Under Trump, Becoming a U.S. Citizen Gets Harder

2025/11/03 Leave a comment

Details of note:

A harder civics test. Stricter social media vetting. Neighborhood investigations into people’s “moral character.”

The Trump administration is erecting new hurdles for lawful permanent residents applying for U.S. citizenship, part of a broader effort to tighten an immigration system that federal officials say has become too lax. Officials are reviving old vetting standards and adding new requirements that emphasize cultural assimilation and more aggressively screen applicants for “anti-American” views.

Joseph Edlow, the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, recently said he was “declaring war” on anyone who wants to naturalize but “doesn’t want the responsibility of what it means to actually be a U.S. citizen.”

Some immigrant advocacy groups contend the moves are meant to discourage people from applying for citizenship and to raise the bar in a way that would reduce the number of naturalized citizens, or immigrants who were approved for citizenship as opposed to people who gained it via birthright. They worry that the anti-American label could be applied to those who disagree with the administration on matters such as the war in Gaza. The changes are stoking fear among immigrants who want to apply but are hesitant to reopen their cases and invite greater scrutiny from immigration authorities, according to legal advocates and groups that teach citizenship classes.

They say the process to obtain citizenship was already fair. To become a citizen, people generally have to have a green card for several years, submit an application, pay a fee, complete an interview with a Citizenship and Immigration Services officer, pass a background check as well as English and civics tests, and take an oath. Those who marry U.S. citizens can apply sooner after obtaining a green card.

Nicole Melaku, the executive director at National Partnership for New Americans, a coalition of immigrant rights groups, said she was concerned that the changes would have a chilling effect on applications. Although green card holders already have the right to live and work in the United States permanently, naturalized citizens have greater protections against deportation, the right to vote and the ability to sponsor more family members, among other things.

“This is an intimidation and fear-producing tactic from this administration to possibly dissuade individuals from accessing the process,” Ms. Melaku said.

In mid-August, Citizenship and Immigration Services issued a memo that increased the standard to show “good moral character.” This is a longstanding requirement that previously involved checking for criminal convictions and other acts of wrongdoing, such as failure to pay child support. Now, officers must also check for “positive attributes,” such as family caregiving, educational attainment, stable employment and community involvement.

The agency also said in a policy memo that it would begin considering “any involvement in anti-American or terrorist organizations” in requests for immigration benefits, including citizenship applications. Officials said they would screen people for support of “antisemitic terrorist organizations” and expand social media vetting to include checks for anti-American activity.

The agency also said it would resume neighborhood investigationsof immigrants who apply for citizenship, meaning that officers could interview neighbors and co-workers of applicants as part of the vetting process. Immigration authorities had essentially stopped doing this by 1991.

People who apply on or after Oct. 20 will also have to take a harder civics test, which will require them to answer 12 out of 20 questions correctly, up from six of 10. The list of potential questions has been expanded to 128 from 100. It also eliminates several simple geography questions and adds some that are more nuanced.

Matthew Tragesser, a spokesman for the immigration agency, said that citizenship was the “most meaningful status the U.S. government can bestow” and that people seeking to defraud the system would not receive the benefit. He added that it “should not be a cakewalk to obtain, and we are certainly not going to give it away.”…

Source: Under Trump, Becoming a U.S. Citizen Gets Harder

Filed under Citizenship, Trump administration Tagged with , ,

Davis: When citizenship becomes a test and the tester is morally bankrupt

2025/08/29 Leave a comment

Strong and largely valid critique:

In August, journalist Mirandaa Jeyaretnam of TIME reported the Trump administration had expanded its definition of “good moral character” for citizenship applicants. The new policy directs U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to apply a “holistic” standard that screens not just for criminal history, but for subjective notions of “anti-Americanism,” including applicants’ social media posts, political opinions and community affiliations.

USCIS even stated that “America’s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies.” It is an extraordinary claim — not because citizenship should be cheapened, but because the arbiter is a president whose own moral record is anything but exemplary.

How can a leader with such a fractured moral compass sit in judgment of immigrants’ character? Worse, how can we allow the immigration system — long a pillar of America’s identity — to be transformed into an ideological loyalty test?

