Education policies for migrant schoolchildren in Moscow Region (2010-2015): Lessons from the Californian experience on migrant schoolchildren integration

In accordance with Article 31 of Law "On Education in the Russian Federation" (2012) local authorities are responsible for ensuring that all citizens residing in the respective territories, choice of educational institution. (Frequently, they do not have information about migrants). If migrant schoolchildren arrive with insufficient knowledge of the Russian language to educational institutions and all the documents are presented, they have a preliminary interview and are directed to the appropriate class. Otherwise, if there is an absence of documents, then students of classes 5 -7 have an exam for the analysis of their knowledge of Russian language and mathematics. Students of classes 8 to 10 have exams of the Russian language, mathematics, physics, chemistry, in order to determine the possibility of training in the appropriate class.

Article 59 of Law 273-FZ "On Education in the Russian Federation" claims that migrants have the same rights as locals in respect of the delivery of the unified state exam. It is allowed to pass the exam for migrant schoolchildren of 9 and 11 classes. Students can be admitted to the exam under several conditions. These are completed educational programs of the basic general and secondary (complete) general education, positive annual grades in all subjects of the curriculum. In fact, children have the same rights as locals, so they pass exam on the same basis with locals. In addition, there are several complementary options for migrants. Firstly, migrant schoolchildren during the obligatory unified exam in 9th class have an opportunity to pass the Russian language exam without complicated grammatical tasks for pupils of schools with native language of instruction. Moreover, migrant schoolchildren during the obligatory unified exam in 11th class have an opportunity to pass the Russian language exam choosing the theme of the essay from a special list.

Finally, all children of school age residing and staying on the territory of the Russian Federation have an equal access to schooling. It is guaranteed with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the law "On education", the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and regional legal acts. As for Moscow, for example, there is the decision board of the Department of Education Moscow dated 22.12.2005 № 19/1 "on the integration of foreign migrant children into the educational environment of the city of Moscow." (Florinskaya, 2010).

However, there is a problem in Moscow connected with the imperfection of the legal framework. The most frequent issue for migrant schoolchildren is the expiration of the temporary registration. Temporary registration is the form of residence in Russia, which is given for a period of 90 days with the migration card. Temporary registration has to be prolonged every 90 days. Migrant workers can extend their registration under all favorable conditions in Russia without leaving the country. Migrant children do not have such an opportunity to prolong the registration in Russia. They do not have right to study while they do not have a registration. Frequently, parents do not have an opportunity to enter and leave the country every 90 days that is why many migrants are in danger of realizing their right for education. Nowadays, the most insurmountable limitation for migrants while applying children to Moscow schools is the compulsory presence of a medical insurance. If you do not have a medical license, it is impossible to pass the medical examination and make the necessary vaccinations. Moreover, even if it is possible to pass medical examination fee, the administration of schools still required from the parents bought the license for a year. (D. Alexandrov et al., 2012b). Thus, there are a bureaucratic and financial barriers.

Expect local federal norms, Russia is a part of international unions and responsible for implementation of international treaties. For instance, these are the Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), Convention for the care of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), the Convention Rights of the child (1989), and others.

Overall, in spite of the fact that migrants in Moscow have the full and equal rights for education as locals, there is a restriction on realization of their rights. Temporary registration mechanism has a negative effect on the integration process of migrant schoolchildren in Russian and Moscow reality. According to different statistics, over 25-30% of migrant pupils do not go to school because of bureaucracy and problems with documents (Florinskaya, 2010). The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the following indicator, as the right of pupils for education is restricted.

Indicator: assessment of prior learning. Children of migrants are not assessed with the level of compulsory education of migrant and language level obtained at home countries. According to the Article 5 of the Law “On Education in the Russian Federation”, municipal administration is responsible for solving educational issue with migrants. However, there is still no general exam for all the migrants arriving to Russia. There are situational cases, when migrant child comes to school and passes exams in Russian and other subjects.

The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the following indicator, as the testing for migrant schoolchildren is not of a standardized nature. Children are tested locally and the process is not systematized.

Indicator: access to non-compulsory education. According to part 5 of Article 66 of the Federal Law № 273-FZ “On Education in the Russian Federation”, basic general and secondary education are compulsory. All the other education such as private schools, vacation trainings and others is regulated with the Federal Law “On Education in Russian Federation”. Private sector does not refer to compulsory education.

