the situation of students who arrive during their teenage years with little prior formal education, low literacy skills and learning difficulties. Students from that age have very low chances to succeed in a regular secondary school – even after their two-year OKAN training. A repeated concern is that these students need more time to become proficient in Dutch but at the same time would need to develop other academic skills to succeed in ordinary education. Thus, simply staying longer in the reception programme does not meet all their needs.

When turning 18, migrant students reach the end of compulsory schooling, but many are still in need of additional education and training. Those who arrived during adolescence require targeted and ongoing follow-up, in the form of further studies and training at Centres for Adult Education. A key problem for this group is low Dutch language skills, even after one or two years of reception education. As a result, many young migrant students do not meet the language requirements (often at the A2 level) to enrol in standard further education or training.

Newcomers that are nearly 18 and have attended one year of reception education, no longer have the opportunity to follow a community integration trajectory for adults. To create a better starting position for 17-19 year-olds who are in the transition from (reception) education to work or further training, the integration agencies organise a tailor-made civic integration programme mainly during school holidays. It includes the 60-hour civic orientation course that is individually tailored to youth and in addition personal counselling, language training if needed, and further 30 hours for extra group activities. The programme targets migrants with a short school career in Flanders or difficult school-to-work trajectory. Students are selected for the programme during intake with the integration counsellor and outreach is mostly done through information sessions in (OKAN) schools and reception centres for asylum seekers.

Another approach that has been piloted in Antwerp, is to support youth directly in getting to know different professions in a more practical manner. LIGO, the umbrella organisation of the Centres for Adult Basic Education, and partner organisations set up a project called BENO, which stands for Basic Education after OKAN. The BENO project was launched in Antwerp in 2016, and since then, seven other co-operatives have been established across Flanders (see Box 6.4).

For youth who arrive at age 13 to 15, these programmes are not an option, as they are too young to join them even after the two-year OKAN programme. In addition, due to their young age, they are not able to start part-time vocational education yet.

Box 6.4. Supporting adolescent arrivals through the BENO project (Basic Education after OKAN)

BENO offers an additional year of schooling focused on preparation for vocational education. The project targets recent adolescent migrants between the ages of 18 and 22 who, for various reasons, are unable to start working or pursue vocational training after having finished reception classes. The full-time programme generally runs from September to June and includes an intensive Dutch language and literacy course (the target level is A2), hands-on learning in vocational training courses, math, communication and ICT courses, a civic orientation course, and sports lessons.

The Centres for Adult Basic Education provide Dutch language, math, ICT, and communication classes, whereas the Centres for Adult Education organise the vocational training. Vocational training generally consists of two streams: one aimed at technical professions (e.g. woodworking, painting, plumbing, welding, electricity, bike repair) and one aimed at other professions (e.g. catering, care, retail). During the programme, PES and integration counsellors provide students with tailored guidance to orient them towards further vocational education and work.

The BENO programme started in Antwerp, six years ago, and is now active in eight other cities in Flanders. Descriptive data on the BENO programme’s outcomes in Antwerp, the only data available at the time of writing, are promising. Out of 78 migrant students in the programme between 2017 and 2020, after completion, 58 students were enrolled in education (i.e. vocational training, or part-time and second chance education), 13 were employed (including subsidised work) and only 7 were neither in education nor employment. A few months to one year after the programme, these figures changed to 34 in education, 34 in employment and 10 not in employment or education.

Source: OECD field mission; https://www.atlas-antwerpen.be/nl/nieuws/binnenkijken-bij-beno-basiseducatie-na-okan; https://www.vlor.be/‌beno-projecten-basiseducatie-na-okan.

Supporting the school-to-work transition of youth with migrant parents

Large employment rate gaps persist irrespective of educational attainment

In most OECD countries, formal education levels correlate positively with employment rates among youth. In Flanders, the employment gap vis-à-vis the native-born offspring among the medium-educated is almost twice as big as that among the tertiary-educated (20 versus 12 percentage points) (see Figure 6.14). Higher education thus has a positive impact on the labour market integration of the native-born children of immigrants. However, education does not appear to be the only key factor. Indeed, immigrant offspring face a strong penalty even among the tertiary-educated – one of the largest in international comparison.

