Australia’s citizenship test should be provided in other languages, landmark review recommends

2024/08/07 Leave a comment

Government right not to accept this recommendation. Language central to integration and allowing immigrants to take the test in other languages weakens citizenship and integration:
The 200-page Multicultural Framework Review has been welcomed by advocates who are calling on all levels of government to update and improve what has been described as “fragmented” policy.
The review, which took more than a year to finalise, called on the federal government to action 29 recommendations, including 10 immediately.
They were made following consultation across Australia with more than 1,400 individuals and 750 organisations.
“Australia stands at a unique crossroads where we have a great opportunity to craft an inclusive future where not only do we celebrate our differences, but also our shared values to help form our national identity,” said Dr Bulent Hass Dellal, director of the Australian Multicultural Foundation and Chair of the review panel.
A key recommendation was a review of the citizenship test procedures, including incorporating languages other than English.
Managing Director of Migration Affairs Taraneh Arianfar said language requirements are an added burden on top of an already lengthy procedure.
“Apart from a very small category that are exempted from the exam, the test, the rest are required to do the test in English, which is very challenging for some groups, especially minority and refugees categories and some family visa-holders,” she said.
Another recommendation was the establishment of a Multicultural Affairs Commission and Commissioner, as well as a standalone Department of Multicultural Affairs, Immigration and Citizenship, with a dedicated minister.
A spokesperson from the Department of Home Affairs said the government “will draw from and embed the key features of the review … across all Commonwealth agencies and activities, now and into the future.”
The citizenship test plays an integral role in ensuring new citizens have “a basic knowledge of the English language and an understanding of Australia”, the spokesperson said, adding that a basic knowledge of English supports integration and participation in the community.
“The citizenship test will continue to be offered only in English as this reflects the role our national language plays in unifying the community and ensuring those who become citizens can fully participate in Australian society,” the spokesperson said.
“The department continuously monitors the operation of the test in order to consider any potential adjustments and support that may be needed.”

The ‘dangerous potential’ for one factor to create more unrest in Australian communities

The Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) welcomed the recommendation to review the citizenship test.
“In too many cases, we see families divided between those who are able to pass the citizenship and those who cannot,” RCOA chief executive officer Paul Power said.
“Instead of penalising those with low English proficiency, we should strive to encourage all individuals to become citizens and contribute to Australian society. We urge the government to implement the Panel’s recommendation for a comprehensive review of the citizenship test.”
Despite committing $100 million to support multiculturalism, the government is yet to accept any specific recommendations, Professor of Sociology Andrew Jakubowicz pointed out.
“A lot of the recommendations of the review relate to parts of government doing new things, and there’s no framework until the multicultural commission is established, if it is established, of ensuring that those sorts of things happen.”
Among the further recommendations are to develop a national plan to celebrate Australia’s cultural diversity.
A full list of the recommendations can be seen HERE.

Source: Australia’s citizenship test should be provided in other languages, landmark review recommends

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Why Joe Biden should scrap US citizenship tests

2023/09/06 Leave a comment

While some have argued this for Canadian citizenship, they forget that this contributes to support for immigration and citizenship among those who are already citizens, whether born in Canada or elsewhere. But given the current government’s lack of understanding of the meaning of citizenship, seen in proposed self-affirmation of the oath and the lack of update to the citizenship guide, wondering whether the government will partly move in this direction:

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies…” 

Exactly 10 years ago, I joined 136 people from 43 countries at a naturalization ceremony in a courtroom in downtown New York to proclaim our allegiance to the country that had embraced us as its own. Overcome by the emotional charge of the occasion, we struggled to keep our voices steady — and our eyes dry. Even Janet Napolitano, administering her Enal oath as secretary of homeland security, teared up as she welcomed us as “my fellow citizens.” 

I was flanked by a young woman from Ukraine and a middle-aged man from Peru; she worked on Wall Street, and he was a cab driver. As we told each other of the journeys that had brought us to that magical moment, her English was heavily accented; his was liberally interspersed with Spanish. 

At one point, we talked about what had been the final hurdle on the path: The citizenship tests. She’d found the civics quiz quite stressful; he, like me, thought it had been easy-peasy. We didn’t talk about the other test — the one that judged our English skills. More than likely, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services officers who had interviewed us skipped over that part of the process in order to move things along. In my case, the examining oficer had said something along the lines of, “You’ve made it this far. There’s no need to waste our time on this.” 

The Biden administration, which is proposing to make the English test harder, apparently does not understand what my USCIS examiner had come to recognize, from some combination of intuition and experience: If you want to be an American and have lived in this country long enough to qualify, then a language test is entirely redundant. 