However, as all the educational private institutions are responsible for children, they have to act in the limitations. For instance, there is the same rule for migrants to study in private school. In accordance with the “Order of enrollment of citizens in educational institutions” approved by the Russian Federation Ministry of Education and Science from 22.01.2014 №32, all the parents to study in any school have to deliver the list of documents. These are passport, registration, medical insurance, and others. As it was stated above the problems frequently occurs while delivering and collecting the entire document. Moreover, there is an obligation that all the documents have to be delivered on the Russian language. There are special option for refugees, however, in practice everything should be translated into Russian.

As for the higher education, there is no limitations for foreigners. All the conditions were explained in the indicator: access to higher education.

Overall, an access to non-compulsory education is as limited as to compulsory. Undocumented migrants without residence status and registration do not have access to education. However, children with education have an opportunity to study in Russia on special conditions (quotas) and on a common basis with locals.

The option 2 (score 50) is valid for the following indicator, some migrants do not have even a common access to the non-compulsory education.

Indicator: access to vocational training. The indicator consists of two measures. The first measure is examine how the state influence an increase of migrants' participation in vocational trainings. The second measure assesses how the state motivates supply of trainings and learnings for migrants from the employers of migrant parents (Mipex, 2010).

There is no common policy for migrant children assimilation in Russia and particularly in Moscow. All the initiatives, which took place, were from the non-governmental and private sector. For instance, “The schools of Russian language” were initiated with the assistance of NGO.

Overall, the option 0 (score 0) is for the indicator because migrants only benefit from the support of non-governmental initiatives.

Indicator: access to higher education. An access to higher education for migrants and refugees in the Russian Federation is regulated with the Article 1 of “Procedure for admission to state educational institutions of higher professional education (universities) of the Russian Federation” approved by Order of the Russian Ministry of 14.01.2003 №50. According to this legal act, citizens of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus citizens, stateless persons, foreign nationals and foreign nationals are accepted for training on the basic educational programs of higher professional education in the state higher educational institutions of the Russian Federation. Foreigners who come for the study to the Russian Federation can be accepted to the study in accordance with a several conditions. These are international treaties, quotas of the Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation, direct agreements of institutions. Moreover, there are special conditions for migrants from the former Soviet Union. They can be taken to universities on a competitive basis to the places financed from the budget.

According to the contemporary survey, there is a high demand from migrant schoolchildren and migrant parents for higher education (Vitkovskaja, Ivanova, Ledeneva, & Tjurjukanova, 2014) (D. Alexandrov et al., 2012b). The tendency is taking place due to the fact that most of the immigrants who moved to Russia in the last decade lived in the capitals and major cities of the former Soviet republics. They have a high cultural and educational capital.

Universities and colleges are open for children of migrants if they have enough financial resources. However, it is surprising that even the children of migrants who graduated from the Moscow schools, but it does not have a specific legal status (residence permission or Russian citizenship), do not have benefits and are not eligible for further free training in Russia.

Overall, migrants have a special access to the higher education, which can be provided with visa, quotas, and universities' agreements. However, as higher education is not compulsory, it is not free for migrants. Government does not provide any special programs or campaigns for migrants. In fact, language programs for potential applicants is held by some NGOs in isolated regions. It is presented as the exception rather than the norm today. The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the following indicator, as migrants get only general support from the government.

Targeting needs dimension

Targeting needs dimension aims to clarify whether migrant children, tutors, parents have specific features to study and to realize themselves in Russia. These features include assistance and guidance on all the levels (human, informational, language resources), children monitoring and analysis, teachers' trainings to explore the comprehensive and up-to-date information about children.

Indicator: educational guidance at all levels. The general idea of the parameter is to assess the system of guidance, language assistance, and orientation centers in Moscow. The analysis of the following indicator is based on the three measures. Firstly, it is important to examine the existence of information on educational system in migrant languages in written form. Secondly, the object of analysis is the provision of resource person/centers for orientation of migrant pupils. Thirdly, the provision of general advice and guidance from the interpretation services (Mipex, 2010).

There is no special policy in educational institutions for migrant children realized on their native languages. It does not exist on either compulsory and non-compulsory education. According to the Federal Law # 273 “On Education in the Russian Federation”, all the documentation and educational process is realized on the Russian language. There is an exception for some programs that can be taught on the English language. However, the presence of migrants' language is excluded.

The provision of guidance such as professional orientation, general education advices, and guidance at all levels does work only on the local level. Immigrant children are treated as locals. They do not have extra facilities from the state to provide assimilation and integration instruments for them. The only organizations, which addresses issues of migrants, connect with the refugees children, Red Cross/Red Moon, Orthodox movements, etc. Educational system of Russia excludes any special help for migrants.

