Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- Preface -- Chapter 1 -- Immigration, Religion and Governmentality -- Abstract -- Introduction -- Theoretical Background -- Methods -- Findings -- Discussion and Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 2 -- Immigration and Gender: Health and Labor Conditions, Implications and Challenges -- Abstract -- Background -- Method -- Results -- Gender and Immigration from the Country of Origin: The Feminization of Migration -- Gender and Immigration in the Host Country: Health Conditions and Access to Health Services -- Gender and Immigration in the Host Country: Legal and Working Conditions -- Discussion -- Acknowledgments -- References -- Chapter 3 -- Using Technology to Expand and Enrich the Vocabulary of Low Level English Migrant Women -- Abstract -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Background -- 2.1. Support for English Learning -- 2.2. Significance of Vocabulary -- 2.2.1. Vocabulary Learning/Acquisition -- 2.3. Significance of MALL -- 2.3.1. Attributes of MALL -- 2.3.1.1. Portability, Accessibility, and Spontaneity -- 2.3.1.2. Context Awareness -- 2.3.1.3. Multimedia and Interactivity -- 2.3.1.4. Scaffolding -- 3. Methods -- 3.1. Context of This Study -- 3.2. Research Design -- 3.2.1. Semi-Structured Interviews -- 3.2.2. Non-MALL and MALL Lessons -- 3.2.2.1. Non-MALL Lessons -- 3.2.2.2. MALL Lessons -- 3.2.3. Thematic Analysis -- 3.2.3.1. Case Study 1 -- 3.2.3.2. Case Study 2 -- 3.2.3.3. Case Study 3 -- 3.2.4. Cross-Case Analysis -- 4. Findings and Discussion -- 4.1. Vocabulary Learning Environment -- 4.2. Learner Characteristics -- 4.2.1. L1 and English Literacy/Education Background -- 4.2.2. Learning Distractions -- 4.2.3. Confidence Level and Pronunciation Capability -- 4.2.4. Technology -- 4.2.5. Scaffolding -- 4.2.6. Self-Regulated/Personalised Learning -- 4.2.7. Tablet and App Features -- 4.3. MALL Framework -- 4.3.1. Challenges.

Immigration is highly salient for voters in Europe and the United States and has generated considerable academic debate about the causes of preferences over immigration. This debate centers around the relative influences of sociotropic or personal economic considerations, as well as non-economic threats. We provide a test of the competing egocentric, sociotropic, and non-economic paradigms using a novel constrained preference experiment in which respondents are asked to trade-off preferred reductions in immigration levels with realistic estimates of the personal or societal costs associated with those reductions. This survey experiment, per- formed on a national sample of British YouGov panelists, allows us to measure the price-elasticity of the public's preferences with regard to levels of European and non-European immigration. Respondents were willing to admit more immigrants when restriction carries economic costs, with egocentric considerations as important as sociotropic ones. People who voted for the UK to Leave the European Union in the 2016 referendum are less price-elastic than those voting Remain, indicating that non-economic concerns are also important.

Intro -- Contents -- Foreword -- Introduction -- Point: The United States Should Crack Down Harder on Illegal Immigrants -- Counterpoint: The Key to Stopping Illegal Immigration Is to Reform the Law, Not to Punish People -- Point: The United States Should Construct Physical Barriers on the Southern Border to Stem the Tide of Illegal Immigration -- Counterpoint: Physical Barriers on the U.S. Southern Border Will Not Solve Illegal Immigration Problems -- Point: Too Much Legal Immigration Is Damaging America's Economy and Society -- Counterpoint: Immigrants Are a Vital Economic and Social Asset to the United States -- Point: English Should Be the Official Language of the United States -- Counterpoint: It Is Unnecessary to Have an Official Language -- Conclusion: The Future of Immigration Policy -- Appendix -- Elements of the Argument -- Notes -- Resources -- Picture Credits -- Index -- Contributors.

