1 Introduction

1.1 Immigration and Internationalisation Trends in Ireland

Although Ireland has always been a destination of in-migration including Celts, Normans, and British, it was the economic boom during the 1990s which brought unprecedented levels of prosperity and helped transform the country into one of net immigration by 1996 (Ruhs 2005). For the first time in its history, Ireland experienced a significant inflow of migrants – both workers and asylum seekers – from outside the European Union (EU) (Faas and Fionda 2019). For the purposes of this chapter, a migrant is defined as someone who moves from outside Ireland to Ireland (for example for employment or educational purposes) while people with a migration background are defined as the children of people who came to Ireland in recent decades and who have progressed through the Irish school system. Between 2001 and 2004, Ireland reached new peaks in non-EU immigration flows before a shift occurred toward intra-European mobility from East to West following eastern enlargement of the EU. Ireland, together with Sweden and the UK, allowed migrants from the new member states access to the labour market resulting in considerable inflows of Polish (63,276 in 2006) and Lithuanians (24,268 in 2006) (Faas and Fionda 2019). Unlike European countries with a colonial history (e.g. the UK, France) or guest-worker schemes (e.g. Germany), the reasons why different groups of people migrated to Ireland were different. For example, longitudinal research conducted by Krings et al. (2013) on Polish migrants highlights the multi-faceted reasons why Polish migrants chose Ireland as a destination. In addition to economic reasons the study found that Polish migrants, particularly those of younger generation and highly educated, saw possibilities for self-development and lifestyle choices as part of their migration journey. At the beginning of the economic downturn in Ireland, in 2008, there was a general expectation that most migrants would return to their countries of origin. Instead, the number of non-Irish nationals increased by 115,475, or 27%, between Census 2006 and Census 2016 (CSO 2016). The proportion of the population who were non-Irish nationals has increased significantly from 6% in 2001 to 12.2% in 2011 before falling back slightly to 11.6% in 2016 mainly due to a rise in the number of those with dual Irish nationality. The increase was particularly marked among Eastern European nationals.

Between 2008 and 2015, Ireland became a net emigration country in the wake of the economic recession where unemployment peaked at a rate of over 15%. In 2016, for the first time since 2009, Ireland returned to a net inward migration country (see Fig. 5.1). The Central Statistics Office noted that between April 2015 and April 2019, the number of immigrants has increased by nearly 30% from 69,300 to 88,600 while the number of emigrants declined over the same period from 80,900 to 54,900. Between April 2017 and April 2018, Irish nationals experienced net inward migration for the first time since 2009 rising to +100 in 2018 from −3400 the previous year, while net inward migration among non-Irish nationals has already been growing since April 2015 (CSO 2016, 2018). The latest Census data, collected in April 2016, show particularly large increases among Romanians, Brazilians and Spanish (CSO 2017). The number of Brazilians, for example, has trebled over the past 10 years in Ireland, to 13,640 in 2016 (CSO 2017). Unlike the previous wave of Brazilian economic migrants to the small town of Gort in the West of Ireland, the current wave of young middle-class Brazilians to Dublin migrates for English language learning purposes (Fanning 2018). Unlike EU migrants, those from outside the EU do not have the same rights to live and work within EU member states, and therefore do not enjoy the free movement of the Polish or other Eastern European groups in Ireland. In the case of many young Brazilians, they currently arrive on an 8-month visa, renewable once, which also allows them to work during their studies.

Fig. 5.1
A stacked column and line chart plots migration versus years. The curve for migration has a fluctuating trend. The highest and lowest estimated values are as follows, immigration, (2007, 150) and emigration, (2013, negative 95).