Overall, migrants benefit only from the general support of the government. There is nether written information on migrant's language nor centers of migrants' orientation nor interpretation services for families. The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the following indicator, as migrants get only general support from the state.

Indicator: migrant pupil monitoring. The issue of pupils monitoring is actual for Moscow and Russia. There is still no working system of migrants monitoring (Aleksandrov, Ivanyushina, Kostenko, Savel'eva, & Tenisheva, 2012). Contemporary number of migrant pupils is still known as around 70 thousand. However, many children have problems with temporary registration, medical insurance, and other bureaucratic issues that harden the possibility of counting the amount of children in Moscow (Mipex, 2010).

Each organization that is connected with the migrants gather their own data. There is still no connected and unite base of all the migrants located in Moscow. The statistics is gathered by the State Federal Migration Service, Prosecutor, Committee for education, schools and municipal administrations. There are several problems caused by the following situation. Firstly, data of various state institutions is not interdependent with others. Secondly, every institution is focused on a special aspects of migrants experience. There is no common form for the data. Thirdly, the issue is that there is a lack of open sources with the statistics over migrant schoolchildren in Moscow.

Overall, the analysis is based on the understanding how monitoring of migrant schoolchildren is realized. The option 2 (score 50) is valid for the following indicator, as migrants systematized only on general category. This category divides only migrant/non-migrants.

Indicator: measures to address educational situation of migrant groups. The following indicator represents targeted policies for financial support of children and teacher's guidance. It differs from the indicator “educational guidance at all levels” in the assistance from above. However, the analysis of the indicator showed the same results (Mipex, 2010).

Overall, the option 3 (score 0) is suitable for the following indicator, as migrants can rely only on benefits from general support. There is no targeted support, which is provided by the state, schools, and teachers.

Indicator: teacher training to reflect migrants' learning needs. The indicator measures the presence of teacher training and professional development programs. There are two options for the indicator. Firstly, the existence of the pre-service trainings for the qualification as a teacher. Secondly, the presence of obligatory development programs (Mipex, 2010).

In spite of the fact that there is the Academy for Advanced Studies and Retraining of Educators (training courses for teachers) in Moscow as in every subject of the Russian Federation. It does not include any pre-service training and obligatory courses concerned to migrant education.

Training of teachers to work with migrant children is one of the most important problems in the field (Yazuga, 2010). This is a requirement in today's migration pedagogy to the training of teachers, who must understand the social and psychological characteristics of students of migrant workers: It should be taken into account the peculiarities of their mentality and understanding of the migration processes, typical for Russia and the region. It is important to know the specifics of teaching bilingual children. The theory of multicultural education is taken place there. At the same time, the number of adult migrants is increasing in the region. Teachers are required for both children and adults. Consequently, the issue of the establishment of a teacher training programs is raised for workers and their children.

Overall, the demand for the training courses and qualitative assistance for migrants is noted by the workers of educational system and experts (D. Alexandrov et al., 2012a; Yazuga, 2010). However, the support is not presented. The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the indicator as such projects exist only on a project basis.

New opportunities dimension

This measurement refers to the analysis of opportunities that immigrants can bear in school such as immigrant culture, languages, customs and others. This dimension is more about support of immigrants to soften barriers between them and Russians. From the one hand, it is devoted to the option of study immigrant language and culture. From the other hand, it is about support not only of migrant schoolchildren, but also it is about studying immigrant parents and teachers.

Indicator: support for teaching immigrant languages (average). The indicator consists of two sub-indicators. These are “Option to learn immigrant languages” and “Delivery of immigrant languages” (Mipex, 2010).

The “Option to learn immigrant languages” implies an analysis of options to study learn immigrant languages. Available answers are state regulation to learn languages, existence of bilateral agreements between Russia and other countries to learn languages, no provision and special assistance for the learning of immigrant languages.

According to the Article 18 Federal Law #273 “On Education in the Russian Federation” , education can be represented only in the Russian language. However, as Russia is a federal republic, all the ethnic republics can provide education on their own languages. This norm is enshrined in the Constitutions of the Republics and is supported by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The learning of Russian and state languages of the Federation is governed by the federal state educational standards established by the Russian Federation. In fact, there are 25 official languages of the republics: Abaza, Adyghe, Altai, Balkar, Bashkir, Buryat, Ingush, Kabardian, Kalmyk, Karachay, Cherkess, Komi (Komi Zyryan), Mari Mountain, Mari meadow, Mordovia Moksha, Mordovian Erzya, Nogai, Ossetian, Tatar, Udmurt, Tuva, Khakassia, Chuvash, Chechen, Sakha (Yakutia). The education in the Russian Federation is guaranteed on the state language of the Russian Federation, as well as there is a possibility of the choice of language training and education within the possibilities offered by the education system.

