This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion
may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails.
Au ho (s):
Ti le:
Yea :
Ve sion:
Copy igh :
Righ s:
Righ s u l:
Please ci e he o iginal e sion:
CC BY 4.0
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
C i ical Social Inclusion o Adul Mig an Language Lea ne s in Wo king Li e :
Expe iences F om SFI and LINC P og ams
© Tobias Pö zsch, Sanna Saksela‐Be gholm.
Published e sion
Pö zsch, Tobias; Saksela-Be gholm, Sanna
Pö zsch, T., & Saksela-Be gholm, S. (2023). C i ical Social Inclusion o Adul Mig an Language
Lea ne s in Wo king Li e : Expe iences F om SFI and LINC P og ams. Social Inclusion, 11(4), 47-
57. h ps://doi.o g/10.17645/si. 11i4.7154
2023
Social Inclusion (ISSN: 2183–2803)
2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X
h ps://doi.o g/10.17645/si. 11i4.7154
A icle
C i ical Social Inclusion o Adul Mig an Language Lea ne s in Wo king
Li e: Expe iences F om SFI and LINC P og ams
Tobias Pö zsch 1,* and Sanna Saksela‐Be gholm 2
1Swedish School o Social Science, Uni e si y o Helsinki, Finland
2Depa men o Social Sciences and Philosophy, Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Finland
* Co esponding au ho ( [email p o ec ed])
Submi ed: 5 May 2023 | Accep ed: 6 Sep embe 2023 | Published: in p ess
Abs ac
How can in eg a ion educa ion p og ams acili a e he mo e seamless inclusion o mig an newcome s in o wo king li e and
ci il socie y? T adi ionally, in eg a ion policy and p ac ice ha e been amed wi hin a na ion‐s a e discou se in which iews
o mig an inco po a ion a e g ounded wi hin a bo de ed na ionalism embodying a na i e–mig an dicho omy ha ei ies
he iew o he “mig an o he ” as a subjec de ined by i s “lack” in compe ence and agency. In ou quali a i e mul iple case
s udy, we explo ed he b idging po en ial o in eg a ion p og ams in acili a ing he inclusion o mig an s uden s wi hin
wo king li e in Helsinki and Edmon on. We examined he “inclusec ionali ies,” e e ing o he in e sec ions o inclusion and
exclusion ha posi ion adul s en olled in SFI (Swedish o Immig an s) and LINC (Language Ins uc ion o Newcome s o
Canada) language in eg a ion p og ams in he liminal spaces be ween belonging and o he ing. Guided by an unde s anding
o c i ical social inclusion whe e mig an s se he bounda ies o in e ac ions wi h au ho i ies based upon hei own needs
and in e es s, we p opose a ans o ma ional app oach. He e mig an lea ne s pa icipa e in a s uc u al p ocess whe e
he luid na u e o social, poli ical, and economic a angemen s is consis en ly enego ia ed on p inciples o egali a ianism
and he ull exe cise o c i ical agency, he ein en isioned as delibe a e ac ion esis ing he social domina ion o acialized
mino i ies by challenging and ede ining ins i u ional s uc u es.
Keywo ds
adul mig an s uden ; c i ical social inclusion; inclusec ionali y; wo king li e in eg a ion
Issue
This a icle is pa o he issue “Adul Mig an s’ Language Lea ning, Labou Ma ke , and Social Inclusion” edi ed by And eas
Fejes (Linköping Uni e si y) and Magnus Dahls ed (Linköping Uni e si y).
© 2023 by he au ho (s); licensee Cogi a io P ess (Lisbon, Po ugal). This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional License (CC BY).
1. In oduc ion
A cha ac e is ic o bo h Canadian and Finnish social pol‐
icy ini ia i es discussing in eg a ion egimes o newly
a i ed mig an s is he he o ic ha s a e‐sponso ed in e‐
g a ion p og ams should closely align wi h na ional eco‐
nomic needs (Ci izenship and Immig a ion Canada [CIC],
2010; Minis y o Economic A ai s and Employmen
in Finland, 2016). The p esc ibed se lemen p ocess
equi es ha mig an s pa icipa e ully in he labou ma ‐
ke , wi hin a nebulously de ined b oade objec i e o
inc easing hei o e all socie al pa icipa ion (Kaushik
& D ole , 2018; Saukkonen, 2017). Acco ding o he
2010 Finnish In eg a ion Ac , o example, mig an inclu‐
sion in o socie y can be conside ed success ul when
hey ha e secu ed employmen (Finnish Minis y o
Educa ion and Cul u e, 2016). As a esul , he main
h us o bo h Finnish and Canadian in eg a ion edu‐
ca ion p og ams is on enhancing employabili y and
acc uing language compe ences. Failing ha implies
ha one’s in eg a ion, concei ed o in p ima ily indi id‐
ual e ms, mus be conside ed unsuccess ul (Pöyhönen
& Ta nanen, 2015). Howe e , he e is also a ecogni‐
ion ha mig an skills and compe ences ha e been
unde u ilized wi hin wo king li e and ha hei educa‐
ional jou neys a e o en long, con olu ed, some imes
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 1
unca ed, and equen ly us a ing (Finnish Minis y o
Educa ion and Cul u e, 2016; OECD, 2018). A selec ion o
esea ch examining he obs acles o e ec i e labou ma ‐
ke inclusion o Finnish and Canadian mig an s includes
de iciencies in in o ma ion and guidance, a lack o
ecogni ion o o eign c eden ials and p e ious wo k
expe ience, employe s’ equi emen s o na i e wo k‐
ing expe ience and language luency, insu icien lan‐
guage skills, disc imina ion and ins i u ional acism, and
a lack o social suppo as well as employmen ne ‐
wo ks (Alho, 2020; E o e e al., 2020; Kaushik & D ole ,
2018; Masoud e al., 2020; Nakhaie & Kazemipu , 2013;
Pöyhönen & Ta nanen, 2015; Sakamo o e al., 2010).
