Shaping Occupational Possibilities for Norwegian Immigrant Children: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

Elementary school education is a key occupational arena for the integration of immigrant children. In this study conducted in Norway, questions about how best to support the education of immigrant children arose partly due to their poorer performance in primary school testing. A critical discourse analysis of the construction of the problem of the educational gap between Norwegian and immigrant children was conducted drawing on a sample of 20 newspaper articles published in 2012 about educational matters in Oslo. The analysis deconstructed how issues related to immigrant children's performance were problematized, with particular foci on how occupation was drawn into solution frames and the occupational possibilities promoted for immigrant children and their families. Three problematizations of the educational gap were identified, with each locating the problem in a different rationale, specifically, linguistic deficiency, parental deficiency and spatial segregation. Within each problematization, although contrasting political rationalities emphasized individual or social solutions, occupations forwarded as means to address the gap and promote integration were narrowly defined in ways that focused on assimilation into Norwegian ways of doing and de-valued difference. Concerns are raised regarding the implications of this narrow framing of occupational possibilities for identity, well-being, and occupational marginalization of immigrant children and families.

Keywords:

• Migration
• Integration
• Assimilation
• Education
• Mothering

Elementary school education is a key occupational arena for the integration of immigrant children, with implications for health, well-being and occupational engagement. This study was conducted within the Norwegian context, where questions of how best to provide education to immigrant children are a prominent policy issue (Seland, 2013). Given that discourses, understood as ways of writing and talking about particular topics (Cheek, 2004), are rooted within power relations and can affect occupational possibilities (Laliberte Rudman, 2010), this study critically examined how the occupational issue of the lower educational performance of immigrant children within the primary educational system in Norway is being problematized within Norwegian newspapers and the implications of dominant problematizations for the shaping of occupational possibilities. This study adds to the body of occupational science research demonstrating the need for policies and practices addressing immigration to incorporate more complex understandings of occupation, and illustrates how an occupational perspective can promote new ways of thinking about and addressing social issues.

In comparison to many other countries, immigration into Norway is relatively recent, with first immigrants in modern times coming in the 1970s. The topic of how best to integrate immigrants into Norwegian society is still highly debated in domestic politics and media (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2009). The Schengen Agreement, which came into effect in 1995, made parts of Europe more or less borderless and opened the door for increased labour immigration from Europe (European Union, 1990). Such labour immigration was further facilitated with the additional expansion of the European Economic Area (EEA) in 2004 and 2007. The number of immigrants and Norwegians born to immigrants increased from 183,000 persons (4.3% of Norway's population) in 1992 to 805,000 persons (13.0% of the population) in 2015. Currently in Norway, immigrants are predominantly non-Western labour immigrants from the first years of immigration, refugees from non-Western countries, and labour immigrants from other European countries (Statistics Norway, 2015).

The integration of immigrants is an important socio-political issue in many nations (Huot, Laliberte Rudman, Dodson, & Magalhães, 2012). As immigration rates into Norway have increased, concerns regarding the limitations of contemporary approaches to integration have arisen, given data that suggest barriers to economic and social integration persist. For example, within Norway, 72% of the non-immigrant youth complete upper secondary school within 5 years, whereas only 49% of immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Latin America with residence less than 10 years achieve this educational outcome (Akershus Fylkeskommune, 2015). In addition, the proportion of people being sentenced or convicted of crimes is higher among immigrants in comparison to other Norwegians, with this negative statistic being dominated by people who have come from non-Western countries, immigrants aged 15 to 24 years, and men (Skardhamar, Thorsen, & Henriksen, 2011). In relation to immigrant youth, as education has been viewed within government policy as a key means to facilitate integration, an apparent educational performance gap between immigrant and Norwegian-born children has been a focus of government concern.

Overall, the political approach to education is consistent with Norwegian welfare politics in general, which emphasize equal rights and social justice (Government.no, 2014). Policies dealing with public education underscore that schools shall be inclusive and suitable for all children and youth, and that all pupils have equal opportunities for skill development (Government.no, 2014). Education is regarded a public responsibility, and only 3% of youth in Norway attend private school (Statistics Norway, 2014). Likewise, there are public loan scheme arrangements to support further education through the Norwegian State Educational Loan Fund. A social equalisation agenda aimed at ensuring that the probability of succeeding in the education system is independent of family background has been forwarded (Government.no, 2008). There is also a strong gender equality policy that has advanced both the academic performance and level of educational completion of girls (Chaudhary, 2011).

Despite these political values and goals, results from national tests¹ conducted with elementary school students in 2012 showed a positive correlation between parental level of education and achieved test results. Pupils who had parents with tertiary education were significantly more likely to achieve a higher level on all tests (Holmseth, 2013), with this gap being particularly significant between linguistic minority and majority pupils (Dale, 2008). In turn, the educational and financial resources of parents are often forwarded in policy and research reports as factors that contribute to lower scores of linguistic minority students, as immigrant families, on average, are overrepresented in lower socioeconomic groups in Norway (Statistics Norway, 2013).

