Objectives and ApproachThis study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to investigate the developmental well-being of children from refugee backgrounds in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Objective 1 (quantitative) leveraged population-level, government administrative data individually linked to a province-wide, routinely collected, teacher-reported measure of children’s development in kindergarten (the Early Development Instrument; EDI) to examine developmental outcomes across five domains for children identified as first-generation refugees (N=770), first-generation immigrants (N=7875), and non-migrants (N=199,186). In Objective 2 (qualitative), the population-level EDI results were brought to focus groups with BC educators and settlement workers (N=7) who work closely with children from refugee backgrounds to further corroborate, expand, and elaborate on the findings. ResultsA series of multiple linear regression models; adjusted for age, sex, and English Language Learner status showed that first-generation refugee status was significantly predictive of lower EDI scores in the areas of language & cognitive development, communication & generation knowledge, social competence, emotional maturity, and physical health & well-being. Focus group results corroborated the quantitative findings, added critical complexity/context (e.g., impacts of trauma), and identified important policy-oriented levers (e.g., early, accessible assessments and supports). ConclusionsThe study provided an understanding of the population-level developmental well-being of children from refugee backgrounds in BC, framed by rich, contextualized, and actionable knowledge from focus groups. ImplicationsShowcasing the combined breadth and depth of using a mixed methods approach, how we can best support the developmental challenges and build upon the strengths of children from refugee backgrounds will be discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gadermann et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: