Educational reforms have become the focus of heated de-bates. It is not a bad thing for all schools of thoughts to contend for public attention, but most of the discussions still circle around the conceptual level or even sloganeering. These will only stir up more social dispute and cause panic among parents. They do not carry any concrete meaning for the nation's educational reforms.
From the viewpoint of educational concepts, the overall direction of the reforms implemented so far -- such as the nine-year integrated curriculum, multiple versions of textbooks under a set of guidelines and the multiple entrance system for colleges and high schools -- are worthy of our praise and support.
But without implementation details, any concept -- no matter how good it is -- achieves nothing and will even create flaws. The current messy enforcement of educational reforms is the result of a lack of implementation details.
How should these details be formulated?
For instance, no single sanitation expert can directly come up with implementation details from concepts. The details for culinary sanitation have to be gradually compiled during the process of cooking, which requires chefs, attendants, managers, customers and sanitation experts to participate in constant discussions, observation, experiments, im-provement and encouragement. Only then will culinary sanitation reach a state of perfection.
By the same token, if educational reforms are flawed, the impatience of the elite reformers should be to blame. The whole concept has been promoted too hastily. No sufficient dialogue has been held with those directly involved in education, such as teachers, students and parents. Neither did the reform experts come up with feasible implementation details through intensive discussions. Therefore, a consensus is lacking in the reforms. Chaos is unavoidable.
Academics should put an end to their disputes. If they are really serious about the reforms, then they should stop shouting slogans and go to the counties and villages, to the grassroots level. Teachers, parents, education administrators, academics and experts should form research and development teams centered around community universities. Working under relevant reform concepts, the teams should conduct well-considered discussions, experiments and research to map out concrete implementation details, such as the selection of teaching materials, curriculum design and the development of teaching methods.
In addition, these details must be experimented with in the classroom first to get students' feedback so that the process will be complete and the details will be concrete and feasible. Also, because these details are the result of participation and discussions from all corners, consensus will be reached and regulatory effects will be achieved. Without the social process of public discussion, any reform will simply become empty talk and even cause social panic.
Hsu Chao-li (徐照麗), an associate professor of elementary education at National Taichung Teachers' College, and some teachers have reportedly launched a "quiet revolution" in four towns and villages in Taichung County. By following the concept of the nine-year integrated curriculum, they have designed various implementation details, including students' proficiency indicators, and coordinated educational resources from the center to local governments to help other teachers become capable curriculum designers.
Their project, which will truly carry out educational reforms, is what's most needed right now -- and will shed some light on the direction and future of such reforms.
Lii Ding-tzann is a professor in the Institute of Sociology at National Tsing Hua University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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