Swann (1985)

Notes on the text
Preliminary pages Membership, Contents, Introduction

Part I: Setting the scene
Chapter 1 The nature of society
Chapter 2 Racism: theory and practice
Chapter 3 Achievement and underachievement
Chapter 3 continued

Part II: Education for all
Chapter 4 Ethnic minorities and education: historical perspective
Chapter 5 Multicultural education: further studies
Chapter 5 continued
Chapter 6 'Education for all': a new approach

Part III: Major areas of concern
Chapter 7 Language and language education
Chapter 8 Religion and the role of the school
Chapter 9 Teacher education; employment of ethnic minority teachers
Chapter 9 continued

Part IV: 'Other' ethnic minority groups
Introduction
Chapter 10 Chinese children
Chapter 11 Cypriot children
Chapter 12 Italian children
Chapter 13 Ukranian children
Chapter 14 Vietnamese children
Chapter 15 'Liverpool Blacks'
Chapter 16 Travellers' children
Reflections and conclusions

Part V:
Main conclusions and recommendations

Appendices

Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Children from Ethnic Minority Groups

Chairman: Lord Swann

Cmnd. 9453

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1985
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Chapter 14 The educational needs of Vietnamese children
[pages 719 - 732]

1. Because of the outward similarities between their situation and that of the Chinese community, we decided to extend our consideration of the needs of Chinese children to include also a brief look at Vietnamese children. We were however so struck by the situation of the Vietnamese community, particularly the educational consequences of being such a recent refugee group to come to this country, that we subsequently decided to devote a chapter of our report to reviewing their needs and problems.

Background

Size and nature of the community

2. Between 1975-1982 some 16,500 refugees from Vietnam entered the United Kingdom (the majority coming from 1978 onwards), including not only those admitted under the quotas agreed by the government, but also those rescued by British ships and those allowed to rejoin families already here. According to a Home Office study (1), some 70 per cent of the Vietnamese refugee population in this country are ethnic Chinese and over 60 per cent are from North Vietnam. The refugee community is predominantly young, with some 35-45 per cent of pre-school or statutory school age. Admission to this country was not based on as strict selection criteria as it was to other receiving countries and as a result the community here can be seen as relatively disadvantaged in relation for example to the Vietnamese community in the United States, where the majority of refugees are from the elite, professional classes of South Vietnam. The Home Office study found that only some 20 per cent of the refugees currently had a minimum working proficiency in the English language and only 36 per cent of adult males were in employment (the latter figure comparing with an employment rate for Vietnamese refugees in the USA of some 95 per cent for those who have been resident there over 2 years).

3. According to a recent report of the Joint Committee for Refugees from Vietnam (JCRV) (2):

'The Vietnamese are one of the most disadvantaged groups ever to come to the United Kingdom.'

The Home Office study highlighted the following particular factors which need to be borne in mind when considering the situation of Vietnamese refugees, compared with the experiences of earlier groups of refugees to this country:

'An important feature of the Vietnamese ... was the almost complete absence of an established ethnic community in the United Kingdom to which the refugees could turn for support ... The wide cultural divide between the Vietnamese and the host community ... was an additional problem which had not been faced in earlier intakes ... This cultural divide had implications in terms of language learning, employment (many of the "skilled" Vietnamese found their skills were not relevant in an industrialised Western economy) and the development of social relationships with British people. These various factors meant the Vietnamese refugees had very much less control over their lives when they came (here) than previous groups and relied to a much greater degree on the efforts of the voluntary agencies.'

