Conditions for Inclusion in Civil Society Organised Language Education Programmes for Adult Forced Migrants in Macedonia

Monday, 7 July 2025: 14:00
Location: FSE031 (Faculty of Education Sciences (FSE))
Oral Presentation
Marija CUBALEVSKA, Universität Bremen / Universität Wien, Germany
This paper examines the conditions for and implementation of civil society organised language education programmes for forced migrants based on the example of Skopje. It discusses adult language education programmes which have been realised by the Macedonian Red Cross starting from 2022, following the war in Ukraine.

Research on civil society and its relation with forced migrants’ agency and access to rights in Europe is mostly conducted in popular “destination countries”, including few so-called “transit countries” such as Turkey and Greece. Smaller transit countries like Macedonia have so far not been in the centre of attention, with exceptions such as Milan (2019).

This paper elaborates on how educational practices implemented by the Macedonian Red Cross relate to discourses on migration and race. It aims to clarify, which forms of intersectional discrimination can be identified in the context of civil society organised language education for refugees i.e. along which positional lines inclusion/exclusion is negotiated. With realities of protracted transit stays and non-linear migration patterns in mind, educational practices on the periphery of Europe are relevant beyond the local or national context.

The study is of an explorative ethnographic research design. The data set consists of semi-guided interviews with language teachers, learners, volunteers and programme managers, as well as group discussions with language class participants, classroom observation protocols and extensive field notes taken during the duration of the field stay, containing accounts of diverse informal and semi-formal conversations with mostly members of the Ukrainian Community as well as civil society activists in the field.

Preliminary analysis suggests that implementation of programmes is dependent on engagement and pressure from the Ukrainian community. Further, access to the programmes seems to be structured by specific interlocking cultural and social forms of capital (Anthias, 2007; Bourdieu, 1986; Erel, 2010), which this paper aims to explore.