A body of research has attempted to understand the various factors shaping this gap. For example, Bonesrønning, Falch and Strøm (2005) found that student body compositions with a high proportion of visible minorities were associated with low supply of certified teachers. Pastoor (2005) found that teachers tend to have insufficient knowledge about minority pupil background. In addition, Øzerk (2003) found that teachers tend to have consistently lower expectations of linguistic minority students, which are problematic as high expectations of students are a vital precondition for facilitating learning (Jenner, 2004). The gap in educational attainment has also been connected to spatial segregation of immigrants, resulting in local primary schools with high proportions of immigrant pupils (Blom, 2012). As well, Andersson, Osth and Malmberg (2010) found that school segregation is higher in regions with a large visible-minority population, linking this to Norwegian-born parents’ preference for majority-dominated schools.

While studies have moved beyond the socio-economic resources of immigrant parents as explanatory factors, few studies have attended to the broader discursive context in which attitudes and actions are shaped. Drawing on a Foucauldian-informed governmentality perspective, we propose, commensurate with the concept of occupational possibilities (Laliberte Rudman, 2010), that discourses influence what immigrant pupils and their families view as possible and ideal ways to participate in schooling and society, as well as what the society, including teachers, researchers, policy makers and others, view as appropriate measures to support immigrant pupils and their occupations. Taken-for-granted ways of writing and talking about immigrant pupils, namely discourses, are productive social practices that “systematically form the objects [and subjects] of which they speak” (Foucault, 1972, p. 49).

Examining the discursive context within Norway is timely as concerns have been raised regarding the sustainability of Nordic social democratic welfare states, which are experiencing a “struggle to retain the welfare state against growing neoliberal and managerial discourses” (Lyngstad, 2008, p. 77). As “neo-liberalism meets the Nordic welfare state” (Dahl, 2012, p. 283), the extent to which welfare state changes, including those related to education and immigration, will resist or align with neoliberal emphases on market-oriented solutions, devolution of state responsibilities to individuals, and public sector downsizing, remains uncertain (Dahl, 2012; Lyngstad, 2008). However, it is clear the neoliberal discourses have entered into the Norwegian context (Nafstad, Blakar, Carlquist, Phelps, & Rand-Hendrikson, 2009). Thus, in this study we attended to how neoliberal and welfare state rationalities intersected to shape the problematization of immigrant children within Norwegian newspapers and the implications of this contemporary discursive context for occupational possibilities.

Theoretical Framework: Conceptualizing Education from Public Health and Occupational Science Perspectives

Critically-oriented public health and occupational science scholarship were drawn upon to frame the educational performance gap between immigrant and Norwegian-born children as an issue of human rights and occupational injustice. From a public health perspective, education is a key social determinant of health and a basic human right, intricately connected with other social determinants such as income, work conditions, and housing (Labonte, Polanyi, Muhajarine, McIntosh, & Williams, 2005). In addition, education has been identified as a key means for marginalized groups, such as indigenous peoples and immigrants, to promote community development and collective well-being (United Nations, 2009). From an occupational perspective, education, as a key occupation of childhood and youth, can be viewed as a human right and as fundamental to participation in society. Lack of success at primary levels of education can shape life-long inequities; for example, by restricting choices for further education and constraining possibilities for work (Detels, Beaglehole, Lansang, & Gulliford, 2009). When a group of people is systemically disadvantaged within an educational system, resulting in poorer overall academic performance, this can be framed as a situation of occupational injustice (Townsend & Wilcock, 2004).

Addressing situations of occupational injustice requires attention to how injustices are socially and politically shaped, as well as systematic changes that enhance equitable opportunities for development of occupational potential (Stadnyk, Townsend, & Wilcock, 2010). Critical public health scholars have questioned why there is often an absence of attention to the political and ideological shaping of the inequitable distribution of social determinants of health (Labonte et al., 2005). To examine the socio-political processes that have shaped and perpetuated this occupational injustice, we drew upon the concept of occupational possibilities. Occupational possibilities refers to “the occupations people view as ideal and possible and which are promoted and made available within specific socio-historical contexts” (Laliberte Rudman, 2005, p. 149). Previous work on occupational possibilities has pointed to the centrality of discursive constructions of collectives as an important socio-political terrain through which occupational injustices come to be taken-for-granted aspects of the ‘way the world is’ (Laliberte Rudman, 2010). This concept builds on the central premise of governmentality scholarship that contemporary forms of governing draw upon discursive technologies to shape subjectivities, that is, possibilities for personhood (Dean, 1994), by highlighting how such technologies also shape everyday doing, that is, possibilities for occupation (Laliberte Rudman, 2014). In essence, we sought to raise awareness of how the educational ‘problems’ of immigrant children in Norway, as well as their subject positions, were discursively constructed, and how these constructions influence how such children and their occupational possibilities are viewed.