Figure 6.14. Employment gaps vis-à-vis the children of native-born persist across educational attainment levels

Poorer labour market outcomes among youth with migrant parents result in large part from differences in educational outcomes. Research for Belgium shows that almost three-quarters and one-third of the employment gap vis-à-vis the native-born offspring is explained by these characteristics for children with EU-born parents and non-EU-born parents, respectively (Corluy et al., 2015[47]; National Bank of Belgium, 2020[48]; Piton and Rycx, 2021[49]). Other important factors are that youth with migrant parents have thinner social networks to help them obtain relevant information and improve their opportunities in the job-search process (Verhaeghe, Li and Van De Putte, 2013[50]). They also often lack role models to look up to and remain underrepresented in the public sector. Finally, negative stereotypes and discrimination are further components that complicate the search for a first job and subsequent career advancement (Baert, 2018[51])

Finding a first job takes longer time for youth with migrant parents

Young people under the age of 25 who register for the first time as jobseekers do not immediately receive unemployment benefits. Instead, they first go through a one-year (310 days) professional integration period (beroepsinschakelingstijd). During this period, all these youngsters receive guidance from the PES. They can also follow PES training, but they are not obliged to do so. At the end of this period, if they do not have a job and if certain conditions are met, they are eligible to unemployment benefits.

In 2018, more than 20 000 young people (aged 18-24) registered for the first time as jobseekers in the third quarter of the year (at the end of the school year) in Flanders. Around 15% of them were born in Belgium to foreign or foreign-born parents. About 70% of these native-born offspring of immigrants were medium-skilled.

While nearly 90% of native-born offspring of native-born parents were employed at the end of their professional integration period, this was only the case for three-quarters of native-born youngsters with foreign-born parents. Among them, those with parents born in the EU had higher success rates than those with parents born outside the EU. Finally, only half of immigrant youngsters managed to find employment within one year.

Figure 6.15. The mandatory professional integration period is less beneficial for youth with non-EU parents

The challenges faced by young people with migrant parents in Flanders have been documented in the literature. Most of these studies focus on youth, native-born with parents born in Türkiye and Morocco. Baert, Heiland and Korenman (2016[52]) find that even after adjusting for differences in family socio-economic background, native-born youth with Turkish and Moroccan-born parents take longer than their native-born peers to finish secondary schooling, to start tertiary education and in their school-to-work transition in general. They find that these gaps relative to those with native-born parents are larger for women than men. Research using longitudinal microdata focusing on women alone finds that compared to women with native-born parents, women with Turkish and Maghreb-born parents are less likely to enter and more likely to exit a first sustainable employment spell and that these differences are reproduced and reinforced over labour market careers (Maes, Wood and Neels, 2019[53]).

A fast transition into work is also key for the future career. Laurijssen and Glorieux (2014[54]) compare the progress in socio-economic status that youngsters with native- and foreign-born parents make from their first to later jobs at the start of their career. Both groups experience upward occupational mobility, but the first job offers less socio-economic status for native-born with foreign-born parents than their peers with native-born parents and this gap in occupational attainment remains constant thereafter. The future career is thus largely determined by the characteristics of the start of the occupational career. Promisingly, however, they find that a first job with a relatively low occupational status does offer better opportunities for native-born with Turkish and Moroccan-born parents than for youth with native-born parents to catch up later. They argue that this finding together with the long-term negative impact of initial unemployment suggests that youth with migrant parents are best off with starting to work as soon as possible after school leaving.

Perceived discrimination is high among native-born children of immigrants

As discussed in previous parts of the report, discrimination is a key obstacle to social and economic integration. Native-born offspring of immigrants are a particular group in this respect. Across the OECD, native-born youth with two foreign-born parents report higher levels of belonging to a group that is discriminated against based on ethnicity, nationality, or race, than young immigrants themselves. As native-born know their society and can identify discrimination easier, they also know that the difficulties they face are not due to their own language skills or an unknown new context (OECD, 2021[9]).

According to the European Social Survey (ESS), in Flanders almost one in four (23%) of the native-born youth with immigrant parents state that they belong to a group that is discriminated against (see Figure 6.16). This figure is one of the highest in the OECD and is only surpassed by the Netherlands and France. Perceived discrimination among foreign-born youth is also relatively high in Flanders, at 16%.

