Diluting education further
I was surprised by the report regarding Taipei County’s new English-language curriculum for elementary schools, slated to begin in the fall (“County cannot force all students to take new English classes,” April 16, page 3). It effectively means that students will spend even more time at school than they already do. Currently, fifth and sixth grade students have one half-day and four full days of school. Now they will have five full days of school. First grade students will have half a day added to their week.
Is this really necessary or wise? The article states that students felt more motivated after taking the new lessons. Were they asked how they felt about having three hours added to their school week? I wonder how motivating that is going to be. These poor kids already have too much homework and spend too much time in cram schools.
Taipei County Commissioner Chou Hsi-wei (周錫瑋) said that students need to start learning English earlier in order to be more competitive. There is no evidence that indicates a better rate of acquisition of English for students starting in grade one as opposed to starting in grade three or even later. In fact, the evidence indicates the contrary. I also question whether they have actually decided or planned how much better the students will be under the “new” program.
Students currently leave elementary school with an A0 or A1 level based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. If you intend to raise the level, do you have the teachers to do so?
A study involving Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese elementary school teachers found that these teachers felt their ability was insufficient and they needed more structured support to attain the right level of English to teach it better. Shouldn’t this be made a point of emphasis?
To raise the students’ ability to an A2 level, the teachers need to have at least a level B1 but preferably B2 proficiency. Most of them don’t. This program puts too much pressure on already stressed and sometimes under-qualified teachers who are asking for more help. They want to be better and they are asking for help. Why are they not getting it?
Chou’s term will finish by the end of this year and there will be some big changes with Taipei County becoming Sinbei City. This program will then probably get cancelled. Is it wise to push through something that is bound to be axed?
If this was Chou’s idea of going out with a bang, then that was not how to do it. It is a poorly conceived and badly planned idea, but then this is not the first time the commissioner has made poor decisions. This one is not based on any scientific evidence and he does not have the resources to implement it properly. I hope somewhere there is someone who sees the light and stops this madness.
GERHARD ERASMUS
Yonghe City
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry
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