The return of the ‘Test’

This is not the first time America has demanded citizens prove their worthiness through arbitrary exams. History offers chilling parallels:

  1. Literacy tests — Introduced across the Jim Crow South, these tests were ostensibly neutral but were weaponized against Black Americans. Registrars could pass or fail applicants at will, asking absurd questions such as “How many bubbles are in a bar of soap?” The intent was clear: Disenfranchisement.
  2. Poll taxes — The requirement to pay a tax before voting disproportionately excluded Black citizens and poor whites. The 24th Amendment (1964) finally outlawed poll taxes in federal elections, and the U.S. Supreme Court extended the ban nationwide.
  3. The Boswell Amendment (1946, Alabama) — This law required prospective voters to “understand and explain” any section of the U.S. Constitution. Of course, registrars decided whether explanations were “good enough.” In Schnell v. Davis (1949), the Supreme Court struck it down, citing its discriminatory intent.

Each of these so-called “tests” was justified in the language of fairness, education or public order. In practice, they served to exclude people deemed undesirable by those in power. Today’s expanded “good moral character” standard belongs to this lineage of exclusionary devices. It is not about uplifting the nation; it is about narrowing it.

What ‘good moral character’ really means

For decades, USCIS has required naturalization applicants to show “good moral character.” Traditionally, this meant avoiding disqualifying offenses such as murder, aggravated felonies or repeated convictions. It was clear, factual and rooted in law.

“Under the Trump administration’s new directive, morality itself is being redefined.”

But under the Trump administration’s new directive, morality itself is being redefined. Applicants must not only avoid crime but also prove they possess “positive attributes,” such as stable employment, civic engagement and tax compliance. Officers are now instructed to weighconduct that may be “technically lawful” but still contrary to “average citizens’ behavior” in a given community.

That’s not a test of law — it’s a test of conformity.

And then comes the most troubling expansion: Screening for “anti-Americanism.” USCIS says it will investigate applicants’ support for “anti-American ideologies,” including antisemitism or pro-terrorist views. On paper, such goals sound defensible. But in practice, the term “anti-American” is undefined. Already, critics have documented how it has been applied to pro-Palestinian student activists, journalists and even lawful visa holders.

According to TIME, the Stanford Daily student newspaper has sued the administration, arguing the policy constitutes “thoughtcrime” and stifles free speech. As one immigration attorney put it: “Anyone who has any position that is against what the American government says they should think, they’re immediately labeled ‘anti-American.’”

The irony of the judge

This would be troubling under any administration. But under President Donald Trump, it is laced with bitter irony.

Here is a president who:

  • Attempted to overturn an election result through false claims of fraud
  • Was twice impeached — once for abuse of power and once for inciting an insurrection
  • Faces multiple indictments for fraud, obstruction and conspiracy over 30,000 lies during his first presidency alone
  • Publicly mocked military veterans, immigrants and even his own cabinet
  • Has more than 30 felonies on his criminal record

And yet, he presumes to sit in judgment of others’ “moral character”? The absurdity cannot be overstated. Yet it’s only a glorious supernatural happening when many don’t see or fail to observe righteously these ungodly offenses.

A president who courts authoritarian leaders abroad, flouts norms at home and has a decades-long record of dishonesty is now dictating the morality of immigrants whose greatest offense may be criticizing American foreign policy online.

This is not moral leadership. It is moral theater — a dangerous masquerade.

Citizenship as ‘privilege’ vs. citizenship as right

USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser declared: “Immigration benefits — including to live and work in the United States — remain a privilege, not a right.”

“Citizenship is not meant to be a privilege reserved for the elite or the ideologically pure.”

But history tells us otherwise. Birthright citizenship, enshrined in the 14th Amendment, was born out of the ashes of slavery. It was designed to guarantee full belonging to those once denied it. Citizenship is not meant to be a privilege reserved for the elite or the ideologically pure. It is a right grounded in America’s founding principle: equality before the law.

Trump already has tried to end birthright citizenship, raising alarms about dismantling constitutional guarantees. He has suggested denaturalizing U.S. citizens — even floating the idea of stripping Elon Musk of citizenship. A Justice Department memo in June directed officials to “maximize denaturalization proceedings.”