Methodology and Methods

A critical discourse analysis (CDA) study, informed by governmentality theory, critical public health and the concept of occupational possibilities, was conducted. We employed an approach to CDA guided by the assumptions that language is key in the shaping of social reality and is employed within power relations to shape possibilities for being and doing (Ainsworth & Hardy, 2004). The approach used drew upon the methodological work of scholars who have employed a governmentality perspective to guide CDA (Cheek, 2004; Jäger & Maier, 2009), and the approach utilized to generate the concept of occupational possibilities (Laliberte Rudman & Dennhardt, 2015).

In particular, Oslo, the capital city of Norway, has experienced an influx of immigrants, with approximately 197,000 people or 31% of its population being immigrants or Norwegians born to immigrant parents in 2014 (Statistics Norway, 2015). Thus, texts were drawn from 2012 editions of the Norwegian newspapers Aftenposten, Aftenposten Aften,² Klassekampen and Dagsavisen, which all have a focus on the Oslo region, but represent different political points of view (Blakar, 2006). Within 2012, given the educational test results, the issue of immigrant pupils and their participation in elementary education was fore fronted. Newspapers were chosen given “the greatly increasing role, power, and influence of the news media … on 21st-century democratic governance” (Lee, 2009, p. 515), as well as their vital role in circulating discourses and shaping subjectivity (Nafstad et al., 2009; Rose, 1999; Rudman, 2005). Relevant articles were found by using the media monitoring service Retriever's electronic archive ATEKST, using the keywords ‘school* AND immigr*’.³ From the initial sample of 429 news articles, the number of texts was scaled down in a four stage sampling process according to iteratively defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in the final 20. Articles with school and immigrants in primary school as the main topic were included. Articles were excluded that focused on school issues outside of Oslo, had a main topic that was not immigrants and school, or addressed school attendance and performance above primary school (above 7th grade). Given that data consisted of publicly available newspaper articles, ethics approval was not required.

A systematic analytical process was used. Each article was analysed with a data analysis sheet with predetermined questions informed by governmentality theory and the concept of occupational possibilities. Examples of questions include: where is the problem of the educational gap located?; who has the authority to define the problem?; what occupations are promoted as ideal for immigrant children?; and, what occupations are presented as non-ideal for immigrant children? For each article, notations were made regarding meaning units, and how the meaning units grouped together into lines of argumentation. Analytic sheets were compared and contrasted across articles to identify main discursive emphases. The iterative analysis process was guided by theoretical guidelines, analytic feedback by co-authors and a reflexive journal, aiming to enhance credibility and transparency. Illustrative quotes from the newspapers were translated by the lead author; the accuracy of the translation was double-checked by the second author who is fluent in both Norwegian and English. The source of quotes given in the text is identified in Table 1.

Table 1: Newspaper Articles Cited in the Text

No.	Author	Date (2012)	Title [Norwegian]	Source
1	Abdirashid, M.	30 March	An iron curtain divides Oslo [Et jernteppe splitter Oslo]	Aftenposten, p. 27.
2	Mellingsæter, H.	3 May	This is Oslo's first city part of immigrants [Her er Oslos første innvandrerbydel]	Aftenposten Aften, pp. 6-7.
5	Borgen, M.	24 May	Not the ethnical diversity that is the challenge [Ikke det etniske mangfoldet som er utfordringen]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 13.
6	Marcussen, H. E.	24 May	It is concerning minority or majority to a small extent [Det handler i liten grad om minoritet og majoritet]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 13.
7	Hagen, C. I.	24 May	It might develop parallel societies [Det kan utvikle seg parallelle samfunn]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 12.
9	Solberg, E. L.	24 May	Oslo is one of the cities in the world that has been most successful in integration [Oslo er en av byene i verden som har lykkes best med integrering]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 13.
10	Berge, T.	24 May	Need small houses in Groruddalen and Søndre Nordstrand [Trenger småhus i Groruddalen og Søndre Nordstrand]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 13.
12	Vestreng, T. H.	16 June	School winner from Vietnam [Skolevinner fra Vietnam]	Dagsavisen, pp. 14-15.
13	Hagesæter, P. V.	25 July	Two school examples [To skoleeksempler]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 2.
14	Meidell, P.	9 October	The result of a deliberate policy? [Resultatet av en villet politikk?]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 23.
15	Stavrum, K. L.	11 October	Schools under investigation [Skoler under lupen]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 2.
16	Åserud, P.	17 October	Prejudices or experience? [Fordommer eller erfaring?]	Aftenposten Aften, p. 25.
17	Gedde-Dahl, S., & Stokke, O.	27 October	Free core time in after-school programme for minority children [Gratis kjernetid i SFO for minoritetsbarn]	Aftenposten, p. 9.
18	Rønvold, I.	27 October	Women and children first [Kvinner og barn først]	Dagsavisen, p. 8.