Immigration and emigration phases in the Republic of Ireland, 2006–2016. (Source: Central Statistics Office 2016)

Full size image

In terms of educational levels, research in an Irish context found that the biggest gap in English reading skills was amongst students with an Eastern European migration background and that their parents had the lowest proficiency in the English language. Since the parents were not proficient in English, the research found that they were less likely to engage with their child’s academic work or engage with cultural activities such as reading in English (Foley 2017, p.14). As a result of the parents’ limited cultural capital in terms of English language proficiency, there was a direct negative impact on their child’s academic achievement, as indicated by their low reading scores (McGinnity et al. 2015). Research has also indicated that collectively, migrants in Ireland are a highly-educated group with high parental educational aspirations when compared to other migrant-receiving societies such as Germany or the United States, with the proportion of degree holders exceeding that of the domestic population (Darmody and Smyth 2018; Barrett and Duffy 2008). However, they appear less likely to access jobs that entirely reflect their educational levels, and appear to be earning less than comparable natives. Collectively, in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015, students with a migration background in Ireland scored only marginally lower than their Irish peers (OECD 2016), whereas in most other OECD countries immigrant students score significantly lower. The most recently arrived migrants from Eastern Europe are found to have the lowest educational attainment levels. While migrant students are over-represented in the Leaving Certificate programme that allows for university access, they are likely to be placed in lower level classes compared to their Irish peersFootnote 1 (Smyth et al. 2009).

As reflected in the Census results, there has been a significant growth in the diversity of the population in Ireland. By 2016, the Top 10 non-Irish nationalities in Ireland were: Polish, British, Lithuanian, Romanian, Latvian, Brazilian, Spanish, Italian, French and German. This is then followed by Americans (US), Indians and Chinese. Previous work by the author with colleagues (Faas et al. 2016) showed that proportion of those who were not Catholic increased due to growing numbers of people with ‘no religion’ (138,264 in 2002 compared with 269,111 in 2011) accompanied by an increase in the number of migrants with different belief systems (up from 89,223 in 2002 to 216,401 in 2011). The number of Catholics reached the lowest point in 2011 (3,861,335), representing 84% of the population. A number of primary school-aged children (14,769 or 3%) were recorded as belonging to ‘no religion, atheists or agnostics’ categories with 6% belonging to a minority faith background (Faas et al. 2016).

The government of Ireland responded to increasing diversity in 2005 by publishing the ‘National Action Plan Against Racism’, a document which adopted an intercultural approach to future integration policies across several areas. Interculturalism aims to help people ‘become personally enriched by meeting and experiencing other cultures’ as well as ‘engage with each other and learn from each other’ (Smyth et al. 2009, p. 16). Within education, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment published intercultural guidelines for both primary and secondary schools in 2006, followed by an Intercultural Education Strategy in 2010. These policy documents aim to guide schools in best practice for implementing intercultural education and developing respect for diversity within schools. Most recently, the Migrant Integration Strategy 2017–2020 outlined several areas within education that will be monitored and improved with the aim that ‘migrants and particularly their children benefit from the education system’ (Department of Justice and Equality 2016, p. 10).

While many European states have adopted a number of different official policies to deal with migration-related diversity such as assimilation, integration, interculturalism, or multiculturalism (Gray 2006; Mac Éinrí 2007), the debate about cultural diversity, including what the appropriate educational response should be, is still very much in its infancy in Ireland (Devine 2011). Thus immigration has posed a number of challenges for Irish schools and universities, which have had little prior experience of dealing with diversity. These developments in Ireland reflect wider debates about the impact of increased ethnic, cultural, and linguistic diversity on traditional conceptions of citizenship and national identity, and how educational policies and curricula should respond to these challenges (O’Connor and Faas 2012; Faas and Ross 2012).

Despite some progress in providing targeted support for migrant children in Irish primary and secondary schools in the form of additional English-language provision, the economic downturn between 2008 and 2013 resulted in significant cuts in the education sector that have also reduced initiatives supporting linguistic and sociocultural inclusion of migrant students. These cuts led to the discontinuation of Integrate Ireland Language and Training, which was established to meet the language and training needs of children from diverse cultural and educational backgrounds, particularly in secondary schools (see Faas et al. 2015). At higher education level, universities saw their budgets cut significantly. For example, in 2008, Ireland’s oldest university (Trinity College Dublin) received approximately 60% of its budget from the State whereas today that amount stands at just 40%. As a result, higher education institutions are being asked more than ever to find non-exchequer revenue and they do so in the form of increasing numbers of non-EU students (Trinity College Dublin 2014), philanthropic and alumni engagement. In terms of support services for students with a migration background including non-EU students, in recent years, universities have provided targeted information and counselling to that group often as part of orientation weeks (e.g. how to register with the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, how to enrol in English language support modules, work opportunities in Ireland while studying, how to navigate the university academically and socially).