Imagine the precedent: Citizenship not as permanent, but as conditional — contingent on loyalty to a president’s worldview. What about Trump’s wife? Melania Trump’s immigration status (born Melanija Knavs of Slovenia) is that she came here on a work visa (an H-1B type and a green card) becoming a citizen in 2006. This is how the Einstein visa applies to a model?

That is not democracy. That is authoritarianism.

The slippery slope of ‘anti-Americanism’

The new directive makes “anti-Americanism” an “overwhelmingly negative factor.” Yet who defines “anti-American”?

Is criticizing U.S. foreign policy anti-American? What about supporting racial justice protests or writing a critical op-ed? Is being pro-Palestinian anti-American? The administration already has pledged to deport pro-Hamas students, conflating political dissent with terrorism.

By this logic, dissent itself becomes disloyalty. But dissent always has been America’s heartbeat — from abolitionists to suffragists to civil rights leaders.

If this policy had been in place in the 1960s, Martin Luther King Jr. — once accused of being a communist sympathizer — might have failed the test.

Lessons from history

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 abolished literacy tests, poll taxes and “understanding clauses” because they were subjective and discriminatory. They handed local officials the power to deny rights arbitrarily.

Today, USCIS officers hold similar discretion over immigrants’ futures. They can now decide not just whether an applicant obeys the law, but whether they “fit in.” That is not the rule of law — it is the rule of bias.

The same danger applies: selective enforcement, prejudice cloaked in procedure and systemic exclusion.

The real moral test

The true test of America’s character is not whether immigrants love us enough. It is whether we, as a nation, love our ideals enough to uphold them consistently.

If we allow subjective morality tests to dictate citizenship, we betray the very principles we claim to defend. We risk turning citizenship from a shield of equality into a weapon of conformity.

In the end, the question is not whether immigrants meet Trump’s definition of “good moral character.” The question is whether America can survive leaders who confuse moral judgment with political control.

Because when citizenship becomes a test — and the tester is morally bankrupt — it’s not immigrants who fail. It’s us.

Edmond W. Davis is a social historian, speaker, collegiate professor, international journalist and former director of the Derek Olivier Research Institute. He is an expert on various historical and emotional intelligence topics. He’s globally known for his work as a researcher regarding the history of the Tuskegee Airmen and Airwomen. He’s the founder of America’s first and only National HBCU Black Wall Street Career Fest.                                                  

Source: When citizenship becomes a test and the tester is morally bankrupt

Filed under Citizenship, Trump administration Tagged with ,

US citizenship test too easy? Trump bringing back 2020 naturalisation format

2025/07/28 Leave a comment

Stay tuned. Arguably, many Trump administration figures could start with a better understanding of the US constitution and history:

The new director of the US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) stirred a debate after he said that the present US citizenship test is easy and can be memorised. The US citizenship test, officially known as the Naturalisation test, is an examination that an applicant has to take to become an American citizen.

The test is not for green card holders unless they are applying for citizenship. Joseph Edlow, the new director of USCIS, said that since the tests are too easy, the Trump administration is planning to bring back the 2020 version of the test.

For the test, applicants have to submit a former N-400 seeking naturalisation. They would be required to pass a background check and meet residency tenure, along with other requirements. After this, they will have to attend an interview where they take two tests: One is an English test, and the other is a civic test.

Source: US citizenship test too easy? Trump bringing back 2020 naturalisation format

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Calls for changes to Australia’s citizenship test after Thai migrant fails five times

2024/10/25 Leave a comment

Don’t have comparable Canadian data on test fail rates but did do this long term analysis on the citizenship processing times and overall approval rates, highlighting contrast between previous conservative government’s tightening and then relaxing operational aspects. What citizenship applications tell us about policy implementation. One of the issues in Discover Canada and the related test questions was the overly high language level but current numbers suggest that is less of an issue. Strongly believe that the test must be written in an official language but case can be made for study guide to be available in other languages:

…More people failing test since 2020

In 2020 the government updated the test for the first time in a decade — introducing five questions on Australian values such as freedom of speech and equal opportunity.

To pass the test, applicants must answer the five values questions correctly.

Since then, more applicants have been failing at the first attempt.

Data from the Home Affairs Department indicated in the year prior to the changes, around 94 per cent of applicants passed on their first attempt.

In the 2023–24 calendar year that had dropped to around 84 per cent, equating to more than 25,000 people failing at the first try.

Ultimately, 96 per cent of 2023–24 applicants passed, but those who made multiple attempts sat the test an average of four extra times.

Advocates, including the Refugee Council of Australia, argue the values questions, because of their more complex wording, are unfair to people without formal education, particularly the elderly and women.

In August, an independent review of the state of Australian multiculturalism recommended the federal government consider offering the test in languages other than English.

But in 2020, the then-Coalition government said ensuring new citizens had a strong grasp of English would make it easier for them to get good jobs.

A spokesperson for Assistant Citizenship Minister Julian Hill said the current government had no plans to make the test available in languages other than English.

“People can seek special assistance with the test, and it is regularly reviewed to ensure the language and questions are clear, fair, and accord with the legal standard of basic English,” the spokesperson said.

Source: Calls for changes to Australia’s citizenship test after Thai migrant fails five times

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Germany set to add citizenship test questions about Jews and Israel

2024/03/28 Leave a comment

Of note (similar in a sense to ensuring new Canadians know about Indigenous peoples and the various harmful actions of Canadian governments):

Those seeking German citizenship could soon have to answer test questions about antisemitism, Germany’s commitment to Israel and Jewish life in Germany.

The catalogue of more than 300 questions from which citizenship test questions can be selected is to be amended shortly, the interior ministry said in a statement, pending final approval. New questions, German magazine Der Spiegel reported, are to include: What is a Jewish house of prayer called? When was the State of Israel founded? What is the reason for Germany’s special responsibility for Israel? How is Holocaust denial punished in Germany? And, somewhat mysteriously: Who can become a member of the approximately 40 Jewish Maccabi sports clubs in Germany? (Anyone, according to the organization’s FAQ.)

The move comes months after the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt made a written commitment for the “right of the State of Israel to exist” a requirement for naturalization.

Germany has cracked down on pro-Palestinian voices and on antisemitism amid Israel’s war in Gaza in response to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel. Germany and German institutions have come under criticism in recent months for enforcing strict speech policies affecting pro-Palestinian protests. Museum shows, book talks and other art events have been canceled.

“One thing is particularly important to me,” Interior Minister Nancy Faeser told Der Spiegel. “As a result of the German crime against humanity of the Holocaust comes our special responsibility for the protection of Jews and for the protection of the State of Israel. This responsibility is part of our identity today.”

“Anyone who doesn’t share our values can’t get a German passport. We have drawn a crystal clear red line here,” Faeser said. “Antisemitism, racism and other forms of contempt for humanity rule out naturalization.”

The 33-question citizenship test is one of several prerequisites to becoming a German citizen. To pass, applicants must correctly answer at least 17 multiple-choice questions within an hour.

A wave of more than 2,000 antisemitic incidents logged by authorities since Oct. 7 has prompted German leaders to call for better enforcement of the country’s antisemitism laws in recent months.

“Antisemitism has no place in Germany,” Chancellor Olaf Scholz said in an address to German parliament in late October. “We will do everything to oppose it. We will do this as citizens, and as bearers of political responsibility.”

This includes enforcing existing laws, Scholz said.

While antisemitism itself is not a crime in Germany, antisemitic motivation for a crime can be considered in sentencing. In April 2023, the government announced that it would increase annual payments to the Central Council of Jews in Germany to almost $24 million, in part “to further strengthen the safety and security of Jewish communities.”

Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany, and punishable by prison time.

Source: Germany set to add citizenship test questions about Jews and Israel

Filed under Antisemitism, Citizenship Tagged with , ,

US citizenship test changes are coming, raising concerns for those with low English skills

2023/07/06 Leave a comment

Similar debates when Canada changed the citizenship test in 2009. The initial drop in pass rates from about 95 percent to 85 percent eventually resulted in changes that resulted in a more reasonable pass rate of 91-92 percent more recently. But literacy, education and the related familiarity with tests all played a role:

The U.S. citizenship test is being updated, and some immigrants and advocates worry the changes will hurt test-takers with lower levels of English proficiency.