Figure 6.16. Perceived discrimination among native-born youth is high in Flanders

Even more worrying findings are shown by data from the 2022 Barometer Living Together, a survey conducted by the Flemish Agency for Home Affairs (see Chapter 3 for further discussion). According to the survey, half of the native-born respondents with non-EU-born parents reported having experienced discrimination based on origin, skin colour or religion over the past 12 months, compared to 46% of the respondents born in a non-EU country. These figures stood at 13% for native-born respondents with EU-born parents and 27% for EU-born respondents, respectively.

In addition to the sentiment of discrimination, a self-reported measurement, discrimination of youth with migrant parents is also well documented in the Flemish housing and labour market (see Chapter 5 for further discussion).

Youth with foreign-born parents are underrepresented in the public sector

One way to support the integration of youth with foreign-born parents is to ensure their equal representation in the public sector. Public sector employment of youth with migrant parents generates several benefits. First, the presence of civil servants with migrant parents enhances diversity within public institutions, making them more representative of the communities they serve. Second, how the wider public perceives immigrants and their children depends in part on their “visibility” in public life and the contexts in which they become “visible”. Teachers, police officers, or public administrators with migrant parents, can also act as role models (OECD, 2021[9]).

Despite rising political awareness about the benefits of diversity in the public sector, youth with migrant parents remain underrepresented in public sector jobs in most OECD countries. In Belgium and in Flanders, public sector employment accounts for a relatively high share of youth employment in international comparison. However, while one in three young people works in the public sector in Flanders, this is the case for only one in five native-born with foreign-born parents.

Figure 6.17. Youth with migrant parents are underrepresented in public service sector jobs

Policy can encourage the employment of youth with migrant parents in public sector jobs. In fact, the Flemish Socio-Economic Council, a key advisory body to the Flemish Government which consists of the main trade unions and employer associations, just recently advocated for increasing the diversity of teachers in the education sector (Flemish Social and Economic Council, 2020[55]). The Strategic Equal Opportunities and Flemish Government diversity plan 2021-25 also highlights the importance of increasing diversity in public administration (Flemish Social and Economic Council, 2021[56]).

Several OECD countries have actively promoted public sector recruitment of candidates with migrant parents – especially at the local and regional level. Austria, for example, has encouraged recruitment of applicants with migrant parents into the Viennese police force in the framework of the “Vienna needs you” project. The initiative launched targeted information campaigns in co-operation with migrant communities, associations, and schools. Finland offers targeted preparatory training, and professional education offers to encourage youth with migrant parents to start a teaching career. German cities and federal states aim to increase the share of public sector trainees with migrant parents through initiatives such as the “Berlin needs you” and “We are Hamburg” campaigns (OECD, 2021[9]). In Norway, for public sector jobs, employers must invite at least one applicant with migrant parents for an interview, and in case of equally qualified candidates offer the job to those with migrant parents first. Norway also put in place a pilot to test anonymous CVs in the public sector (OECD, 2022[57]).

NEET rates are high, despite the existence of second chance programmes

In the OECD, youth native-born with foreign-born parents as well as those who arrived as children are more likely to be not in education, employment or training (NEET) than their peers with native-born parents. In some countries such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, France and Belgium, the differences among native-born youth by their parents’ place of birth are particularly large. However, nowhere is the absolute and relative difference as large as in Flanders. In Flanders native-born youth to immigrant parents are twice as likely to be NEET, at 24%, compared to their peers with native-born parentage (12%). Rates of youth who arrived as children are somewhat lower at 20% (see Figure 6.19). A recent analysis by the Flemish Policy Research Centre for Work confirms that even though NEET rates among 15 to 29-year-olds have steadily decreased since 2013, these rates continue to vary widely by place of birth (Boey and Vansteenkiste, 2022[58]).

Figure 6.18. Immigrant offspring have high NEET rates

Youth who are NEET have typically left the formal schooling system, either by choice or because they dropped out involuntarily. Here, comprehensive second-chance programmes provide school dropouts and other youth with an opportunity to catch up. Some programmes enable participants to obtain an occupational qualification, while others focus on preparing youth to reintegrate into mainstream education and training programmes. Successful second-chance programmes display several characteristics that distinguish them from mainstream education. These include a focus on individualised teaching methods; flexible and needs-based curricula; holistic assessment approaches; small classes with low student to teacher ratios; multi-professional teams supporting learners, welcoming learning environments; and partnerships with mainstream education institutions, local communities and employers (UNICEF, 2017[59]).

