Nearly 300,000 junior-high school graduates participated in the two-day Academic Proficiency Examinations on Mother's Day weekend. Ten years after education reform began, it inspires mixed feelings in me, one of which is irony, to witness scenes both inside and outside the examination halls that are essentially no different from those seen before the reform began -- nervous students and parents in no mood to celebrate Mother's Day and high-ranking government officials making the usual rounds.
A primary goal of education reform is to reduce pressure on students. The use of the proficiency exams from last year, however, has not only failed to reduce that pressure, but has in fact intensified it. This year, the problem of junior-high school students taking leave to attend cram schools has become more serious. Reportedly, school administrations are resorting to practically every conceivable means to keep their students in school -- from extending hours to giving additional quizzes -- to help them to maximize their exam scores. The problems that used to bedevil the old Joint Senior High School Entrance Examinations persist, but in a worse form.
Minister of Education Huang Jung-tsun (黃榮村) once said that the nation would never revert to the old system under which entrance exams shackled the students' minds. I agree with him. But the new approach is simply not much better. It has in fact produced a whole new set of problems.
For instance, in the past, joint entrance exams were separately conducted nationwide by several regional examination districts. While all the districts were broadly similar, differences in the characteristics of local communities nevertheless existed. Students competed only against other students in the same district. This arrangement was more congruent with the goal of developing community-based senior-high schools.
In contrast, the new proficiency examination has become the largest entrance exam to be jointly conducted across the nation. In other words, the country has been turned into a king-size testing district. Fierce competition is now underway between all students.
The education ministry's biggest mistake lies in not giving up its preoccupation with tests. In fact, the recruitment of students is a matter for the schools. What the education ministry should be doing is making sure that the students learn effectively, and that the enormous annual education budgets are appropriately distributed and utilized. To guarantee the quality of educational provision, perhaps the education ministry should learn from Western Europe and the US by establishing a standard test, scores in which will serve only as one of a number of criteria for school admission.
The education ministry should also help private organizations establish performance testing centers that will test the students at their request.
Schools could undertake recruitment either independently or in collaboration with one another, depending on their needs and the communities they serve. They could also require applicants to take additional aptitude tests or subject tests whenever they deem necessary.
The ministry should enhance its supervision over school administrations to ensure openness and fairness in student recruitment. It should also establish a special unit to monitor recruitment affairs. Irregularities should be severely punished.
Our experience over the past two years is that the proficiency exams are failing to solve all the problems associated with the joint entrance exam. They also do not tally with the spirit of the education reform. It is to be hoped that new reforms will be carried out soon to save our children.
Huang Der-hsiang is chair of the Graduate Institute of Education at National Changhua University of Education.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then