Across Europe, schools have become the primary institutional spaces in which migrant and refugee children encounter the state, society and the promise of belonging. European policy frameworks consistently emphasise integration as essential for social cohesion, democratic stability and economic sustainability (European Commission, 2021). Yet, despite this recognition, schools and educators remain structurally under-positioned within integration policy architectures. They are most often framed as implementers of integration strategies rather than as knowledge-holders and contributors to and critiquers of policy design.

This paper examines the disjuncture between European integration policy aspirations and the everyday realities of school-based integration work. Drawing on European Union policy documents and research generated through the SIRIUS Network on Migrant Education, it argues that schools function as a “forgotten frontline” of integration: central in practice, yet marginal in policy.

The paper responds to a growing pattern across European education systems whereby responsibility for integration is increasingly devolved to schools without commensurate resourcing, cross-sectoral infrastructure or professional recognition. This dynamic risks rendering integration fragmented, uneven and dependent on individual school capacity rather than embedded as a systemic responsibility.

Research Questions

The paper is guided by three interrelated questions:

1. How are schools conceptualised within European integration and inclusion policy frameworks, and what assumptions underpin this positioning?
2. What forms of pedagogical, relational and affective labour do educators undertake in supporting the integration of migrant and refugee learners?
3. How can a theoretically informed reframing, drawing on concepts of natality, care and relational integration, reposition schools as co-creators rather than implementers of integration?

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

The paper is grounded in Hannah Arendt’s concept of natality, understood as the human capacity for new beginnings and renewal. Natality provides a particularly generative lens for examining education in contexts of migration, where children arrive not only as learners but as newcomers to a shared social and political world. From this perspective, education becomes the space in which societies decide whether they are willing to assume responsibility for both the world and those newly arriving into it.

This framework is complemented by scholarship on affective labour in education (Reay, 2012; Lynch et al., 2009), which highlights the emotional, relational and frequently invisible work undertaken by educators in contexts of inequality and precarity. The paper also draws on relational theories of integration (Klarenbeek, 2021), which challenge assimilationist models by conceptualising integration as a mutual, structural process rather than a unidirectional demand placed on newcomers.

Together, these perspectives enable a critical reframing of integration away from deficit-based or compliance-oriented models and towards an understanding of schools as ethical, relational and political spaces of co-creation.

Purpose and Contribution

The purpose of the paper is threefold. First, it seeks to make visible the central role schools already play in integration processes across Europe, drawing on European research evidence. Second, it critically interrogates the policy tendency to rely on schools’ professional goodwill while excluding them from integration governance. Third, it proposes a conceptual shift in how integration is understood within European education policy, from individual adaptation to institutional responsibility.

By bridging theory, EU policy analysis and SIRIUS-informed research, the paper contributes to European debates on migration, inclusion and education governance.

This paper adopts a qualitative, interpretive methodology, drawing on a synthesis of policy analysis and research-based evidence from European education contexts. Rather than presenting new empirical data, the paper integrates insights from multiple sources to develop a theoretically informed argument about the positioning of schools within integration systems. Primary sources include European-level policy documents on integration and inclusion, with particular attention to how education and schools are conceptualised within these frameworks. These documents are analysed using critical policy analysis to examine underlying assumptions about responsibility, agency and implementation. The paper also draws on findings from comparative European research projects and networks focused on migrant and refugee education. These include studies examining teacher preparedness, cross-sector collaboration, multilingual education, and the integration of migrant and internationally educated teachers. While diverse in scope and geography, these studies consistently highlight the gap between policy ambition and school-level capacity. To ground the analysis, the paper incorporates illustrative examples drawn from published case studies and practitioner research in different European contexts (e.g. Ireland, Germany, Greece, Nordic countries). These examples are not treated as representative cases, but as analytically useful illustrations of broader systemic patterns. Analytically, the paper employs thematic synthesis, identifying recurring patterns related to: • the expansion of educators’ roles beyond formal pedagogical responsibilities, • the reliance on informal, relational practices in the absence of systemic support, • and the marginal involvement of schools in integration policy design. The theoretical framework of natality is then used as an interpretive lens through which these themes are re-examined, enabling a conceptual rather than evaluative reading of integration practices.

The paper concludes that schools constitute the most consistent and relationally significant sites of integration for migrant and refugee children in Europe, yet remain structurally under-supported and politically under-recognised. While educators routinely engage in complex pedagogical, emotional and mediating work, this labour is rarely acknowledged within integration policy frameworks. A key outcome of the paper is the argument that current approaches risk rendering integration fragile and uneven, as success depends heavily on individual school capacity and professional goodwill. Where integration is not institutionalised, through interdisciplinary collaboration, policy co-design, and sustained resourcing, it remains vulnerable to burnout, inconsistency and inequity. The paper calls for a reframing of integration as a shared, structural responsibility rather than an individualised educational outcome. It argues that recognising schools as co-creators of integration has implications for teacher education, policy development, and governance structures across Europe. Ultimately, the paper suggests that strengthening schools’ role in integration is not only an educational imperative, but a democratic one. When schools are positioned as strategic partners rather than silent responders, integration becomes more sustainable, equitable and socially cohesive.

Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press. European Commission. (2021). Action plan on integration and inclusion 2021–2027. Publications Office of the European Union. Klarenbeek, A. (2021). Relational integration: A response to assimilationist integration models. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(5), 820–838. Lynch, K., Baker, J., & Lyons, M. (2009). Affective equality: Love, care and injustice. Palgrave Macmillan. Reay, D. (2012). What would a socially just education system look like? Saving the minnows from the pike. Journal of Education Policy, 27(5), 587–599. SIRIUS Network. (2019). Migrant education and integration in Europe: SIRIUS Watch. SIRIUS Network. SIRIUS Network. (2024). SIRIUS Watch: Migrant education in Europe. SIRIUS Network.