In addition to these problems which the Vietnamese community face, reference was also made in the evidence we received to the particular effect on an ethnic minority group of being refugees rather than immigrants by choice. The 1982 JCRV report described this effect as follows:

'This condition, for convenience referred to as refugee trauma, derives from the range of experience and expectations they bring with them to their adopted country. All refugees are vulnerable in this respect, the Vietnamese outstandingly so. They come with a legacy of violence and insecurity from 30 years of war; they have had to face the realisation that the country in which they were born no longer offers security and prospects; they have endured the strains of preparation for covert flight and the flight itself in which large numbers of Vietnamese lost their lives, among whom may be family members and friends. Having reached a country of first asylum they feel guilty at being the ones to get out and survive. They experience a loss of control over the factors that affect their lives, particularly during the processes of selection, rejection and, finally, acceptance by a Western nation. They now become aware that there is no going back, though sometimes a "myth of return" develops. Expectations of the country of resettlement are unreasonably high. The reality of unemployment, lack of English and isolation, which is the immediate prospect for the Vietnamese in the UK, taken with their earlier experiences and expectation, hits particularly hard.'

4. On arrival in this country the Vietnamese refugees were placed in one of some 45 reception centres which were funded by central government but run by three voluntary bodies: The British Council for Aid to Refugees (later to become the British Refugee Council), the Ockenden Venture, and the Save the Children Fund (later to establish a new charity, Refugee Action, to continue this aspect of its work), each of which had responsibility for a designated zone of the country and for the reception centres and arrangements for resettlement within it. In July 1979, as the refugee numbers increased dramatically, the Joint Committee for Refugees from Vietnam, consisting of representatives of each of the three voluntary bodies under an independent Chairman and with a secretariat seconded from the Home Office, was formed to oversee the coordination of the programme of reception and resettlement. During their stay in the reception centres, which varied considerably in both size (between 18 and 730) and regime, the refugees received some teaching in 'survival' English (provided by LEAs but with full reimbursement of costs by central government) as well as an introduction to life in Britain and any necessary medical treatment. The major responsibility for the resettlement of the refugees remained with the voluntary bodies using housing made available by local authorities or housing associations and relying on local volunteers. No special funding was provided for the resettlement stage by central government and after resettlement the refugees were dependent for financial support on normal statutory entitlements and benefits. Central government funding for all Vietnamese reception centres ceased on 30 September 1982 although we understand that the voluntary agencies have themselves funded some centres after this date. A small number of Vietnamese refugees who are living in agency accommodation funded by voluntary bodies still remain to be resettled.

Dispersal

5. In organising the resettlement of the Vietnamese refugees a conscious decision was taken to disperse them throughout the country in small groups. This decision was based partly on administrative convenience - it was felt it would be easier to find housing and to obtain local voluntary support if the 'burden' on individual areas was not too great - it was also felt that dispersal would make it easier for the refugees to integrate within the majority community and thus 'settle down', and also that the creation of 'ghettos' would be avoided. There has however been some criticism of the dispersal policy for the problems which it poses for the refugees themselves - firstly, by placing them in areas of the country which may be unfamiliar with meeting the needs of 'immigrants', for example in terms of education, and secondly, in spreading the refugee community throughout the country the isolation of the refugees may be exacerbated and there is little chance of mutual support within the community. As the JCRV report put it:

'The Vietnamese ought to be able to look to their own community for support. However, the dispersal policy has meant that, with the exception of a few urban areas, the numbers settled together are not large enough to provide that support.'

'Attitudes to dispersal were generally positive with respondents balancing the practical short term advantages against the possible longer term problems. The most common reason given in support of dispersal was the need to avoid 'ghettos'. It was strongly believed that from the point of view of host population response "it is a good thing that there are not seen to be too many (refugees) in one place". A second factor was the belief that "dispersal avoided the statutory resources being over-stretched". Support for dispersal was not limited to purely practical considerations, and several respondents agreed with the view that, though the initial resettlement period is unhappy for some, there are better chances of good integration into the community ultimately. Despite such elements of ideological support the main advantage of dispersal would seem to be the practical one of ease of resettlement. If the refugees had not been dispersed the task of resettlement would have been considerably more difficult and may not have been able to rely so heavily on voluntary local support as much as it did and still continues to do. From the perspective of the refugees the advantages of dispersal are few. "Dispersal is all right if it means groups of families in different areas of big cities but in country areas it can mean total isolation for old people unable to travel and for young mothers with children".'