Also, for Flanders it has been shown that youth who dropped out of school early, often face the inability of the combination of rigid school and working duties. Due to family obligations, predominantly financially, for example as the oldest male child, they found it impossible to keep being enrolled in school and working full-time (Van Praag and Clycq, 2019[37]).

In Flanders, there are several options for second-chance education. Centres for Adult Education offer second-chance education opportunities (tweedekansonderwijs) in the evening but also during the day or over the weekend. Another option is self-study and sitting examinations at the Secondary Education Examination Board. Both options are similarly popular. Over the last two years, around 23% of early school leavers registered for evening classes and around 20% of early school leavers registered for the self-study option within two years after leaving school early. It is also possible to re-enrol in formal upper secondary schooling after dropping out, basically to go back to the standard education path, but this is not popular and only done by a very small share of dropouts (around 2%).

Second-chance education offers early school leavers the opportunity to obtain a degree of secondary education based on a modular structure. It also allows young adult learners to set out their individual learning path. As a financial incentive, graduates are paid back their tuition fees when obtaining a diploma. Data on registration for this type of second-chance education shows that it has become increasingly popular, especially among youth not speaking Dutch as a first language. In 2018/19 close to 27% of early school leavers with a home language other than Dutch registered for this type of second-chance programme, up from just 14% in 2013/14. Also, among youth with a home language different from Dutch the programme gained in popularity, though not as strongly from 18% to around 23% enrolling.

Those who wish to catch up on their own on the education they have missed can sit examinations before the Secondary Education Examination Board and obtain their secondary education diploma or certificate in this way. The Examination Board does not organise lessons or provide textbooks, so self-study is the only option. Data on the numbers of early school leavers who enrol for this path up to two years after leaving school early show that this option is equally popular among youth speaking Dutch and those who do not speak Dutch at home. Data on the outcomes of these students show however, that those who have migrant parents are less likely to obtain their certificate in this way – with about a third of the cohorts 2016-18 obtaining their diploma, against 40% of those with native-born parents.

In addition to large scale public programmes, also the private sector can help in tackling the NEET challenge. In Germany, for example, the Joblinge programme trains mentors and connects young people with the labour market (OECD, 2021[60]). Participants are mostly between 16 and 25 years of age and over two-thirds have migrant parents. Based on a close collaboration with regional employers, individual mentorship and skills training the programme supports youth to find their own vocational training place or job. In Slovenia, the PUM-O programme helps young people ready themselves for re-entering formal education or finding a job. The ten-month programme operates with small groups of 15 to 20 youth with an average age of 20 years old, supported by three mentors (OECD, 2021[9]).

Youth with migrant parents are unrepresented in most effective ALMPs

Recent research for Flanders shows that native-born jobseekers with non-EU-born parents are less likely to find a job than native-born jobseekers with native-born parents, even after taking into account differences in socio-demographic background characteristics (De Cuyper, Havermans and Vandermeerschen, 2018[61]). At the same time, native-born youth with migrant parents from a non-EU country are somewhat underrepresented in occupation-specific and workplace training (see Figure 6.19), which – as discussed in Chapter 4 – are the training types that have a larger return in terms of employment entry (Wood and Neels, 2020[62]). It is not entirely clear to what extent this is linked to their own interest in these types of measures or the preference of employers, but the intervention of PES counsellors who encourage job seekers to take part in these options was shown to be an important factor (Elloukmani and Raeymaeckers, 2020[63]).

Figure 6.19. Native-born youth with non-EU-born parents are underrepresented in workplace and occupation-specific training

Box 6.5. Ensuring educational continuity for Ukrainian refugee children in Flanders

The school years 2021-22 and 2022-23 have seen many more refugee children entering the Flemish education system. According to Statbel figures, about 20 700 children and young people from Ukraine were registered in Belgium between February and December, including more than 3 300 pre-schoolers (aged 2.5 to 5), about 7 500 children of primary school age and about 7 000 young people of secondary school age. To ensure the integration of these children and young people into the education system, a number of measures have been taken, captured in an Emergency Act adopted by the Flemish Parliament on 22 April 2022.

During the first months of the refugee crisis, many refugee children continued to follow a Ukrainian curriculum remotely, supported by the online platform of the Ukrainian Ministry of Education. The Flemish Department of Education and Training opened schools in emergency villages, alongside current schools, to provide children with collective home schooling under the guidance of teachers speaking Ukrainian.

