CE Week #5: “New Test Asks: What Does ‘American’ Mean?”
By JULIA PRESTON
Patrick Henry and Francis Scott Key are out, but Susan B. Anthony and Nancy Pelosi are in. The White House was cut, but New York and Sept. 11 made the list. Federal immigration authorities yesterday unveiled 100 new questions immigrants will have to study to pass a civics test to become naturalized American citizens. The redesign of the test, the first since it was created in 1986 as a standardized examination, follows years of criticism in which conservatives said the test was too easy and immigrant advocates said it was too hard. The new questions did little to quell that debate among many immigrant groups, who complained that the citizenship test would become even more daunting. Conservatives seemed to be more satisfied. Bush administration officials said the new test was part of their effort to move forward on the hotly disputed issue of immigration by focusing on the assimilation of legal immigrants who have played by the rules, leaving aside the situation of some 12 million illegal immigrants here. Several historians said the new questions successfully incorporated more ideas about the workings of American democracy and better touched upon the diversity of the groups — including women, American Indians and African-Americans — who have influenced the country’s history. Would-be citizens no longer have to know who said, “Give me liberty or give me death,” or who wrote “The Star-Spangled Banner.” But they do have to know what Susan B. Anthony did and who the speaker of the House of Representatives is. Alfonso Aguilar, a senior official at Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency that designs and administers the test, said it was not intended to be punitive. “We don’t seek to fail anyone,” said Mr. Aguilar, an architect of the test. Immigration officials said they sought to move away from civics trivia to emphasize basic concepts about the structure of government and American history and geography. In contrast to the old test, which some immigrants could pass without any study, the officials said the new one is intended to force even highly educated applicants to do reviewing. “This test genuinely talks about what makes an American citizen,” said Emilio Gonzalez, the director of Citizenship and Immigration Services, speaking at a news conference in Washington. The $6.5 million redesign was shaped over six years of discussions with historians, immigrant organizations and liberal and conservative research groups. The questions were submitted to four months of pilot testing this year with more than 6,000 immigrants who were applying for naturalization. The agency will begin to use the revised test on Oct. 1, 2008, leaving a year for aspiring citizens to prepare and for community groups to adjust their study classes. The overall format has not changed. Legal immigrants who are eligible to become citizens must pass the civics exam as well as a test of English proficiency in reading and writing. In a one-on-one oral examination, an immigration officer asks the applicant 10 questions of varying degrees of difficulty selected from the list of 100. To pass, the applicant must answer 6 of those 10 questions correctly. The questions released yesterday will remain public along with their answers. Immigrants are eligible to become citizens if they have been legal permanent residents for at least five years (or three years if they are married to a citizen) and have “good moral character” and no criminal record. In the pilot runs of the revised test, Mr. Aguilar said, the pass rates improved over the current tests, with 92 percent of participants passing on the first try, as opposed to 84 percent now. At least 15 questions were eliminated as a result of the pilot because they proved too difficult. For example, a question about the minimum wage was dropped because test takers were confused between federal and state rates, Mr. Aguilar said. In the new test, the pilgrims have been replaced by “colonists,” and they are the subject of fewer questions, while slavery and the civil rights movement are the subject of more. A question was added asking what “major event” happened on Sept. 11, 2001. The new test drops questions about the 49th and 50th states, but adds one about the political affiliation of the president. There are no questions about the White House. Instead, one question asks where the Statue of Liberty is. In a statement today, the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, one of the groups consulted in shaping the new test, denounced it as “the final brick in the second wall.” The group said the test included “more abstract and irrelevant questions” that tended to stump hard-working immigrants who had little time to study. But several historians said the test appeared to be fair. “People who take this seriously will have a good chance of passing,” said Gary Gerstle, a professor of American history at Vanderbilt University. “Indeed, their knowledge of American history may even exceed the knowledge of millions of American-born citizens.” John Fonte, a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute, called the new test “a definite improvement.” But he said it should have included questions about the meaning of the oath of allegiance that new citizens swear. “I would like to see an even more vigorous emphasis on Americanization,” he said. About 55 percent of the applicants who participated in the pilot test were from Latin American countries. Some Latino groups noted yesterday that no question on the new test refers to Latinos. Mr. Aguilar said that the test was not intended to be a comprehensive review, but rather to include “landmark moments of American history that apply to every single citizen.” Naturalizations have surged in recent years, to 702,589 last year from 537,151 in 2004, according to official figures. In July the fees to become a citizen increased sharply, to $675 from $405.
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://pkautzman.edublogs.org/2007/10/03/ce-week-5-new-test-asks-what-does-%e2%80%98american%e2%80%99-mean/trackback/
After personally seeing the new citizenship test compared to the old citizenship test, I agree to the satisfied conservatives that wanted a new harder test. I do believe that the new test is harder than the older one, but the old test appeared like a joke to me. “In contrast to the old test, which some immigrants could pass without any study, the officials said the new one is intended to force even highly educated applicants to do reviewing. ‘This test genuinely talks about what makes an American citizen,’ said Emilio Gonzalez.” I agree. This new test will truly test the immigrants. Instead of wingin’ it, and many Americans would do. Which is actually an odd note. The old test really showed that “Americans” like to wing it on tests. Not study, (cram before or not at all) and hope to pass the test. So immigrants are much better off than natural born citizens. They most likely study for the test, and then pass. “ ‘Indeed, their knowledge of American history may even exceed the knowledge of millions of American-born citizens.’ John Fonte.” What a concept. “I would like to see an even more vigorous emphasis on Americanization.” The interesting thing is that many things considered to be Americanism, Americans don’t necessarily recognize. We take for granted the things we are given when we are born here. We ignore important politics because it’s boring, and immigrants put our ways above all else. We see it and leave it, where as they try as hard as they can to get it. “ ‘People who take this seriously will have a good chance of passing,’ said Gary Gerstle.” That’s it though; all the immigrants who truly want to be here will work hard for it. They will pass, and earn all the rights many of us are given just for being born. I think that this new test is a good compromise for the extremes of difficulty and easiness.
SSEMB
I think that the new test being implemented is actually a really good idea. When I looked through it, I didn’t find any questions that to me were really too hard or too easy. For the most part, the test was fairly easy-going and made a lot of sense. The old test was definitely too easy (at least, some of the questions were). I think that this new test, even though the pilot’s pass rate was 92 percent—compared to the 84 percent of the current test, has a few more complicated questions, but they are not asking too much. The article said that on the old test, “some immigrants could pass without any study.” The fact that the new test has some more difficult questions leads me to believe that it will encourage more people to study for the test and learn some things about the country they want to gain citizenship in.
One of the things that really upsets me about this article is the fact that the Latino groups have been asking why nothing is mentioned about their history in the citizenship test. I really want to know what they think should be in there about them. It isn’t like there was a specific person who fought for their civil rights other than the people who were just fighting for civil rights for all minorities. I think the fact that questions about Susan B. Anthony and other rights based questions are in there is more than enough. The fact is: Hispanics would not have the ability to even complain about the test if these liberties had not been previously gained for them. I personally believe it is very important for these questions to be included so that all immigrants applying for citizenship can know why they are able to have the same rights as the white/Caucasian majority that once ran the country.
I find citizenship tests very difficult to comment on because I have done nothing to become inducted into the “most desirable” country on earth. I was just born. I didn’t have to haul all of my belongings, pay a fee, pass a test and learn a new language. This being said I feel moderately hypocritical. I am very stubborn in that I feel that immigrants should be able to speak fairly fluent English. I think the concept of naturalization is ridiculous otherwise. In America, English is spoken. Thus, people wanting to become American people should speak English. Although English is not officially the national language, its like informal amendments. It is the national language because that’s how it has always been. I agree that America is composed of immigrants and I certainly hail from immigrants but I believe a formal process must be there. Strengths of our country have always been our unity and pride, how thin can we afford to spread ourselves? Is a language barrier in our own country really a good idea? We need a universal language that all Americans can understand from Alaska to California to New York. Los Angeles is one of the largest Spanish speaking cities in the world. Now if all of LA were bilingual I would be extremely impressed, however this is not the case unfortunately. Immigrants wishing to become citizens should have a mandatory-speaking requirement when it comes to their fluidity of their English.
Here’s something I mentioned in my reflection about the citizenship tests: I need to hear opinions about the naturalization process from people who are smarter than me. I’ll try to find some and post them for the Saturday assignment. I want to know the social implications of administering an English proficiency test as a citizenship requirement.
As far as the test itself, the article mentions immigration supporters who criticize the test’s difficulty, but I believe the information it provides is valuable. All American citizens should understand the key points of our nation’s origin, history, and values. The knowledge acquired by those applying for citizenship should be common sense to those born and raised here, although I’m not sure it is.
The quote, “This test genuinely talks about what makes an American citizen,” was one I thought was interesting, because this should have been the focus all along. I think the first test did not really do such a thing.
I agree with the historians who said that the workings of American democracy are better represented in this new test. I also agree that more groups are represented in this one (not just the Pilgrims, for example).
I disagree with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. I think the questions are actually less abstract than the previous test, and I also believe that with good study, this test should not be difficult to pass for most who take it (hence the 92% pass rate).
(A couple of things I want to look into: I was interested in this “test of English proficiency in reading and writing” that is mentioned as something immigrants also have to pass along with the test. I also want to see if I can find the questions that “proved too difficult” for the citizenship test. )
It took 6.5 million dollars’ worth of research to redesign this, which at first glance shocked me for such a simple result, but when I reflected on it, made good sense. After all, this test does determine people who will be citizens of the United States. And it’s only fitting that adequate time and money is spent to make sure immigrants have the fairest chance of passing it while at the same time having to learn about our country.
-C.Rash
Reply to Callie:
I loved the point you made in your opening sentence. We have that in common you know. I too, was born here and therefore have done nothing to become indicted into this great country. I also agree that people who want to become citizens should be able to communicate at least semi- effectively in English as it is the most widely spoken language in the nation. As we discussed in class – that may be subject to change. But before it does they should learn to adapt. If Spanish were to become the most used language in the country over night I’d have no problem learning Spanish. It’s all about adapting to the environment you live in. I would speak English with my family and use Spanish everywhere else. You are right a language barrier is the last thing this country needs. However I don’t believe that English will always be the national language.
Response to Grace Evans
You mentioned, “I want to know the social implications of administering an English proficiency test as a citizenship requirement.” I am almost positive that we still do not have English as our set language. This is a decision that the country has to make, whether we want to or not. We either offer the citizenship test in more than one language, or we set the nations language to English. We can not have both, or that would simply not work. I think the United States setting English as its official language is long overdue. I agree with you, Grace, in the sense that yes, much of that stuff in the test is applicable to our countrie’s history, but what I disagree with in the new test is that it only includes 2 questions about the flag. This is the highest and mightyest symbol that this country has. This is what we raise when we win in battle. Shouldn’t the people of the United States know what it means-know why it is how it is? Besides this, I feel that the new test is better than the old test. However, I do not see how it took so much money to only tweak a few areas of the test. It isn’t like they scrapped the old one and came up with a new citizenship test. To me, that seems like that is too much money.
Response to Ethan
You said that you wouldn’t mind learning Spanish if it became our new national language overnight and it was all about adapting to your environment. Well I would have to disagree with you. Immigrants should adapt to our environment, not vice versa. If they want to live in the United States and become citizens then they should know some English. They don’t need to be fluent, but English has been our national language since the colonial times and it isn’t right to have a new national language whether it’s Spanish or French. It’s awesome that immigrants want to live in the United States for a better life, but they need to know some English in order to live here. I’m glad that the new citizenship test tests immigrants their English proficiency by reading and writing, it will be a good way to have immigrants adapt to our environment and keep English the national language. With so many legal and illegal immigrants in the United States, it is a good idea to know some Spanish in order to communicate but I hope in the future we won’t have to resort speaking Spanish in public then going home speaking English. Like Callie said, “is a language barrier in our own country really a good idea?”
Response to Callie:
I kind of disagree with Callie about how she thinks that immigrants need to be able to speak fluent English as an entrance requirement to become an American citizen. I think it depends on where the person wants to live. If they want to live in some of the northern states, then of course they won’t be able to get by without learning some English. However, if they are going to live and work in states like Arizona, Southern California, TX, etc, I do not think that it is necessary that they learn English. They can get by just fine the way they are. I think forcing anyone who enters our country to speak English is slightly hypocritical. Think about it, in most countries, they cater to us. Most signs, menus, and other things are written in English, as well as the native language of the country. Plus, isn’t it already hard enough to become an American citizen? Shouldn’t we be trying to make it a little easier? Maybe that way we won’t have such a problem with the illegal population. I think maybe that is why I like the old citizenship test better than the new one. It is easier, and I think that the questions encourage incoming citizens to learn and acquire more practical facts about our government and our history as a nation.
~ Maggie
Reply back to Maggie
I don’t believe that there is anything hypocritical about asking someone who wants to assimilate into our culture to learn our language. I think it’s only fair. If I was playing on a basketball team and someone wanted to join, I wouldn’t be like “Oh, no. You don’t have to learn our plays. The most important thing is that YOUR transition is easier.” Becoming an American citizen shouldn’t be like joining the PTA. Okay, sign here, come to this meeting and bring snacks. No, it’s a big deal and it should be treated like one. We shouldn’t have to sell ourselves as a country. The tests shouldn’t be easy and language shouldn’t be an option. In order to be a functioning member of society, which I assume is what those citizenship tests are there to assure, citizens must be able to communicate with other citizens. If we enable immigrants by not making English fluency mandatory we are hurting both them and ourselves. Sure, don’t make our country like a vault with no one in or out, but put some difficulty into it otherwise there will be no value on being a citizen if anyone can just simple have it. If we are handing out citizenship, what is so great about being a citizen?
Response to All:
Although, I understand the point of view that the citizenship test should be harder, I personally, don’t understand the point of the test in the first place. If most Americans cant pass it, then I think it is unfair to ask someone else too. I do think that immigrants wanting to becomet citizens of the US should be educated on our history and what we stand for, but do we truely need a test that costs us millions of dollars to create. Also, the test raises the fee for the naturalization process. The immigrants who do choose to attempt legal immigration, and who sacrifice everything to come to America, should not be slapped with a 600 and odd dollar fine. They will have plenty of time to learn about that when they fill out their taxes for the first time. So, in the end, I can agree with all opinions about the test. But, I think being an American is a lot deeper than 10 random questions, it is about pride and responsibility, among other things. So, do we really need this test, or is there another way we can naturalize immigrants?
I have to say that I think the new Citizenship Test is significantly harder than the first. After discussing the two in class, I’ve come to realize though, that the first test was difficult for many immigrants seeking citizenship. The reason the first test (and parts of the second) seem so easy to many of us, is because we grew up learning those little facts. Even in kindergarten and First Grade, our teachers were reading stories about pilgrims and the Oregon Trail and stuff. These immigrants never have been exposed to that. Therefore, the increased difficulty should decrease the number who pass…is that what we want? Even though the pilot tests seemed to have gone well, that’s a pilot testing.
Besides the difficulty, or lack thereof, does anyone else find the pay for it to be excessive? The test itself has minor changes besides a few taken out and a few added in. To me, it seems like we could have made one just as good without spending $6.5 million on it! That money is just thrown around, and it’s money that could theoretically go towards something a little more productive. Now, I’m not saying citizenship isn’t productive, and I know that immigration is a hot topic right now, but that seems, to me, to be way too high of a number…I don’t agree with that, especially since the test itself hasn’t seemed to dramatically change.
I definitely agree that the citizen test was in need of a makeover. After seeing it for myself I felt it was a little ridiculous. It was way too easy, after looking at the difference between the two tests I couldn’t help but laugh. “In contrast to the old test, which some immigrants could pass without any study, the officials said the new one is intended to force even highly educated applicants to do reviewing. ‘This test genuinely talks about what makes an American citizen,’ said Emilio Gonzalez.” I couldn’t agree with you more, I could definitely see a good majority of immigrants passing this test with out even studying. All-in-all it is a test for immigrants, it believe that it has the necessary ideals that an immigrant needs to be aware of to be an American. Having it such an easy test before just sort of show how we as Americans go about certain things. If you could just pass the test without studying it just shows we like to “take it easy” and not put to much effort in. That is something we definitely don’t want to do, giving the wrong impression of ourselves is not what we want to do when it comes to inviting new people into America.
~Ryan Brannan