Education

6. In relation to the school education of Vietnamese children, the JCRV Report concluded that:

'Provided that they come into school at an early age we believe that there is usually sufficient time for total integration of the Vietnamese in the educational stream towards O and A Level exams. However, there is no room for complacency ... Nor should it be overlooked that although children may absorb formal education, school experience itself can prove traumatic (we have had reports of some able Vietnamese children being placed in classes for the educationally subnormal).'

7. From the evidence which we ourselves received, the major issue in relation to the education of Vietnamese youngsters is clearly the acquisition of English, especially for youngsters arriving in the upper secondary age range for whom provision for E2L support may be very limited. Both teachers and community workers working with the Vietnamese referred to the tendency of class teachers to equate lack of English with lack of ability and to categorise able Vietnamese children as 'slow' or 'remedial' by overlooking the language difficulties which they faced. One language specialist we met, for example, related how a very bright Vietnamese pupil who had shown a definitive talent in science, had asked him to accompany him to a school parents evening where the science teacher had explained that the boy was in a low band because he 'couldn't remember things' and this indicated that he lacked the intellect to cope. This science teacher had not realised that it might be difficult for the boy to remember what he might have only partly understood and that his actual knowledge of the subject might 'outrun' his proficiency in English. He might thus not only appear slow but his English might seem more incoherent than if he were talking normally. This would inevitably lead to frustration on his part as well as further confirming the school's view of his abilities. (Such incidents serve to reinforce the view we took in our Language Chapter on the need for all teachers to have some understanding of E2L needs.) An extract from the booklet 'Vietnamese Children in Derby' (3), indicating the more specific language problems which a Vietnamese child may experience in learning English, is attached as Annex A to this chapter.

Effects of dispersal

8. Several of our witnesses felt that the official policy of dispersing the refugees around the country, especially to areas which had had little previous experience of catering for children for whom English was not a first language, had clearly made the task of teaching English to Vietnamese children considerably harder. (It must be remembered of course that, under the present system, expenditure on special provision related to the needs of the Vietnamese community is not covered by Section 11). A small scale survey, carried out by the Ockenden Venture at the end of 1981, in their 'zone' of the country which had few areas of multiracial settlement, of the E2L provision made by schools for Vietnamese pupils, confirmed this view. For example the following extracts from the school responses to this survey illustrate not only the tendency to equate lack of English with lack of ability, but also the problems associated with some forms of E2L provision:

On the question of the provision made to meet the E2L needs of Vietnamese pupils:

'X attends eight sessions a week with a group of slow-learning English speaking children.'

'Remedial English sessions with young children who are slow learners.'

'Attached to small remedial group of children of her own age.'

'X's English is not inadequate, merely eccentric.'

'Comprehension of the subtler shades of meaning inherent in some exam/test questions had led to lower scores in mathematics than are a true reflection of X's ability.'

'(a hindrance) to some extent although it was masked at first by apparent understanding.'

'The withdrawal for extra English, whilst of very great value, does break the continuity of the lessons that are being missed.'

'Both X and her sister Y show a (polite) aversion to be singled out from their class groups.'

Scale of E2L need

9. As a general guide to the proficiency in English of Vietnamese youngsters, the following table from the Home Office study indicates the scale of E2L need of secondary age youngsters:

Parental attitudes to education

10. As with many other ethnic minority parents, Vietnamese parents tend by tradition to leave the education of their children largely to the teachers and it can often prove difficult to bridge the gap between teachers and parents, not least in linguistic terms, and explain to parents the role which the school wants them to play. All the teachers we met however emphasised the wish of Vietnamese parents to see their children 'succeed', although their understanding of what this would actually entail for example in terms of examination results, was often, understandably, somewhat hazy.

Teachers' attitudes

11. Although some concerns were expressed to us about the effects which the trauma of leaving Vietnam and their arrival in this country had had on the children's behaviour - leaving them sometimes moody and depressed - it was generally agreed that Vietnamese pupils were well-motivated, lively and keen to learn. It was suggested however that, as with Chinese children, there was a risk that such positive 'outward' signs might lead teachers to overlook any genuine educational problems which Vietnamese children might experience. As one language teacher we met put it to us:

'The neat and orderly presentation of work, the skills apparent in art and craft, fluency with formal computation and reading, a high level of motivation and concentration, may all be factors which mislead teachers into thinking that the children have no learning problems.'