In the current format, the officer conducting the naturalization interview can evaluate the applicant’s speaking ability by asking questions she or he has already answered when Eling the paperwork. The new test, meant to go into effect next year, would include a speaking section in which applicants would be asked to describe scenes depicted in photographs, such as kinds of food or activities like commuting to work. 

It sounds simple enough, but it is no less superfluous for that. All applicants for citizenship are tested by the ultimate arbiter of American life: The free market. Before they can get to the naturalization test, their abilities are vetted by a system that requires immigrants to End work, shelter, food and access to education and healthcare, with little support from the state. 

And living the American way puts us all through a long and continuous examination, unlike the brief, one-of test at the USCIS. I had been fortunate to be fast-tracked for the Green Card that confers permanent residency in the US, and then waited Eve years, the minimum requirement, before applying for citizenship. It had taken the Ukrainian twice as long and the Peruvian three times as long to reach the test stage. By then, we were as duent as required by the nature of our livelihoods and, by extension, our lives. 

What’s more, we were in a country where the government — city, state and 

federal alike — was getting better and better at communicating in languages 

other than English. Multilingual forms are the norm rather than the 

exception, and even the USCIS website offers information in 33 languages, from Amharic to Vietnamese. 

If the language test is unnecessary, the civics test is just plain unfair. Applicants must correctly answer six out of 10 questions chosen from a published set of 100. Polls have shown most Americans would fail: Why should those who want to join their ranks be held to a higher standard? 

Joe Biden is not the Erst American president to try and raise the bar for naturalization. Donald Trump wanted to make the civics test longer and to introduce more politically loaded questions. Biden rightly scrapped that plan. This makes his administration’s proposal for a tougher English test even more inexplicable. 

Over 9 million Green Card holders are eligible for citizenship, but barely 10% of them apply for naturalization each year. The Biden administration has said it wants that proportion to grow. In typical Washington fashion, it has set up an interagency committee to come up with a strategy to encourage more people to take the path that brought me to that New York courthouse 10 years ago. 

Here’s a good place to start: Scrap the civics and language tests. 

Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/migrate/why-joe-biden-should-scrap-us-citizenship-tests/articleshow/103367059.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Les tests de français «made in France» seront adaptés au contexte québécois

2023/06/02 Leave a comment

Following the backlash:

La ministre de l’Immigration, Christine Fréchette, convient qu’il faut « mieux adapter » au contexte québécois les tests de français pour les immigrants, mais elle ne compte pas pour autant exiger que ces examens soient conçus au Québec.

« Il faudrait à tout le moins que les tests soient mieux adaptés au contexte québécois. Il y a des références au Québec qui ont déjà été introduites dans plusieurs des tests standardisés. On veut que ça se poursuive, comme travail », a déclaré la ministre mercredi, lors de la période des questions.

Elle était interrogée par la députée Ruba Ghazal, de Québec solidaire, au sujet d’un dossier du Devoir qui révèle les écueils des tests pour l’immigration. Ceux-ci sont conçus en France et sont truffés de références européennes.

La ministre Fréchette a refusé de s’engager à confier la production des tests à une organisation québécoise, comme le lui suggérait Mme Ghazal. « On va continuer à procéder à ces analyses-là jusqu’à ce qu’elles soient complètes, et on verra quelles sont les pistes d’action », a-t-elle affirmé.

« Bonne chance de demander à des Français d’adapter le test à notre réalité québécoise avec notre accent québécois. J’ai hâte de voir ça », a répondu avec ironie sa collègue solidaire.

Des changements demandés

En matinée, les partis d’opposition ont pressé Québec de faire mieux. « Il est temps que ces tests-là soient revus, a lancé André Fortin. Je pense qu’on est capables de fournir [aux immigrants] un bien meilleur accueil et de leur présenter notre langue sous un bien différent angle. »

« Franchement, les tests de français pour les immigrants devraient être faits au Québec, a lâché Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, de Québec solidaire. Pour bien mesurer l’intégration d’un immigrant au français québécois, il faut avoir des outils québécois. François Legault se présente comme le chevalier du français. Ça fait dur, là, d’utiliser des tests faits en France. »

Le député péquiste Pascal Bérubé a déclaré que les tests devraient être « adaptés à notre réalité ». « Et on a une expertise pour ça », a-t-il précisé.

Les deux instances françaises, dont France Éducation international, assurent que les tests ont déjà été adaptés. La Chambre de commerce et d’industrie de Paris Île-de-France, qui en fait passer deux sur huit, affirme avoir reçu « une demande forte de la part du ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration d’inclure davantage de référents culturels québécois ». Elle avance aussi que l’accent québécois « est présent à 35 % environ dans l’épreuve de compréhension orale ».

Le Devoir a cependant constaté, en allant passer le test, que cette proportion est nettement surévaluée : seuls quatre enregistrements sur plus d’une quarantaine présentent un accent québécois. Ces enregistrements sonores permettent aux participants de répondre à 51 questions.

Source: Les tests de français «made in France» seront adaptés au contexte québécois

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Should new Australians have to pass an English test to become citizens?

2022/01/27 Leave a comment

Canada moved towards more formal language assessment in 2015, with exceptions for those with difficulties. Surprising no mention made of Canada’s experience (basic level), as more relevant than the more restrictive European policies and practices. And last time I checked, acceptance rates were above 90 percent although they did dip to the low 80s when this change was introduced :

On Australia Day each year, thousands of people become Australian citizens at ceremonies around the country.

Prospective citizens have to meet a number of eligibility criteria, including passing a citizenship test to show they have a reasonable knowledge of Australia and basic English.

But there are persistent suggestions those applying to be citizens should also pass a separate formal English test to prove their language skills.

In a newly published article, we explain why this poses a range of problems and why it would not boost English proficiency among new Australians.

What do other countries do?

Language tests for citizenship have become increasingly common overseas: for example, 33 of 40 Council of Europe member states surveyed in 2018 had one.

In 2017, the Australian government also proposed adding a language test to the citizenship requirements. It backed away from the idea following a public backlash, although it continues to put a strong emphasis on the importance of English ability across the visa system.

Proponents of language tests for citizenship see them as promoting migrant integration and social inclusion. Requiring prospective citizens to pass an English test seems like an easy way to ensure they can be educated, employed and participate in society more generally.

But there are some real issues with this approach.

Why language tests don’t work

Language-testing scholars have repeatedly criticised the tests, saying there is no evidence they help people integrate.

Furthermore, it is not clear what kind of language skills a citizenship language test should include.

As our article notes, language tests for jobs or entry to higher education have been developed by experts to reflect the linguistic demands of the relevant discipline or profession.

For example, doctors are tested on medical language and their ability to communicate respectfully and empathetically with patients, prospective university students on their academic reading and writing abilities, and so on.

But what are the language skills required to be a good citizen? We might think skills like being able to follow a political debate are a good starting point, but this is a very high bar that would exclude many people – including, potentially, some native English speakers.

What about testing basic skills?

And even if – like many European countries – we set the bar lower and asked for more basic, conversational language skills, this would still raise a number of problems. We know many factors beyond people’s control influence their ability to learn a second language after migration.

Among those who find it particularly difficult are older people, those with limited education or who are illiterate in their first language, and those who have experienced significant trauma (such as refugees and asylum seekers). Language tests risk putting citizenship out of reach for these vulnerable groups, an outcome that seems inequitable at best, discriminatory at worst.

This is complicated by the huge variation in the way people around the globe speak English, and how we avoid situations where those who speak English with particular accents (including, sometimes, well-educated native speakers), fail English tests because their accents are deemed too different from what the test thinks is “normal” or “standard”.

Tests as an incentive to learn English

What of the idea that tests motivate prospective citizens to learn the language of their new society?

Migrants’ motivation to learn the language of their new country cannot be assessed independently of contextual factors, especially incentives and rewards. Furthermore, migrants often face barriers around eligibility, scheduling, transport, work and childcare commitments, or lack of good quality classes.

Moreover, there is no guarantee tests actually work as an incentive. The Netherlands, for example, introduced a tough system that fines new migrants if they do not pass a Dutch test within three years of their arrival. Despite this, around one in four migrants still fails to pass the test within the required time.

Older migrants, especially those from countries where schooling is commonly interrupted (such as Afghanistan and Somalia), are particularly likely to fail the test. This reinforces the view that social and cognitive factors are more reliable predictors of language learning than lack of motivation.

What to do instead

Forcing people to pass an English test in order to become Australian citizens creates a range of practical and ethical problems, while producing little benefit for migrants and their host society.

Instead, the federal government should use other measures – such as extending eligibility for its adult migrant English program – to support English learning.

Meanwhile, COVID-19 has reinforced the importance of migrant language media and migrant associations. To better support and include this part of our population, we also need to ensure people with lower English skills are able to get the information they need and fulfil the expectations and duties of citizenship.

Source: Should new Australians have to pass an English test to become citizens?

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,