Secondary special and higher education is carried out in Russian. However, higher education can be provided in English, German, and French languages. The study on the other immigrant languages and the languages of immigrants are not presented at educational system of the Russian Federation.

As for the state regulation of the immigrant languages, Government adheres to the standpoint on the Federal law from 01.06.2005 N 53-FZ (ed. From 05.05.2014) "On the state language of the Russian Federation". The status of the Russian language as the state language of the Russian Federation provides for the mandatory use of the Russian language in the areas such as education, healthcare and others. “The Russian language is the language of the Russian Federation, which promotes mutual understanding, strengthening of international relations of the Russian Federation peoples in a single multinational state.”

Overall, the Russian language is secured by the state and promoted as the language of integration. The provision of immigrant languages are not supported by the system of education. Protection and support of the Russian language as the state language of the Russian Federation contribute to the enhancement and enrichment of the spiritual culture of the peoples of the Russian Federation. Teaching and learning the official languages of the republics of the Russian Federation should not be at the expense of teaching and learning of the state language of the Russian Federation. Government admits the usage of foreign languages in compliance with school opportunities. Thus, the option 3 (score 0) is suitable for the present situation. The education on immigrant languages is provided only no forms of private initiatives and by the private sector. As for the private initiatives, there are several of them such as “"School of the neighboring languages" Indicator: support for teaching immigrant cultures (average). The following indicator consists of two sub-indicators. The first one is devoted to the analysis of options to learn immigrant cultures. The assessment includes an examination of state regulation of the issue, bilateral agreements between the countries, and private initiatives (Mipex, 2010).

As it is claimed by the leading experts, there is a growing cultural distance between migrants and visiting Russian population (Zayonchkovskaya et al., 2014b). Moscow system of education issues the adaptation and integration of migrants as a part of the educational process. The core principles are included in the plans and the contents of the capital formation.

Through the efforts of the Moscow City Department of Education, the testing program of adaptation of migrants (Moscow Government Resolution № 711-PP dated August 21, 2007 "On the Moscow city target migration program for 2008 to 2010") took place in the period 2008-2010. One of the tasks of the Moscow City Migration Program for 2008-2010 was "adaptation and integration of immigrants on the basis of mutual respect for their culture, religion, customs, traditions and way of life of city residents." \

In August 1997, the Moscow government approved “the Regulation on secondary schools with ethno-cultural (national) educational component” and the Regulations of preschool educational institution with ethno-cultural (national) educational component. The main aim of these institutions with ethno-cultural component of education, as well as other public schools, was to train in Russian in accordance with the educational standards of the Russian Federation. According with the following legal act, the organization of educational process at school with ethno-cultural component of education has a number of features. Firstly, the school has the right to use the textbooks and manuals of ethno cultural cycle of the republics and countries of native speakers on a contract basis. Secondly, an educational institution may also involve teaching subjects of foreign experts of ethno cultural cycle. Thirdly, along with the Russian national holidays, traditional national holidays of ethnic minorities are celebrated in ethno-cultural school. Finally, the traditional national symbols of minorities are allowed to be used with the Russian state symbols.

In virtue of the concept of Moscow schools with ethno cultural components, there are implemented a program of additional education on the basis of these and the national-cultural centers. There are special folklore, dance, choral, music studios and ensembles, museum and regional studies, ethnographic expeditions. The formation of "Ethnosphere" system of international communication of youth clubs was initiated. A project is supported by the UNESCO Associated Schools, which actively involve educational institutions with ethno-cultural component of education.

New trends and problems of social and cultural development in the capital are also in the focus of the Government of Moscow. All the issues are defined in the city-target-program "Moscow multinational: formation of civil solidarity, peace and harmony of culture (2005-2007)." The program aims to promote the development of civil society, strengthening of the Russian state, the unity of the Muscovites, organic combination of national interests and the rights of citizens to preserve their ethnic and cultural, linguistic and religious affiliation, approval atmosphere of ethnic harmony, adapting to the conditions of Moscow's recent migrants. Provided for in the new conditions of the development of mechanisms to facilitate the solution of problems of formation of civil solidarity Muscovites of different nationalities.

Overall, there is a regulation of the issue of learning immigrant culture from the governmental side. There is an opportunity for schools with different ethnic composition to implement extra classes for the strengthening of immigrant integration. The sub-indicators “Option to learn immigrant cultures” and “Delivery of immigrant cultures” is valid for option 1 (score 100).

Indicator: measures to counter segregation of migrant pupils and promote integration. This indicator measures two aspects of integrational processes. Firstly, it measures whether school encourages with few migrant pupils to attract more migrant pupils and schools with many to attract more non-migrant pupils. Secondly, it measures to link schools with few migrant pupils and many migrant pupils (curricular or extra-curricular).

Inter-ethnic relations is an important and little-studied topic in the school environment, that is why it causes fear in society and often appears in the media. In modern Russia, journalists problematize co-education in Russian schools, local and migrant children instilling unwarranted panic and fear in the parents. The rhetoric of this kind are often fears that joint training impairs the quality of education for the local children (Elena, 2010). One of the conditions for the implementation of the idea of "culture of peace" is the elimination of all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, as well as the promotion of the ideals of mutual understanding, tolerance and solidarity among all civilizations, peoples and cultures, including towards ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities (International Federation of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent Societies, 2011). This approach is essential in integration of migrants into the society.

It is important to avoid segregation of immigrant children because it would harm to the integration and assimilation of them. There is a tendency that migrant students seek to be friends with other children of migrants (Aleksandrov, Ivanyushina, et al., 2012). At the same time, as a rule, they do not form mono-ethnic coalition. Students choose their friends with similar life experience, which is included in the recent move, difficulty with learning the language and so on.

Schools with ethnic component in Moscow aim to bring its content and direction in accordance with the requirements of modern life, the features of the new social and multinational situation in the capital. There is a need to strengthen the unity of the Moscow society through the development of inter-ethnic integration on the basis of the Russian language, spiritual and moral foundations of Russian society and Russian national identity, the Moscow tradition of intercultural dialogue, inter-ethnic and inter-confessional accord (Grigor'eva, M I, Zhuravleva, 2012).

As for the measures to increase the number of migrants there is no such a tendency because migrants cause many issues to solve such as ignorance of the Russian language, culture, and others. It might be a reason for the avoidance of the taking to school. Another reason is the issue with temporary registration, which was mentioned above. The illegal migrant child can not have an access to education in Russia. As for the second parameter, the special schools with “ethnic components” have common normative base, experience exchange, tutorship, educational practices, and educational model. Overall, the option 2 (score 2) is valid for the indicator as the only one measure corresponds to Moscow reality.

Indicator: measures to support migrant parents and communities. My point is that the indicator is the most important one because it implements analysis of parents influence on children. Parents are the closest people to migrants and they can have a strong influence on the formation of children. There are three parameters, which are analyzed. These are requirement for community-level support for parental involvement, school-level support to link migrant students, involvement migrant parents to school governance (Mipex, 2010).

Educational institutions of Moscow pay specific attention to the work with the parents of schoolchildren. They are actively involved in the preparation of significant school activities related to intercultural communication and education in school environment. In some schools of education issues of tolerance included in the program "Parental VSEOBUCH". Experts developed methodological recommendations for the class hours, parents' meetings on the problems of education of a culture of peace and inter-ethnic harmony. Moscow experience shows that teaching and educational process in schools is built on close cooperation in school life teachers, students and parents (UNESCO, 2008).

One of the area of the school's work is the socialization of migrant children through a family-centered approach. As part of the school, migrant children and their parents have exercises with psychologists, teachers, specialists, master classes, classes of schoolteachers, involving parents to participate in all school-wide celebrations (Myazina, 2013).

However, despite inclusion of immigrant parents is important process for integration of their children to Russian reality, parents are only encouraged to be involved in school governance. It is worth mentioning that interaction approach between schools and migrant parents is bottom-up. Overall, the option 2 (score 50) is valid for the issue, as migrants are included only in school governance (Mipex, 2010).

Indicator: measures to bring migrants into the teacher workforce. This indicator shows how migrants are encouraged to be professionally oriented for work in schools (Mipex, 2010).

Foreigners can be employed in Russia on general basis. Migrant has to receive permission to work in Russia. To become a teacher, migrant pays a state fee in the amount of two thousand rubles and the employer pays six thousand rubles for each foreigner. This option is used when an organization is interested in the foreign experts that it is ready to pay for one.

Another situation concerns foreigners who granted refugee status or temporary asylum in Russia. These citizens and their host organizations should not obtain a work permit, and therefore pay eight thousand rubles. It is much easier to get temporary asylum applicant's documents are considered within three days. Asylum is granted for one year with possibility of extension. Working as a teacher requires higher and, preferably, special education, so foreigners have to submit their documents on education.

However, despite working as a teacher is permissible for migrants, there are no campaigns, initiatives, and support from the government to promote the profession of teacher. The option 3 (score 0) is valid for the indicator.

