I read in abject disbelief in this morning's paper that Ma Ying-jeou (
This is the same man who, at a speech given to members of Taiwan's foreign business community at the Howard Plaza Hotel on Nov. 29, was not able to understand an important question on the subject of greenhouse gases from an English-speaker in the very front row.
Some stark facts from an letter by Stephen Krashen (Letters, Nov. 22, page 8) bear immediate repetition.
A proposed "English village" would be a "one-week English immersion experience for students between the ages of 13 and 14 years" that "can accommodate 200 students at a time," he said.
Krashen pointed out that if "three villages are set up, they can accommodate about 600 students a week. That amounts to about 25,000 a year." Doing the math, Krashen concluded that "fewer than 1 percent of the children in school in Taiwan will experience the English village, and the experience only lasts one week."
This leaves me wondering where Ma is getting his advice with respect to the future of English in Taiwan.
It seems likely he is drawing from the exaggerated -- although popular -- claims in support of the efficacy of language-learning by speaking and listening in a target-language community.
But research clearly shows that this approach is egregiously inferior to those that emphasize more focused, comprehensible, examined input.
Leaving aside the issue of how much money would be squandered for such an initiative, one should hope for Ma's sake that any proposals he might have to combat greenhouse gases are not nearly so specious.
Martin de Jonge
Fulong, Taipei County
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS