The study analyzes the forces leading to or impeding the assimilation of 18- to 32-year-olds from immigrant backgrounds that vary in terms of race, language, and the mix of skills and liabilities their parents brought to the United States. To make sure that what we find derives specifically from growing up in an immigrant family, rather than simply being a young person in New York, a comparison group of people from native born White, Black, and Puerto Rican backgrounds was also studied. The sample was drawn from New York City (except for Staten Island) and the surrounding counties in the inner part of the New York-New Jersey metropolitan region where the vast majority of immigrants and native born minority group members live and grow up. The study groups make possible a number of interesting comparisons. Unlike many other immigrant groups, the West Indian first generation speaks English, but the dominant society racially classifies them as Black. The study explored how their experiences resemble or differ from native born African Americans. Dominicans and the Colombian-Peruvian-Ecuadoran population both speak Spanish, but live in different parts of New York, have different class backgrounds prior to immigration, and, quite often, different skin tones. The study compared them to Puerto Rican young people, who, along with their parents, have the benefit of citizenship. Chinese immigrants from the mainland tend to have little education, while young people with overseas Chinese parents come from families with higher incomes, more education, and more English fluency. Respondents were divided into eight groups depending on their parents' origin. Those of immigrant ancestry include: Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union; Chinese immigrants from the mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Chinese Diaspora; immigrants from the Dominican Republic; immigrants from the English-speaking countries of the West Indies (including Guyana but excluding Haiti and those of Indian origin); and immigrants from Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. These groups composed 44 percent of the 2000 second-generation population in the defined sample area. For comparative purposes, Whites, Blacks, and Puerto Ricans who were born in the United States and whose parents were born in the United States or Puerto Rico were also interviewed. To be eligible, a respondent had to have a parent from one of these groups. If the respondent was eligible for two groups, he or she was asked which designation he or she preferred. The ability to compare these groups with native born Whites, Blacks, and Puerto Ricans permits researchers to investigate the effects of nativity while controlling for race and language background. About two-thirds of second-generation respondents were born in the United States, mostly in New York City, while one-third were born abroad but arrived in the United States by age 12 and had lived in the country for at least 10 years, except for those from the former Soviet Union, some of whom arrived past the age of 12. The project began with a pilot study in July 1996. Survey data collection took place between November 1999 and December 1999. The study includes demographic variables such as race, ethnicity, language, age, education, income, family size, country of origin, and citizenship status.

In the year to June 2025, approximately 898,000 people migrated to the United Kingdom, while 693,000 people migrated from the country, resulting in a net migration figure of 204,000. There have consistently been more people migrating to the United Kingdom than leaving it since 1993 when approximately 1,000 more people left the country than arrived. Although migration from the European Union has declined since the Brexit vote of 2016, migration from non-EU countries accelerated rapidly from 2021 onwards. In the year to June 2023, 968,000 people from non-EU countries migrated to the UK, compared with 129,000 from EU member states. Immigration and the 2024 election Since late 2022, immigration, along with the economy and healthcare, has consistently been seen by UK voters as one of the top issues facing the country. Despite a pledge to deter irregular migration via small boats, and controversial plans to send asylum applicants to Rwanda while their claims are being processed, Rishi Sunak's Conservative government lost the trust of the public on this issue. On the eve of the last election, 20 percent of Britons thought the Labour Party would be the best party to handle immigration, compared with 13 percent who thought the Conservatives would handle it better. Sunak and the Conservatives went on to lose this election, suffering their worst defeat in modern elections. Historical context of migration The first humans who arrived in the British Isles, were followed by acts of conquest and settlement from Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Danes, and Normans. In the early modern period, there were also significant waves of migration from people fleeing religious or political persecution, such as the French Huguenots. More recently, large numbers of people also left Britain. Between 1820 and 1957, for example, around 4.5 million people migrated from Britain to America. After World War Two, immigration from Britain's colonies and former colonies was encouraged to meet labour demands. A key group that migrated from the Caribbean between the late 1940s and early 1970s became known as the Windrush generation, named after one of the ships that brought the arrivals to Britain.

As of the third quarter of 2025, the unemployment rate for people of white ethnicity in the United Kingdom was 4.3 percent, the lowest of the provided ethnic groups in this quarter. By contrast, the unemployment rate for people in the Bangladeshi ethnic group was 18.1 percent.

This article explores which students–with regard to gender, socio-economic background and migration background–skip school in Germany, Japan, Sweden and the United Kingdom (UK) according to PISA data. Students who skip school are observed in many countries, but there is not much systematic research that studies this across countries. Comparable data is to a large extent missing. PISA data offers an opportunity to use comparable data. In PISA, students were asked in 2018, 2015 and 2012 whether they had skipped school a whole day in the last two weeks prior to their completion of the PISA student questionnaire. Patterns of how absence relates to sociodemographic factors vary in countries and school systems. In the comparison between the four countries the UK stands out as having a higher percentage of students who have reported that they have skipped school than in the other countries. This does not seem to be related to any specific group of students. Japan also stands out with a lower percentage of students who have reported that they have skipped school. According to PISA data, skipping school is more related to socio-economic background than any other of the variables studied. The socio-economic background seems to be related to skipping school in all three PISA studies in Sweden and the UK. Gender seems not to be an important factor in the four countries. In Sweden and Germany there is a lower percentage of non-immigrant students who report that they have skipped school than first-and second-generation immigrant students. In the UK the figures are more ambiguous. When the percentages of students skipping school are compared over time and in the countries, it is difficult to find any trends, but the data only covered three measurements during a period of six years, which may be too short a time span to see trends.