Recent reports in the media said that some city and county governments intended to appropriate education budgets to purchase textbooks for elementary school students or provide free after-school programs. These plans have caused much debate.
Parts of municipal and county education budgets have long been used for non-educational purposes and this has led to criticism that implementation rates for education budgets are too low. Local governments’ plan to use these budgets for after-school programs means they would be spending the money in an appropriate manner.
What deserves our attention, however, is that different after-school programs may yield widely opposite results. Education authorities should therefore act with caution. For example, if the programs are merely used to prepare students for entrance exams, the benefits may be limited to certain students, while also encouraging public schools to organize similar programs.
However, if schools can design curriculums based on the individual needs of students, academic performance could increase and students would have more opportunities to explore different topics. Such programs could also offer a clean break from passive childcare.
After-school programs can offer remedial instruction to poorly performing students. In light of the wide performance gap among Taiwanese students, remedial instruction is necessary. Results of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006 organized by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development showed that the mathematics competency of 15-year-old Taiwanese was excellent. But the standard deviation of their average scores was the highest among the top 10 countries. Finland’s youngsters also ranked at the top, but standard deviation there was the lowest.
The results of the Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students also show a similar tendency. More poorly performing students might have encountered difficulties already in elementary school, but they are unable to receive appropriate counseling and assistance because of fixed curriculums and limited manpower. As a result, their learning constantly declines and the gap widens.
Remedial instruction is most important and effective in primary education and will be more difficult to achieve if only picked up in junior or senior high school.
Average and successful students could also use the programs to explore their aptitudes and develop new fields of interest. Promotionism, a phenomenon all too frequent in Taiwan’s high-pressure school environment, involves students seeking advancement to higher levels of education without regard to personal interests or quality of learning, which causes most students to only care about school work and devote most of their time studying for tests. They therefore seldom have a chance to explore other subjects.
The phenomenon is more obvious when junior high school graduates enter either senior or vocational high schools, as they will be studying in different departments or fields. Are they aware of their own interests? Is it better for them to go to a senior or a vocational high school? In what fields can they make best use of their talent?
Without exploration and consideration beforehand, they will be at a loss about what to do and teachers will hardly be able to advise them. Students are often likely to consider these things only in the last few weeks before making their choices and pressure may cause them to make rash decisions. This lack of understanding of their own aptitude and the resulting passive choice of future direction will in turn affect their career development.
If after-school programs can offer more courses and decouple them from tests, instill an understanding of and participation in the workplace and social concern and services, they will give students more opportunities to understand their abilities and needs and possibilities for social interaction. Such programs would also assist students in making decisions for their lives.
Finally, they can serve as an ability index when education authorities adjust enrollment programs.
It would be even better if programs planned for the long term, such as reducing teachers’ teaching hours to give them sufficient time to plan and implement more suitable after-school programs, or bring additional teaching resources to schools.
This would create greater all-round benefits, compared with the outcome of specific education measures of certain local governments.
Sung Yao-ting is a professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling at National Taiwan Normal University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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