As a significant proportion of the Ukrainian minors only arrived in Flanders late in the school year, the Flemish Government supported summer schools in July and August, that could be tailored to their needs, for example with a focus on learning Dutch and trauma support. The organisation was in the hands of schools and local authorities, whereas the Flemish Government was responsible for the funding.

Primary and secondary schools receive extra resources for extra pupils in an accelerated manner initially until the end of school year 2022-23. There are also measures in place to address overcrowding and teacher shortages, including budget for adding modular units to school grounds and extra funding for recruitment and support staff. In preschools, primary, and secondary education, extra teaching periods, (para)medical, social, and psychological and remedial staff are provided. The Centres for Pupil Guidance and reception education for non-native newcomers also receive extra support. Pre-primary schools, too, can count on extra financial support: for each foreign-language newcomer younger than five years old, a school is entitled to an additional EUR 950.

To facilitate and ease access to both upper secondary and adult vocational training, entry fees are waived for Ukrainian refugees. Finally, in higher education institutions, Ukrainian students have been able to benefit from pre-existing policies and measures in place for refugee students, including host language training or support, psychological counselling, academic guidance, introductory courses, scholarships, and reserved study places.

Source: https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/nl/oekrainecrisis.

References

[29] Agirdag, O., M. Van Houtte and P. Van Avermaet (2011), “Why Does the Ethnic and Socio-economic Composition of Schools Influence Math Achievement? The Role of Sense of Futility and Futility Culture”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 28/3, pp. 366-378, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq070.

[51] Baert, S. (2018), “Hiring Discrimination: An Overview of (Almost) All Correspondence Experiments Since 2005”, in Audit Studies: Behind the Scenes with Theory, Method, and Nuance, Springer International Publishing, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71153-9_3.

[52] Baert, S., F. Heiland and S. Korenman (2016), “Native-Immigrant Gaps in Educational and School-to-Work Transitions in the 2nd Generation: The Role of Gender and Ethnicity”, De Economist, Vol. 164/2, pp. 159-186, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-016-9273-4.

[58] Boey, R. and S. Vansteenkiste (2022), Trendrapport 2022: Kwetsbare groepen op de Vlaamse arbeidsmarkt, Departement Werk en Sociale Economie/Steunpunt Werk, Brussel/Leuven.

[5] Boone, S. and M. Van Houtte (2013), “Bepalende factoren bij de overgang van basis- naar secundair onderwijs: de rol van kenmerken van leerlingen, leerkrachtadviezen en schoolkenmerken”, Tijdschrift voor jeugd en kinderrechten, Vol. 14/4, pp. 329-342, https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5672057 (accessed on 20 December 2022).

[31] Broek, S. (2020), Dual learning in Flanders: professionalisation of teachers-project supported by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Structural Reform Support (DG REFORM) Consolidated final report, https://ockham-ips.nl/Portals/57/OpenContent/Files/4902/Dual_learning_in_Flanders_-_professionalisation_of_teachers_2020_B129-1.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2023).

[12] Clycq, N. et al. (eds.) (2014), Oprit 14. Naar een schooltraject zonder snelheidsbeperkingen, Academia Press, Gent, https://kuleuven.limo.libis.be/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=lirias1795660&context=SearchWebhook&vid=32KUL_KUL:Lirias&lang=en&search_scope=lirias_profile&adaptor=SearchWebhook&tab=LIRIAS&query=any,contains,lirias1795660 (accessed on 20 December 2022).

[47] Corluy, V. et al. (2015), “The labour market position of second-generation immigrants in Belgium”, No. 285, National Bank of Belgium, http://www.nbb.be.

[42] Court of Auditors (2017), Gelijke onderwijskansen in het gewoon basisonderwijs, https://www.ccrek.be/NL/Publicaties/Fiche.html?id=a3841440-80c3-46b8-9d9d-a51fcc4b6b2c (accessed on 22 December 2022).

[7] Danhier, J. and D. Jacobs (2017), Aller au-delà de la ségrégation scolaire. Analyse des résultats à l’enquête PISA 2015 en Flandre et en Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles., https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319422951_Aller_au-dela_de_la_segregation_scolaire_Analyse_des_resultats_a_l'enquete_PISA_2015_en_Flandre_et_en_Federation_Wallonie-Bruxelles.

[61] De Cuyper, P., N. Havermans and H. Vandermeerschen (2018), “Labour market outcomes and activation of second generation jobseekers in Belgium”, HIVA-KU Leuven, Leuven, https://hiva.kuleuven.be/en/news/newsitems/Labour-market-outcomes-and-activation-of-second-generation-jobseekers-in-Belgium-20181210.

[40] De Witte, K., M. Smett and Van Assche (2017), “The impact of additional funds for schools with disadvantaged pupils - A regression discontinuity design”, https://steunpuntsono.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SONO_2017.OL3_.1_3_vrijgegeven.pdf.

[63] Elloukmani, S. and P. Raeymaeckers (2020), “Activeren en begeleiden van vrouwen met een migratieachtergrond: besluitvormingsprocessen van arbeidsmarktconsulenten.”, in Wood, J. and K. Neels (eds.), Wegwijs naar werk. Longitudinale analyse en evaluatie van inburgerings- en activeringstrajecten in Vlaanderen, 2005-2016, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/wegwijs-naar-werk-longitudinale-analyse-en-evaluatie-van-inburgerings-en-activeringstrajecten-in-vlaanderen-2005-2016-eindrapport-van-de-viona-leerstoel-migratie-integratie-arbeidsmarkt (accessed on 24 November 2022).

[46] Emery, L., B. Spruyt and P. Van Avermaet (2021), “Teaching to the track: grouping in reception education for Newly Arrived Migrant students”, International Journal of Inclusive Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1942568.

[16] European Commission (2022), National reforms in school education, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/france/national-reforms-school-education.

[32] Flemish Department of Work and Social Economy (2021), Vlaams Partnerschap - Duaal Leren - Jaarrapport 2020-2021, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/jaarrapport-vlaams-partnerschap-duaal-leren.

[14] Flemish Educational Council (2013), Analytical report: Education for pupils with a migrant background in Flanders, https://eunec.eu/sites/www.eunec.eu/files/members/attachments/analytical_report.pdf.

[56] Flemish Social and Economic Council (2021), Advies - Strategisch Gelijkekansen- en Diversiteitsplan Vlaamse overheid 2021- 2025, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/strategisch-gelijkekansen-en-diversiteitsplan-vlaamse-overheid-2021-2025-advies-commissie-diversiteit.

[55] Flemish Social and Economic Council (2020), Advies - Diversiteit binnen het onderwijzend personeel, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/diversiteit-binnen-het-onderwijzend-personeel-advies-commissie-diversiteit.

[34] FPS Employment and Unia (2022), Socio-economische monitoring 2022 : arbeidsmarkt en origine, https://werk.belgie.be/nl/publicaties/socio-economische-monitoring-2022-arbeidsmarkt-en-origine.

[43] Groenez, S. et al. (2015), Analyse van het nieuwe financieringsmechanisme voor de werkingsmiddelen van scholen, KU Leuven, Leuven, https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/327735 (accessed on 8 December 2022).

[27] Harker, R. and P. Tymms (2004), “The Effects of Student Composition on School Outcomes”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 15/2, pp. 177-199, https://doi.org/10.1076/sesi.15.2.177.30432.

[26] Havermans, N., T. Wouters and S. Groenez (2018), Schoolse segregatie in Vlaanderen: Evolutie van 2001- 2002 tot 2015-2016, Steunpunt Onderwijsonderzoek, Gent, https://data-onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/documenten/bestanden/11487.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2022).

[17] Hulpia, H. and J. Peeters (2014), Study on the effective use of early childhood education and care in preventing early school leaving- Final Report Belgium (Flanders), https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.3429.5040.

[22] Juchtmans, G. et al. (2020), Synthetic document: Hoe basisscholen werken aan gelijke onderwijskansen na het nieuwe omkaderingssysteem (2012). Een kwalitatieve studie naar het aanwendingsbeleid- en praktijk van Vlaamse basisscholen. - Gelijke onderwijskansenbeleid in basisonderwijs en secundair onderwijs. Verkenning van het beleid en de aanwending van lestijden/uren., SONO, https://steunpuntsono.be/portfolio/hoe-basisscholen-werken-aan-gelijke-onderwijskansen-na-het-nieuwe-omkaderingssysteem-2012/.

[45] Kemper, R. et al. (2022), “Separating newcomers: pragmatism or ideology? Schools’ responses to newly arrived migrants in Flanders”, International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol. 26/6, pp. 622-641, https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1711537.

