Social work practices and enabling the integration of students from war and conflict zones

The study addresses how young people from war and conflict zones adapt and integrate into a new society, focusing on Syrian international students in Turkey. Prior work shows war has short- and long-term psychological impacts on youth, including anxiety, depression, trauma-related symptoms, educational disruption, and social alienation. Social work interventions—particularly those that are culturally and spiritually informed—are posited as critical to support integration and well-being. The current study aims to: (i) test whether depression differs between international students from war/conflict zones versus war-free zones; (ii) examine whether a longer residency period in a safer environment is associated with better integration via relationship building, participation in social activities, and overcoming cultural challenges; (iii) identify coping methods students use to handle difficulties after moving to Turkey; and (iv) assess the extent to which students utilize psychological and social support services at their university. The study also probes exposure to violence, asylum-seeking status, and family exposure to war-related harms.

The literature indicates that youth exposed to war and conflict suffer heightened risks of mental health problems (e.g., anxiety, depression, PTSD), educational disruption, and social marginalization (e.g., studies on Bosnian, Israeli/Palestinian, and Iraqi youth). Effective intervention requires culturally adapted, spiritually sensitive social work and mental health services, as well as structurally and culturally competent service networks. Evidence suggests safe, post-conflict environments and strong social support systems (family, peers, community) mitigate psychological symptoms and reduce loneliness, facilitating integration. Conversely, low social support correlates with poorer mental health. Cultural stigma and structural barriers often deter help-seeking from professional services, leading youth—especially from Middle Eastern and similar contexts—to rely on traditional coping (family, friends, prayer). These insights underscore the need for culturally competent, accessible, and trust-building social work practices in host institutions.

Design and setting: Quantitative study conducted at Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University (AYBU), Turkey, during the 2017–2018 academic year. Sample and inclusion criteria: Syrian nationals enrolled at AYBU in 2017–2018; undergraduate (1st–4th year); studied at least one year in Turkey; provided informed consent. Of N=121 Syrian students enrolled, N=98 met criteria; N=63 participated. Participants migrated to Turkey with their families due to the Syrian conflict. Grouping: 45 were classified as refugees (witnessed or directly exposed to war); 18 were classified as immigrants (left earlier, did not witness war). Measures: (1) Demographic questionnaire (including exposure to violence, asylum status, family exposure to kidnapping, detention, threats; and schooling information); (2) UCLA Loneliness Scale (20 items, 4-point Likert), Arabic version validated in Arab context; (3) Beck Depression Inventory (21 items, 0–3 Likert), Arabic adaptation validated in Arab societies. Procedure: Recruitment via email and campus notices (opportunity sampling). Surveys were completed in person or taken home and returned within 3 days. Only fully completed forms were analyzed. Data analysis: Independent-samples t-tests compared depression and loneliness between students from conflict vs. non-conflict zones, considering years in Turkey. Frequencies described relationships with Turkish and other international students and academicians, participation in social/cultural activities (inside and outside university), cultural-difference problems, and coping methods. Analyses were conducted in SPSS 20.0. Ethics: Ethical approval from AYBU Research Ethics Committee (13/03-02072013-352). Informed consent obtained; confidentiality assured; right to withdraw preserved.

- Depression and loneliness: No significant differences between students from war/conflict zones and those from non-conflict zones. Depression means: war-exposed X=18.18 (SD=7.44) vs non-exposed X=15.39 (SD=10.89), t(61)=1.17, p>0.05. Loneliness means: war-exposed X=45.02 (SD=6.95) vs non-exposed X=45.61 (SD=10.91), t≈-0.21, p>0.05. - Relationships indicating integration: • With Turkish students: 97.78% of war-exposed reported good relations vs 66.11% among non-exposed; 2.22% of war-exposed reported no relationship vs 33.33% among non-exposed. • With other international students: Good relations were high in both groups (war-exposed 97.78%; non-exposed 94%). • With academicians: Good relations were 91.11% (war-exposed) vs 77.78% (non-exposed). - Participation in social activities: • Within university: 53.33% of war-exposed participated vs 22.22% of non-exposed; 46.67% of war-exposed and 77.78% of non-exposed did not participate. • Outside university (social/cultural activities): War-exposed—Never 26.67%, Very little 15.56%, Sometimes 44.44%, Always 13.33%; Non-exposed—Never 33.33%, Very little 27.78%, Sometimes 16.67%, Always 22.22%. Overall “always” participation was low in both groups. - Cultural difference problems (overall patterns): Being viewed as foreigners was reported by 88.89% in both groups. Relationship with the opposite sex was a notable issue (war-exposed 46.67% vs non-exposed 11.11%). Other issues included social customs/rules of daily life (war-exposed 31.11% vs non-exposed 22.22%), food culture (11.11% vs 22.22%), religious beliefs (11.11% both), entertainment habits (8.89% vs 5.56%), clothing (4.44% vs 0%), and language (0% vs 5.56%). - Coping methods: Students predominantly relied on family support and prayer; seeking help from psychologists/social workers was rare. Only 4.44% of war-exposed students reported requesting psychologist/social worker support, and 0% among non-exposed. Some students did not seek help or used multiple coping strategies. - Utilization of university psychosocial services: Minimal, indicating gaps in social work practice and service accessibility/acceptability for this population.

The absence of significant differences in depression and loneliness between war-exposed and non-exposed Syrian students suggests that a stable, safe host environment and time spent in it can attenuate psychological distress and facilitate integration. Consistent with prior literature, robust social support networks (family, peers, faculty) are associated with better adaptation and lower depression/loneliness. War-exposed students formed notably stronger relationships with Turkish peers, other international students, and academicians, possibly as an adaptive strategy to integrate and counter negative stereotypes, aided by language proficiency and host community sympathy. Participation in social activities was generally modest, potentially constrained by scholarship-related academic demands and adaptation concerns; yet such participation is known to support mental health and academic success. Cultural challenges—especially being perceived as foreigners and navigating opposite-sex relationships and daily social customs—were common. Coping was dominated by traditional strategies (family, prayer), with very limited engagement with professional psychosocial services, likely due to cultural stigma, unclear roles of social work, and structural barriers. These findings underscore the need for culturally competent, accessible, and proactive social work interventions that leverage existing traditional supports while encouraging appropriate professional help-seeking and facilitating integration through relationship-building and activity engagement.

This study highlights substantial gaps between the problems faced by international students from war-affected contexts and the systematic responses available to them in university settings. While a safe environment and social supports appear to foster psychological readiness and integration, psychosocial services are underutilized. University social work units should be reviewed and strengthened to provide culturally informed, accessible, and continuous support tailored to students from conflict zones. Practitioners and researchers should incorporate cross-cultural approaches and involve students in program design to improve care, reduce stigma, and enhance integration. Future research should adopt cross-cultural methods to assess the impact of integration supports and examine early post-arrival experiences to better inform interventions.

Some students declined participation in the qualitative aspects, considering it unhelpful given prior experiences with researchers, which limited qualitative depth. The study indicates a need for embedded research that captures early post-arrival experiences of youth from war/conflict zones to better understand their challenges and integration trajectories.