Findings

Commensurate with the emphasis on subject positions in governmentality scholarship and the interconnected nature of identity and occupational possibilities, the ideal and non-ideal subjectivities shaped for immigrant children are presented and how these subjectivities are linked to the shaping of occupational possibilities is delineated. Subsequently, three major discursive emphases revolving around the problematization of immigrant pupils’ educational attainment are outlined. The discussion addresses how each of them led to particular problematizations of the educational gap, as well as specific solutions tied to occupation. The key problem identified was the poor educational performance of immigrant children compared to ‘typical’ Norwegian children, as measured by standardized tests. The first emphasis located the problem in a linguistic deficiency, the second pertained to a parental deficiency tied to immigrant culture and religion, while the third highlighted spatial segregation.

Subjectivities: The ideal, and the non-ideal, immigrant pupil

The texts outlined several main characteristics of the immigrant pupil, shaping both a non-idealized and idealized subjectivity. In turn, each subjectivity was connected to occupation, either in outlining deficiencies that constrained occupational performance in education or in highlighting the types of occupations that should be taken up to strive towards becoming an ideal immigrant pupil. The discursive shaping of the ‘problematic’ immigrant pupil incorporated three key characteristics: having poor Norwegian language skills, having non-Western background, and having parents with low socioeconomic status (SES). These characteristics are, for instance, seen in quotes such as:

It is also a challenge that some schools have a very high proportion of pupils with non-Western background, something that makes the integration more difficult (7).

It is also a major challenge if a large population of the pupils don't know Norwegian well enough when they start school or speaks another language in the recesses (9).

In addition, the ‘problematic’ immigrant pupil was presented as in danger of becoming an outsider to Norwegian society, even becoming a criminal:

The experience in Oslo is that schools with a majority of minorities struggle with language skills, pupils who are criminals and poor parental contact (16).

In contrast, the ideal immigrant pupil is constructed as a hard-working, high-achieving ‘school winner’. One article brings up a recent finding that some minority pupils are doing increasingly better at school than pupils with Norwegian background. As a representative of minority pupils doing well, a Vietnamese girl is fronted as ‘the school winner’. When asked why some pupils with a minority background do so well in school, she answered:

I read a lot and memorize my homework. I wish to do well at school, she says. What's your dream for the future? – I want to become a doctor, the 11-year old girl says (12).

The ideal immigrant pupil is depicted as highly motivated for school, interacting with Norwegian peers, and eager to engage in leisure occupations that enable him or her to become as Norwegian as possible, such as playing in the school band, attending after-school clubs and participating in organised after-school sports. These various occupations are connected to achieving good results at school.

We know that in those parts of the city that have a particularly high proportion of, especially non-Western immigrants, there are some extra challenges in terms of giving information about the importance of children attending kindergarten and after-school clubs and getting good following-up of their school work (10).

Engagement in these types of occupations is framed as being “part of the larger community” (18) and enabling successful integration through learning and being like Norwegian children.

Linguistic deficiency

In more than half of the articles analysed, proficiency in Norwegian language was fore fronted as a prerequisite of immigrants’ successful participation in elementary school. For example, in an article about a part of Oslo with an especially high proportion of immigrants, the leader of an immigrant association is quoted as proposing, “language and communication are key factors in successful integration” (2). In several articles, lack of Norwegian language skills is seen as a problem for schools and teaching and, ultimately, as a key reason for immigrant pupils not performing as well as other children. For instance, an Oslo politician who was asked for her opinion about Oslo's high proportion of immigrants, was quoted as stating:

If you, for instance, have got a high proportion of children not speaking Norwegian, this will of course be problematic for both school and teaching (6).

As this excerpt exemplifies, the problem is often presented as situated in the gap between the immigrant pupils’ lack of Norwegian language skills and the schools’ resources to meet these pupils’ extra needs. It differs in where the emphasis is; either in society's ability to adjust for these extra needs or in lingual minority pupils for presenting great challenges for teachers. These different constructions in turn tend to align with different solution frames; that is, as either promoting societal responsibility for integration or individual responsibility for language learning. When linguistic deficiency is framed as a challenge that requires societal adjustment, the solutions offered up emphasize measures to strengthen schools’ resources to meet the challenges of student bodies that have a high proportion of immigrants. The importance of highly skilled teachers is emphasized, in addition to improved language teaching at schools:

The government tantalizes the municipalities with 31 million Norwegian kroner in development funding if they will make good projects to improve integration, for instance by improved Norwegian language training (17).

In some articles, the problem of linguistic deficiency is framed as resulting from a lack of interaction with Norwegian peers outside of school hours. Play and organized occupations together with Norwegian peers in kindergarten and after school hours are especially highlighted:

Several children show limited Norwegian language skills in the transition from kindergarten to school because they don't meet Norwegian-speaking children in play and interaction after school hours (17).