12. In relation to achievement, the general feeling amongst the teachers we met was that once they had overcome their linguistic difficulties, Vietnamese children would be 'high achievers'. Some concern was however expressed about the kind of press reports which highlighted instances of Vietnamese youngsters having obtained examination qualifications after perhaps only 2 years in this country, and the extent to which this probably in fact represented considerable underachievement in relation to their true potential. As one teacher put it in his evidence to us:

'In view of the relatively short time of stay in UK it is difficult at present to make any objective assessments of the educational performance of Vietnamese children or make real comparisons with other groups, even if such comparisons are desirable. Pure speculation would foresee that most Vietnamese children would compare favourably with the "better" sub-continent Asian children, and thus be generally lower than the educational performance of indigenous children.'

13. The particular problems of 'late arrivals' to this country i.e. youngsters arriving aged perhaps 14 or 15, who require probably 4 or 5 years education in order to do themselves justice but whose ages preclude this, was of great concern to our witnesses. We received some evidence concerning an initiative taken by the Save the Children fund to establish a separate residential school for some of these older Vietnamese youngsters. This school, which, we understand, closed with the end of major government funding for the refugee programme, catered for 50 older Vietnamese pupils offering a specially devised curricular diet of intensive English teaching and with a concentration on maths and science. Provision was also made for teaching by Chinese and Vietnamese teachers in their mother tongues.

Vietnamese teachers

14. A number of the representatives of the Vietnamese community whom we met referred to the contribution which they felt could be made to the education of Vietnamese children by teachers who were themselves of Vietnamese origin. In this connection, we were interested to learn of the work of one Institute of Higher Education which had run a one year part-time bridging course for teachers from Vietnam, whose qualifications were not accepted in the UK, designed to bring the participants up to a standard that would enable them to gain access to higher education and possibly in due course to enter teaching in this country. Understandably, a substantial part of the course was devoted to improving the fluency, accuracy and confidence of the students in English, and also developing their 'cultural awareness' of Britain and the study skills required within higher education, some of which were unfamiliar to them. In a progress report on the course, the course tutor and her head of department offered the following reflections on the students' general progress, which we found particularly revealing in view of the comments which had already been made to us about the psychological pressures on 'refugee' groups:

'An interesting progression in the individual tutorials has been the student's willingness and desire to talk about personal problems. At the beginning of the course they still seemed to be suffering from the "grateful refugee" syndrome. They accepted everything passively, thanking people at every stage and seemed as though they could perceive themselves only as Boat People ... The students now discuss quite freely many of their problems connected with family, health, finance and inter-student relationships ... From the passive, accepting attitude exhibited by the students at the beginning of the course has developed a marked confidence. The students are now very ready to criticise and question material which is presented to them. It has been heartening to see them argue through their ideas and support them with logical reasoning ... The students make greater efforts to control their own futures than they did at the beginning of the course. A few have made the conscious decision to pursue a career other than teaching and one has decided to seek employment rather than undertaking any further training course. Such decisions have been reached by individuals after much conscious thought and planning, and without seeking constant "advice" from other sources.'

Racism

15. It is regrettable that, despite the tremendous amount of public goodwill originally generated in this country by the plight of the 'boat people', much of this seems now to have evaporated as the refugees have been given public housing, often ahead of those on waiting lists, and have entered the jobs market, which has created some resentment to their presence. The local reactions in the areas where the refugees have been resettled, according to the volunteers working with them, were reported thus in the Home Office study report:

'The reaction of the people in the United Kingdom to the refugees has been one of initial goodwill followed by a gradual loss of interest ... The very favourable media response to the Boat People in this country certainly helped in the initial stages of the programme but local reactions during resettlement have been mixed.

"Initially people were very helpful but now enthusiasm has waned and generally help is now left to a few faithful friends - usually voluntary language teachers."

"there has certainly been a lot of hostility ... they have been harassed mainly by groups of young people."

"Four of my families live very close to me and a general feeling of concern has been expressed by people in this area that no more families be moved in ...".'

16. Before leaving the issue of racism, it may be worth noting that we also heard some evidence of antagonism amongst Vietnamese youngsters towards members of other ethnic minority groups, especially Asians, for example the head of one language centre whom we met, referring to his Vietnamese pupils, commented that:

'A few of them seem to have an unfortunate sense of superiority towards people from the Indian sub-continent.'

17. In many ways the experience of the Vietnamese community and the educational needs of Vietnamese children have much in common with the other ethnic minority communities whom we have considered, particularly for example in relation to their language needs and the increasing impact of racism on them. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, however, the very particular circumstances under which the Vietnamese community arrived in this country have meant that their level of self-determination has tended to be very limited and their lives have been very much influenced by external agencies, notably central government and the voluntary bodies. The clearest manifestation of this external influence was of course the policy of dispersal. As we have explained, we are concerned at the underlying implications of such a policy which appears to be founded on essentially the same principles as were the original assimilationist policies adopted by central government during the early years of large scale immigration to this country (discussed at some length in Chapter Four) which similarly involved 'dispersing' ethnic minority children in order to 'spread' a perceived 'problem' and cause as little disruption to the majority community as possible. Just as we rejected the legacy of assimilationist thinking in putting forward our philosophy of 'Education for All', we are concerned that the approach adopted to the resettlement of the Vietnamese refugees, whilst undoubtedly founded on good intentions, can be seen with hindsight, as misconceived, and as in many respects a manifestation of institutional racism. We strongly urge therefore that, if and when any other groups of refugees come to Britain in the future, central government and particularly the Home Office will adopt a more enlightened and positive approach to their settlement, which takes greater account of the need for such communities to retain their cohesiveness and cultural identity and which does not exacerbate the already demanding educational challenges which the children from such groups might face.

Footnotes

(1) 'Vietnamese Refugees. A study of their reception and resettlement in the United Kingdom'. Peter R Jones. Home Office Research and Planning Unit Paper 13. 1982.

(2) Report of the Joint Committee for Refugees from Vietnam. Home Office. 1982.

(3) 'Vietnamese Children in Derby'. Norman Fitchett et al. January 1981.

Annex A: Language - an extract from 'Vietnamese Children in Derby'
[pages 730 - 731]

The Vietnamese alphabet

The original native writing system of Vietnamese was a modification of Chinese characters, and was the sole writing system for the Vietnamese between the 13th and 17th centuries. In the 17th century, a Portuguese priest, Alexandre de Rhodes, and other Europeans and Vietnamese, developed a new writing system to further their evangelical work. This writing system was a Roman alphabet modified with diacritics so that it could represent the sounds of Vietnamese, for which there were no Roman symbols. The two writing systems - the Chinese-based and the Roman-based - were used side by side for some time, although by different segments of Vietnamese society. Gradually, however, the Roman-based alphabet replaced the Chinese-based writing system, so that today it is the only writing system in general use.

The Vietnamese alphabet is phonetic. There is usually one letter or combination of letters per sound, and only one. The one-sound-one-symbol correspondence sometimes breaks down between one regional dialect and another. Perhaps these differences tend to be academic rather than inhibiting, but it does indicate that some Vietnamese children may differ in their ability to reproduce English sounds.

Pronunciation

Pronunciation of Vietnamese words varies slightly from speaker to speaker depending where in Vietnam the speaker comes from. There are three major dialects - Northern, Central and Southern. Whilst these dialects differ, sometimes very markedly, a speaker of one of them has no great difficulty understanding or communicating with a speaker of another.

The most interesting and difficult to understand aspect of Vietnamese is its tones. Vietnamese, like Chinese, is a tonal language. Every word has a particular 'tone' always associated with it, and if a speaker does not use the correct tone for a word, he either mispronounces the word, or pronounces an entirely different word.