"Es gab zwar einen parteiübergreifenden Konsens über die Notwendigkeit einer neugestalteten Einwanderungspolitik, aber von Beginn an erheblichen Dissens in fast allen Detailfragen. Im Laufe der Debatte schwand die Bereitschaft der politischen Lager, den Konsens zu suchen. In Deutschland herrscht große Unsicherheit bezüglich der Frage, wie das Verhältnis der nationalen zur europäischen Migration- und Asylpolitik gestaltet werden soll." (Autorenreferat)

Immigration is a very real and a very difficult problem currently facing our society. Religious communities have large concentrations of undocumented people, many of whom are Spanish‐speaking Catholics escaping poor economic conditions, and the Church is called to play a special role in order to help them.Their presence is a large pastoral challenge for the Catholic community. Cardinal Bernardin is conscious that no simple route to immigration reform seems available. Nevertheless, he believes it is a challenge which needs to be met nationally and internationally. Countries need to apply justice and generosity in their immigration policies.Furthermore, he points out that immigrants are often marginalized by society and therefore, find themselves among the unemployed, the hungry, and the homeless. As a community – Cardinal Bernardin insists we have a duty to respond to their needs, regardless of race, nationality, or legal status.

What moral standards ought nation-states abide by when selecting immigration policies? Peter Higgins argues that immigration policies can only be judged by considering the inequalities that are produced by the institutions – such as gender, race and class – that constitute our social world. He challenges conventional positions on immigration justice, including the view that states have a right to choose whatever immigration policies they like, or that all immigration restrictions ought to be eliminated and borders opened. Rather than suggesting one absolute solution, Higgins argues that a unique set of immigration policies will be just for each country. He concludes with concrete recommendations for policymaking.

The issue of migration is all the more central in the European Union as it is the essential component of population growth in a Union whose population would decline without migratory flows. And the Union is engaged in a process leading to a Community immigration policy. However, this process must not hide the differences in the dynamics and traditions of migration between countries. Finally, it is important to highlight some key challenges to the issue of immigration for the European Union. ; International audience [Migration issues appears in the more central European Union it is the essential component of population growth in a Union with a population decrease without migration flows. And the Union is engaged in a process leading to a common policy on immigration. However, this process should not obscure the differences in dynamics and migratory tradition in different countries. Finally, it is important to highlight some key issues of immigration issue for the European Union.] ; The issue of migration is all the more central in the European Union as it is the essential component of population growth in a Union whose population would decline without migratory flows. And the Union is engaged in a process leading to a Community immigration policy. However, this process must not hide the differences in the dynamics and traditions of migration between countries. Finally, it is important to highlight some key challenges to the issue of immigration for the European Union. ; La question migratoire apparaît dans l'Union européenne d'autant plus centrale qu'elle est la composante essentielle de la croissance démographique dans une Union dont la population diminuerait sans les apports migratoires. Et l'Union se trouve engagée dans un processus devant conduire à une politique communautaire concernant l'immigration. Néanmoins, ce processus ne doit pas masquer les différences de dynamique et de tradition migratoire selon les pays. Enfin, il importe de souligner quelques enjeux essentiels de la question de l'immigration pour ...

What moral standards ought nation-states abide by when selecting immigration policies? Peter Higgins argues that immigration policies can only be judged by considering the inequalities that are produced by the institutions - such as gender, race and class - that constitute our social world. He challenges conventional positions on immigration justice, including the view that states have a right to choose whatever immigration policies they like, or that all immigration restrictions ought to be eliminated and borders opened. Rather than suggesting one absolute solution, Higgins argues that a unique set of immigration policies will be just for each country. He concludes with concrete recommendations for policymaking

This commentary argues that prescriptive immigration scholarship has something to learn from the rise of Donald Trump. The Republican party's relatively close ideological engagement with the aspirations of its immigration dissenters (white nationalists) has paid political dividends in the long run by allowing the party to capture a passion for immigration issues and marry that atavistic energy to legal know-how. But mainstream Democrats, along with scholars whose immigration reform prescriptions align with that group, reject as fantasy the open-borders demands of its dissenters. Yet fantasy can be made real, or at least spark real political enthusiasm, as Trump illustrates. A deeper engagement with the dreams of open-borders advocates, like the group #Not1More Deportation, could in time prove similarly fruitful and galvanizing for the mainstream immigration left.

The phrase immigration reform has been around since the early history of the country, and its meaning varies according to different social perspectives of whether to admit more immigrants or limit their numbers. Sociologist Nestor Rodríguez argues that while immigration reform may open the door for some new immigrants, invariably it keeps other immigrants out, sometimes because of restrictive regulations adopted by the administering government agencies.