Consequen ly, in eg a ion p og ams such as SFI and
LINC mi o wide changes in social policy wi hin he
wel a e s a e, which p omo e ma ke ‐o ien ed in e en‐
ions and measu able ou comes by emphasizing he
acc uemen o skills and compe ences ha a e de ined
acco ding o labou ma ke demands (Haque, 2017;
Kä kkäinen, 2017). I emains a poin o discussion i
mig an s a e au oma ically cons ued as unemployed
wi hin hese p og ams which he eby seek o amelio a e
his pe cei ed lack o employabili y h ough p ocesses o
deskilling, eskilling, and upskilling (Ga s en & Jacobsson,
2004). Al hough bo h Canada and Finland a e na ions
whe e o icial bilingualism is cons i u ionally ensh ined,
p ac ices a y acco ding o how and whe e in eg a ion
p og ams a e o e ed in he mino i y languages o F ench
(CAN) and Swedish (FIN). Regional ac o s such as he p o‐
po ion o mino i y language speake s in a gi en locali y,
dis inc local/p o incial legisla ions, and a gene al will‐
ingness o p edisposi ion o engage wi h mino i y con‐
ce ns a ec hei a ailabili y.
In his a icle, we explo e he b idging po en ial
o in eg a ion p og ams in acili a ing he inclusion o
mig an s uden s wi hin wo king li e a No Ques College
in Edmon on, Canada, and he Swedish Adul Educa ion
Ins i u e (A bis) in Helsinki, Finland, using a mul iple case
s udy app oach. We examine he “inclusec ionali ies,”
e e ing o he in e sec ions o inclusion and exclusion
ha posi ion adul mig an s en olled in LINC (Language
Ins uc ion o Newcome s o Canada) and SFI (Swedish
o Immig an s) language in eg a ion p og ams in he lim‐
inal spaces be ween belonging and o he ing (Pö zsch,
2020). Guided by an unde s anding o c i ical social inclu‐
sion whe e mig an lea ne s enego ia e social, poli ical,
and economic a angemen s wi h majo i ies based on
p inciples o egali a ianism and he ull exe cise o c i ical
agency, we p opose a ans o ma ional app oach. He e
inclusion is no p esc ip i e bu a dynamic, in ol ing, and
e ol ing p ocess.
2. In eg a ion s. C i ical Social Inclusion
2.1. Why De ini ions Ma e
Na ional in eg a ion educa ion p og ammes such as
LINC and SFI ha e ended o adop a “ci ic in eg a‐
ionism” (Joppke, 2009) in which “good” mig an s a e
ei ied by demons a ing language p o iciency, illing
labou ma ke niches, and adop ing canons o libe al
alues. Howe e , and his cons i u es he co e o ou
a icle, such p og ams also p esc ibe how in e ac ions
be ween s uden s and s a con igu e inclusion. They
expose inclusec ionali ies as well as he a endan limi‐
nal spaces in which mig an s uden s a e subsequen ly
posi ioned. Some imes hey can be bo h included and
excluded wi hin he same shi ing zone (e.g., he labou
ma ke ). How s uden s a e posi ioned depends g ea ly
on who se es as an a bi e o e which exp essions
o mig an di e si y ei he “help” o “hinde ” inclu‐
sion. Gi en he in e dependence o inclusec ionali ies,
desc ibing he p ocess o social inclusion in in eg a ion
educa ion p og ams ma e s, o as Ahmed (2012, p. 183)
s a es, “ he e y p omise o inclusion can be he con‐
cealmen o exclusion.” I is, he e o e, impe a i e o
explo e whe e he concep s and a ending p ac ices o
in eg a ion and c i ical social inclusion di e ge as hey
a e o en employed synonymously o in e changeably.
Gi en he s a ic and o en s igma izing implica ion o
he e m “immig an ,” in his a icle we ha e chosen o
employ he mo e luid and less pejo a i e desc ip ion
o “mig an ” in e e ing o adul s uden s in in eg a ion
educa ion p og ams while acknowledging ha i oo is a
con es ed e m.
2.2. In eg a ion
Wes e n in eg a ion policy has been c i icized as a hinly
eiled a emp o assimila e cul u al and o he di e ‐
ences in o he essen ialis na a i es o homogenous
na ional cul u es (Fa ell, 2022; Schinkel, 2018). I a ge s
in eg a ing he “mig an o he ” wi hin a la gely s a ic,
unc i ically depic ed na ional home—no gene al soci‐
e al ans o ma ion (Hage, 2000). The majo i y’s unde ‐
lying a i ude o “we know wha ’s bes o immig an s”
obs mig an s o hei c i ical engagemen c ea ing ela‐
ionships o dependence on he ecei ing socie y o
which hey a e la e chas ised (Goldbe g, 2015). Ano he
di icul y is ha in eg a ion is o en gauged as ei he a
p esen s a e o an ou come. I is measu ed in labou
ma ke pa icipa ion, language compe ence, educa ional
diplomas, e c., and he eby obscu es he link be ween
ou comes and s uc u al cons ain s (C ul & Schneide ,
2012). A mo e on ological c i ique ocuses on he social
imagina y which in o ms ou concep ions o in eg a ion.
When in eg a ion e e s o pe sons “ou side o socie y,”
who need o be g a ed in, socie y hen becomes ci ‐
cumsc ibed as he myopic domain o en i led majo i‐
ies who a e gi en an exemp ion om such in eg a ion
egimes. Socie y hus concei ed has no in eg a ion p ob‐
lems. Howe e , i i we e posi ed ha socie y includes all
who mo e wi hin i s na ional/in e na ional domain hen
aiming in eg a ion measu es solely a dis inc indi idu‐
als o g oups o “mig an o he s” becomes p oblema ic
(Schinkel, 2019).
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 2
The in e minable mig a ion wo ies embedded in
his exclusiona y unde s anding o socie y may, in ac ,
mask ea s o “ eal” in eg a ion (Beauzamy & Fé on,
2012; Len in & Ti ley, 2011). On he one hand, “we”
mus be seen o wan o in eg a e “ hem” while pa a‐
doxically ea i ming he “ u h” o hei non‐in eg abili y
in o de o jus i y hei illibe al ea men . In in eg a ion
discou se, g oups o mig an s uden s a e ypically iden‐
i ied by wha hey lack, such as linguis ic compe ences
o wo k expe ience in he ecei ing coun y. Acco dingly,
mig an lea ne s a e expec ed o upda e o e o m adi‐
ions and skills ha a e p esupposed o impede hei abil‐
i y o in eg a e. In his way, in eg a ion p og ams become
a medium o deskilling and e‐skilling s uden s p edi‐
ca ed on assump ions o “ he lack” (Kä kkäinen, 2017).