[39] Kis, V. (2010), OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training: A Learning for Jobs Review of Belgium Flanders 2010, OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264113718-en.

[54] Laurijssen, I. and I. Glorieux (2014), “Early career occupational mobility of Turkish and Moroccan second-generation migrants in Flanders, Belgium”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 18/1, pp. 101-117, https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2014.933194.

[2] Liebig, T. and S. Widmaier (2009), “Children of Immigrants in the Labour Markets of EU and OECD Countries: An Overview”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 97, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/220823724345.

[53] Maes, J., J. Wood and K. Neels (2019), “Early labour market trajectories of intermediate and second generation Turkish and Maghreb women in Belgium”, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, Vol. 61, pp. 65-78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2018.11.001.

[48] National Bank of Belgium (2020), The economic impact of immigration in Belgium, https://www.nbb.be/en/articles/economic-impact-immigration-belgium.

[10] Nusche, D. et al. (2015), OECD Reviews of School Resources: Flemish Community of Belgium 2015, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264247598-en.

[13] OECD (2022), OECD Economic Surveys: Belgium 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/01c0a8f0-en.

[57] OECD (2022), Skills and Labour Market Integration of Immigrants and their Children in Norway, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6109d927-en.

[60] OECD (2021), “Digital catch-up of youth with parents born abroad: Evaluation of the JOBLINGE programme in Hesse”, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/migration/mig/migration-policy-lab-evaluation-of-joblinge-in-hesse-2021.pdf.

[30] OECD (2021), International Migration Outlook 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/29f23e9d-en.

[9] OECD (2021), Young People with Migrant Parents, Making Integration Work, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6e773bfe-en.

[8] OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students Can Succeed, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en.

[35] OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.

[1] OECD (2017), Catching Up? Intergenerational Mobility and Children of Immigrants, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264288041-en.

[3] OECD/European Commission (2023), Indicators of Immigrant Integration 2023: Settling In, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d5020a6-en.

[19] Peleman, B., M. Vandenbroeck and P. Van Avermaet (2019), “Early learning opportunities for children at risk of social exclusion. Opening the black box of preschool practice”, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, Vol. 28/1, pp. 21-42, https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2020.1707360.

[49] Piton, C. and F. Rycx (2021), “A Broken Social Elevator? Employment Outcomes of First- and Second-Generation Immigrants in Belgium”, Economist (Netherlands), Vol. 169/3, pp. 319-365, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-021-09385-2.

[36] Praag, L. et al. (2020), “Long and winding roads: educational decision- making of youngsters at risk of early school leaving in Flanders”, Educational Studies, Vol. 46/5, pp. 532-547, https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1620690.

[44] Pulinx, R. et al. (2017), Cartografie en analyse van het onthaalonderwijs voor anderstalige nieuwkomers en OKAN-leerlingen, https://lirias.kuleuven.be/3693394?limo=0 (accessed on 29 November 2022).

[11] Shewbridge, C., M. Fuster and R. Rouw (2019), “Constructive accountability, transparency and trust between government and highly autonomous schools in Flanders”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 199, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c891abbf-en.

[18] Statistics Flanders (2022), Attendance toddlers in pre-primary education, https://www.vlaanderen.be/statistiek-vlaanderen/onderwijs-en-vorming/aanwezigheid-kleuters-in-kleuteronderwijs (accessed on 21 December 2022).

[33] Statistics Flanders (2022), Early school leaving, https://www.vlaanderen.be/statistiek-vlaanderen/onderwijs-en-vorming/vroegtijdige-schoolverlaters-op-basis-van-administratieve-data#vroegtijdig-schoolverlaten-sterk-gelinkt-aan-schoolse-achterstand (accessed on 21 December 2022).

[20] Statistics Flanders (2022), Student characteristics primary and secondary education, https://www.vlaanderen.be/statistiek-vlaanderen/onderwijs-en-vorming/leerlingenkenmerken (accessed on 21 December 2022).

[28] Thrupp, M. (2002), Schools Making a Difference. Let’s be realistic!, Revue française de pédagogie, https://www.persee.fr/doc/rfp_0556-7807_2002_num_139_1_2890_t1_0173_0000_4.

