Why the US Citizenship Test Needs a Reboot

Guest blogger: Dallin Nielsen, law student, University of San Francisco

I remember when my best friend in high school told me that his mom passed the US Citizenship test. He was excited and proud, and I felt the same for him. His mom was (and still is) a great person – she is warm, welcoming, generous, funny, and always made us eat whenever we came over, even if we said we weren’t hungry.

My friend and his family are from Guadalajara, Mexico. They moved to the United States for his dad’s job when he was in elementary school. I remember talking candidly with him about his and his parents’ citizenship status. Those conversations never felt shameful, judgmental, or like anything other than two friends talking about life.

That's why when I learned about the problems surrounding the citizenship test and English proficiency requirement, I was floored. I had never considered that the test itself might disadvantage people based on where they came from. In light of these considerations, it is time to think about whether we should allow the English proficiency requirement to be a barrier to citizenship at all.

Problematic Roots

Under INA §312(a)(1), an applicant must demonstrate an understanding of the English language, which includes the ability to read, write, and speak words of ordinary use.[1] Even though this requirement appears neutral, it emerged from a time in US history when restrictive immigration policies were being used to exclude Southern and Eastern European immigrants.[2]

As legal scholar Ricardo Gonzalez Cedillo points out, this test still has discriminatory effects on certain groups of immigrants, particularly those of Mexican descent.[3] The test was designed to stigmatize these groups and be a barrier to them obtaining political rights via naturalization/citizenship.[4]

These effects persist today. Research from the National Immigration Forum shows Mexican immigrants have among the lowest naturalization rates at 42%, with lack of English proficiency cited as a primary barrier.[5]

The Equity Problem

One might think that giving everyone the same test is equal. But equal is not always equitable.

Consider two applicants for naturalization: one from Ireland, one from the Philippines. Both have lived in the US for five years. Both work hard, pay taxes, and are integrated into their communities. Both want to become citizens and will receive identical rights once they are. Yet the Filipino applicant must pass a test in their second language, while the Irish applicant takes it in their native tongue.

This isn't about making the test easier; it's about recognizing that testing US history knowledge and English proficiency creates a double barrier for non-English speakers. This barrier is one that native English speakers never face, simply because they were born in a particular country.

A Dynamic Approach

I propose a dynamic citizenship test that tailors difficulty to each applicant's English proficiency:

Step 1: All applicants take a simple English language assessment. This assessment could be similar to tools used by language-learning apps or English-as-a-Second-Language programs.

Step 2: Based on results, applicants receive a calibrated civics portion of their tests. Higher English proficiency means the standard civics test. Lower proficiency means a simpler civics test (perhaps 4 out of 10 correct instead of the standard 6 out of 10).

Adaptive testing technology already exists in education and has been shown to improve equity and more accurately measure actual knowledge.[6] Research also demonstrates that adaptive assessments particularly benefit students by meeting them at their level.[7]

Other countries already use similar procedures to remove barriers to citizenship. Argentina grants citizenship after just two years with minimal language testing.[8] Portugal offers citizenship after five years with virtually no language barriers.[9]

By tailoring the civics portion of the test according to each applicant’s level of English proficiency, the barrier of speaking English to gain citizenship can be more easily overcome. If an applicant knows that their level of English proficiency will be accommodated and not used against them, it will cease to be an obstacle to applying for naturalization.

Learning English is valuable, both nationally and globally. But it should not be a tool used to exclude those who otherwise meet the qualifications for US citizenship.

Moving Forward

I wonder how my friend felt watching his mother study for that test. Did he think it was ironic that she had to prove her worthiness to become a citizen of a country that already benefited from her work, her taxes, and her community contributions? Did he question why his Mexican family faced hurdles that a family from Australia wouldn't encounter?

In a country whose founding dream is that all people have an equal opportunity to get ahead, we cannot maintain barriers that systematically disadvantage certain groups.

Learning English is undoubtedly valuable in today’s world. As a society, there is much we can do to improve education and access to language resources. But requiring immigrants to demonstrate English proficiency before granting them the same citizenship rights given to native-born Americans isn't about integration. It's about exclusion.

A dynamic, equitable testing system would maintain civic assessment while removing inequitable barriers that favor immigrants from certain countries over others. It's also a step toward making the American Dream accessible to all, regardless of which language they dream in.

Author’s note: Research was conducted with the assistance of AI tools. All opinions, arguments, and the final writing are my own. See attached appendix for link to transcript of prompts used and research compiled.

Research Appendix and Prompt Transcript: https://claude.ai/share/94e6a9ba-2280-4c02-8eba-5c85b5f63770

Tools used: Claude, using Sonnet 4.5, by Anthropic

[1] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1423&num=0&edition=prelim

[2] https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2002/summer/immigration-law-1

[3] https://commons.stmarytx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2511&context=thestmaryslawjournal

[4] https://commons.stmarytx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2511&context=thestmaryslawjournal

[5] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/01/18/naturalization-rate-among-u-s-immigrants-up-since-2005-with-india-among-the-biggest-gainers/

[6] https://www.everylearnereverywhere.org/blog/what-is-adaptive-learning-and-how-does-it-work-to-promote-equity-in-higher-education/

[7] https://elearning.company/blog/adaptive-assessments-a-game-changer-for-students-with-learning-disabilities/

[8] https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/easiest-countries-to-get-citizenship/

[9] https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/easiest-countries-to-get-citizenship/