Explana ions o pe o mance de ici s a e a ibu ed o
he obse ed cha ac e is ics o indi iduals o o he ness
o he g oup and a e no placed a he doo o he edu‐
ca ional sys em in which hey pa icipa e o which hey
subsequen ly lea e (Hil , 2015).
2.3. C i ical Social Inclusion
By con as , c i ical social inclusion shi s he adap ion
bu den om mig an s o socie y. This ansposi ional
eimagining o inclusion o ces majo i ies o u n hei
gaze om he mig an o he on o hemsel es o in e ‐
oga e how hei aken‐ o ‐g an ed en i lemen s a e
e lec ed in and ep oduced by socie y. This necessi a es
ha ci il ins i u ions ackle inequali ies based on class,
gende , ace, and eligion as s uc u al impedimen s o
he e ec i e exe cise o poli ical agency and con on
hegemonies (S ewa , 2000). Recognizing ha socie al
s uc u es a e icissi udinous is a p e equisi e o social
ans o ma ion on his scale. Inclusion, so en isaged,
is no based on in eg a ionis esponses ha p esume
mig an subsump ion in o some hing as aguely de ined
and s a ic as “socie y.” I en ails a clea ecogni ion ha
inclusion’s egali a ianism goals a e illuso y i he assump‐
ions and p ac ices egula ing e e yday social and ins i‐
u ional li e emain e hnically skewed and acially blink‐
e ed. Inhe en ly, his implies a adical ans o ma ion o
he aims and pe o mance o inclusion. The bounda ies
o solida i y a e ed awn, “no by ans o ming hose on
he ou side o clones o inside s, bu by alo izing he
di e si y ha hey b ing wi h hem” (Ki is o, 2015, p. 25).
In ou de ini ion o c i ical inclusion, mig an s a e
egali a ian collabo a o s in enego ia ing poli ical, social,
and economic a angemen s wi h majo i ies on p inci‐
ples o social jus ice (Askonas & S ewa , 2000). How
inclusion is p ac iced is no p esc ibed by majo i ies
bu is ecip ocally nego ia ed and ansac ed wi h acial‐
ized mino i ies. I s means and schemes a e mu able and
adap able o he singula i ies o social ci cums ances.
Social inclusion in his sense is no seen as a mo e benign
and less assimila ionis e sion o in eg a ing mig an s
in o a p e‐de ined socie y bu a he in o a p ocess o
social imagining ha is ans o ma i e, emana ing om
mig an s’ own needs and ci cums ances. When his hap‐
pens, he bounda ies o solida i y can expand (A ac &
Rosenbe ge , 2013). Thus, he mos c ucial di e ence
be ween in eg a ion and inclusion es s in he ideological
and p ac ical con en s wi h which hese a e in es ed. The
inclusion challenge is o emb ace socie y as a dynamic,
mul i udinous cons uc wi hin which social bounda ies
a e de ined and con es ed by di e se pa icipan s wi h
unequal access o sou ces o powe and a enues o pe ‐
suasion; and o acknowledge his inequali y as la gely
s uc u al while a emp ing o alle ia e i . As such, i mus
be ecognized ha all p ojec s o inclusion po en ially
gene a e new o ms o exclusion which a e subjec , in
u n, o c i ique and democ a ic e o m (Pö zsch, 2018).
2.4. S uc u al Resea ch Examining LINC and SFI
In eg a ion P og ams
P e ious esea ch ha sc u inizes LINC and SFI om a
s uc u al pe spec i e, by analysing he unconscious soci‐
e al and ins i u ional no ms shaping pedagogy and in e‐
g a ion egimes is gene ally spa se. Howe e , he e a e
no able excep ions. Among hem, a e hose ha ha e
in e oga ed he ami ica ions o en enching p inciples
o neolibe alism and new public managemen , exem‐
pli ied by a ocus on mig an employabili y and sel ‐
su iciency (see Ca lson & Jacobson, 2019; Y. Guo, 2013;
Haque, 2017; Paque & Xha dez, 2020; Sandwall, 2013;
Slade, 2015; Webb, 2017). Addi ionally, s udies ha e c i‐
iqued he hea y ocus on language acquisi ion in unde ‐
lining ha language p o iciency alone is no a gua an o
o social inclusion o socio‐economic ad ancemen (see
Ennse ‐Kananen & Pe i , 2017; Pö zsch, 2020; Rosén,
2014). Resea ch has also p oblema ized he “de iciency
discou se” in which mig an lea ne s a e iden i ied by
wha hey lack in pe cei ed language as well as cul‐
u al and employmen compe ences (see Gibb, 2015;
He zbe g, 2015; Hil , 2015). These s udies pose he
ques ion o whe he he policy goal—“ ull” inclusion in
socie y—is a all ealizable i exclusion p ocesses a e
an in e nal pa o inclusion p ocesses. Mo e gene ally,
he concep o mig an employabili y de ined h ough
“indi idual esponsibili y” (Colliande e al., 2022; E o e
e al., 2020; Fejes & Be glund, 2010; Lindblad & Lundahl,
2020) and “deskilling & eskilling” (Aydine & Ride , 2022;
S. Guo, 2015; O iga, 2021), as being equa ed wi h
“success ul” in eg a ion (Nakhaie & Kazemipu , 2013;
Pöyhönen & Ta nanen, 2015) and as “c ea ing liminal‐
i ies” (Died ich & Omano ić, 2023; Kaushik & D ole ,
2018; Sakamo o e al., 2010; Yijälä & Nyman, 2017) is
cen al o ou discussion.
3. Me hodology
3.1. Me hods and Da a
We examined how social inclusion was concei ed, con‐
es ed, and p ac ically ope a ionalized wi hin LINC and
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 3
SFI cu icula modules designed o enhance mig an
employabili y and labou ma ke pa icipa ion. Resea ch
ques ions guiding ou inqui y we e: Wha is he b idging
po en ial o SFI and LINC in eg a ion p og ams in acili a ‐
ing he inclusion o adul mig an s uden s wi hin wo k‐
ing li e? Wha a e he esul ing inclusec ionali ies in posi‐
ioning adul mig an s uden s c ea ed by hese e o s a
wo k‐li e inclusion?
Th ough bo h semi‐s uc u ed and in‐dep h quali‐
a i e in e iews, we o eg ounded he expe iences o
s a , s uden s, and employe s. This s udy ook inspi‐
a ion om esea ch designs ha embody a collabo‐
a i e, pa icipan ‐cen ed app oach (B own & S ega,
2005). Acco dingly, we spen ex ended ieldwo k pe i‐
ods in Helsinki and Edmon on be ween he yea s o
2018–2019. We adop ed a mul iple case s udy esea ch
app oach ins ead o a compa a i e case s udy app oach
o ep esen he expe iences o con ibu o s. The la ‐
e seeks simila i ies and di e ences among cases based
on a ew speci ied a ibu es. Howe e , his ocus
on p e‐desc ibed a iables o opics o compa isons
can obscu e he si ua ionali y and complexi y o cases
and deli e mo e simplis ic a he han “ hick desc ip‐
ions” (S ake, 2006, p. 82). By con as , he aim o
mul iple case s udies app oaches is o elucida e new
in o ma ion abou a b oad pa e n ha holds ac oss
cases and analyze he commonali ies ha cha ac e ‐
ize hem. The e o e, in p esen ing ou indings we
ha e no adop ed he compa a i e app oach by jux a‐
posing and sepa a ely con as ing No Ques o A bis
cases bu sough o highligh ecu ing pa e ns as
well as s eng hs and weaknesses accompanied by he
mos ep esen a i e illus a i e quo es ha connec ou
c oss‐case hemes.
The ma e ial consis s o 53 in‐dep h, semi‐s uc u ed
in e iews wi h eache s, adminis a o s, s uden s, sup‐
po pe sonnel, and ep esen a i es om wo king li e
(32 om A bis and 21 om No Ques ). In e iew an‐
sc ip s and obse a ion logs gene a ed a mul i ace ed
quali a i e da ase , analyzed using ATLAS. i aided induc‐
i e con en analysis. This included s ages o coding, ca ‐
ego iza ion, and heming. In he coding s age, single
codes including bo h emic and e ic labels we e inse ed
in he ma gins o collec ed da a a chi e iles ep esen ‐
ing he en i e y o he ieldwo k ma e ial. This s age
was ollowed by ca ego iza ion, i.e., labels we e subse‐
quen ly subsumed unde code g oups and la e ca e‐
go ies. In his g ouping, al hough codes we e aken om
he en i e da abase in ATLAS. i, a ag was made nex
o each elemen o da a o indica e which case na a‐
i e i o igina ed om. Code g oups ep esen ed in a‐
ins i u ional ac o s such as cu iculum s uc u e, s udy
choices, s uden and eache pa icipa ion, disc imina‐
ion, e c., as well as ex a‐ins i u ional ac o s including
liaising, employe eadiness, goal se ing, p ac ice expe‐
iences, and alue bases among o he s. This ini ia ed
he so ing o codes in o ela ed ca ego ies depending
on hei con ex ual linkages and in e ela ions. In e iew
guides helped o s eamline he coding p ocess as in e ‐
iews ollowed a ce ain sequen ial hy hm. The lexi‐
ble na u e o he code amily p og am in ATLAS. i also
allowed o a c ea i e eo de ing and e‐con igu ing o
code g oups and in e linkages in a i ing a hemes.
Os ensibly, he heming s age in he s udy began a he
ea ly. Du ing da a collec ion and in he i s s ages o ana‐
lysis, ce ain subjec i e u hs embedded in he ma e ial
began o eme ge (i.e., he ole o enabling and disabling
s uc u al ac o s). This cogni i e eadiness was e ined
du ing he mapping s ages o subsequen ieldwo k pe i‐
ods. The code amily p og am se ed as he means o
c ys allizing he inal hemes. In making heme choices,
he shee equency o pa icula codes did no necessa ‐
ily dic a e inal heme selec ion. In ac , i was some imes
he a ypical o ma ginal ca ego ies ha encapsula ed a
pa icula poignancy in desc ibing he phenomenon o
wo k‐li e inclusion. Some conside a ions ha helped in
heming we e hinking abou how hemes linked up wi h
esea ch ques ions and how hey e lec ed he bo de ed
eali y o single cases. Fo example, is he chosen heme
one which holds ue o all case s udies? Be o e mak‐
ing a inal selec ion hen, we e isi ed he No Ques and
A bis ma e ial sepa a ely and compa ed he associa ions
he hemes had wi h he da a. Ul ima ely, ou analysis
yielded he ollowing inal hemes: “ i ing in” and “back‐
g ound ma e s.”
In conduc ing in e iews (45–90 min.), enues, imes,
and da es we e adap ed o he wishes and needs o he
in e iewees. Pa icipan s c ea i ely challenged and pe ‐
sonalized ou dialogues on la ge hema ic a eas co e ‐
ing “sel ‐ e lexi i y” (i.e., how in o man s e lec ed on
hei own unde s anding o and con ibu ion o inclusion
wi hin wo king li e), inclusion’s “pe o mance” deno ‐
ing how inclusi e p ac ices we e p ac ically ope a ional‐
ized wi hin and beyond ins i u ions, and he “s uc‐
u al ac o s” aiding o impeding i s implemen a ion.
In in e iews wi h mig an s uden s, he policy o gi ‐
ing oice and choice dic a ed a angemen s. SFI lea n‐
e s spoke ei he Swedish o English, he la e o en
being he p e e ed choice as mos s uden s’ compe‐
ence in English exceeded hei Swedish language p o‐
iciency. Un o una ely, ou ieldwo k a No Ques was
unca ed by he Co id pandemic and hus LINC s uden
in e iews ha we e scheduled o 2020 could no be
comple ed. This also accoun s o he unde ep esen a‐
ion o LINC s uden oices in he analysis.
3.2. E hical Conside a ions
We buil a ounda ion o us wi h s udy pa icipan s
and ele an ga ekeepe s by es ablishing con ac s in
ad ance including p epa a o y isi s o he schools.
