This paper aims to give a concrete account of how the teaching of newly immigrated children and adolescents in lower secondary education is organized in practice. The results point to the urgent need to formulate guidelines and minimum standards. Schools must be able to use targets as a support, so that they are not obligated to make decisions concerning the integration and education of newly immigrated children.  

The great migratory movement of recent years met many comparatively unprepared. In Germany, more than one third of registered asylum seekers are younger than 18 (BAMF 2017).  Looking specifically at the school-aged children, the guideline for securing the best possible participation opportunities is “integration through education” (MSW 2016). Since education poses as a basic requirement for social integration and participation (Berthold 2015), it is necessary to let newly arrived children and adolescents participate in the regular school system as quickly as possible. What is the best practice for including migrant children in education? How does the admission and education of newly immigrated children work best?

The school law requirements in Germany, which explain how schools should implement the task of taking on children without knowledge of German with the help of intensive language support, show notable differences. This leads to wide scopes of action for the schools: In North Rhine-Westphalia, for example, three models for schooling are possible. They range from instruction in special classes to direct schooling in regular classes: In the case of schooling in the Parallel Model, lessons for the new immigrant children and adolescents take place exclusively in classes specially designed for them. Lessons in the Semi-Integrative Model on the other hand also take place in a special class, but with a gradual participation in a regular class. The Integrative Model is characterized by the fact that the newly immigrated children and adolescents are directly schooled in the regular class and receive no special language support (Massumi & Dewitz 2015).

What else needs to be taken into account in research training? With regard to the reduction of migration-specific disparities, we can summarize that teaching in regular classes can have a beneficial effect. In addition to the migration-specific disparities, language is also taken up as an important prerequisite for integration. These are exemplary crucial aspects that can provide clues as to how, for example, specially equipped classes can prevent or accommodate the integration of new immigrant students.

In addition to specific legal requirements, empirical evidence on the use of the different school organizational structures and language development programs is lacking (ibid). The question of the effectiveness of the models remains unanswered. In summary, it is controversial in research whether a temporary separate schooling contradicts or complies with inclusion requirements. As a result, there is a lack of information on how the individual schools or entire municipalities deal with regulations and their particular scopes.

Against the backdrop outlined above, the overall aim of this paper is to point out concretely how the teaching of newly arrived children and adolescents in lower secondary education is organized in practice. Focusing on a limited school location, the following subordinate questions are examined:

1. Which school organizational models for the promotion of newly immigrated children and adolescents are used in the municipal schools in Münster (in North Rhine-Westphalia)?
2. Does the collected data corroborate the identified school organizational models?
3. Which kind of schooling does the surveyed school administrators prefer?
4. Are there discrepancies between the preferred and exhibited model?

Based on a classification of teaching models for the educational support of newly immigrated students, a questionnaire was developed for school administrators of all municipal secondary schools in Münster. The instrument used to describe certain characteristics and follows a descriptive approach with mostly closed questions and individual rating scales with verbal characterization. The pretest showed that the school administrators were able to assign their schools to the individual models. That means that the classification of the models according to Massumi and Dewitz thus provides a good basis for the survey instrument. Ten schools were examined in detail using the questionnaires.

Since the evaluation of the results makes clear how unequally the newly immigrated children and adolescents are distributed among the different schools and types of schools, it must also be taken into account in the further interpretation of the results that the individual schools have to cope with very different circumstances and, of course, prerequisites. While for example the percentage of new immigrant children and adolescents at one school is 46%, another school teaches just 0.22% of new immigrants in comparison to the entire student body. An important result is that all three models in Münster are carried out regardless of the type of school. The data also indicates that all three models are implemented much more variably than stated and that schools use the additional scope of action very differently. An example of this is the length of stay in the specially designed class before students are taught in the regular class: the school administrators report very different periods from one month up to twelve months. In addition to the wide scope of action, which on the one hand gives schools flexibility to respond to the different requirements, the results also point to the urgent need to formulate guidelines and minimum standards. If targets are defined, there is less risk that schools will be required to make decisions. The exchange of experiences can also help to meaningfully use the available scope of action so that education processes can ultimately be adapted to the conditions and requirements of each individual school. Furthermore, the results indicate that in the long term, teacher awareness and education as well as long-term studies are of great importance, in order to ensure that the complex process of integrating immigrant children through education with its many aspects that must not be neglected such as language development, integration or trauma care, can succeed as best as possible.

BAMF (Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge) (2017). Aktuelle Zahlen zu Asyl (Current numbers on asylum): http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Downloads/Infothek/Statistik/Asyl/aktuelle-zahlen-zu-asyl-dezember-2016.pdf;jsessionid=AB662FA15F8FBC34E9E00330E26F413D.2_cid294?__blob=publicationFile Berthold, T. (2015). In erster Linie Kinder (2. Teil). Flüchtlingskinder in Deutschland (First and foremost children (2nd part). Refugee children in Germany). Lernende Schule, (71), 14-15. Massumi, M. & Dewitz, N. von (2015). Neu zugewanderte Kinder und Jugendliche im deutschen Schulsystem. Bestandsaufnahme und Empfehlungen (Newly immigrated children and adolescents in the German school system. Inventory and recommendations): http://www.mercator-institut-sprachfoerderung.de/fileadmin/Re-daktion/PDF/Publikationen/MI_ZfL_Studie_Zugewanderte_im_deut-schen_Schulsystem_final_screen.pdf MSW (Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2016). Integration durch Bildung. Maßnahmen und Initiativen des Ministeriums für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen für zugewanderte Kinder und Jugendliche (Integration through education. Measures and initiatives of the Ministry of Education and Training of the State of North-Rhine-Westphalia for immigrant children and adolescents): https://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/docs/Schulsystem/Integration/Gefluechtete/Massnahmen/Uebersicht-Massnahmen-Integration-durch-Bildung.pdf