Vice President Lien Chan (
However, there does not appear to be a uniform view on the 12-year proposal among the educators.
First, let's take a look at the worldwide trends in education. Most US states have adopted a 12-year public education system. The English system is 11 years. Germany and Japan have a nine year system, but the percentage of Japanese students continuing on to senior high or vocational schools is 94.2 percent.
Only five countries in the world have a 12-year system of public education. So a 12-year system is not an inevitable trend.
It is also questionable to assume that the time is ripe to extend public education to 12 years just because sufficient opportunities exist for junior high graduates in Taiwan to enroll in senior high schools, senior vocational schools and five-year junior colleges.
In Taiwan, the ratio of senior high schools to senior vocational schools is gradually tilting in favor of the former from the current 4:6 ratio. But at present, 43.5 percent of schools are public and 56.5 are private, including both senior high and senior vocational schools.
In other words, less than half of the schools are public.
Some parents were overjoyed by Lien's proposal because they believed their children would no longer face the pressure of trying to get into good schools. Most parents apparently thought that under Lien's proposal their children would be able to enter public schools.
Can the Ministry of Education drastically increase the number of public schools within the next three years?
Or is the government planning to treat private senior high and senior vocational schools as substitutes for public schools -- the way it treated private elementary and junior high schools as substitutes 39 years ago when the 9-year system was introduced?
The percentage of expenditure on eduction in our country's GDP would be reduced from 6.51 percent to just 5.06 percent if your deduct the expenditures for private schools. This figure trails far behind the 9 percent spent by advanced countries on education.
The extension of public education by three years would also seem to require a lot more than a NT$60 billion budget. Too many supporting measures are still lacking.
The history of education tells us that a truely public system is universal, compulsory, free and basic. We cannot assume that a public education system is being implemented simply because an easy-to-achieve feature of such a system has been designated for implementation. Issuing annual coupons for each student is not the same as implementing a public education system.
Does a cost-free education encompass free tuition, free textbooks, free lunch, and/or free transportation? To satisfy public demand, a 12-year public education must be compulsory and free. However, it would take a lot more than a NT$60 billion budget to accomplish all this.
Let us now take a look educational development trends in other advanced countries. The provision of pre-schools for three to five years-olds and the incorporation of pre-schools into the public system are part of a new trend. For example, compulsory education begins at age five in England. Every four or five year-old in France goes to preschool. Even in North Korea, compulsory education begins at five.
However, our government is planning to issue an annual education coupon for each student without considering the possibility of extending public education to lower age groups.
The distribution of resources among Taiwan's senior high and senior vocational schools has always been unfair. How do we resolve the inequalities in school districts after a 12-year system is implemented? The problem is complicated by the fact that the subjects or majors offered by senior vocational schools are not evenly distributed around the country. How do we satisfy the demand of the students under these circumstances?
In Taipei County alone, there are 60,000 junior high graduates a year. More than 20,000 go to Taipei City or other counties and cities to continue their education. These figures tell us the adoption of a school district system is virtually impossible.
In a democratic country, every administrative act must have a legal basis. New legislation on education must address pressing issues such as the appropriation of an additional budget from the state treasury, what rights and obligations are entailed in one's right to education and human rights education.
But before these issues are adequately provided for, we should work on more practical items such as decreasing the workload on school children and increasing their sleeping hours, rather than declaring a new educational policy.
Teng Yun-lin is a professor at the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hsuan Chuang University (
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with