The Ministry of Education's proposal to include civics education in the Joint University Entrance Examination is not a bad plan; the question is whether or not it is necessary. If the goal is to raise civic awareness, then implementing this plan should be further discussed. Examinations only help develop a person's intelligence quotient, but not his or her emotional quotient -- which is what students need.
Universities have started accepting children born after 1987 -- a period during which the nation's economy prospered and society became more diverse. These young adults' experience of life differs greatly from those who were born in the 1950s and 1960s.
If we were to introduce civics and moral education, it must be done in step with the times and with an understanding of the new generation's needs, rather than relying on the ideas of the older generation. Neither must we seek to project things that we once thought natural on the younger generation.
Students nowadays express themselves better, have a higher sense of self-awareness, accomplish more multi-faceted tasks, and place more importance on enjoying life.
Therefore, when stressing the importance of civic and moral virtues, we must be empathetic and try to understand their values to be able to win their trust and approval and reach the goal of promoting civic and moral virtues.
Teaching students civic virtues should of course be the responsibility of schools, but doing it through examinations is not the best way.
Teaching by example and possessing the courage to admit wrongdoing are a better way of serving as a good role-model for students.
Given the country's educational system, where examinations are often a good inducement to studying, introducing a civics education test is a sure step to forcing students to take it seriously.
However, the Joint College Entrance Examination is already composed of nine elective subject tests, from which universities sometimes choose only three to six of the subjects in the calculation of the overall score. It is questionable then that civics education would even be included in the final score.
Having students prepare for nine subjects is already burdensome. The government should seek to simplify the joint examination and reducing its content to cover only basic subjects like Mandarin, English, natural science and social science would be better. Including another subject will only increase the pressure and study load for students.
This is similar to the addition of Chinese composition to the High School Entrance Examination. Although a good idea, it only gave rise to a large number of cram schools offering Chinese composition courses.
If civics education were to be added to the university entrance examination, a similar phenomenon would occur and we would see students spending more time preparing for this subject in cram schools. Will the ministry be willing to promote the emergence of civics education cram schools?
In the Analects (
In other words, moral education should be promoted through the improvement of social mores that encourage students to learn the habits of virtue, rather than taking examinations.
The ministry must therefore be cautious in its consideration of whether civics education should be included in the university entrance examination.
Chang Ruay-shiung is the dean of academic affairs at National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing