The global refugee crisis, exacerbated by conflicts and disasters, necessitates inclusive education for all, including RwDs. SDG-4 and the CRPD mandate this inclusion, yet significant barriers persist. These barriers include social stigma, discriminatory policies, and institutional constraints, which are amplified for RwDs due to their intersecting identities. Globally, access to higher education for refugees is low, even lower for RwDs. This study addresses a research gap by exploring the experiences of Syrian RwDs in Jordanian and Qatari higher education institutions (HEIs). It examines how geopolitical, cultural, and economic contexts influence inclusion and aims to provide actionable recommendations to enhance support and accessibility. The 4-A framework serves as the theoretical basis for evaluating the universities' policies regarding inclusive education.

Existing literature underscores the significant challenges faced by refugee students, particularly those with disabilities, in accessing and participating meaningfully in higher education. Studies reveal low enrollment rates globally and within specific regions, highlighting systemic exclusion. The literature emphasizes the multi-layered barriers faced by RwDs, stemming from their refugee status, disability, socioeconomic background, trauma, and societal prejudices. The absence of adequate policies and services specifically tailored for RwDs represents a key gap in inclusive education initiatives. The 4-A framework, while not explicitly designed for RwDs, is adopted as a suitable lens to evaluate the availability, accessibility, acceptability, and adaptability of education systems for this marginalized population. Research on inclusive higher education for RwDs, particularly in Arab countries, remains limited, emphasizing the need for this comparative study.

This study employs a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative and quantitative data. Two Syrian RwDs, one at each university, participated in semi-structured interviews. One participant, Sana, was a third-year student at Qatar University with a visual impairment and a high-income background. The other participant, Mohammad, was a fourth-year student at Yarmouk University with a physical disability and a low-income background. The interviews were conducted in Arabic, transcribed, and translated into English. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify recurring themes within the interview data. Concurrently, a document analysis was performed on relevant educational policies from both universities’ websites. These policies were analyzed using a coding scheme derived from the 4-A framework. The analysis assessed the extent to which each university's policies adhered to the principles of availability, accessibility, acceptability, and adaptability for RwDs. Multiple strategies were employed to ensure the trustworthiness of the study, including member checking, triangulation, an audit trail, researcher reflexivity, and a detailed description of the university context.

Interview findings revealed three main themes: equity, services, and challenges. Regarding equity, residency status emerged as a major barrier for Mohammad, while Sana’s different residency status offered more advantages. Admission procedures were similar for both participants regardless of their refugee or disability status. Financial resources posed a significant challenge for Mohammad, whose low-income background prevented him from enrolling earlier without a foreign scholarship. Sana's family's financial stability made higher education more accessible. The services theme included accessibility and support services. Sana found university services adequate for her visual impairment. In contrast, Mohammad faced difficulties with physical accessibility at Yarmouk University. Both discussed psychosocial support. Mohammad benefited from such services at Yarmouk University. Sana reported no dedicated refugee support services but had access to general counseling services. The challenges theme included administrative obstacles and future career prospects. Both participants encountered difficulties with administrative tasks due to the intersection of their refugee status and disabilities. Both expressed significant uncertainty regarding their future career prospects, highlighting the lack of adequate career support services for RwDs at both universities. Policy analysis revealed differences between Yarmouk University and Qatar University. Yarmouk University demonstrated greater availability of services for refugees with disabilities, though lacking in some aspects of adaptability. Qatar University showed better alignment of policies with the 4-A framework, particularly regarding accessibility and adaptability, likely due to greater economic resources. However, neither university explicitly addressed the specific needs of Syrian RwDs in their policies.

The study reveals a significant gap between policy commitments to inclusive education and the lived experiences of Syrian RwDs. While both universities publicly endorse inclusivity, their actual practices vary significantly, influenced by available resources and the complexities of the intersectional identities of RwDs. Financial barriers, administrative challenges, and the lack of adequate career support services pose substantial obstacles to academic success and future prospects. The findings highlight the necessity of addressing the multi-layered barriers affecting RwDs through targeted policies and support systems, taking into account the different contexts and resources of different HEIs.

This study underscores the urgent need for systemic improvements to ensure inclusive higher education for Syrian RwDs. Recommendations include streamlining residency and admission processes, expanding need-based financial aid, enhancing physical accessibility, and providing comprehensive disability-specific support services and career counseling. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies, explore faculty training needs, and investigate the effectiveness of rights-based approaches to inclusive education.

The study's limitations include a small sample size (two participants) which restricts generalizability. The focus on two universities may not fully represent the broader landscape of higher education for RwDs in Jordan and Qatar. The reliance on self-reported data and the potential for bias in thematic analysis should also be acknowledged. Future research should incorporate larger and more diverse samples to enhance the generalizability and transferability of the findings.