A/HRC/14/25 experience unfamiliar languages, cultural practices and expectations. These can be exacerbated when finite resources are perceived to be focused upon one community at the expense of the other. One contributor from Liberia noted: “if education is not equitably distributed ... there are bound to be pockets of dissatisfaction and escalation of crime”. 34. There is also ample evidence that migrant, refugee and asylum-seeking students in many countries face a far higher risk of marginalization with regard to education systems and opportunities when compared with native students25 Movement across national borders is only one of the many causal factors and mechanisms (social, economic, cultural, physical and psychological) that impact upon migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers in the exercise of their right to education. Early marriage and pregnancy, cultural expectations requiring girls and women to attend to childcare and household duties, and insecurity when travelling to school are examples of others. An assumption of linear causality should therefore be avoided. 35. Many of these factors combine and are reflected in low socio-economic status, classbased residential patterns and consequent school composition. Research suggests that a concentration of non-native students in any one school can be detrimental to education outcomes.26 Many low-income families and migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers do not have access to good-quality education.27 36. The Special Rapporteur highlights the issues facing families in conflict-affected areas, especially those on precarious incomes. Pertinent is the comment of a refugee who stated that: “shortage of food forces parents to use their children to work”; and another who stated that: “an empty stomach does not have ears”. In such contexts, food and shelter are prioritized over payment of education fees (where imposed) and indirect costs to quality education. 37. States, civil society and global international agencies have, in their own ways, sought to address some of the issues noted above. The Special Rapporteur points to three examples of how to strengthen educational opportunity and quality across all groups in disadvantaged communities.28 First, a number of European States have weighted additional funding according to the socio-demographic characteristics of the student population. Switzerland, aiming to halt native middle-class “flight” from inner city districts with a high proportion of ethnically-diverse populations, has focused on raising the quality of existing multi-ethnic schools by introducing an area-wide model of quality assurance.29 In Ecuador, human rights organizations and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have collaborated to organize inclusive workshops to design and implement “codes of living together” based upon respect for diversity, solidarity, equity and justice. 25 26 27 28 29 10 UNESCO, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the Marginalized (Paris and Oxford, UNESCO and Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 157. See in particular Deborah Nusche, “What Works in Migrant Education? A Review of Evidence and Policy Options”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 22 (OECD, 2009), p. 9. See, inter alia, David Arnold and Greta Doctoroff, “The early education of socio-economically disadvantaged children”, Annual Review of Psychology, No. 54 (2003), pp. 517–545; “What works in Migrant Education? A Review of Evidence and Policy Options”; and also EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010, p. 52. See Stephen McNair, “Migration, Communities and Lifelong Learning”, IFLL Thematic Paper, No. 3 (Leicester, National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, 2009), p. 49. http://www.niace.org.uk/ lifelonglearninginquiry/docs/IFLL-migration.pdf. See EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010, pp. 10–12. GE.10-12879