At the biannual Convocation of Academicians held by Academia Sinica earlier this month, academician Lin Yu-sheng (林毓生) proposed to reform the university evaluation mechanism in Taiwan. Many academicians co-signed his proposal in order to demonstrate their support. In response, Minister of Education Chiang Wei-ling (蔣偉寧) said that the Ministry of Education is to merge some external assessments to allow institutional self-assessments. This may be a good start in the reform of the much-criticized evaluation mechanism.
In his proposal, Lin clearly pointed out some major flaws in the evaluation mechanism.
First, the complex assessment requirements have created an enormous burden for universities and violated academic freedom.
What is worse is that the evaluation places too much emphasis on certain publication indices, especially SCI (Science Citation Index) and SSCI (Social Science Citation Index), forgetting that it should not apply the same standard to all departments or schools. Even Academia Sinica President Wong Chi-huey (翁啟惠) said that we need to clarify the goal of the evaluation and should not view publication as the goal.
Next, Lin suggested that the frequency of the evaluation be reduced from once every five years to once every 10 years, to relieve the burden on schools and teachers. Some academicians seemed to have different views, arguing that a decade-long cycle would be ineffective in today’s rapidly changing world. So they suggested that universities that score well in the evaluation be allowed to extend the cycle as a reward. Such flexibility is also good in the face of the ministry’s lack of manpower needed to undertake the evaluations. In addition, it should adopt macro-management by focusing on the essentials, such as the “teacher-student ratio,” instead of focusing on every little detail.
Finally, Lin suggested a distinction between “researching professors” and “teaching professors,” to correct the emphasis on research over teaching. Indeed, under the current evaluation mechanism, most teachers are forced to spend more time on research and less time on teaching to meet the assessment requirements. However, since research and teaching are often associated, it might not be feasible or pragmatic to draw a clear line between research and teaching professors.
Still, we must not forget that for most schools and teachers, the primary goal is teaching. To find a balance between research and teaching the education minister’s call for “de-indexation” is perhaps worthy of greater attention.
I am not saying that indices should be abolished, rather, we should apply multiple standards to different departments and schools according to their own characteristics, and the number of publications in SCI/SSCI journals should not be the most important assessment requirement, at least not for teaching-oriented universities.
As the ministry pledges to reform the university evaluation mechanism to allow more self-assessments, I suggest that it focus on the essentials based on the principles of simplicity, flexibility and diversity: Simplify the assessment requirements to relieve schools’ and teachers’ burden; be flexible about the frequency of assessment; and apply diverse standards to various settings.
I have called on the government to reform the evaluation system since 2004. After eight years, the ministry is finally taking action. Better late than never. It is to be hoped that the authorities can take the above suggestions into account and come up with a sound mechanism.
Chang Sheng-en is an assistant professor in the English Department at Shih Hsin University.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
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