• Posts

FILES



Summary PDF: What works to improve digital inclusion among resettled refugees?

M&E | Track Resource Download
  • PUBLISHED BY
  • Date
  • Topic(s)
   Digital Inclusion
  • Subtopic(s)
   
  • Population(s)

SHARE

What works to improve digital inclusion among resettled refugees?

Among digital inclusion programs serving marginalized populations, there is strong evidence for common elements of success as well as common barriers. Programs serving refugees should incorporate these evidence-based elements.

  • Successful digital inclusion programs for marginalized populations share the following characteristics: social support, collaborative learning, hands-on experience, inclusive program design, a multi-faceted approach, and simple user interfaces.
  • There are several common barriers to digital inclusion of marginalized populations: access (connection, speed, and coverage); skill (ability to use hardware and software); and attitude (interest, motivation, and trust).

 

Among programs serving refugees specifically, suggestive evidence provides support for certain program models.

  • Public libraries, schools, and community centers are vital sources of digital access for refugees. Refugee service providers should collaborate with these sources of digital access and skills training.
  • Laptop and tablet provision programs are also important sources of digital access, and these should be explored by refugee service providers.
  • Digital inclusion of refugees likely occurs intergenerationally. Children in immigrant families serve as digital conduits and interpreters for their parents; yet, children’s computer use may conflict with parental expectations. These intergenerational family implications should be considered in digital inclusion programming.
  • Despite this suggestive evidence, refugee voices are underrepresented in digital inclusion program planning. More participatory project design is needed.

 

Future research should examine the long-term impacts of digital inclusion, as well as the potential for promoting digital inclusion remotely.

  • Further research is needed on longer-term outcomes of digital inclusion as well as the impact of digital inclusion on other outcomes, such as health and economic well-being.
  • With remote learning increasing, research should examine the potential of digital inclusion via remote learning.

Post TitleStrength of EvidenceType of StudyDirection of Evidence
Mobile communication and refugees: An analytical review of academic literatureSuggestiveSuggestive evidenceNo evidence about impact
Digital Inclusion & Health Communication: A Rapid Review of LiteratureStrongSystematic reviewPositive impact
Migrants, refugees and mobility: how useful are information communication technologies in the first phase of resettlement?SuggestiveSuggestive evidencePositive impact
Intergenerational online health information searching and brokering: Framing health literacy as a family assetSuggestiveSuggestive evidenceNo evidence about impact
When the Divide Isn’t Just Digital: How Technology-Enriched Afterschool Programs Help Immigrant Youth Find a Voice, a Place, and a FutureSuggestiveSuggestive evidencePositive impact
Rapid review of evidence for basic digital skillsStrongSystematic reviewPositive impact
Expanding Notions of Digital Access: Parents’ Negotiation of School-Based Technology Initiatives in New Immigrant CommunitiesSuggestiveSuggestive evidenceInconclusive or mixed impact
Digital inclusion for low-skilled and low-literate people: A landscape reviewStrongSystematic reviewPositive impact

Studies included in the database focused on high-income or upper middle-income countries, including but not limited to the United States. Studies included must have been published since 2000. To identify evidence related to emergency preparedness among refugees, we searched the following websites and databases using the following population, methodology, and target intervention terms:

Websites and Databases Population Terms Methodology Terms Target Problem Terms
Campbell Collaboration
Cochrane Collaboration
Mathematica Policy Research
Evidence Aid
Urban Institute
Migration Policy Institute
HHS OPRE
ASSIA
Social Services Abstracts
Social Work Abstracts
ERIC
PsycInfo		 refugee
OR
immigrant
OR
“unaccompanied minor”
OR
asylee
OR
“temporary protected status”
OR
“victims of traffick*”
OR
“traffick* victims”
OR
T-Visa
OR
U-Visa
OR
Cuban
OR
Haitian
OR
Amerasian
OR
“low english”
OR
“limited english”
OR
“LEP”		 evaluation
OR
impact
OR
program
OR
intervention
OR
policy
OR
project
OR
train*
OR
therapy
OR
treatment
OR
counseling
OR
workshop
OR
review
OR
meta-analysis
OR
synthesis		 “digital inclusion”
OR
“digital access”
OR
“digital literacy”

For databases or websites that permitted only basic searches, free-text terms and limited term combinations were selected out of the lists above, and all resultant studies were reviewed for relevance. Conversely, for databases or websites with advanced search capability, we made use of relevant filters available. All search terms were searched in the title and abstract fields only in order to exclude studies that made only passing mention of the topic under consideration.

After initial screening, Switchboard evidence mapping is prioritized as follows: First priority is given to meta-analyses and systematic reviews, followed by individual impact evaluations when no meta-analyses or systematic reviews are available. Evaluations that are rated as impact evidence are considered before those rated as suggestive, with the latter only being included for outcomes where no evidence is available from the former.