Intercultural education for all dimension

The main idea is to examine whether pupils and teachers have enough opportunities to work and study in a multicultural environment. Is the educational system of Russia consistent with the principles of cultural diversity? Is the state support initiatives that would help to provide intercultural development in the society? Do the daily life of pupils comply with the multinational principles? Are all the teachers trained in accordance with the principles of cultural diversity? I will answer these questions in the following dimension.

Indicator: adapting daily school life to reflect diversity. There are a few legislation acts, which regulate migrant schoolchildren adaptation in Moscow. These are:

§ Decree of the Government of Moscow dated 25.08.1998, № 646-PP of “Ethno-cultural development program education in Moscow for 1998-2000”

§ Decree of the Moscow Government dated 12.05.1998 of №382 “On the status and development of ethno-cultural education and cooperation with national associations in Moscow”

§ Decree of the Government of Moscow dated 19.08.1997 № 653 “On the position of the secondary school with ethno-cultural educational component in Moscow. The position of the preschool educational institution with ethno-cultural educational component in Moscow”

§ Decree of the Government of Moscow dated 21.08.2007 № 711-PP “About Moscow city target migration program for 2008-2010”

§ The decision of the board of the Department of Education of Moscow dated 23.03.2006 № 5/2 “On the program of the integration of foreign migrant children in the Moscow educational environment and their socio-cultural adaptation to the conditions of the capital metropolis”

In accordance with these legal acts, there should be special conditions for the integration of immigrant features in a daily school life. There are three aims of the integration. Firstly, it is important to create environment for migrant pupils for usage of ethnic culture for purposeful development of their personality for further life. Secondly, all the ethno-cultural demands in the sphere of education should be realized. Thirdly, all the migrant pupils should be provided with an opportunity to study native language, literature, history, and ethno-cultural traditions. Educational program is based on the specific of ethnic minorities. In addition, there are special conditions for the schools to implement national cuisine if there is a need for it or demand from migrant parents.

Overall, the option 2 (score 50) “Law allows for local or school-level discretion” is valid for the indicator. There is no obligatory norms for schools to follow because all the norms are in recommendation form.

Indicator: school curriculum to reflect diversity. As it was already analyzed, curriculum is divided on two parts. These are compulsory and additional. This indicator aims to evaluate whether there is special subject for the promotion of cultural diversity or the principles are integrated throughout program.

Thus, analysis of the legal acts presented above showed that there can be both subjects and program-oriented approach.

Indicator: state supported information initiatives. The indicator is devoted to the analysis of informational support for the promotion of cultural diversity, migrant adaptation and assimilation to the Russian society.

There are a number of public organizations, which promote the principles of cultural diversity in Moscow. These are "School of the Russian Language" (educational centers of integration of migrants), Muzeon (educational programs of migrant languages, public lecturers), "Tolerance Institute" (on the basis of Russia State Library for Foreign Literature M.I. Rudomino), Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center, project “Citizen of the world”.

Initiatives part of mandate of state-subsidized body (please name).According to the Decree of the Moscow Government dated 12.05.1998 of №382 “On the status and development of ethno-cultural education and cooperation with national associations in Moscow”, it is recommended for Moscow mass media to create and develop the media support for the projects related to cultural diversity, multinational basis of Russia, experience of inter-national and inter-ethnic relations in Moscow and Russia.

Overall, option 1 (score 100) is valid for the indicator.

Indicator: adapting curriculum to reflect diversity. The indicator aims to reflect how curricula and teaching materials provide integration of migrant pupils. First measure is devoted to the presence materials that is suitable for migrants. Second measure reflects inspection and monitoring of curricula's realization.

In accordance with the Russian educational system, the head of the educational organization confirms the curricula annually. The curricula consists of two parts. These are obligatory part and part, which is formed with the needs of the educational process's actors (additional part). The last part can be devoted to inter-cultural education. This part can provide classes for migrant's adaptation.

As it was mentioned the head of educational organization establishes curricula, but there is a special state institution, which inspects curricula to avoid promotion of impermissible ideas (terrorism, extremism, etc.) This institution is Rosobrnadzor (Russian educational inspection). The obligatory part is directly inspected because there should by norms and common standards for all the schools. However, additional part is analyzed only through the prism of extremism, terrorism promotion that is why it depends on schools whether to put inter-cultural education or not.

The following system is regulated with the number of legal acts. These are Federal Law #273 «on Education in the Russian Federation”, Federal basic curriculum and preliminary curriculum approved by order of Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation on March 9 2004 №13-12, order of the Minister of Education “About the inclusion of Federal State Educational Standards”, school charter.