The naturalization test is one of the final steps toward citizenship — a monthslong process that requires legal permanent residency for years before applying.

Many are still shaken after former Republican President Donald Trump’s administration changed the test in 2020, making it longer and more difficult to pass. Within months, Democratic President Joe Biden took office and signed an executive order aimed at eliminating barriers to citizenship. In that spirit, the citizenship test was changed back to its previous version, which was last updated in 2008.

In December, U.S. authorities said the test was due for an update after 15 years. The new version is expected late next year.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services proposes that the new test adds a speaking section to assess English skills. An officer would show photos of ordinary scenarios – like daily activities, weather or food – and ask the applicant to verbally describe the photos.

In the current test, an officer evaluates speaking ability during the naturalization interview by asking personal questions the applicant has already answered in the naturalization paperwork.

“For me, I think it would be harder to look at pictures and explain them,” said Heaven Mehreta, who immigrated from Ethiopia 10 years ago, passed the naturalization test in May and became a U.S. citizen in Minnesota in June.

Mehreta, 32, said she learned English as an adult after moving to the U.S. and found pronunciation to be very difficult. She worries that adding a new speaking section based on photos, rather than personal questions, will make the test harder for others like her.

Shai Avny, who immigrated from Israel five years ago and became a U.S. citizen last year, said the new speaking section could also increase the stress applicants already feel during the test.

“Sitting next to someone from the federal government, it can be intimidating to talk and speak with them. Some people have this fear anyway. When it’s not your first language, it can be even more difficult. Maybe you will be nervous and you won’t find the words to tell them what you need to describe,” Avny said. “It’s a test that will determine if you are going to be a citizen. So there is a lot to lose.”

Another proposed change would make the civics section on U.S. history and government multiple-choice instead of the current oral short-answer format.

Bill Bliss, a citizenship textbook author in Massachusetts, gave an example in a blog post of how the test would become more difficult because it would require a larger base of knowledge.

A current civics question has an officer asking the applicant to name a war fought by the U.S. in the 1900s. The applicant only needs to say one out of five acceptable answers – World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War or Gulf War – to get the question right.

But in the proposed multiple-choice format, the applicant would read that question and select the correct answer from the following choices: A. Civil War B. Mexican-American War C. Korean War D. Spanish-American War

The applicant must know all five of the wars fought by the U.S. in the 1900s in order to select the one correct answer, Bliss said, and that requires a “significantly higher level of language proficiency and test-taking skill.”

Currently, the applicant must answer six out of 10 civics questions correctly to pass. Those 10 questions are selected from a bank of 100 civics questions. The applicant is not told which questions will be selected but can see and study the 100 questions before taking the test.

Lynne Weintraub, a citizenship coordinator at Jones Library’s English as a Second Language Center in Massachusetts, said the proposed format for the civics section could make the citizenship test harder for people who struggle with English literacy. That includes refugees, elderly immigrants and people with disabilities that interfere with their test performance.

“We have a lot of students that are refugees, and they’re coming from war-torn countries where maybe they didn’t have a chance to complete school or even go to school,” said Mechelle Perrott, a citizenship coordinator at San Diego Community College District’s College of Continuing Education in California.

“It’s more difficult learning to read and write if you don’t know how to do that in your first language. That’s my main concern about the multiple-choice test; it’s a lot of reading,” Perrott said.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said in a December announcement that the proposed changes “reflect current best practices in test design” and would help standardize the citizenship test.

Under federal law, most applicants seeking citizenship must demonstrate an understanding of the English language – including an ability to speak, read and write words in ordinary usage – and demonstrate knowledge of U.S. history and government.

The agency said it will conduct a nationwide trial of the proposed changes in 2023 with opportunities for public feedback. Then, an external group of experts — in the fields of language acquisition, civics and test development — will review the results of the trial and recommend ways to best implement the proposed changes, which could take effect late next year.

The U.S. currently has the easiest citizenship test compared to other Western countries — including Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom — according to Sara Goodman, a political science professor at the University of California, Irvine.

