Vocational students neglected
Learning English can be fun, and learning it well can be easy. On a personal level, efficient learning strategies, continuous effort and constant practice help a student make great strides.
Successful English learners are everywhere, but why are young English learners of such interest to corporate institutions? As society becomes increasingly globalized, there seem to be more factors likely to influence the success of English education than people might think.
English learning has gone beyond a purely educational dimension, and evolved across managerial, social, economic and political dimensions as well. In assessing standards of learning, there are many contexts to consider when attempting to improve the education system.
I agree with Cheng Shiuh-tarng’s (鄭旭棠) analysis of some fundamental problems of English education, including the gap between class learning and real-life use of English (“Poor English reflects flawed system,” Oct. 24, page 8). Many Taiwanese students start to learn English in primary education, and should therefore possess reasonable English communication skills by adulthood.
However, when it comes to using English as a foreign language, it is difficult to think of many occasions where Taiwanese really need to use English. When people do need to speak English, some struggle due to a lack of confidence.
As the English learned at school seems to have little benefit in real-life situations, low-performing students might feel that learning English is irrelevant, and therefore lack the required motivation to learn.
Cheng said that the unfavorable conditions of private universities compare to those of public institutions, in terms of the educational resources allocated by the government, and this also has an impact on the motivation to learn English.
However, he failed to address the situation from the perspective of private technological and vocational universities students. Vocational higher education has never been the government’s top priority, and schools in this system have long been criticized by policymakers and teachers of EFL for having undesirable English learning standards. However, I do not think society and policymakers really understand the problems facing private technological university students and the needed support that is long overdue.
The low entry level of technological university students places them on an unequal footing and at a competitive disadvantage with their counterparts in conventional universities.
The limited number of required English classes and the students’ relatively lower socioeconomic background further reduces their confidence. More often than not, the impractical English curriculum lowers their motivation to learn, especially if it is not geared toward a real-life context, or beneficial to their potential employment.
Unfortunately, more words have been spoken about these problems than the actions that should have been taken to remedy the problems. Instead of paying lip service, the government and school management should show their resolve by making positive changes for the students concerned and invest more resources to improve their English ability and competitiveness in the job market.
Improvement of curricula to highlight core practical skills and inspire self-directed learning through effective mechanisms and efficient management of English education could have a substantial impact given strong and lasting support from those in charge.
The key to a better future of English education is not simply to identify problems, but to seeking feasible solutions.
Everyone can help themselves by finding successful English learners and adopting their effective habits to aid continual improvement.
Learning English is a lifelong process. Instead of preaching to students about the importance of learning English, people should show them how to treasure learning English by using themselves as examples. Making it a habit to improve one’s English is a worthwhile goal and a good lesson for younger generations.
Huang Da-fu
Greater Tainan
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