The philosophical principles of education run counter to what is inked in the official guidelines in every country and region in the world. In question here are four pillars that the Taiwanese education system is founded on, especially at the secondary level.
First, a high school student spends approximately 60 hours per week at regular and extension/cram schools and/or studying independently. The winter vacation, which is typically three weeks long, often shrinks to one week. About six weeks are shaved off the summer vacation. Why? In addition to acquiring more temporary knowledge, long hours teach more than lessons — they teach endurance.
The system is in great demand for those energetic and relentless individuals who can keep up the pace, because once they enter the job market, a 50-hour-work week would feel like a breeze and a two-week annual vacation, for instance, would be considered a great privilege. This is a race that will go on for at least half a century. Therefore, a rigid resistance training is required to test the resolve and the determination of the future workforce.
Second, virtually every high school student is required to sit for a 30-minute or 50-minute quiz on a daily basis. In theory, the practice is supposed to evaluate the student’s academic performance (whereby the student exhibits signs of independent thinking), but in reality it is meant to enhance competitiveness, which in turn leads to laborious work. The students do not retain much information because of these tests; mechanically memorized knowledge is knowledge that is bound for oblivion.
Further, the short period allotted to these tests is basically meant to teach efficiency and speed. If we asked an average Taiwanese student to perform a math operation, and asked an average US student to perform the same task, the former would be more likely to complete it in much less time than his/her US peers. The result may be incorrect, but it is carried out at the speed of light. Efficiency is required of a good worker.
Third, the system needs disciplined individuals: Absence and lateness are not tolerated. Postponing duties like school cleaning is unheard of. Wearing the school uniform in high school is the norm rather than the exception as students are not allowed to be different in appearance from other students (the rules about hairstyles and make-up have only recently been somewhat relaxed).
Any departure from the norm will incur disciplinary measures. Rebellious boys are expected to shape up after the compulsory military service. Rebellious citizens could stir up discord and put a severe crack in a social system that thrives on the “veneration” of authority, which is vital to social stability.
Harsher disciplinary measures are put in place when students enter junior high school, which is no coincidence: They come tellingly at the start of adolescence, the age of rebelliousness and exploration.
Fourth, related to the point above, a system that depends on rote learning is a system that is very likely to produce powerless recipients rather than empowered respondents. The former would produce obedient/loyal and dependent individuals who are eventually expected to follow orders and depend on authority, which would ultimately ensure a high level of “harmony” once these individuals enter the job market. It is worth noting here that philosophy as a subject is absent from the curricula in the whole region because it is the very subject that helps develop critical thinking. Critical thinking leads to inquisitiveness and the contesting of knowledge that is deemed degrading, enslaving and exploitative.
Naturally, there are allusions to philosophical figures, their dates of birth and their famous quotes, but not much else. Memory is rewarded, but critical thinking is frowned upon because it is a threat.
In fact, it is a double-edged sword: The elite should befriend this “behemoth” and adopt it, but it should be kept away from the rest of the populace lest it be used to sink its teeth into the establishment and lay its carcass bare.
Absent any significant natural resources, the educational system resorts to other means to keep its economy booming, or at least afloat. Endurance, hard work, competitiveness, efficiency, loyalty and discipline are effective tools that make up for the lack of significant natural resources — and/or military superiority. Japan, the leading tiger in Asia, knows it; Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea know it. So far none of these countries has dared make any drastic changes in their education systems. They are aware that their educational systems are a nightmare to many students, but they also know that thanks to this system, violent crime rates are low compared with those of many industrialized countries; homelessness, racism and many of the other social ills that plague the West are not at all acute. More importantly, the edifice upon which “soft authoritarian” democracies is built is in dire need of these pillars — at least for now.
From Japan to Taiwan, there is a call for change in the education system. A growing body of research on education reform threatens to reach the ceiling. But adopting an approach that empowers all citizens could in the long run send the economies of these countries into a calamitous spin. These countries, of course, need leaders and policy makers at all spheres of government and society.
Therefore, the top performers, who are generally critical thinkers, are granted the means to pursue their studies and ultimately take the helm.
Once the small elite occupy positions of power, they would pose no threat to the stability of the nation; in fact, they become the guardians of this stability as the great majority continues to pay myopic allegiance.
And thus most of the economies in the region roar on-despite a few hiccups from now and then.
Mo Reddad is a lecturer in the department of applied English at I-Shou University.
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