Goodman said she uses the following metrics to determine the difficulty of a test: the number of questions required to pass and the number of questions overall, the percentage of applicants who pass the test, the language level of the test, and whether or not questions with answers are made available to study before taking the test.

In the U.S. test, applicants must answer six out of 10 questions correctly to pass. About 96% of applicants pass the test, according to recent estimates. The test is at a “high beginner” level of English, Goodman said, and a question bank with answers is made available to study beforehand.

But in the German test, Goodman said applicants must answer 17 out of 33 questions correctly to pass. About 90% of applicants pass the test, according to recent estimates. The test is at an “intermediate” level of German, according to Goodman. And a question bank with answers is made available.

The Canada and United Kingdom tests are even harder, and a question bank is not provided in the latter, Goodman said.

Elizabeth Jacobs, director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies – a nonprofit research organization that advocates for less immigration – said the proposed changes would make the U.S. citizenship test even easier for many people.

“We think that’s in the wrong direction,” Jacobs said on behalf of the organization.

The proposed multiple-choice format for the civics section would put the answer to each question in front of applicants, Jacobs said, and would get rid of the memory challenge that’s in the current test.

Jacobs said her organization would prefer a test that includes more material and emphasizes American values, such as religious freedom and freedom of speech, more.

She added that most people who naturalize in the U.S. are not in the country because of merit or refugee status, but because of family sponsorship, where someone in their family became a U.S. citizen before them and petitioned for them to naturalize.

Jacobs said having a stricter test would help ensure that new citizens integrate into American society – and the economy – with sufficient English language skills, as well as promote a healthy democracy with civics knowledge and engagement.

Not everyone agrees.

“Is it important for us to even have a civics test in the first place? I don’t know the answer to that question,” said Corleen Smith, director of immigration services at the International Institute of Minnesota, a nonprofit that connects immigrants to resources.

Smith said USCIS already evaluates whether applicants have past criminal histories, pay taxes and support their children financially.

“They’re already evaluating that portion of your background. Is it also important to know this information about history and government and be able to memorize it?” Smith said, adding: “People that were born in the U.S. and are natural-born citizens — a lot of those folks don’t know many of these answers to the history of government questions.”

More than 1 million people became U.S. citizens in fiscal year 2022 — one of the highest numbers on record since 1907, the earliest year with available data — and USCIS reduced the huge backlog of naturalization applications by over 60% compared to the year before, according to a USCIS report also released in December

Source: US citizenship test changes are coming, raising concerns for those with low English skills

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Canada’s citizenship numbers are rising. How many passed the test?

2023/07/04 Leave a comment

Some useful numbers on pass rates (91-92 percent). Seems largely unchanged once the initial revised version of test was revised around 2011 when the pass rates dropped significantly (language level and complexity of questions):

On Canada Day, more than a thousand people will be pledging their oath to the country as new Canadian citizens.

Ceremonies for 1,130 citizenship recipients are scheduled to take place across the country on Saturday, according to numbers Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada shared with Global News.

Passing a citizenship test is one of the requirements to officially becoming Canadian – and the majority who took the exam this year were successful, recent IRCC data shows.

Between January and May 2023, a total of 119,053 tests were completed – out of which 92 per cent passed, while the rest failed.

It was a similar story last year, with 91 per cent of the people passing among the roughly 260,000 citizenship tests that were completed.

By comparison, Canadians would be less successful, recent polling suggests.

A Leger survey of 1,512 Canadian adults found that only 23 per cent would pass the citizenship test, based on their answers to 10 randomly selected questions.

The average score of the Canadians who were surveyed was only 49 per cent – where 75 per cent is needed to pass the test.

…

Source: Canada’s citizenship numbers are rising. How many passed the test?

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Think you could pass the citizenship test? Poll shows most Canadians would flunk

2023/06/29 Leave a comment

No surprise as believe other surveys have similar results. Reflects some of the arcane questions and the general lack of historical knowledge. Those who have to write the test have to prepare and pass rates, last time I checked, are over 90 percent. Similar to other countries, those who have to prepare generally have little difficulty, those who do not tend to “fail:”

Canadians’ hearts may be brimming with pride as Canada Day approaches, but a new poll suggests their minds aren’t full of the knowledge needed to pass a citizenship test.

In a survey of 1,512Canadian adults, Leger found that only 23 per cent would pass the citizenship test, based on their answers to 10 randomly selected questions.

People who wish to become Canadian need to answer 20 questions about citizens’ rights and responsibilities, as well as Canada’s history, geography, economy, government, laws and symbols.

They need to score at least 75 per cent to pass, but the average score of the Canadians who were surveyed was only 49 per cent.

The questions focused on things like famous Canadians (Who is John Buchan?), history (Who established the first European settlements in Canada?) and national symbols (Whose portrait is on the Canadian $10 bill?).

The correct answers, for those struggling along with most survey respondents, are: a popular governor general, the French and Viola Desmond.

History questions seemed to trip up respondents the most: For example, only 24 per cent knew that the House of Commons recognized in 2006 that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada.

Only 29 per cent knew the Constitutional Act granted legislative assemblies elected by the people, and only 41 per cent knew that English settlement began in 1610.

They fared slightly better when it came to national symbols and influential people: 49 per cent knew that Marjorie Turner-Bailey is an Olympian and descendant of black loyalists, and 42 per cent recognized Canada’s motto, “From sea to sea.”

Most Canadians were also in-the-know about the main groups of Indigenous Peoples in the country, with 79 per cent correctly identifying First Nations, Métis and Inuit.

People in Western Canada scored slightly better than their East Coast counterparts, with average scores in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and British Columbia at 50 per cent.

Those in Atlantic Canada scored the lowest, with a 44 per cent on average.

When the results were broken down by political affiliations, People’s Party of Canada supporters had the lowest average score at 47 per cent, while people who vote for the Bloc Québécois scored the highest, at 51 per cent.

There was one question most people seemed to have no problem answering: 81 per cent said they were proud to be Canadian.

The poll cannot be assigned a margin of error because online surveys are not considered truly random samples.

Source: Think you could pass the citizenship test? Poll shows most Canadians would flunk

Filed under Citizenship 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 , ,

Denmark Expands Citizenship Exam With ‘Danish Values’ Test

2021/11/26 Leave a comment

Ongoing trend of hardening Danish policies:

Denmark’s government has introduced changes to its citizenship exam, designed to test potential new citizens’ knowledge of Danish society, culture and history. The new questions will test an individual’s awareness of so-called “Danish values” on areas including free speech, gender equality and the relationship between law and religion.

It’s the latest step in a tightening of immigration policy by Denmark’s center-left government. The latest changes were passed in parliament thanks to support from opposition parties on the center-right rather than the usual allies to the left.

Led by Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democratic party, the minority government has adopted many policies long associated with parties far to the right of the political spectrum. Foreign Policy described the revamp as “one of the harshest refugee policies in the world.”

How Danish are you?

Introduced in 2015, the citizenship exam is designed to verify an individual’s knowledge of Danish society, culture and history as part of a citizenship application.

Previously, candidates had to score 32 out of 40 to pass. Candidates taking the new-look exam will have to score 36 out of 45, but also answer at least four of the five Danish values questions correctly. The time available for the PC-based test remains at 45 minutes but despite this, the government insists the test is no harder than before.

“I do not know what the politicians mean by Danish values,” one candidate told DR prior to taking the exam. One of the issues highlighted by critics is that there is no study material, meaning what is meant by “Danish values” is entirely subjective.

The government’s citizenship spokesperson Lars Aslan Rasmussen said the revised test will prove applicants understand the society they are applying to join.

“I actually think it’s very simple. Should girls be allowed to do the same things as boys, does Denmark have the death sentence? These are very simple questions which I think you should be able to answer if you live in Denmark,” he told DR.

How to become a citizen of Denmark

Becoming a Danish citizen requires far more than passing one exam, of course. The exam is just one part of the process. There is also a requirement to have lived in the country holding valid residence permits for up to nine years, with a positive recent employment history.

There are a few groups of people not required to take the citizenship exam. Exemptions are available for most people from Norway, Sweden or the Schleswig-Holstein region of Germany. Children under 12 are also exempt.

Source: Denmark Expands Citizenship Exam With ‘Danish Values’ Test

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

← Older posts