Overall, option 2 (score 50) is valid for the indicator, because there is a presence of state guidance, opportunities for flexibility in curricula, but it is not obligatory for schools to implement intercultural education.

Indicator: teacher training to reflect diversity. The indicator devotes to the analysis of special trainings for teachers to work with migrant schoolchildren and assessment of obligatory passage of the courses.

There is a special institution of Moscow Institute of Open Education, which is working to implement the orders of the Department of Education of Moscow. Educational institution "International (Multicultural) Education and Integration of Migrant Children in School" (IEIMCS) was established in 1996. The department focuses on the issues of intercultural education, adaptation and integration of migrant children from to Moscow schools.

The aim of the department directly concerns with the indicator. It is the development and implementation of training courses for teachers and analysts of educational institutions of Moscow on the subject of inter-ethnic relations in the contemporary capital. There are full-time, part-time and full-time-distance programs for teachers annually. Over 30 groups are studied there in different directions. In addition, most of the specialists of the IEIMCS works not only with schools, but also with they pay attention to the global challenges faced by other capitals and attractive for migrant cities all around the world (UNESCO, 2008).

Besides, there are exchange programs, conferences and trainings organized for teachers who work with migrant schoolchildren in schools with ethnic component.

In general, purposeful activities of the IEIMCS contributes to the expansion of the inter-cultural education of the range of educational services, the growth of the professional level of teaching staff in the field of intercultural education (Guljaeva, 2010). Thus, the indicator scores 50 (option 2), as teachers take courses for professional development, but courses are not obligatory for the professionals to teach migrant schoolchildren.

MIPEX Analysis of the USA and California

MIPEX analysis over the USA was held in 2014. The USA is on the 9th place with 63 MIPEX points among all the other countries.

The highest rate for the US is based on the anti-discrimination policy with 90/100 points, which means that migrants' rights are not infringed and protected by the legislation and policies. This sphere is highly protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, amendments to the law, and Supreme Court precedencies (Aiken, Salmon, & Hanges, 2013; Cary, 2001; Nicholas Pedriana & Robin Stryker, 2004). Moreover, there are special instruments of self-protection except laws such as EEOC (equal employments opportunity complaint) complaints, which provide migrants with assistance in solving issues with employers.

The lowest rate is for the political participation of migrants in the USA. There are 36 out of 100 points, which means that the development of this sphere is slightly unfavorable for migrants. Migrants do not have electoral rights in the USA, as these rights are not provided by the Constitution and Voting rights. However, many states initiated voting rights on the municipal level. As for California, there is a process of restoration of voting rights in the state (R. Hayduk, 2016 ). The most developed states have immigrant NGOs and associations, which assist city councils with their feedback on the policies implementation in the field. For instance, there is the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), which integrates over 100 immigrant unions and associations. In addition, there is no violation of right to association in accordance with the 1st amendments to the US Constitution. The only limitation is for the representatives of the communists immigrants. Communists are equated to the totalitarian parties and their members are considered inadmissible (8 U.S. Code § 1182(D)).

As for other research fields, there are 67/100 points for labour market mobility, 66/100 points for family reunion, 69/100 points for health protection, 54/100 for permanent residence, and 61/100 for access to nationality (“USA|MIPEX”, n.d.).

My research is based on the analysis of educational policy of the USA and California for migrant schoolchildren. Education field is based on the analysis of immigrant opportunities over achievement and development in schools.

Access dimension examines whether all the children despite the legal status have an equal access to education. There are special programs, which aims to include all the children to the educational process. These are NCLB (No Child Left Behind) Act of 2001, Supreme Court Case Plyler v Doe, and Perkins Career and Technical Education law (Perkins Act, 2006). There are no boundaries for pre-primary and higher education. However, there is no unified state examination to evaluate migrants' educational background. According to the NCLB, there are tests on the native languages for migrants to evaluate their education, but this testing is held annually. All in all, the average score for the access dimension is 83 out of 100, which means that the conditions are favorable.

Targeting needs dimension aims to evaluate whether all the demands of actors of educational process (children, parents, and teachers) are considered. Firstly, there is a right for immigrants on the native language support in accordance with the Supreme Court decision 1974 (Lau vs. Nichols). Secondly, the NCLB prescribes schools and governmental agencies to measure English proficiency of immigrant schoolchildren. Thirdly, US Department of Education provides a program “the English Language Acquisition Grant”, which aims to promote English in the neediest states and districts. The program was addressed in the NCLB and it replaced several other programs. The budget spent on the program in 2014 is about 700 million dollars (“The Office of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students (OELA)”, (n.d.). Moreover, schools are obligated to hold testing not only on the English, but also on maths, history and science. It is important to note that teachers responsible for testing should be specially educated and have a license to contact with immigrants. As for the after-testing education, migrants have the same program as citizens. Schools with a large amount of migrants are monitored annually. However, the trainings do not have an obligatory basis. It is up to districts to decide whether to develop teachers to work with LEP students or not. There are only 11 states, which initiated policies for the development of obligatory teachers' trainings.

New opportunities dimension discloses issues of interaction between locals and immigrants. This dimension uncovers cultural and social sides of interaction such as language, religion, communication etc. This dimension is one of the most problematic one as the average score is 15 out of 100 points. Present dimension consists of 2 indicators and 7 sub-indicators. The first indicator focuses on the opportunity to study native language of migrant schoolchildren. As it was stated, there is federal policy, which regulates following sphere the Foreign Language Assistance Program. This policy has recommendations for states to assist immigrants with language support. As for California, it implements overall scope of measures to provide immigrants with their language. There is a CLAP (California Language Assistance Program), which gives immigrants an option to learn native languages.

The most disastrous indicator is “Support for teaching immigrant cultures”, which is devoted to understand how immigrant cultures are toughed at school level. There are no conditions for studying immigrant culture because it is not provided. There are no any subjects devoted to the immigrants culture. There are only common for all Black and Hispanic studies without any specification on immigrant sides.

Intercultural-education-for-all dimension aims to analyze whether there is special environment for students and pupils in mixed society. One of the indicators over dimension is the presence of intercultural education in the curriculum of the schools. This subject is not compulsory because it is chosen in accordance with the needs of the state. Overall, this is not obligatory practice for all the states. As for California, the intercultural education is the most important part of a comprehensive education student (California Education Department, 2012). Next indicator is state supported initiatives. However, there is no unified regulation over the initiatives across all the USA. There is also no special policy for adaptation of curriculum and daily school life to reflect diversity. The last indicator is the presence of special courses for teachers to reflect diversity. The availability of special preparation of teachers for communication with migrants requires special knowledge. However, these courses are not obligatory. There are about 30% of states, which require teachers to attend special courses. California is among them since 2001. Overall, the average score for this indicator in MIPEX analysis is 50 out of 100. This is due to the fact that there is just common recommendations from the federal center for states. There is no obligatory policy over intercultural education operates in the USA.

Findings

Thus, I came to a number of results using the MIPEX framework in comparison of California (USA) and Moscow (Russia). Based on the results, I made two graphs illustrating the differences of California and Moscow in accordance with the MIPEX analysis (See Figure 11). I focused on the examination educational policy. It was important for me to understand how educational systems of the countries are profitable and effective for migrant schoolchildren and their families. Axis of the graph correspond to the dimensions of the educational policy. These are access, targeting needs, intercultural education, and new opportunities dimensions. Each dimension consists of indicators and sub indicators (See Appendix 1). The maximum score for each dimension is 100. If the score is higher, than policy is more convenient for migrants.

Figure 11. MIPEX Analysis of California and Moscow Educational Policy

Moscow concedes California in access and targeting needs dimensions, while California gives in intercultural education and new opportunities dimension.

The Californian overall score for access dimension is 83 out of 100, while in Moscow this index equals 17 points. The question addressed in MIPEX: “Do all children, with or without a legal status, have equal access to all levels of education?” California showed better results due to the more developed legislative regulation and mechanisms of implementation. Firstly, there is a specially developed NCLB act, which aims to equalize all the students in their rights of getting appropriate education in spite of the fact whether you are migrant or not. Moreover, there are special programs not only for the schools, but also for the colleges and universities. These are High School Equivalency Program and College Assistance Migrant Program. As for Moscow, there are no state supported measures such as financing, informational campaigns to attract immigrant children to schools. Moreover, there are no measures to specially monitor the educational outcomes of immigrant pupils to develop the system. Secondly, if child has problems with the residence status or registration, his right to education can be violated. In accordance with the Russian migration legislation, immigrants whose registration is expired cannot be educated in Moscow schools. The only concessions are related to the non-compulsory education as children can pay for their education and the norms are softer for them. As for the access to higher education there are some features for the applying. It is important to state that if migrant so not have a legal status, he could not get a higher education. The exceptions are only for study on quota or chargeable higher education. Universities are interested in the admission of legal immigrants in school because they can get extra financing from the Government to provide immigrants with all necessary.