Gaining access o mig an s uden g oups was aided by
in oduc o y in o ma ion sessions whe e we solici ed
hei pa icipa ion by dis ibu ing o mal le e s o con‐
sen and explained he olun a y na u e o pa icipa‐
ion as well as issues o con iden iali y, p i acy, and da a
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 4

secu i y. To ensu e con iden iali y, he iden i ies o in e ‐
iewees we e p o ec ed by assigning pseudonyms and
by he non‐disclosu e o iden i ying backg ound in o ma‐
ion. When wo king wi h ulne able pa icipan s such as
mig an s uden s, da a access by whom and o wha
pu poses is a ecu ing ques ion. We he e o e de ised
a da a managemen plan ha ensu ed ha du ing and
a e he p ojec , all da a would be secu ed in a locked
s o age and sa ed on secu e se e s wi h each ile p o‐
ec ed by a passwo d. We also had o submi a ho ough
e hical applica ion be o e commencing he No Ques
College ieldwo k. Sepa a e e hical applica ions we e no
a equi emen o he Finnish case s udies.
3.3. Si e Desc ip ions: No Ques LINC and A bis SFI
LINC is a ede ally unded p og am in oduced by he
Canada Employmen and Immig a ion Commission (pa
o CIC) in 1992 (Ce a iuc & Ricen o, 2012). Acco ding
o i s mission s a emen , i aims o acili a e he in e‐
g a ion o mig an s in o Canadian cul u e by p o id‐
ing language and se lemen aining and by ex ending
possibili ies o de elop employmen and social compe‐
ences. In he p o ince o Albe a, p e equisi es o s u‐
den eligibili y include ha ing pe manen esidence s a‐
us and a p elimina y Canadian Language Benchma k
(CLB) assessmen (CIC, 2015). Du ing he ime o ou
ieldwo k, No Ques College’s LINC p og am educa ed
mo e han 1500 mig an s uden s in in eg a ion classes
anging om CLB le els 3–8. S uc u ed a ound po olio‐
based lea ning assessmen s as he ounda ion o cu ‐
icula de elopmen , i g ouped s uden s o he same
educa ional backg ound oge he acco ding o hei p e‐
ious educa ional his o ies. In ecogni ion o he a ied
li e si ua ions o s uden s, No Ques College’s LINC o e s
a wide ange o ull and pa ‐ ime s udies, as well as
specialized classes o ganised in lexible ime schedules
(Le eb e, 2014).
In 2019, he p og am was in a phase o ansi ion
o mee he Canadian Fede al Go e nmen ’s inc easing
employmen ocus o newly a i ed mig an s wi h all
CLB le els now ea u ing in‐class modules on employ‐
men including hemes on CV‐w i ing and job in e ‐
iew p epa a ion (Paque & Xha dez, 2020). In addi‐
ion, he newly in oduced, go e nmen ally subsidized
LincWo ks p og am p esen ed CLB 3–5 s uden s wi h
oppo uni ies o engage in paid, en y‐le el job in e n‐
ships. Communi y se ice‐lea ning modules p o ided
mig an lea ne s a CLB 6–7 le els wi h expe ien ial lea n‐
ing componen s. Concomi an ly, LINC p o ided employ‐
men ce i ica e aining in ood sa e y, i s aid, and
occupa ional heal h o acili a e wo kplace en y. These
modules we e embedded wi hin a comp ehensi e ne o
s uden suppo se ices including wo kplace‐in eg a ed
lea ning (WIL) s a who liaised wi h wo k‐li e collabo a‐
o s and ma ched lea ne s wi h placemen s, social wo k‐
e s, employmen counselo s, and a ca ee cen e ha
assis ed in secu ing employmen . Unlike he Finnish SFI
cou ses, howe e , obliga o y wo k in e nship pe iods
o all pa icipa ing s uden s we e no an in eg al pa
o LINC.
The Swedish A bis SFI ep esen s an in e es ing case
as i is embedded wi hin a majo i y language (Finnish)
en i onmen o e ing in eg a ion educa ion in he o he
o icial (and mino i y) language, Swedish. A bis o e s
an SFI p og am o iginally concei ed o as a pilo wi hin
he na ional in eg a ion p ojec Pa icipa ing in Finland
(Ta nanen e al., 2013). I s cu iculum is based on he
guidelines laid down by he Na ional Boa d o Educa ion
(Finnish Na ional Boa d o Educa ion, 2012) and on
he Ac on he P omo ion o Immig an In eg a ion
(1386/2010) aimed a ad ancing mig an in eg a ion by
acili a ing hei ac i e pa icipa ion in wo king li e and
ci ic ac i i ies. SFI is a ge ed a mig an newcome s
wi h s a u o y in eg a ion suppo including an in eg a‐
ion plan om he local employmen se ices bu can
also be accessed as olun a y s udies as pa o ia
bildningen, o he in o mal, s a e‐subsidized adul edu‐
ca ion sys em. I comp ises 20 hou s/week o compul‐
so y language lea ning in one o he o icial languages
(Finnish o Swedish). Acco ding o A bis’ own mission
s a emen (Helsing o s A bis in eg a ionsg upp, 2012,
p. 5), “ he educa ion aims o p omo e social jus ice and
help mig an s o adap o and engage wi h Finnish socie y
while simul aneously a i ming hei own cul u al back‐
g ound.” Pa icipa ion is p eceded by an en ance es
ocusing on eading, w i ing, and lis ening skills, g am‐
ma knowledge, as well as ma h and IT skills.
A bis o e s oca ional componen s in ou hema ic
a eas: (a) wo king li e skills; (b) knowledge o wo king
li e; (c) ca ee choice; and (d) in e nships. The “wo k‐
ing li e skills” cou se p o ides p ac ical skills ele an
o he Finnish labou ma ke , whe eas he goal o he
“knowledge o wo king li e” cou se is ha he s uden s
ecei e basic ac s abou wo king li e p ac ices as well
as labo legisla ion. The s uden s also become amilia
wi h job sea ch channels o enhance hei employabil‐
i y in addi ion o pa icipa ing in CV and job applica ion
wo kshops. Du ing he “ca ee choice” cou se, he s u‐
den s ecei e indi idual ca ee supe ision and c ea e a
ca ee plan. The inal pa consis s o an in e nship in a
Swedish‐speaking o ganiza ion o six weeks. Impo an
suppo ha complemen s he wo k o language each‐
e s a e ca ee supe iso s and in e nship p o ide s.