This problem is sometimes proposed to require a societal response, such as governmental funding for free core time in after-school clubs for immigrant children, so that parents’ financial resources and formal education levels do not serve as barriers to costly after-school clubs. When this problem is individualized, the lack of interaction outside of school hours is situated in immigrant parents’ limited understanding of the importance of their children's attendance in kindergarten and after-school clubs to gain proficiency in the Norwegian language. For example, in an article dealing with a part of Oslo with a high proportion of immigrants, a Norwegian living in the area stated:

The challenge … is the lingual poverty when children don't attend after-school clubs but go straight back home and don't have access to Norwegian children's television, but instead watch programs from their home country (2).

The non-participating immigrant children are presented as a result of their parents’ choice to hold them back from participation in occupations where they can interact with Norwegian peers and media. Parents’ choices aligned with their culture and language become shaped as a barrier for children's participation in occupations, and solutions focus on changing the values, attitudes, and behaviours of immigrant parents or side-stepping them to ensure immigrant children are exposed to Norwegian language and culture through Norwegian occupations.

Parental deficiency

Parents of immigrant pupils are presented as having an essential role in ensuring their children's integration and educational success, as well as being the main issue negatively impacting on their children's probability of succeeding in school in several articles. Building further on locating the problem of linguistic deficiency in immigrant parents’ values, understandings and choices, the influence of parents is problematized in various ways. Two main discursive emphases are evident. The first focuses on the parents’ insufficient financial resources. The second focuses on the parents’, and especially the mothers’, lack of formal education and employment and connects these to the constraining effects of immigrant cultures. The presentation of the financial resources of immigrant families as a barrier for the children's participation in after-school activities is exemplified by a Socialist Left Party politician: “Poverty among parents means that a lot of children do not attend after-school clubs and participate in cultural activities” (5).

The second discursive emphasis addresses the inadequate education and employment of immigrant women, and frames aspects of their culture and religion as impeding their children's educational success. This emphasis is underpinned by a construction of problematic immigrant parents as being from cultures where women traditionally have a less active position in the working society compared with men, and where “it is expected that they [immigrant women] stay home with a lot of children” (17). In turn, this is framed as restricting the rights of immigrant women. The Minister of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion points out the ‘problem’ of immigrant women's lack of workforce participation in an article regarding a recently presented white paper on integration:

The key to a successful society where women are of equal worth, are equally positioned in the society and have the freedom of choice, and where their children are socially included from an early age, is to be found among the women. … The white paper emphasizes the importance of increasing the employment rates among immigrants and women in particular (17).

In turn, a key solution proposed to enhance the educational success of immigrant pupils is for immigrant women to transcend the cultural and religious values that constrain their occupations so that they can shift away from being stay-at-home mothers and their children will become active in after-school programs. The governmental solutions are mainly to provide programs designed to meet women's needs for formal education and employment:

This is partly the reason that the government wants to make New Chance, a project helping immigrant women into work, into a permanent program (18).

However, it is often implied that the effect of governmental measures depends on parents’ ‘choice’ of making use of the public services being offered. The Minister of Education and Research stated that there is “a huge difference between those who make use of the services the after-school club provides and those who don't” (18). Thus, the lack of education and employment is also linked to poor parenting choices and behaviours. Overall, the implication is that traditional ways of doing are not right within the contemporary context of Norway, which has a more equitable approach to women's rights, and that immigrant women must become more active through formal work to facilitate their own integration and that of their children.

Spatial segregation

Spatial segregation, built on ethnicity, is explicitly shaped as the main problem related to immigrant pupils’ educational attainment in several articles. Spatial segregation is proposed to contribute to the educational gap because it results in immigrant-dense areas and schools, as exemplified in this statement from a Progress Party politician:

Areas and city parts with a high proportion of immigrants have some extraordinary challenges, such as higher use of social support and Child Protective Services (7).

Immigrant-dense schools are essentially framed as deficient, to the extent that Norwegian politicians avoid sending their own children to such schools:

It is a generally accurate characterization of Oslo that those governing the city and the country don't send their children to typical immigrant schools (13).

The implied problem is that spatial segregation and choices of Norwegian parents to send their children to other schools leads to the creation of schools with high proportions of immigrant children and, in turn, these ‘typical immigrant schools’ face challenges that may lower the quality of education provided.

The root to the problem of spatial segregation is mainly constructed around two foci, one that emphasizes issues of inequitable options for housing and mobility, and one that frames spatial segregation as resulting from choices of both immigrant and Norwegian parents. The emphasis on inequitable opportunities highlights how lack of financial resources limits the mobility of immigrants. For example, some articles highlight high costs of housing in certain parts of the city: “A large proportion of minorities live in Oslo, and they are having a hard time in the housing market” (17).