1.2 Diversity in the Irish Education System

Schooling in Ireland is compulsory from the age of six until 16. Around 96% of primary schools are denominational in their intake and management, with 90% of all primary schools under Catholic patronage (McGarry 2017). An alternative option for parents is provided by new multidenominational Community National and Educate Together schools. Gaelscoileanna, which teach through the medium of the Irish language, are also an interesting option. There has been a growing demand for alternative schools, as the proportion of the population who do not belong to the Catholic faith has increased. A considerable body of research focuses on migrant students’ experiences in Ireland and in the education system (see Devine 2011; Darmody et al. 2011; Kitching 2011; Curry et al. 2011; Faas et al. 2015). Many of these studies point towards the external influences that shape migrant students’ educational experiences including their lived experience, structural factors and education policy, while acknowledging the contributory family and child-related factors (Faas et al. 2018, p.487). Ireland has seen a threefold increase in the number of migrant pupils over the past two decades, with pupils in Irish schools coming from over 160 countries and for over 70% English is not their first language (Department of Education and Skills 2011). Children of immigrants and non-nationals now account for roughly 10% of the primary school level population (between 4 and 12 years of age) and about 8% of the post-primary school level population (between 12 and 18 years of age). There is however a difference in the distribution of these students across schools at primary and post-primary levels. At post-primary (secondary) level, the vast majority of schools (90%) have so-called newcomer students, but many of them have a rather small proportion of between 2% and 9%. At primary level, over 40% of schools have no newcomers at all, but those that do, tend to have a greater proportion of newcomer students (Faas and Fionda 2019, p.611). Irish universities need to be prepared to manage cultural diversity as a result of (a) higher numbers of students with a migration background progressing through the Irish school system and into tertiary education, and (b) simultaneous direct recruitment of non-EU applicants to Ireland.

Entry into third-level education in the Republic of Ireland is generally high, so among young adults (those aged 25–34), 41.6% have attained third-level degrees – the second highest level in the EU after Cyprus, and substantially ahead of the average of 29.1% (CSO 2008). The Higher Education Authority, which leads the strategic development of the Irish higher education system, has continually prioritised improved equity of access to higher education, and considerable progress has been made in the last three decades: participation in higher education has risen from approximately 20% of the relevant age cohort in 1980, to 44% in 1998 and to 52% in 2011 (HEA 2015). The National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education 2015–2019 states that the population of new entrants to higher education should be broadly representative of the general population in terms of socio-economic mix, disability status, gender, migrant population and so forth (HEA 2015). In 2008, the National Office for Equity of Access to Higher Education launched a new access plan to higher education in Ireland setting a national target of 72% entry to higher education by 2020. Based on the principle that no group should have participation rates in higher education that are less than three-quarters of the national average, the plan sets a target that all socio-economic groups will have entry rates of at least 54% by 2020 (HEA 2008). Besides English language skills and recognition of international qualifications, one particular barrier to access for many migrants in Ireland is the fees charged to non-EU nationals in universities and institutes of technology which can be up to three times higher for non-EU students compared to EU/Irish students. In many institutions, the fee structure is also based on the residency principle with students having to have resided three out of the previous 5 years to qualify for EU fees.

