Uppeldi og menntun - 01.07.2013, Blaðsíða 99

Uppeldi og menntUn/icelandic JoUrnal of edUcation 22(2) 2013 99
margrét a. markÚsdÓttir og sigrÚn aðalBJarnardÓttir
present obstacles, for example in getting a job. They also thought this could inhibit
immigrants from getting to know people, making friends, and communicating in gen-
eral. The second theme was equal rights: immigrants should be able to enjoy the same
rights as other citizens, such as having a voice about social issues through the right to
vote and to maintain their identity related to their cultural origins. The third theme
was prejudice: the young people felt that prejudices towards immigrants could keep
them from participating in society.
Second, the main theme of ”we and the other” consists of two subthemes. The the-
matic analysis revealed that five of the young people made a clearer distinction be-
tween “us” and “them” in their discussion about immigrants. In other words, they
“othered” immigrants. The analysis indicated that their views about immigrants re-
flected to some extent two subthemes: ideas about an Icelandic cultural identity and their
fear of changes in Icelandic culture, religion, and society.
For the remaining issue, i.e. attitudes towards the reception of refugees, the themat-
ic analysis revealed three main themes. The first was “human rights”: here, the young
people felt that refugees should enjoy the same human rights as other people, and that
they should be able to feel secure, given our common human need for safety and shel-
ter. The second theme was “limiting the numbers of refugees” and using a background
check to avoid allowing just “anyone” to enter Iceland as a refugee. The third theme
was an emphasis on “morality and helping” others, including the moral responsibility
and duty to help refugees who need assistance.
The study’s main limitation is that the young people could have been asked about
their views of the refugees’ rights in greater depth. Also, the interview method may
be limited, as some of these young people might have found it difficult to express and
describe their ideas and experiences. The study has at least two key strengths: First,
by using in-depth interviews, which focus on young people’s views of the rights of
immigrants and the reception of refugees, we can get a more holistic picture and a
deeper understanding of their thinking about the rights of minority groups. Second,
few studies have used in-depth interviews to understand young people’s attitudes to
immigrants. Given these strengths, the study should make an important contribution
to this field of study, on both national and international levels.
We do hope that our findings can be of use to researchers in this field, to those who
work in human rights education, and to those who raise and educate children and
young people of different backgrounds in situations that aim to cultivate their social,
ethical, and civic growth.
Keywords: Human rights, civic engagement, young people, immigrants, refugees