The second discursive emphasis locates spatial segregation within Norwegian and immigrant parents’ choice to settle in certain areas due to ethnic belonging. This preference for ethnic belonging is shaped as desired by immigrant parents, as expressed by a young politician with an immigrant background:

There are no parents who want their children to stand out from other children at school, and that's one of the reasons most of them move to those places with greatest ethnical belonging (1).

Norwegian parents are shaped as contributing to the problem through their decision-making based on the same preferences for ethnic belonging: “[Ethnically Norwegian] fathers … had moved out of the area because they didn't want their children to grow up as minorities in their own country” (14). The solutions connected to areas and schools with high proportions of immigrants are separated into two main arguments. The solution to spatial segregation when it is framed as resulting from a lack of parental financial resources focuses on changing societal structures, particularly housing options, to enable immigrants to live in various neighbourhoods. For example, this is seen in this statement from a Socialist Left Party politician:

To achieve better equalization we need more small houses in Groruddalen and Søndre Nordstrand [more deprived areas] and more apartments in western [richer] parts of the city (10).

The rationality of this statement is that more varied housing will result in a more diverse mix of people in the whole city, enhance integration, and avoid immigrant-dense schools.

The main solution addressing parents’ preference for ethnic belonging and resourced schools is to strengthen the challenged schools. Through funding, the government aims to enhance school quality by making them more attractive to highly skilled teachers:

Teacher quality is the one variable that has greatest effect on the pupils’ learning outcomes … The Education Agency follows this by raising the salaries to principals and teachers at the most challenging schools (15).

By promoting means to improve the situation as it is, the latter solution frame might have an underlying acceptance of segregation, as the focus is on making the existing segregation less significant for children's school attainment.

Discussion

The key aim of this study was to critically deconstruct how issues related to the poor performance of immigrant children in Norwegian elementary schools were constructed in the media, with a particular focus on how this occupational issue was problematized and the types of solution frames emphasized. All three problematizations of the educational gap, linguistic deficiency, parental deficiency and spatial segregation, embodied a particular discursive tension in that they encompassed constructions which located the problems, and solutions, in either immigrant pupils’ and parents’ values, choices and behaviours or in societal structures and practices. Ultimately, the occupational possibilities constructed as ideal and possible means for successful integration were narrowly defined in ways that failed to value or create space for difference, thus potentially shaping occupational marginalization.

Placing discursive tensions within competing political rationalities

Neoliberal ideologies underpinning global capitalism are permeating diverse socio-political contexts (Estes & Phillipson, 2002; Nafstad et al., 2009). Although key characteristics of neoliberalism have not yet been adopted at the state level in Norway (Richards, Bjørkhaug, Lawrence, & Hickman, 2013; van Riemsdijk, 2010) the findings, which align with Nafstad and colleagues (2009), show the rising influence of neoliberal rationality. Based on their analyses of ideological shifts in Norwegian newspapers from 1984 to 2008, Nafstad and colleagues (2009) concluded that the “rhetoric of neo-liberalist market ideology has increasingly gained predominance in the public discourse in Norway” (p. 173). Consistent with neoliberal political rationality (Brady, 2014), these authors pointed to an increasing focus in Norwegian media on framing various aspects of life in market terms, emphasizing values of individualism, prioritizing individual rights over societal obligations, and questioning the long-standing societal contract between individual citizens, communities and government. At the same time, these authors noted the presence of counter-ideologies advocating for collective notions of societal responsibilities and a broader construction of life beyond the private market. In this analysis, similar competing underlying rationalities were evident.

On the one hand, aligned with neoliberal rationality, within each problematization there is a discursive shaping of the problem of the educational gap as located in the choices of immigrant families. This type of discursive construction aligns with neo-liberal rationality by emphasizing private responsibilities enacted through the choices and occupations of individuals and families (Ilcan, 2009). When the problem is framed as resulting out of individual choices, the solutions emphasize the need for immigrant families, particularly mothers, and their children to make different occupational choices. Thus, the problem of the educational gap is essentially constructed as an individual problem requiring individual action, which aligns with the neoliberal individualizing of the social (Laliberte Rudman, 2013).

A key problem that arises out of such a construction is that it obscures the diversity of economic, political, historical, social and cultural factors that shape the occupational choices of individuals and families and that, in turn, shape injustices (Galvaan, 2014). For example, as pointed to within the counter-discourse apparent in the media analysed, inequities in socio-economic resources mean that the occupational choices of immigrants within Norway are often constrained. As illustrated within Galvaan's (2014) analysis of the situated nature of occupational choices of marginalized adolescents in South Africa, there is a danger that locating the problem and solutions for the educational gap at the individual level will not effectively decrease the gap, but instead will enhance educational injustices for those immigrant children whose parents do not make the right occupational, housing and other choices, which may neither be possible given their resources or, as outlined below, desirable given implications for identity and well-being.