2 Cultural Diversity in Higher Education: The Case of Trinity College Dublin

There are seven universities in the Republic of Ireland as well as 14 Institutes of Technology, all of which have targets to deliver in terms of widening access to higher education. The National Access Plan (HEA 2015) aims to increase participation in higher education for: entrants from socio-economic groups that have low participation in higher education; mature student entrants; students with disabilities; part-time/flexible learners; further education award holders; and Irish Travellers. Interestingly, national policy steering through the HEA does not explicitly refer to students with a migration background or migrants and therefore does not set specific targets to higher education institutions – though several higher education institutions have clear targets how to increase participation from students with a migration background, as shown further below. It should be noted, however, that these targets generally relate to fee-paying international students rather than those from third countries now living in Ireland who cannot afford fees and who therefore have limited access to higher education, notably asylum seekers and refugees. There are a number of successful alternative access routes for widening participation groups at national level in Ireland such as the Higher Education Access Route (HEAR) for students from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and the Disability Access Route to Education (DARE). Qualifying applicants may obtain a reduction in Leaving Certificate (A-level) points required to access a particular undergraduate degree programme. At local level, universities have their own access programmes such as the Trinity Access Programme (TAP) for young adults and mature students. For example, at Trinity College Dublin, 25.2% of new entrants (719 out of a total of 2855 new students) in 2016/17 came through alternative admission routes including HEAR (251 students), DARE (277 students) and TAP (191 students) (Martin 2018). In relation to the proportion of EU/non-EU undergraduate students, there was an increase from 7.3% in 2012/13 (11,340 EU and 833 non-EU) to 11.5% by 2016/17 (11,415 EU and 1324 non-EU). At postgraduate level, the proportion of EU/non-EU students increased from 13.0% in 2012/13 (3956 EU and 516 non-EU) to 24.4% by 2016/17 (3929 EU and 962 non-EU). Overall, in 2016/17, Trinity had over 4700 non-Irish students (26.7% of its 17,630 total number of students), from over 120 countries around the world, with 43% of its academic staff also having an international background. The university’s goal, by 2019, is to increase its share of non-EU students from 7.8% in 2012 to 18% (Trinity College Dublin 2014). Nationwide, in 2016/17, there were 225,628 students at higher education institutions (43,569 new entrants in first-year), which is an increase of over 5% over the past 5 years due to increasing internationalisation and globalisation of the higher education sector (such as increasing non-EU student recruitment) as well as transitions of larger cohorts of Irish students from second to third level (HEA 2018).

Given this increasing internationalisation and globalization, it is important for Irish universities like Trinity College Dublin to engage with the challenges and opportunities presented by greater cultural diversity among students and staff. Attending to the significance of cultural diversity in all its forms helps the whole university community be more sensitive and appreciative of cultural difference, and more respectful and responsive to the needs and experiences of fellow students and staff in this regard. It also offers students opportunities to become more enlightened about different cultures; to become more aware about their own cultural identities; and to develop competence in communicating across cultures, a twenty-first century skill valued in the workplace and often highlighted as a graduate attribute (Trinity College Dublin 2018a). The following sections highlight some of the initiatives underway at university level in Ireland to respond to this increasing cultural diversity.

2.1 Examples of Good Practice

In 2017, a Cultural Diversity Working Group at Trinity College Dublin conducted an ‘asset-mapping’ exercise to identify existing good practices within the university. This covered five themes: Student Experience, Education, Staff, Campus Culture and Structures. The exercise uncovered several positive and promising initiatives, a selection of which are discussed below. At a structural level, Trinity College Dublin had already established the post of Director of Diversity and Inclusion and approved its first Diversity and Inclusion Strategy and Diversity Statement. Various albeit limited staff training opportunities exist, including Equality, Diversity and Inclusion training (in-person), an online training for all staff partaking in recruitment panels, and a pilot of intercultural awareness training which was conducted in 2015. In the revised undergraduate curriculum, as part of the Trinity Education project, there are new specifications of graduate attributes, such as global citizenship and effective communication (see Trinity College Dublin 2018a). In terms of campus culture, emerging engagement by catering services is noted including serving halal chicken throughout university outlets, and there are also a number of research initiatives relevant to cultural diversity across subject disciplines. Students, particularly international students, have access to a Global Room space, Global Room student ambassadors and cross-cultural events programmes. There is a Student Union Ethnic Minorities Officer and Committee, and the new student orientations held at the start of each academic year have integrated a cultural awareness component since 2017–2018.

