The fact that students who only had an average of three points in every subject in this year's university entrance exam were eligible for admission to university has become a hot topic in education. But the Ministry of Education's measures to remedy this problem, such as closing down universities and setting minimum enrollment requirements, only address the symptoms and not the fundamental problems in higher education in Taiwan.
First, there are too many universities and too few students, so even without the ministry's measures, some universities will have to close. When a bank goes bankrupt, the money in its savings accounts still has some minimal guarantee from the central bank. But how would the ministry handle a university's possessions and the people connected to the school when a university closes down? What about the teachers, the student body and the alumni? The costs and problems this constitutes should not be ignored.
To avoid wasting university resources, the only solution seems to be to expand the potential pool of students. There are two possibilities for this -- one is recruiting students from China, the other is recruiting students from other countries. The former involves too many political problems to resolve in the short term.
As to the latter, there are three problems. The first is language. Unless university courses are taught in English, it will be hard to attract foreign students. Therefore, universities need to gradually increase the number of courses taught in English.
The second problem is that the foreign students who now come to Taiwan are from countries that aren't doing very well economically. They depend on scholarships given out by the Taiwanese government and are provide no substantial economic benefit to the universities.
Third, the government has to stabilize the situation across the Taiwan Strait, as foreign students will not study in what is considered a dangerous place.
Second, the present enrollment system at universities is outdated. There are too many universities, for too few students, necessitating a change in the recruitment system from choosing the most talented students, to assigning students to a variety of universities. The old method of recruiting students worked in a time when there were more students than places in universities, but that no longer works. Now that there are more places in universities than there are students a new method is needed, to keep the diversity of the students' backgrounds within a campus and the competition between universities from disappearing.
The current system works for a minority of students -- those studying at national schools, those from prosperous families and those living in major cities. For the majority it does not offer a fair deal.
For private universities to survive and develop, they have to think of a way to change their recruitment system. Students from rural areas and less advantaged families should ask themselves what benefits the current recruitment system gives them.
Third, there is no connection between quality of the education and a university's tuition fees. If the tuition fee for National Taiwan University is only half of that of a private university, then who would want to go to a private university, unless they are not accepted by any other school? Any effort private universities make to woo students would be futile.
The ministry should take the opportunity to allow more freedom in the higher education system. For example, allowing universities to decide their own recruitment methods (maybe even bypassing the university entrance examination) and setting their own tuition fees to reflect the quality of the education offered.
At present, the higher education system has too many regulations and restrictions that govern the initial phase of university admissions. This should shift toward a system that allows universities a greater say in assessing and admitting students. As long as the government can maintain the quality of the education offered nationwide, it should be the universities themselves and market forces who govern the recruitment process.
Chang Ruay-shiung is the vice president of National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past