The views expressed here are personal and are solely based on impressions gathered during my twenty years of residence in the Finnish Diaspora as an Immigrant. However, it would not be a surprise if these views are either expressed by other immigrants and/or immigrant grroups as well.

It must also be acknowledged [and I do think] that  first and second generations immigrants are different in terms of their generic make-up. The serious fact is that the immigrant population of Finland is not homogeneous, but rather heterogeneous.

Therefore, to address  barriers  to the access of Education;  It is necessary to determine levels of literacy, affordability of access, skills and ability as well as the opportunities available to an individual immigrant and/or group of immigrant to adapt to a new society and environment is linked to sufficient access of available information.

In this regard, the idea of sustainable integration is intrinsically linked to the access of higher education and the actual processes and procedures of disseminating education resulting  into high quality education.

In my opinion, the primary barrier on immigrant access to higher information is language. Another clear barrier of access is the attitude and behavior of the host population [private and public entities] and the systemic structures in place: (i.e. the lack of cultural competence, the understanding of the advantages of cultural diversity, the absence of inclusive and cohesive policy mechanisms to integrate immigrant into host society, e.t.c).

Because language is the “key” to communication and understanding of the content of information; it is essential in my view that a multiple level of communication be set in place. By this I mean that the information pertaining to higher education must and should be produced in the many languages of various immigrant groups.

In Finland the situation of access to higher education by immigrant groups can better be addressed and improved by ensuring that sufficient and reliable multicultural education programs and dialogue must be initiated and conducted on the basis of “Best Practices” model for knowledge transfer. 

There is an absolute difference between first generation and second generation immigrants in regards to their language proficiency, ability to grasp new skills and technologies as well as the strength and tenacity to cope with stressful and competitive odds.

Due to this latter factor, it isappropriate to measure by “bench mark analysis” in order to make sure that these two immigrant groups are better served and provided with the skills development tools to overcome all obstacles and barriers associated with the access of higher education.

Finally, I would like to argue herein that “Higher Education” does not and should not only mean the academic impart of knowledge and skills to an individual. It can [and I do believe] that higher education must be construed as providing a relatively empowering skills and competitive advantage to an immigrant in comparison to previous skills, capabilities and/or capacity.

Higher education must also focus on capacity building of any sort of education and training that impart any new skill(s) and abilities to an immigrant in Finland.