2.2 Cultural Diversity Challenges

Despite examples of good practice, considerable challenges remain not just at Trinity College Dublin but across the higher education sector in Ireland more broadly. While we see an ever-increasing number of staff and students from non-EU backgrounds in Irish universities, and a variety of benchmarks are in place to monitor internationalisation, to date there has been little systematic attempt to build in cultural diversity in the curriculum (see also discussion by Jennifer Bruen and Niamh Kelly, Chap. 8, in this volume). A good deal of university teaching and practical examples in Ireland is still rooted in more parochial local, regional and national traditions. While there are good reasons for retaining a local-national perspective, it should be more actively and systematically explored how modules can bring in not just a European but also a global non-European perspective, and how the local-national dimension interacts and relates to the global. Arguably, this may be easier in the humanities and social sciences compared to STEM subjects. Systematically embedding an intercultural and global dimension into university curricula also ensures that teaching is more authentic and relevant for non-Irish and Irish students alike in light of changing student demographics.

Two International Education Strategies have been launched in Ireland thus far – the first ranging from 2010–2015 and the second from 2016–2020 (DES 2010, 2016) focusing on building global partnerships among higher education institutions, making Irish universities globally competitive, establishing competitive visa, labour market and immigration policies, and increasing outward mobility among staff and students for instance under the Erasmus programme. In 2010/2011, 20,995 international students attended Irish higher education institutions. This increased by 58% to 33,118 in 2014/2015. The increase over the period was primarily driven by increases in the non-EU student cohort, which increased by 85% from 11,604 to 21,440 compared to a 25% increase in the EU student cohort (DES 2016). A growth target of 33% in the higher education sector will result in an increase in international students in higher education institutions from 33,118 in 2014/2015 to approximately 44,000 by the end of the 2019/2020 academic year. Outside the higher education institutions, figures indicate around 106,000 students in high-quality English Language Training (ELT) organisations – a 10% increase on 2010 estimates (Study Travel Magazine 2013). These reports also indicate 29% growth in student weeks in the sector between 2010 and 2014, suggesting that more students are staying in Ireland for longer periods. A growth target of 25% in the ELT sector will result in an increase in ELT students from 106,000 in 2014/2015 to 132,500 by the end of 2019/2020 academic year (DES 2016).

Growing internationalisation as well as increasing cultural, ethnic and religious diversity across Irish higher education institutions has both didactical and pedagogical implications that have yet to be better understood and addressed. For example, learning patterns, teaching methods and classroom cultures differ greatly between students coming to Ireland from the United States versus those coming from India or China. This presents challenges that academic staff need to be aware of when designing module outlines and assessments. While it may well be the norm in North America to present in front of a larger audience, this may not necessarily be the case in parts of Asia. Staff need to be more aware and trained that such cultural and didactical differences exist, and how best to respond to the challenges arising from this diversity in a lecture theatre or seminar group. While there is some training in cultural diversity for those sitting on interview and recruitment panels, this is both insufficient and only applies to a smaller number of mainly senior staff. Teacher training classes how to operate in a cross-cultural environment are needed for both senior and junior staff. Equally, there should be more intercultural awareness training and dialogue built into orientation weeks to prepare incoming students how to interact with a globally culturally diverse community.

There is a large body of literature on the distinctions, similarities and conflicts between internationalization and globalization in the higher education context (see Marginson and van der Wende 2007; Altbach and Levy 2006; Scott 1998).

Not all universities are (particularly) international, but all are subject to the same processes of globalisation - partly as objects, victims even, of these processes, but partly as subjects, or key agents, of globalisation. (Scott 1998, p. 122)

This includes increasing mobility of academics and students, global university rankings, global branding and marketing, joint and dual degree programmes between higher education institutions. But globalisation and internationalisation vary from university to university, from one higher education system to another meaning that the national context still matters (Marginson and van der Wende 2007). Though higher education institutions often see themselves as objects of globalisation, they are also its agents (Scott 1998). Research universities are intensively linked within and between the global cities that constitute the major nodes of a networked world (Castells 2001, McCarney 2005 cited in Marginson and van der Wende 2007, p.7). Students are increasingly global market commodities where institutions compete for the brightest highly mobile students.