4. Findings
A conside a ion in ep esen ing ou indings was ha
any iden i ied heme(s) should inhe en ly highligh ecu ‐
ing c oss‐case pa e ns in keeping wi hin a mul iple case
s udy app oach. We ha e he e o e a oided sepa a ing
cases in o a Finnish/Canadian compa a i e dicho omy
and chosen hose quo es ha mos poignan ly desc ibe
ecu ing pa e ns as well as s eng hs and weaknesses
o wo king li e inclusion p esen a No Ques College
LINC as well as A bis SFI.
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 5
4.1. Fi ing In
The ollowing quo e nea ly encapsula es a ecu ing
heme wi hin ou esea ch, namely ha he h us and
di ec ion o cu icula componen s a ge ing wo king li e
inclusion wi hin LINC and SFI in eg a ion p og ams aimed
la gely a mig an s “ i ing in” o mee labou ma ke and
employe needs:
And hen we alked abou he Canadian wo k‐
place…how can you change and i in, so i wo ks o
you employe . (LINCWo ks cu iculum planne )
Gi en he a icula ed p io i y ha hese p og ams align
wi h social policy di ec i es aimed a enhancing mig an
employabili y in bo h Canada and Finland, a clea shi
owa ds wo k‐li e in eg a ion was e iden . LINC’s cu ‐
icula employmen modules a all CLB le els as well
as SFI’s compulso y in e nships o all mig an lea n‐
e s a es o his. Some esea ch pa icipan s es i ied
ha hese had se e al inclusi e ou comes including s u‐
den empowe men :
One lady om Sy ia, he d eam was o be in child‐
ca e, wen h ough he job in e iew. I was no easy
and she did amazing. They hi ed he and I swea
o he nex wo days she smiled like….She was so
happy and so i ’s kind o like a d eam coming ue.
(LINCWo ks planne )
The job‐ma ching endea ou s unde aken by WIL s a
who liaised wi h wo k‐li e collabo a o s pai ing lea n‐
e s wi h placemen s a e assessing s uden needs
and wishes ep esen ed ano he cons uc i e way in
which LINC a emp ed o b idge he school–labou ma ‐
ke di ide. In eg a ed o subsidized wo k placemen s
wi hin also p o ided hose mig an lea ne s who seemed
“s uck” epea ing he same CLB le els mul iple imes, an
oppo uni y o a esh s a , he chance o es ablish com‐
muni y con ac s, and o p ac ice o he skills. Such p o‐
g ams supplemen ed an awa eness o he impo ance o
s uc u al suppo s in acili a ing mig an employmen i
go e nmen al aims, as well as educa ional goals, we e
o be me . Simila ly, in he Finnish con ex , success ul
in e nships could wo k as b idge builde s o he labou
ma ke and he Swedish‐speaking communi y a la ge
in p o iding oppo uni ies o SFI s uden s o imp o e
hei language and o ganisa ional skills, and expand hei
social ne wo ks:
I is impo an o us o unde s and whe e hey a e
going wi h a i e‐yea in e al, i.e., whe e his pe son
wan s o end up. And because we ha e so many wo k
assignmen s, we ake his backg ound in o accoun .
One o he ainees wo ked wi h main aining a eg‐
is e sys em, answe ed he phone, helped a e en s.
Ano he has wo ked a a ai wi h ma ke ac i i ies.
My ecommenda ion hi s p e y high when I know
lo s o people and ha e a massi e ne wo k. The s u‐
den s ha e ealized i hemsel es, when hey see
which people mo e a ound he e and who hey mee .
(CEO o a Swedish‐speaking associa ion)
The employe s’ commi men o de o e hei ime o he
s uden s’ needs and o inco po a e hem in o he wo k
cul u e was o u mos impo ance o a success ul in e n‐
ship. This was also emphasized by A bis s a who p o‐
ided employe s wi h ins uc ions:
A bis ad ised us o gi e he s uden meaning ul wo k‐
ing asks, bu hey also poin ed ou [ ha ] he p i‐
o i y in he p og am was o p o ide he s uden
wi h an oppo uni y o ex end his social ne wo ks
and be pa o ou co ee communi y. (Head o a
Finnish‐Swedish NGO)
Al hough inding in e nships o highly educa ed
mig an s p o ed di icul , he majo i y o he in e ‐
iewed SFI s uden s we e sa is ied wi h hei p ac ice
placemen e en when hese did no always ma ch hei
p e ious educa ion o wo k expe ience. The indings,
howe e , also demons a e ha he cu icula modules
aiming a labou ma ke inclusion gene a ed hei own
unique inclusec ionali ies. LINCWo ks, o example, was
a op‐down ini ia i e wi h a cu iculum desc ibed by
eache s as in lexible and p esc ip i e. I embodied a dis‐
inc ocus on pe sonal change by emphasizing compe‐
ences such as “so skills,” sweepingly de ined as social
and beha iou al employmen skills mig an s seemingly
lacked. Topics on disc imina ion and acism in wo king
li e, as well as how o con on and add ess hese we e
conspicuous by hei absence. A poignan example o he
exclusiona y ou comes o pu po edly inclusiona y mea‐
su es was how s uden s we e selec ed o LINCWo ks:
S uden s we e pu in o hose classes. So, hey didn’
choose i , and he e was some backlash, so we we e
ins uc ed no o call i LINCWo ks. Because s uden s
didn’ wan o hink ha hey we e pu in o he
LINCWo ks class, as he e was a bi o a s igma….They
dese e o know, and ha ’s pa o ea ing s u‐
den s wi h espec and no being so pa e nalis ic.
