Would you pass the Australian citizenship test?
Some sample questions from the August draft of Becoming an Australian Citizen:
1. In what year did Federation take place?
2. Which day of the year is Australia Day?
3. Who was the first Prime Minister of Australia?
4. What is the first line of Australia’s national anthem?
5. What is the floral emblem of Australia?
6. What is the population of Australia?
7. In what city is the Parliament House of the
Commonwealth Parliament located?
8. Who is the Queen’s representative in Australia?
9. How are Members of Parliament chosen?
10. Who do members of Parliament represent?
11. After a federal election, who forms the new government?
12. What are the colours on the Australian flag?
13. Who is the head of the Australian Government?
14. What are the three levels of government in Australia?
15. In what year did the European settlement of Australia start?
16. Serving on a jury if required is a responsibility of Australian
citizenship: true or false?
17. In Australia, everyone is free to practice the religion of their
choice, or practice no religion: true or false?
18. To be elected to the Commonwealth Parliament you must be
an Australian citizen: true or false?
19. As an Australian citizen, I have the right to register my baby
born overseas as an Australian citizen: true or false?
20. Australian citizens aged 18 years or over are required to enrol
on the electoral register: true or false?
How would you rate? You can do a practise test here. But is it just me, or is all this deadly boring? Australia is so much more than these things. Indeed, you could argue that these questions are not at all indicative of life in Australia.
12 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Its just an English test to keep non-whites out.
I thought it was pretty easy and it is for citizenship not residency or entry to the country. Don’t think it will achieve much though and is probably a waste of time. Also I don’t see how skin colour affects one’s ability to answer the questions.
Skin color determines your likelihood to have English as a first language.
India, many Pacific and Caribbean islands, some African countries, Singapore all have English as the official language. Anyhow look at the immigration statistics for recent years - non-whites appear to be just as welcome here as anyone else. There is however no harm in requiring citizens (not visitors) to speak a little of the official language.
Ok let me put it this way: Two people take the test - a poor, young, hardworking woman from Bombay who meets all the AU citizenship requirements compared with someone of equal merit from Whitesville, USA.
Do you really think Whitey doesn’t have an advantage taking the test? Google “cultural bias in testing” for a clue.
And if we agree that English speaking is a requirement, then we should be honest about it and make an *English Test*. That would be far more accurate.
This whole thing smells like a bullshit plan cooked up to win votes from the “Today Tonight” crowd. Most of whom would probably fail. In fact, lets make every citizen in Australia take the test and revoke citizenship for those who don’t make the grade. Could solve the Aboriginal “problem” too.
I agree, make it an English test (I think there may already be one) and forget this new test. I’ve already said its a waste of time. All I’m saying is that it is not inherently racist. I bet you there are more monoculture towns in India than there are in the USA. America is one of the most ethnically diverse countries on earth (but still probably less than Australia given our smaller size, 25% of Aussies are born OS and many are from non-English speaking and non-white countries). Check out new citizenship statistics for Australia in 2005/06. The 3rd biggest country of new citizens after UK and NZ is India. Immigration between Australia and US would be tiny.
http://www.citizenship.gov.au/resources/facts-and-stats/stats.htm
And if both candidates (white American and Indian) can speak English then I see no reason why either would be at an advantage or disadvantage regarding obscure things about Australia’s history.
Hmmm…I think obscure is the right word here. And, let’s face it, we’re pretty intelligent people with a knack for squirreling away obscure bits of information. But it just seems to me that the test above is more representative of something you’re made to learn in Grade 5 at school and quickly forget because it bears no relevance to life in Australia as we know it. Take the jury question, for example: you could argue that it’s almost an Australian passtime to dodge jury duty. And does not knowing what the floral emblem is make you any less Australian?
So what criteria should be used to decide who is allowed to become a new citizen? English proficiency (or at least passable English) is one I’d want, no criminal record is another - we have enough criminals of our own without taking more, good work and social record while a resident before applying for citizenship. I’d imagine all these things are already part of the citizenship process. I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting applicants to have made an effort to learn about Australia but some of the sample test questions seem a bit random and of little consequence. By the way I just applied to be excused from jury duty, I’m sure my excuse was as good as all the others.
The test is pretty easy (I know the answers and it’s something you could easily study for). George is right though, it’s pretty boring stuff and not really what Australia is all about. I don’t object to it on principle. Most questions require one word answers so it’s not presenting a huge language barrier. Also, if English is not a requirement, you may be able to sit the test in your own language.
Just an update on this one. You can now download a report about the test:
http://www.citizenship.gov.au/_pdf/citz-test-snapshot-report.pdf
In a nutshell, between 1 October and 31 December 2007:
• 9 043 people sat the test.
• 8 405 people (or 92.9 per cent) passed the test on their first or subsequent attempt.
• Overall, there were 10 730 tests (some of these were resits)
• On average 1.2 tests administered per person.
as long as it can be translated into other languages for the participator it should be easy…It IS kind of stupid…i mean i only know it because i do yr 9 history but if you study for a few days you would be able to complete…unless ur stupid. personally i think there shouldn’t be a test.