Globalisation [which entered the discussion in Europe from 2000 onwards] was and is understood primarily in terms of the growing pressures of global economic competition while internationalisation continued to be synonymous with a more cooperative approach to higher education, or at least to carry less political or ideological baggage. This distinctive and contrasting use of the terms persists in many policy circles in Europe (Marginson and van der Wende 2007, p. 11).

However, as the authors point out, such a normative distinction may obscure from view both the differences between the two processes and the manner in which they feed each other. Internationalisation (as the term inter-national implies) ‘can involve as few as two units, whereas globalisation takes in many nations and is a dynamic process drawing the local, national and global dimensions more closely together’ (Marginson and van der Wende 2007, p. 11, Marginson and Rhoades 2002). Globalisation may therefore be viewed as more transformative compared to internationalisation. Scott (1998 cited in Marginson and van der Wende 2007, p.12) suggests that globalisation transcends national identities and carries the potential to be actively hostile to nation-states. In some respects globalisation in higher education is an alternative to the old internationalisation, even a rival to it. Yet they do not necessarily exclude each other. ‘One difference between globalisation and internationalisation is whether national systems become more integrated as suggested by globalisation, or more interconnected as with internationalisation’ (Beerkens 2004 cited in Marginson and van der Wende 2007, p. 12). By extension, Europeanisation in higher education could then be viewed as a form of globalisation on a regional scale. Trinity College Dublin, which was recently admitted into the League of European Research Universities (LERU), is one such research-intensive global university in Ireland that has not only forged international connections (for instance through the Erasmus programme) but has become globally integrated through setting up a range of dual and joint degree programmes with like-minded institutions outside of Europe.

The Cultural Diversity Working Group at Trinity College Dublin noted in this context that only a limited number of staff in service roles are from ethnic minority backgrounds. In terms of the educational experience, recent success in international recruitment (following government cutbacks) may have the unintended consequence that students may be in classrooms only with peers from their home culture or institution. Moreover, assignments and reading lists could better reflect the needs and academic interests of students from different cultural backgrounds. It was also noted that additional support is needed for academic staff in managing culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms and for administrative staff in effective cross-cultural communication. There is also insufficient transparency in presentation of menus to accommodate cultural and religious (and also dietary) diversity. And finally, from a structural point of view, there is a need to tailor admissions and related information to the needs of a more diverse body of applicants and their families. There may also be a need to adjust systems to accommodate differences in naming practices in different cultures, including some cultures only use one name or multiple names, but the Irish systems are oriented towards Western naming conventions.

3 What Can Irish Higher Education Institutions Learn from Other Education Sectors?

Findings from a previous review of the literature by Faas et al. (2015) summarized below, show that supportive and caring educational institutions are settings designed to provide pedagogical and academic support to students (Hersi 2011). Practically, in line with inclusive education, it also means using diverse strategies and working at many different levels on whole-class tasks, often without adequate resourcing and sharing specialist skills (Corbett 2001). The provision of formal (e.g. learning support) and informal (e.g. extracurricular) support tends to have a positive impact on students’ social and academic development (Fertig 2012). Previous studies suggest that efforts by staff to create a supportive climate are likely to prevent bullying and encourage student engagement (Eliot et al. 2010). In addition, supportive schools contribute significantly to the health and well-being of children through participation and empowerment (Konu and Rimpela 2002; Osterman 2000). A number of studies have shown that successful participation in academic life is associated with school composition, and that, in addition to peer group dynamics, the sociocultural context of the educational institution matters (Faas 2016). Where the proportion of students from a lower socio-economic background is high, migrant students are found to have fewer targeted supports available to them (Cebolla-Boado 2007; Rangvid 2007).

In the post-primary (secondary) sector in Ireland, a postal survey of school principals showed that 28% were ‘to a great extent’ prepared to cater for an increased diversity among the student body; 51% ‘to some extent’ and approximately 20% reported being challenged by having migrants among their student body (Faas et al. 2015). No such survey exists in the Irish higher education sector. There are a number of different support measures in place in Irish schools for all students who need them, irrespective of their background, including class tutors and year heads, assistance from guidance counsellors and other personnel at school. In some cases, migrant students were expected to utilise the support systems already in place. As the number of migrant children in schools continued to increase, schools devised ways of catering for the needs of the new arrivals. A variety of approaches has been adopted, including a mentoring system whereby another student was asked to look after the ‘newcomer’ and a pastoral care team (available to all students). Another widely used approach was the support from a teacher who, in some cases, was given a post of responsibility to look after newly-arrived migrant students. Of particular note is that student mentors or ‘buddies’ were used in a number of schools to provide informal support for migrant students. Similar buddy and mentoring systems are also in place in Irish higher education institutions to help exchange and other international students integrate with local students on an academic and social level. Senior students will be teamed up with new entrants, especially those with a migration background, to assist with their transition (see Faas et al. 2015, p.457f.).

Schools with a proactive approach to migrant inclusion, good leadership and a whole school stance on student support are more likely to meet the challenges rather than schools where staff are resistant to change and report limited interaction with parents. Although secondary schools were also relatively unprepared for the arrival of students from other cultural and ethnic backgrounds, ‘they devised a variety of approaches and included special clauses regarding tolerance and anti-racial harassment in their school policies. Interestingly, the measures put in place by schools did not vary depending on the number of migrants in each school. This could be explained by the fact that the number of migrant students in Irish secondary schools is still quite small’ (Faas et al. 2015, p.460). A majority of principals in Irish secondary schools felt that pre-service education does not adequately prepare teachers for teaching in a newly multicultural classroom and expressed their dissatisfaction with in-service education, and nearly all principals felt that more in-service education in intercultural education was needed (see Faas et al. 2015). ‘Regardless of diversification of practical approaches to the concept of inclusion, a fully inclusive approach as advocated by Booth et al. (2000) would require establishing inclusive values, organising support for diversity, producing an inclusive school development plan and reviewing it on a regular basis to ensure enhancement’ (Faas et al. 2015, p.461). However, these findings were largely based on 2008 data of the Adapting to Diversity study conducted by the Economic and Social Research Institute and there have not been more recent large-scale studies purposefully looking at migrants in Ireland.

4 Conclusions

The Irish example indicates that ongoing investment in education is necessary at all levels. This includes adequate staff training, offering continuous professional development programmes how to operate successfully in increasingly culturally diverse classrooms. Nurturing earlier levels of education lays the foundation to advance to higher education (see McGorman and Sugrue 2007). Educational institutions need to show clear leadership on cultural diversity issues – within the university community, and within wider Irish society. By striving to be more inclusive in relation to cultural diversity, universities and other educational institutions will be stronger and richer institutions and communities.

The Cultural Diversity Working Group at Trinity College Dublin (Trinity College Dublin 2018b) identified several priority areas where action could be taken: (1) the university academic community should reflect more on how to accommodate the interests and experience of a more diverse student body in teaching and assessment; (2) that services with a specific remit to support students in times of stress and difficulty should consider how to make their offering more responsive to the needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds; (3) that universities develop communal social spaces not linked to alcohol and accessible within and beyond library opening hours; (4) that university catering further its efforts to respond to cultural diversity and to promote awareness of same; (5) that consideration be given to the Commissioning by the university of a work of art for prominent location as symbol of commitment, engagement, invitation in relation to cultural diversity; (6) that attention be given to developing appropriate non-Christian faith facilities on campus and addressing religious diversity more generally; (7) that resources be invested into capacity-building, particularly intercultural awareness training, so that staff and students are equipped to communicate flexibly across cultures; and (8) that universities actively consider how to improve the quality of data about ethnic and cultural diversity in the academic community (staff and students). The latter would allow an institution to see for example the exam success and graduation rates of migrant (international) students rather than just overall figures or those coming through access programmes.

Above all, in future mission statements and strategic plans, higher education institutions in Ireland and further afield must make cultural diversity a core theme with specific actions/targets as well as being embedded throughout the development of other actions. This will clearly signal commitment and priority of this issue, internally and to the wider world. There is a lot of scope to expand intercultural awareness training among higher education staff and leaders to equip them with the intercultural and pedagogical skills needed (including different didactical and assessments techniques) to teach third-level students from different cultural backgrounds and learning traditions.