MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2229446780 · doi:10.25916/sut.26290537

Policy without evidence? The Australian Citizenship Test 2006-12

2024· article· en· W2229446780 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kerry A. Ryan

Notice bibliographique

RevueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésParliamentCitizenshipTest (biology)LegislationLawPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Argument (complex analysis)PoliticsHistory

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This thesis analyses the introduction and operation of the Australian citizenship test. The test, first proposed in April 2006, came into operation on 1 October 2007, after eighteen months of discussion in the parliament and in the public arena. The central argument of this thesis is that while there was some dissension in the parliamentary debates and committee hearings leading up to the introduction of the test, it focused primarily on the minor details of a piece of legislation that was always going to proceed. The Howard government had arrived at its decision to implement a citizenship test long before it sought public input and was committed to introducing the test prior to the 2007 election. No amount of evidence, it seemed, was going to derail or even delay the introduction of an ideologically-based policy, which was implemented despite ample testimony from academics and refugee advocates who warned that the test would be problematic. The thesis also argues that the Australian Labor Party, unwilling in the context of the times to oppose any demonstration of Australian 'patriotism', was a compliant ally in the smooth passage of the legislation through the parliament. What emerged from a superficial and rushed parliamentary process was what many commentators had predicted: a flawed and discriminatory test that adversely affects the more vulnerable individuals in society while privileging others. The thesis also examines the Australian government's use of overseas citizenship testing regimes, particularly those of the United Kingdom, United States, Netherlands and Canada, to legitimise the implementation of its own test. The Australian government, however, had done little or no research into the criticisms of such regimes and was either ignorant or determinedly dismissive of the fact that all were highly contested and contentious. In addition, the government remained unswayed by the fact that little or no evidence exists, or is indeed ever likely to exist, that citizenship tests are effective in achieving their almost universally stated aims of improved social cohesion and migrant integration. In the years since the Australian citizenship test was introduced, successive governments have failed to acknowledge that it is impossible to match a test of knowledge about Australian history, customs and government with the legislative requirement that prospective citizens demonstrate a 'basic knowledge of the English language'. It is a point that was made repeatedly to the Howard government in the lead-up to the test's introduction and a point that has been repeatedly reinforced throughout the life of the test, much of which has been overseen by the Rudd and Gillard Labor governments. Such is the scale of the government's ignorance of matters related to language learning and language testing that the 2008 review of the citizenship test, chaired by Richard Woolcott, succeeded only in magnifying the test's already significant shortcomings, resulting in a revised test that is even more discriminatory than its predecessor.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,692
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,006
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,118
Tête enseignante GPT0,400
Écart entre enseignants0,282 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)Même sujetCommonwealth, Australian Politics and FederalismTravaux en français237 207