On the other hand, within each problematization, there is a discursive shaping which emphasizes how structural issues, such as costs of after-school programs and the distribution of qualified teachers, shape the educational gap. This second type of discursive construction aligns at least partially with welfare state ideology through emphasizing the role of the state in addressing inequities experienced by immigrants as a collective. However, as outlined below, both types of discursive locations of the problem are associated with similar occupation-based solutions focused on becoming and being as Norwegian as possible.

The socio-politically shaping of occupational possibilities and occupational marginalization: Becoming and being as Norwegian as possible

Various approaches can be adopted within immigration policies. For example, Portes and Zhou (1993) outlined three modes of incorporation: assimilation, multiculturalism and integration. Each mode varies in relation to the extent to which immigrants are expected to take up ways of being and doing that are similar to those of a host society, with assimilation involving the greatest expectations for similarity, multiculturalism attempting to accommodate difference, and integration addressing the need for both immigrant and societal adaptation. Within the articles analysed, assimilation was strongly emphasized in that solutions often focused on ways that immigrant children, as well as mothers, could work towards being like Norwegians. As such, occupations were primarily presented as means to promote assimilation – that is, to learn and adopt typical Norwegian ways of doing and thereby “become a part of the larger community” [18]. In turn, the range of occupational possibilities promoted as a means to integrate into Norwegian society is narrowed in ways that exclude difference and shape occupational marginalization.

Ultimately, underlying most of the problematizations and solution frames identified, was a particular construction of an idealized immigrant pupil who succeeds by adopting Norwegian ways of being and doing, such as learning the Norwegian language or playing with Norwegian children in after-school clubs. On the other hand, the problematic, non-ideal immigrant pupil is a challenging pupil who is in danger of becoming a social outsider by not participating in idealised Norwegian occupations or through engagement in culturally-focused occupations. These subjectivities are tied to participation in particular occupations, resulting in a dichotomous construction of outcomes for immigrant children and families: assimilated through occupations that are associated with Norwegian culture or marginalized through occupations that are associated with their cultures of origins.

Occupation-focused research addressing immigration challenges this discursive construction as over-simplistic, pointing to the complex ways that immigrants and immigrant families actively negotiate their relationship with the host culture and culture of origin on an on-going basis through occupation, as well as the important contributions of occupations associated with cultures of origin (Huot et al., 2012; Huot, Laliberte Rudman, & Dodson, 2014; Lencucha, Davis, & Polatajko, 2013; Nayar, Hocking, & Giddings, 2012). For example, a study of immigrant families living in Sweden found that they negotiate multiple cultures and identities through family-orchestrated occupations, pointing to the need for research, discourse and policy to more fully consider “how people's engagement in occupations embedded in cultural values enacts opportunities for identities expression, development, (re)construction, acceptance, management and negotiation after experienced shifts in personal meanings and place” (Farias & Asaba, 2013, p. 10). As well, articles focused on a narrow range of occupations engaged in by the children and their mothers, neglecting to consider the diversity of occupations that can contribute to integration, outside of structured play and work (Nayar et al., 2012).

Demands for successful integration that incorporate fundamental changes to one's occupations and identity may shape situations of occupational marginalization in that they do not incorporate “respect for differences that arise in different, individual capacities, and different meanings derived from both personal and cultural meanings” (Wilcock & Townsend, 2000, p. 84). Previous research has pointed to negative implications for well-being and identity that can arise when individuals are marginalized from occupations central to their culture. For example, a study exploring the occupational well-being of Middle Eastern immigrants to Sweden found that disruption of occupational trajectories that occurred with migration presented challenges to the maintenance of self-continuity (Pooremamali, Persson, Östman, & Eklund, 2015).

As well, occupation-focused studies have pointed to the identity challenges faced by immigrants when they transition to places characterized by a cultural worldview that varies from their culture of origin, particularly the transition from a collectivist to an individualist cultural worldview. Consistent with a Western ideological focus on productivity and individualism (Huot et al., 2012; Kantartzis & Molineux, 2011), Norwegian culture emphasizes the importance of being an active citizen who makes a productive contribution to the welfare state (Carlquist, Nafstad, & Blakar, 2007; Christiansen, Haavet, & Haave, 2006). An especially dominant feature of Nordic welfare policies is women's right to work; indeed, the proportion of formally employed women is higher in Norway than anywhere else in the world (Christiansen et al., 2006). Within the texts analysed, there is an emphasis on the importance of immigrant children and their mothers engaging in occupations that involve enhancing and using their productive potential.

The tensions such values, and associated occupational emphases and expectations, may create for immigrants from non-Western or collectivist contexts are not addressed within the newspaper texts. At the same time, those not doing occupations in ways consistent with Norwegian approaches and values, such as stay-at-home immigrant mothers, are essentially framed as dis-engaged, as outsiders, as un-educated, as oppressed, or as passive. This framing devalues, problematizes or neglects the occupations that immigrant mothers are engaged in as well as the values, embedded within a collectivist worldview, that guide their approaches to parenting. In relation to occupational possibilities, this assimilationist approach thus focuses on shaping possibilities for occupation constrained within the ways of doing and being valued within Norwegian society, creating little space for or valuing of difference and thus perpetuating occupational injustice.

