New government, new approach. One of the first things Minister of Education Pan Wen-chung (潘文忠) did after taking office was to announce the withdrawal of controversial high-school curriculum guidelines that have been criticized for being laid down in a non-transparent process. The announcement also included the establishment of a new curriculum guideline committee to allow students to participate in the discussion and formulation of curricula. This is an important step forward for democratic school procedures.
The Ministry of Education also announced the “Observations on the Notice Governing Educators’ Teaching and Punishing of Students as Defined and Implemented by Schools,” saying that schools may not dole out punishments based on uniforms or personal appearance. Uniforms and appearance are to be separated from punishment, and while schools can use democratic procedures, such as public hearings or school-wide referendums to regulate student uniforms and appearance, they cannot issue demerits for violating the regulations, but are instead expected to rely on methods such as oral persuasion and counseling.
Some people have criticized Pan for acting too hastily, as he called a news conference to announce the new policies before discussing them within the ministry, but in doing so, he promptly removed an issue that has caused tension between students and teachers in recent years. This is a good sign of self-confidence and resolve.
The uniformity and neatness of the nation’s school uniforms might be supported by teachers, but rebellious members of the younger generations often dislike rigid and authoritarian rules on uniforms and appearance. Even if they must wear uniforms, they often try to differentiate themselves by wearing caps or shorter skirts, or sporting more flamboyant hairstyles, with many students having been given warnings and punishments for such behavior. Most adults can recall such a battle of wits between students and teachers from their school days, but are likely to realize now that such confrontation was meaningless.
The basic spirit of the ministry involves the need to adhere to democratic procedures and build an academic culture founded on openness and trust. Education is diverse and free, while compulsory course contents and regulations on student uniforms and appearance are not in line with educational trends. As schools move toward democratic procedures, they must not treat students as ignoramuses. Instead, they must build students’ confidence, treat them with respect and stop issuing warnings and punishments in an authoritarian manner. They must also start adhering instructions and advice and teach students through discussion and dialogue. If schools took such an approach, they would probably achieve better results.
The 2014 Sunflower movement has had massive political, economic, social and educational effects. It made it clear that modern students are capable of independent thinking. They were well-intentioned and willing to speak up for a majority of Taiwanese — which was verified at the ballot box in January’s presidential and legislative elections. The Executive Yuan’s announcement that it is dropping all charges against students who stormed its compound in March 2014 and the ministry’s measures to open up schools is a declaration that the new government plans to treat students with more respect and trust to build a strong relationship with young Taiwanese.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS