Writing As Enhancing Means to Integrate in Dutch Society

Writing as Enhancing Means to Integrate in Dutch Society An Investigation into the Role of Developing Writing Skills in the Management of Civic Integration of Low-Educated Migrants in the Netherlands Details of student: Name of the Supervisor(s): Name: Lisan Swartjes Name supervisor: Dr. M. Spotti ANR: 314156 Name second reader: Dr. H. Siebers Master thesis Management of Cultural Diversity Tilburg University | Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences August 27th, 2020 ABSTRACT Policymaking regarding civic integration of newly arrived migrants within the Netherlands has been a highly debated topic over the past 40 years. During the 1990s civic integration tests were introduced and have ever since been the cornerstone of civic integration policy. Knowledge of the culture and the state’s official language is viewed key in defining whether an immigrant is integrated in Dutch society. Whereas the Dutch government acknowledged the alleged discriminatory nature of including literacy skills in the civic integration regime for low- educated and low-literate migrants, writing became a compulsory component in the examination in 2007 nonetheless. Language-based attainment requirements have become stricter over the years and with the new Law on Civic Integration taking effect in 2021 requirements will further be sharpened to CEFR level B1. Against this background, this study aims to develop an understanding of civic integration policies in the Netherlands and unravel the discourses on newly arrived migrants, language and identity they contain. More specifically, it investigates the role of writing skills development in the management of civic integration of low-educated migrants. It does so by means of a socio-culturally rooted discourse analysis of policy documents issued by an array of governmental agencies and through a review of existing literature in the fields of integration, language testing, identity, writing in an L2 and low literacy skills. Keywords Policy, discourse, civic integration, newly arrived migrants, low literacy, L2, writing skills, language testing, CEFR, identity 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................... 3 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4 2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Research desing ................................................................................................................ 8 2.2 Search strategy .................................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Data analysis ................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Research quality indicators ............................................................................................. 11 3. LITERTURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Development of the Dutch civic integration regime....................................................... 13 3.2 Literacy and the importance of written language ........................................................... 20 3.3 The Common European Framework of Reference ......................................................... 26 3.4 Divergent perspectives on the notion of language ......................................................... 29 4. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................ 33 5. LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 37 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 41 3 1. INTRODUCTION Over the past 40 and odd years there have been large shifts in policymaking regarding integration of migrants in the Netherlands. Whereas in the 1960s and 1970s there was no such thing as an explicit integration policy, the 1980s saw a first policy attempt aimed at newcomers to integrate in Dutch society. The ‘Ethnic Minorities Policy’ and the paradigm that came from it, aimed at promoting equality in society, especially concerning vulnerable groups such as asylum seekers, guest workers, migrants from Surinam and the Dutch Antilles, Moluccans and nomadic travelers. However, at the end of the 1980s there was a lot of criticism on the policy approach and the tendency became that the policy had “failed in important areas of labor and education” (Bruquetas-Callejo, Garcés-Masareñas, Penninx and Scholten, 2007: p. 12). The shift in the public opinion during the 1990s ultimately led to a turn in policy in 1998 where the focus was much more on the individual’s responsibility in the integration process and more emphasis was put on the socio-economic aspects of integration rather than on ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious preservation of someone’s origins. Further, civic integration courses and exams were introduced and became crucial statements for a government that was changing its integration policy discourse regarding newly arrived migrants (Bruquetas-Callejo et al., 2007). The emphasis in these tests, although they may also be dealing with cultural norms and values of the host country, is mostly on language, showing that the mastering of the official national language is key to defining whether someone is integrated or else (Kurvers & Spotti, 2015). After the millennium turn, the dominant view withheld by both Dutch political and public discourse, was that the failed integration policies had led to the endangerment of Dutch society. More stringent rules regarding integration were introduced and the multicultural approach of the 1980s had shift away towards an assimilation stance (Bruquetas-Callejo et al., 2007). While engaged in giving an overview of the integration landscape across Europe, Extra, Spotti and Van Avermaet (2009) claim that “the topic itself, the public discourse and the political and legal regimes surrounding it are in flux, generally moving in the direction of more restrictive regimes over time across nation-states” (p. 5). Correspondingly, looking back at a decade of developments on this topic, De Waal (2017) argues that increasing civic integration requirements in several EU member states has resulted in a diminishing number of permanent residence permits or the granting of citizenship. This is also evident in Dutch society: according to a report by the Court of Audit (Algemene Rekenkamer, 2017a) only 60% met civic integration requirements in time in 2017, of which 6% was exempted for the examination. What has been striking here, is that the requirements to pass for the integration test are still getting 4 higher over time (Groenendijk, 2012). The new Law on Civic Integration, that will take effect in 2021, will further increase the language requirement from CEFR level A2 to B1 (Koolmees, 2018), while current attainment requirements are already hard to be achieved. By further raising the level to pass for civic integration tests, the government subscribes to and authors a political discourse that lays bare a linkage between high level of Dutch language proficiency and overall civic integration. This level of Dutch a newly arrived migrant must attain is the highway into Dutch society, getting newcomers to work and thus to rely less on State benefits (Rijksoverheid, 2019). With regard to language requirements, Section 2 of Article 7 of the Law for Civic integration states that migrants are compulsory to complete an exam in oral and written skills on CEFR level A2 (Wet Inburgering, 2020). Article 3.9 of the Decree for Civic Integration elaborates on that in section 2 by stating that the parts that need to be completed are: reading, listening, writing and speaking (Besluit Inburgering, 2020). What is interesting in that respect, is that literacy skills have not always been part of language proficiency examination. It was, in fact, not until 2007 that reading and writing became compulsory parts in the civic integration test. Later on, in 2011, literacy skills were also included in the pre-departure (WIB) test which immigrants need to pass in order to be admissible to the Netherlands. While the pre-departure test was already introduced in 2006 and needed to be completed at CEFR level A1-minus, only speaking skills were examined. However, when literacy skills were added to the equation, attainment levels immediately raised to CEFR level A1. Questionable in this regard is how writing has become so important in the integration of newly arrived migrants. Another important note is that by examining writing skills, people who do not know how to read and write or have low literacy level of proficiency in this skill, will inevitably be excluded (Spotti, 2013; Koolmees, 2018). Haznedar, Peyton and Young-Scholten (2018: referring to Condelli et al., 2003, Kurvers et al., 2006 and Tarone et al., 2009) argue, that migrants’ progress in second language (L2) acquisition is affected by conditions upon immigration. If an individual develops literacy skills in the mother tongue it helps one in learning how to read and write in a new language. This means that

Load more