Do Refugee Students Feel Well at School? An Analysis of the Influence of Individual, Social, and Structural Factors

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article explores the subjective well-being of refugee students in German schools by integrating general predictors of student well-being with refugee-specific stressors, drawing on Cultural Stress Theory (Meca & Schwartz, 2024). Using data from the ReGES panel study (Refugees in the German Educational System), the analysis includes responses from 2,415 refugee adolescents aged 14 to 16. A key strength of the study lies in its theoretical framework, which adopts a multi-level approach by distinguishing between individual, social, and structural determinants of well-being. The incorporation of Cultural Stress Theory introduces a valuable perspective on refugee-specific challenges such as discrimination, cultural dissonance, and precarious legal status. Methodologically, the study is robust, benefiting from the scale and longitudinal design of the ReGES dataset, the application of multiple imputation for missing data, and the use of linear probability models. The findings offer policy-relevant insights, particularly in highlighting how discrimination, PTSD symptoms, and insecure residency negatively influence refugee students’ well-being, while support from teachers emerges as a protective factor, suggesting concrete implications for educational practice and reform. The study also makes a comparative contribution by centering refugee youth—a population frequently excluded from broader well-being research. However, several limitations warrant consideration. Conceptually, the application of Cultural Stress Theory could be deepened by examining interactions among stressors; for example, whether experiences of discrimination intensify the psychological impact of trauma. Furthermore, the study relies on a single-item Likert scale to measure well-being, which limits the depth of analysis on this complex construct. Methodologically, the exclusive use of Wave 1 data restricts the ability to draw causal inferences, and a longitudinal approach would be necessary to track the evolution of well-being over time. Measures of discrimination focus on perceived individual and group bias, omitting structural forms such as institutional or systemic barriers. The absence of comparison groups such as non-refugee immigrants or native-born peers, further constrains the ability to discern whether the identified patterns are uniquely refugee-related or more broadly linked to migration. Finally, school-level variables remain underexplored; although the analysis considers class composition, it does not account for school-wide policies such as language support initiatives or anti-discrimination programs that may significantly affect student well-being. Finally the lack of qualitative data is a limitation and a recommendation for a follow up study. 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the article, which we have carefully discussed. Where possible, we have made the appropriate changes to the article. Please find enclosed our response to each comment (in italic type).

Comment1: Conceptually, the application of Cultural Stress Theory could be deepened by examining interactions among stressors; for example, whether experiences of discrimination intensify the psychological impact of trauma.

Response1: Thank you very much for this valuable comment. We examined the following interactions that could be expected according to Cultural Stress Theory: a) Does perceived discrimination increase the negative effects of PTSD on well-being? b) Do experiences of discrimination reinforce the negative influence of an insecure residence status on well-being? c) Can good school performance mitigate the negative effects of an uncertain residence status on well-being?

None of these suspected interactions proved to be statistically significant, which is why we have decided not to include the results in the paper.

 

Comment 2: Furthermore, the study relies on a single-item Likert scale to measure well-being, which limits the depth of analysis on this complex construct.

Response2: This is a very important point. We have included this in the limitations of our study (page 17, lines 675-679).

 

Comment 3: Methodologically, the exclusive use of Wave 1 data restricts the ability to draw causal inferences, and a longitudinal approach would be necessary to track the evolution of well-being over time.

Response 3: This is absolutely correct, and we fully agree with the reviewer's assessment. That is why we already pointed out the limitations in the causal interpretation of our cross-sectional results in the section on limitations when we submitted our article (page 17, lines 652-654). The development of well-being over time is certainly also an important research question, but in our view, it is important to describe the base line level of well-being of refugee students in school and to discuss possible causes. An analysis of the development would require a different analytical strategy and would have to include additional explanatory variables (e.g., changes in the educational situation). Due to the diverse educational trajectories of the students, examining the development of well-being within the individual contexts (school, vocational training, vocational preparation) would mean that our case numbers for the analyses would be significantly reduced (depending on the context). A joint consideration would entail a significant restriction of the explanatory variables, as social and structural aspects in particular were surveyed in a context-specific manner, and the comparability of the indicators between the contexts would first have to be subjected to a thorough examination.

Comment 4: Measures of discrimination focus on perceived individual and group bias, omitting structural forms such as institutional or systemic barriers.

Response 4: This is a very important point, because not all institutional and systematic barriers are necessarily reflected in the awareness of those affected and in their perception of discrimination. By incorporating various problems at school and also different strategies for the schooling of new immigrants (attendance of a newcomer class vs. regular class; age-appropriate schooling), and the type of school, we have attempted to address structural barriers, as much as the dataset allows.

 

Comment 5: The absence of comparison groups such as non-refugee immigrants or native-born peers, further constrains the ability to discern whether the identified patterns are uniquely refugee-related or more broadly linked to migration.

Response 5: Yes, it is indeed a great pity that we do not have a comparison group. The current state of research suggests that some aspects also apply to migrants in general. Nevertheless, there could certainly be differences in the details, the investigation of which could provide important insights for policy and practice. Unfortunately, this is not possible with the ReGES data.

 

Comment 6: Finally, school-level variables remain underexplored; although the analysis considers class composition, it does not account for school-wide policies such as language support initiatives or anti-discrimination programs that may significantly affect student well-being.

Response 6: Thank you very much for this important point. We have added missing information about school measures to the limitations of our study (page 17, lines 662-664). The ReGES data does indeed contain some information about schools, but unfortunately not, for example, on anti-discrimination programmes. Moreover, school data are available only for a small proportion of the participating students, meaning that including school information would lead to a significant reduction in the number of cases in the analyses.

 

Comment 7: Finally the lack of qualitative data is a limitation and a recommendation for a follow up study. 

Response 7: A detailed, qualitative study of the well-being of refugee students at school, e.g., with regard to the interaction of various risk factors, is certainly another area for further research. We therefore expressly pointed out in the discussion that our findings provide indications for further qualitative studies (page 17, line 684).

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I suggest to insert a concluding section

 

Author Response

Comment 1: I suggest to insert a concluding section.

Response 1: Thank you very much for this suggestion, which we have discussed in detail for our revision. However, as the journal guidelines state that a conclusion should only be added if the discussion is very long or very complex, we ultimately decided against adding a conclusion. As our discussion is only two pages long, adding an additional conclusion would probably result in repetition.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presents a very original and interesting research on the well-being of adolescents in a migration situation participating in the German education system. In this sense, this research is of high interest due to the current global conditions where factors such as the resilience of education systems to assimilate migrant students is little explored.  Addressing this issue from the point of view of student well-being provides a rarely used perspective.
The bibliography is sufficiently up to date (most of the texts cited are from around 2020, although two texts from 2025 are presented). The authors cited are also highly relevant, although it is suggested that Tijoux (Ana María), who can help to understand the migration process in other educational systems, be included due to her relevance in the Spanish-speaking world.
With respect to the graphs, the two tables presented offer essential information for the analysis.

Author Response

Comment 1: The authors cited are also highly relevant, although it is suggested that Tijoux (Ana María), who can help to understand the migration process in other educational systems, be included due to her relevance in the Spanish-speaking world.

Response 1: Thank you very much for pointing out further literature. Unfortunately, most of María Emilia Tjoux's publications on migration and education are only available in Spanish. The English book on the topic, ‘Interrogating the Relations between Migration and Education in the South: Migrating Americas,’ which María Emilia Tjoux co-edited, is unfortunately not available to us and could not be obtained in the short time available for this review. Therefore, while we are certainly interested in reading her work at a later time, we could not cite María Emilia Tjoux at this point in time.