(LINCWo ks eache )
The “s igma” desc ibed abo e was oo ed in s u‐
den s´ pe cep ions ha a p og am unneling hem in o
low‐wage, en y‐le el wo k would s ymie hei language
lea ning, dep i e hem o oppo uni ies o ad ance‐
men , and se hem apa . O he conce ns, howe e ,
we e mo e undamen al in na u e and ques ioned he
neo‐libe al ideology unde pinning he inc easing employ‐
men ocus as po en ially c ea ing a mig an unde class:
One o my conce ns is ha we a e c ea ing his unde ‐
class. We a e saying, oh, come o Canada, we’ll gi e
you enough language ha you can clean ho els o
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 6
he es o you li e. S uden s ha e aspi a ions beyond
ha , and I hink we do hem a disse ice i we don’
ealize ha and acili a e hei ulle in eg a ion in o
Canada….I eally s uggle wi h his. A e we saying ha
[paid] wo k is he only way o be a success ul pa ic‐
ipan in ou cul u e, ou socie y? Wha kind o wo k
a e we p epa ing s uden s o ? Is i jus o ill in hose
low‐wage jobs nobody wan s o do? (LINC eache )
4.2. Backg ound Ma e s
Ano he pe haps unin ended side e ec o he p eoccu‐
pa ion wi h p ima ily job‐ ela ed skills was ha i ailed
o ecognize he he e ogenei y o s uden backg ounds,
occupa ional aspi a ions, and pe sonal o educa ional
choices, hus pa adoxically emo ing choice:
How we app oach wo k doesn’ speak o a lo o
women who’ e been wo king in adi ional oles.
I was e y demo i a ing when we we e alking abou
employmen because in his class he women we e
ei he on he e ge o becoming g andmo he s who
had wo ked ha d o ge hei amilies he e sa e, o
hey we e eally young moms who a e jus like, yeah,
I wanna wo k someday. P og ams a e ocused on
e ail, cleaning, unskilled cons uc ion and none o
hose speak o whe e hese g oups o women a e.
(LINC eache )
The abo e quo e illus a es no only he exclusiona y ou ‐
comes o he myopic ocus on paid wo k which ails o
alida e he wid h and b ead h o socie al pa icipa ion
bu also desc ibes he liminal posi ion o hose mig an
lea ne s who do no i he paid jobseeke p o ile. Lack
o ecogni ion o s uden s’ educa ional and social back‐
g ound was also cha ac e is ic o SFI classes. Fo exam‐
ple, an SFI eache showed a lis o “bes jobs” based
on open acancies wi h an emphasis on low‐skilled wo k.
These we e ma ke ed as “easily accessible jobs” o “jobs
o look o .” Such he o ic acili a es he de alua ion o
he exis ing skills, expe iences, and di e se educa ional
backg ounds o SFI s uden s.
A angen ial esul o helping s uden s “ i in” o mee
labou ma ke and employe needs was he discou se o
“managing expec a ions” and “ ans e able skills” wi hin
wo king li e‐cen ed cu icula modules. The sub ex o
exho ing s uden s o adjus hei expec a ions— o be
“ ealis ic”—in ela ion o u u e ca ee plans and he
choice o wo k in e nships some imes se ed as a jus i‐
ica ion why hei p ac ice o employmen wishes could
no always be me :
We ge a lo o [complain ] calls. In one example, we
asked a s uden who no mally wo ks wi h ou senio s
on ec ea ion o help sweep up lea es because ou
g oundskeepe was sho someone, and he s uden
said no, ha ’s no wha he’s he e o do. Bu we also
ha e o wo k on coaching hem a bi i hey wan
ha eally good e e ence o mo e up in a ca ee
o e ime ha hey ha e o ake on hese addi ional
esponsibili ies when asked. (LINC p og am planne )
Wha is in e es ing in he abo e quo e is ha ins ead o
ecognizing he s uden ’s agency in ques ioning he occu‐
pa ional bounda ies o his job, he la e is essen ially
old o “go along o ge along” because an employe ’s
posi i e e e ence ou weighs such conce ns. Thus, hose
mig an s who ailed o “manage hei expec a ions” ol‐
lowing LINC and employe needs we e consigned o he
liminal posi ion o being included wi hin he labou ma ‐
ke a he expense o hei own ini ia i e and aspi a‐
ions. Also, in SFI in e nships, s uden needs we e some‐
imes subo dina ed o hose o employe s by equi ing
mig an lea ne s o wo k in jobs nei he i ing hei edu‐
ca ion no mo i a ion. Fo example, wo SFI s uden s
wo ked alone in an a chi e du ing hei en i e in e n‐
ship, whe eas ano he s uden wi h a backg ound in law
wo ked in a kinde ga en. In e es ingly hough, employ‐
e s s essed ha hey oo lacked in o ma ion abou s u‐
den s’ cul u al, social, and poli ical backg ounds. Gi en
ha some s uden s had a i ed as auma ized e ugees
om coun ies s ill plagued by wa , his unde lines
he impo ance o majo i ies engaging wi h acialized
mino i ies be o e subjec ing hem o ixed in eg a ion o
employmen egimes.
The he o ic o “ ans e able skills” ollowed a sim‐
ila logic. I essen ially p opaga ed he necessi y o
eskilling s uden s by elling hem ha main aining hei
p e ious ca ee s may be di icul due o di e ing employ‐
men s anda ds, bu ha hei skillse could be ead‐
jus ed o con o m o ela ed occupa ions whe e labou
ma ke sho ages exis ed. Al hough s a a emp ed o
mee s uden s’ wishes by ma ching hem wi h wo k‐
ing li e pa ne s, hey also admi ed o coaxing hem o
selec ela ed al e na i es:
We y and help b oaden ha pe spec i e and ind
ways o hem o see ha , “[i ] I wanna be an admin‐
is a i e assis an so I’m gonna go olun ee a a
non‐p o i and wo k a he ecep ion desk.” Maybe
you i le is no adminis a i e assis an , bu ob i‐
ously you’ e ge ing expe ience on you esume o
help you ge he e. We s uggle a lo wi h s uden s,
o hem o unde s and he concep o ans e able
skills and he ac ha i you wo k in an o ice he e,
i ’ll help ge you skills ha will e en ually lead o he
ca ee you wan . (LINC planne )
These poignan examples om he LINC p og am e eal
once again he impac o inclusec ionali ies and hei
esul ing liminal posi ioning o mig an lea ne s. While
he p edominan discou ses o Wes e n immig a ion
egimes posi ion employed mig an s as success ully
in eg a ed—as included—i becomes appa en how
mig an oices and compe ences a e easily de alued and
excluded wi hin his na a i e.
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 7
5. Discussion
To build an unde s anding o how LINC and SFI in e‐
g a ion educa ion acili a es he wo k‐li e inclusion o
adul mig an lea ne s, ou s udy e ealed a numbe
o inclusec ionali ies and he a endan liminal spaces
which si ua ed s uden s be ween belonging and o he ‐
ing. The heme o mig an s “ i ing in” o mee labou
ma ke needs, o example, illus a es he pa adoxi‐
cal na u e o he double ges u es o inclusion and
exclusion (Popkewi z, 2009). While he pedagogical
shi om p edominan ly language compe ence acc ue‐
men o employabili y signals a ecogni ion ha social
inclusion demanded mo e om in eg a ion p og ams,
how employabili y was ope a ionalized in neo‐libe al
e ms simul aneously delimi ed mig an pa icipa ion
and agency.
Gi en he esou ce capaci y, ex ensi e ins i u ional
suppo s, and b ead h o cu icula choice wi hin
No Ques LINC, i became appa en ha o ganising wo k‐
ing li e modules was easie o la ge p og ams han
hose in esou ce and pe sonnel‐s apped communi y‐
based educa ional p o ide s like A bis. No Ques LINC’s
ne wo k o employe s, social wo ke s, counselo s, and
o he ca ee planning ini ia i es was unma ched and
a es ed o social inclusion being seen as a mul i‐
sec o ial socie al conce n (Lindblad & Lundahl, 2020).
The job‐ma ching and labou ma ke liaising done by
WIL s a as well as a p epa edness among employe s
ex ended empowe ing oppo uni ies o s uden s who
we e, o a ious easons, no bes se ed by class oom‐
based, language‐cen e ed pedagogies. A he same ime,
by aming employabili y wi hin a na a i e o pe sonal
esponsibili y and change, mig an s bo h indi idually and
as a g oup became he objec s o speci ic e o s o
amelio a e he “immig an condi ion” (He zbe g, 2015),
he eby excluding hei aspi a ions in o de o “ i hem
in o” he labou ma ke (Hil , 2015). P esc ip i e cu ic‐
ula s essed adap a ion while omi ing discussions on dis‐
c imina ion, gende inequali y, and occupa ional igh s
in p esen ing an idealized uni e sal wo kplace cul u e
(Y. Guo, 2013; Slade, 2015). The ec ui men p ocesses in
LINCWo ks whe e s uden s we e en olled wi hou hei
knowledge o conceal he cou se’s “low‐wage job unnel‐
ing” s igma illus a ed ano he exclusiona y ou come o
op‐down employabili y schemes and he liminal posi‐
ion in which i placed mig an lea ne s. SFI s uden s
could also bene i om a mo e a ge ed coo dina ion o
in e nships which ully in ol e hem in he planning and
implemen a ion o hei p ac ice pe iods and ecip ocally
connec in e nship lea ning mo e closely o language and
cul u al s udy modules in class. C ucially, employe s mus
ex end s uden s’ g ea e oppo uni ies o exe cise hei
language skills and amilia ize hemsel es wi h wo king
cul u es, while in ol ing hem in Swedish‐speaking com‐
muni y ne wo ks.
Wi hin he “ i ing in o ill he domes ic skills gap”
discou se ha included an emphasis on ans e able
skills, managing expec a ions, and de‐skilling he e is a
dange ha employabili y goals become hegemonic ales
in which mig an s’ p io wo k skills and quali ica ions a e
de alued (Webb, 2017). These ea s a e encapsula ed in
he LINC ins uc o ’s quo e on he c ea ion o an e hnic
unde class as an inclusec ional ou come o wo k‐li e in e‐
g a ion modules whe e mig an subjec i i ies a e con‐
s uc ed h ough hei abili y o nego ia e and su i e
he “ icious cycle o skilling” (Masoud e al., 2020, p. 116).
This cycle becomes a disempowe ing eskilling eadmill
whe e, in o de o mee labou ma ke demands, s u‐
den s a e compelled o in e minably “ e‐educa e” hem‐
sel es while elinquishing hei own ca ee aspi a ions.
Aydine and Ride (2022) a gue ha he insecu i ies in
he a ious s ages o he mig a ion and se lemen p o‐
cess ha e he cumula i e e ec o compounding mig an
ulne abili ies. The e is also e idence ha collabo a ions
be ween employe s and public o ganiza ions in p o id‐
ing in e nships ollowed he “ i ing in” sc ip (Died ich
& Omano ić, 2023). A an elemen a y le el, he LINC
eache ’s que y i he only alue s uden s ha e is ha
o a wo ke o ce ain p e‐selec ed occupa ions ep e‐
sen s a c ucial commen a y on labou ma ke inclusion
e o s which equa e success ul in eg a ion wi h secu ‐
ing any so o employmen . This employabili y he o ic
was u he pedagogically de ined in he p eeminence
gi en o componen s in wo king li e modules ha posi‐
ioned mig an s uden s as neolibe al subjec s who mus
become lexible li elong lea ne s and en ep eneu ial
subjec s made esponsible o hei own employmen
ou comes (Haque, 2017, p. 107). These sus ained a de i‐
ciency discou se while aci ly enabling disc imina ion by
employe s (E o e e al., 2020; Sakamo o e al., 2010).
Mo eo e , i en enched powe hie a chies by exemp ‐
ing majo i ies om in e oga ing hei own assump ions
embedded in cu en labou ma ke policies and in eg a‐
ion egimes (Pö zsch, 2020).
Ou indings a e in line wi h p e ious s udies showing
ha mig an s’ mul iple subjec i i ies a e o en no aken
in o conside a ion in “p agma ic” cu icula discou ses
a ound labou ma ke pa icipa ion. The e is a dange
ha i s uden ‐cen e ed, pa icipa o y app oaches a e
eplaced wi h a numbe o p esc ibed skills and no ma‐
i e beha iou s mig an s a e o “pe o m” in occupa‐
ional se ings, one imposes no only whose knowledge
is alued, bu also nulli ies he ecip ocal b idging po en‐
ial o such p og ams (Ennse ‐Kananen & Pe i , 2017;
Gibb, 2015; Sandwall, 2013; Webb, 2017). E idence
om No Ques LINC’s new labou ma ke ini ia i es sug‐
ges s ha his was p ecisely wha was happening unde
moun ing go e nmen al and adminis a i e p essu es o
ind employmen o LINC lea ne s. While labou ma ke
in eg a ion modules idealized employed mig an s as suc‐
cess ully in eg a ed—as included—i became appa en
how mig an oices and compe ences a e easily de al‐
ued and excluded wi hin his na a i e.
Social Inclusion, 2023, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages X–X 8