English has 'tones', but they are associated with sentences rather than words. We call these 'intonation patterns', e.g. consider the difference in meaning between 'Now?' and 'Now!', or between, 'He's a doctor?' and 'He's a doctor.' There are five tones in the Southern dialect, each of these being represented by a mark (a diacritic) over one of the vowels or syllables, e.g.:

The word 'ban' spoken with a mid-level tone means 'committee': the same word 'ban' this time with a diacritic indicating a high-rising tone means 'sell'; 'ban' with a low-falling tone means 'table': 'ban' with a mid-rising tone means 'copy' and, finally, 'ban' with a low-rising tone means 'friend'.

Vietnamese is also a monosyllabic language - that is, all words consist of only one syllable. Vowels can occur together, but consonants cannot. There are no consonantal clusters in Vietnamese and therefore children have great difficulty in pronouncing English words like 'desks', 'picture', 'crisps' and 'skipping'.

As most Vietnamese children speak either Cantonese, Vietnamese (with regional variations) and Mandarin, they tend to identify English sounds with the sounds with which they are familiar - with confusing and frustrating results.

Here is a table of common difficulties ...

• l, n and r are confused (hence led for red, can for car).
• final l or ll pronounced as w (hence baw for ball).
• final consonants p, t, k and d are often formed but not sounded. (In fact experience has shown that whilst there are considerable pronunciation difficulties with identifying vowel sounds, a major problem has been to teach the children to articulate audibly final consonants. There is a strong tendency to 'clip' word endings ... e.g. re for red, hou for house, bi for big, gree for green etc ... ).
• s, sh and z are confused (Cantonese for example has no sh or z).
• th is pronounced d (common in Asian sub-continent children) or v.
• the (hard th) unknown in Chinese or Vietnamese.
• f is confused with v or p.
• soft g (as in gentle) does not exist in Vietnamese.
• p is confused with f.
• b is confused with p.
• t as a final consonant sounds like k.
• d (initial) often pronounced as y or z.
• k is always identical with c.
• short vowels are usually easily learned and reproduced, but the children find that long vowels are difficult to distinguish and pronounce ... e.g. ... ee for i and ar for a.

Annex B: Article taken from The Times 12 March 1982
[page 732]

Vietnamese refugee families in an inner London tower-block estate are being attacked and abused and singled out as scapegoats for the estate's difficulties, it was said yesterday.

Community workers, police and tenants' representatives from the Pepys Estate, in the derelict Deptford dockland, listed a series of attacks on former 'boat people' that included muggings, beatings-up, stone-throwing and setting fire to a girl's hair. The refugee families, 36 out of 1,500, are said to be living in a state of siege.

According to Mr Quang Nguyen, a spokesman and interpreter for the boat people, they rarely complain to the police because they are afraid of reprisals.

The British Refugee Council said that the position on the Pepys Estate, although worse than most, was not untypical.

Vietnamese on the estate were brought together yesterday by the Lewisham Council for Community Relations to give their accounts of attacks. The Council said they launched their investigations after a local headmaster asked them why a Vietnamese girl, aged nine, cried all day at school.

Mr Martin Rabstein, a council officer, said: 'We found out that she and her family had been forced into living in one room of their flat because the rest of it was under siege'.

Other examples include a woman aged 50 being beaten up by three teenagers after her hair was deliberately trapped in the lift doors; a mother aged 30 and two small children having to run a gauntlet of sticks and stones; and a man aged 32 who had to crawl back to his flat after being attacked from behind, kicked on the ground and robbed by a gang of about ten teenagers. He has still not fully recovered his sight.

The Pepys Estate has long been plagued by vandalism, high crime rates and tenant discontent, resulting in a high turnover and vacancies. It is now the subject of a 'safe neighbourhood' project run by the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders with a grant from the Greater London Council.

Mr Nicholas Taylor, Chairman of Lewisham housing committee and a resident on the estate, described security there as an 'absolute disaster'. He added: 'In that situation people look for a scapegoat and the easiest scapegoats are people who cannot easily communicate with others.'

Mr Robert Heagren, Chairman of the Pepys tenants' association, said many residents had resented the allocation of flats to the refugees instead of to British people.'