Overall, the various cultural, social, economic, and other socially shaped barriers to choosing the occupations highlighted as ideal result, for immigrant children and their families, in the means by which they might integrate being largely downplayed. For example, within the problematization focused on linguistic deficiency, it is implied that simply learning the Norwegian language will lead to enhanced academic performance and integration. However, as highlighted in research by Huot and colleagues (2012), linguistic capital is only one form of capital, and immigrants who are visibly ‘other’ may face other types of barriers to integration even when they learn the language of the host society. For example, within the texts analysed, issues related to barriers such as racism, or at least intolerance of difference, do not surface, and there is little room for discussion of potential changes in Norwegian culture or occupations. Thus, solutions such as free kindergartens, after-school clubs, and language training may be insufficient in improving immigrant children's school performance if there are other forms of exclusion, such as subtle ways of talking about or relating to them, which limit their occupational possibilities (Fangen, Johansson, & Hammarén, 2012).

Previous research suggests that Norwegian teachers have lower expectations of minority pupils (Øzerk, 2003) and are focused on the barriers of a multicultural pupil group (Gjervan, 2004). A continued dominant construction of immigrant pupils as deficient or problematic may perpetuate the educational gap through maintaining such expectations and perceptions. Rather than homogenizing immigrant pupils in relation to deficiencies, Børhaug (2012) contended that empowerment of minority pupils should be based on multiple-identity choice making and an anti-racist stance that seeks to develop minority pupils’ capability sets and strengths. Drawing on an occupational perspective, such a re-framing of educational practice would require a discursive re-framing of the problem of the educational gap, one that allows for and values different ways of doing as well as being.

Previous research also suggests that policies promoting assimilation and negating difference as a means to integrate immigrants might have opposite effects, such as socio-political exclusion (Fangen et al., 2012). In an anthology of life-stories written by immigrants in Norway, Somali immigrants described experiencing encounters between themselves and different public offices as humiliating. They expressed being met with a lack of empathy and respect, and highlighted how value judgements regarding occupation were embedded in advice received, an attitude which Fangen and colleagues (2012) equate to “you must adopt our way of doing things, which again is better than your way of doing things” (p. 6). Moreover, this type of assimilationist discourse could promote the marginalization of immigrant children from occupations connected to their parents’ culture and religion, presenting challenges to creating spaces in which immigrants families can negotiate culture, identity and relationships through occupation (Farias & Asaba, 2013).

Conclusion

As Cheek (2004) pointed out, research results in critical discourse analysis are not generalizable as descriptions of how things are, but provide insight into how a phenomenon has come to be constructed within a particular socio-historical context. Aligned with this, this study aimed to interrogate the media's shaping of immigrant children's occupational possibilities in education in Oslo, Norway within newspaper articles published in 2012. The findings reveal taken-for-granted ways of discursively shaping immigrant pupils that can influence how the problem of the educational gap between Norwegian and immigrant children is understood, as well as the types of occupation-based and other solutions offered up as means to solve the problem. Findings revealed that despite some discursive variation in the location of the problem, solutions tended to focus on a narrow range of occupational possibilities that emphasized Norwegian ways of doing and devalued or excluded difference. As a CDA, the findings attend to dominant discourses circulated within public media based on the key assumption that the ‘truths’ produced through such discourses set parameters for the negotiation of everyday life, including occupation, and the organization of societal practices and institutions. Further understanding of the ways in which such discourses shape occupational possibilities and engagement for immigrant pupils in Norway could be attained via research conducted with immigrant pupils and their parents.

This study adds to the growing body of occupational science research on migration that demonstrates the need for policies and practices addressing immigration to incorporate more complex understandings of occupation. More specifically, this study raises concerns related to how problematizations and solutions that focus primarily on occupation as a means of assimilation, and that marginalize difference, may narrow occupational possibilities for immigrants and perpetuate occupational injustices. Further work applying an occupational perspective to understandings of integration processes may facilitate more holistic understandings of the integration experiences of newcomers that attend to the complex inter-relationships between occupation, place, identity and well-being, and inform new ways of thinking about and supporting the integration of immigrants in educational and other occupational arenas. In addition, this study illustrates how occupational science concepts can inform critically oriented qualitative research that provides insights regarding connections between the occupations of individuals and collectives and the broader socio-political context.

Notes

1 Since 2007, national tests are carried out at the beginning of the school year for 5th and 8th graders, and reflect the competence objectives of the curriculum in 4th and 7th grade (Primary school). The tests contain reading in Norwegian and English, and mathematics (Holmseth, 2013).

2 Aftenposten Aften was closed down as a separate publication on 1st Jan 2013, subsequently becoming part of Aftenposten.

3 Norwegian: ‘skole* AND innvandr*’.