[41] Tierens, H., M. Smet and K. De Witte (2020), GOK-OMKADERING IN HET BASISONDERWIJS - Evaluatie van het nieuwe systeem, SONO Steunpunt Onderwijs Onderzoek, https://steunpuntsono.be/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/3.1_GOK-omkadering-in-het-basisonderwijs.-Evaluatie-van-het-nieuwe-systeem.pdf.

[6] TIMSS (2019), International Results in Mathematics and Science, https://timss2019.org/reports/.

[24] Unia (2018), Diversiteitsbarometer Onderwijs, https://www.unia.be/nl/publicaties-statistieken/publicaties/diversiteitsbarometer-onderwijs.

[59] UNICEF (2017), Early warning systems for students at risk of dropping out: Policy and practice pointers for enrolling all children and adolescents in school and preventing dropout, https://www.allinschool.org/reports-and-guidance/early-warning-systems-students-at-risk-dropping-out.

[38] Van Avermaet, P. et al. (2017), “Cartografie en analyse van het onthaalonderwijs voor anderstalige nieuwkomers en OKAN-leerlingen”, https://data-onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/documenten/bestand.ashx?nr=9679.

[25] Van Caudenberg, R., N. Clycq and C. Timmerman (2020), “Feeling at home in school: Migrant youths’ narratives on school belonging in Flemish secondary education”, European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 428-444, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904120923184.

[23] Van Houtte, M., J. Demanet and P. Stevens (2012), “Self-esteem of academic and vocational students: Does within-school tracking sharpen the difference?”, Acta Sociologica, Vol. 55/1, pp. 73-89, https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699311431595.

[15] Van Petegem, P. et al. (2004), Zelfevaluatie en beleidseffectiviteit in Vlaamse scholen. Het gelijke onderwijskansenbeleid als casus, Academia Press, Gent, https://lirias.kuleuven.be/1858135?limo=0 (accessed on 20 December 2022).

[37] Van Praag, L. and N. Clycq (2019), “Going to work without educational qualifications: school-to-work transitions of early school leavers in Belgium”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 23/4, pp. 465-480, https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2019.1620926.

[21] Van Praag, L. et al. (2017), “‘Everyone has their own qualities’: tracking and academic self-appraisal in Flemish secondary education”, Social Psychology of Education, Vol. 20/3, pp. 601-618, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9371-4.

[4] Vanduynslager, L., J. Wets and J. Noppe (2013), Vlaamse Migratie- en Integratiemonitor 2013, Steunpunt Inburgering en Integratie en Studiedienst van de Vlaamse Regering, Brussels, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/vlaamse-migratie-en-integratiemonitor-2013 (accessed on 20 December 2022).

[50] Verhaeghe, P., Y. Li and B. Van De Putte (2013), “Socio-economic and ethnic inequalities in social capital from the family among labour market entrants”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 29/4, pp. 683-694, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcs047.

[62] Wood, J. and K. Neels (eds.) (2020), Wegwijs naar werk. Longitudinale analyse en evaluatie van inburgerings- en activeringstrajecten in Vlaanderen, 2005-2016, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/wegwijs-naar-werk-longitudinale-analyse-en-evaluatie-van-inburgerings-en-activeringstrajecten-in-vlaanderen-2005-2016-eindrapport-van-de-viona-leerstoel-migratie-integratie-arbeidsmarkt.

Notes

← 1. In this report, the term “youth with migrant parents” refers to all youth who are migrants (foreign-born) themselves but arrived during childhood, as well as those who are native-born but have at least one parent who is foreign-born.

← 2. The OECD Secretariat defines the proportion of early school leavers as the share of people aged between 15 and 24 who are neither in education nor in training and have gone no further than lower-secondary school. This differs from the Flemish Department of Education and Training who defines an early school leaver as a person aged 18 to 24 who has not completed upper secondary education and is no longer in any form of education or training.

← 3. This applies to individual schools only. In cases where several schools within the same school cluster co-operate, 12 teaching hours are allocated.

← 4. Non-Dutch-speaking newly arrived children are not registered separately in primary education. The figure accounts only for newly arrived children for whom the schools requested additional teaching hours. Since not all schools apply for additional teaching hours, the number of newly arrived children is underestimated.

← 5. After 2016, the support for further education coaches was substantially increased. Now, every school who offers reception education receives 0.9 teaching hours per non-Dutch-speaking newcomer during the reception years.

╳

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

https://doi.org/10.1787/4ea309cb-en

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at https://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.