Recent Ministry of Education plans to have colleges and universities raise millions of dollars for a small number of carelessly planned institutes has riled many intellectuals, who are concerned that the plans could result in a money crunch for universities.
If schools are required, in just a few short months, to raise a huge amount of money for the establishment of new educational centers, just finding convenient times for colleges and universities to meet will be difficult.
On top of this, decisions regarding which schools are more suited to open which centers should only be decided after lengthy debate and compromise.
Unfortunately, the ministry's plans do not accord with the far-reaching ambitions of some of Taiwan's world-class universities and they disregard the ideals of university education in general.
In short, the slapdash raising of several hundred million dollars in such a short period of time runs counter to the social conscience of intellectuals and the educational mission of universities.
Taiwan leads the world in terms of the ratio of colleges and universities to the nation's physical area. A constantly changing society, economic globalization, clashes with traditional values, Internet education and the ever-changing political and economic situation all mean that higher education in Taiwan is facing unprecedented competition.
Therefore, the issue of how to raise the overall quality of higher education by creating a new system for college education and research universities is the most urgent issue facing the sector.
First, universities must emphasize a liberal education and design curricula based on an ideal of education for all people. In particular, they should invite outstanding scholars to lecture on how the great changes in thought throughout history have influenced the evolution of major civilizational trends and public policy reform.
The purpose of this would be to avoid a withering of the civilizational spirit following a take-off in cross-strait economic relations, as well as to minimize the pursuit of fame and money.
Educators also have to consider that the young are less likely to go with the flow, have greater ambition and are more open-minded than their elders.
Next should be a thorough reform of teaching in more specialized fields. In particular, top universities must replace the system of compulsory credits and student recruitment methods -- both of which revolve around departments -- with integrated educational programs including inter-disciplinary study.
Conservative departments and professors failing to understand current trends face challenges over and above the difficulties of attracting the students and parents of the e-generation.
There are, for example, fundamental training problems in certain medical school departments which are much too oriented toward specialization, as well as within some departments at the College of Agriculture. The same concerns apply to students in literature, the law, business and sociology, which all face rapid scientific and technological change. These concerns have repeatedly highlighted the fact that Taiwanese universities must put more effort not merely into cooperation between themselves (which will only lead to budgetary problems), but also into designing a set of innovative educational approaches based on a new ideal, in order to cultivate a younger generation capable of thinking "out of the box." In other words, deep reflection and concrete action over contemporary problems are called for.
Third, there needs to be a reconsideration of the internal structures and organization within colleges and universities.
This should begin with head-hunting for university presidents whose principles coincide with the "university spirit."
Members of the social elite and influential leaders from outside the educational system should be invited to participate as members of university boards, which are in charge of the allocation of financial resources.
Further, a faculty senate system within each university should be established to define potential problems. This is a key element of the success of the University of California, Berkeley. In other words, there should be a debate about the most effective system for school administration, built from within, which has the power to respond to the needs of the times by ensuring the timely and flexible use of staff, resources and educational talent.
Fourth, university administrative planning committees should regularly examine academic trends, international competition and social needs. They should also establish core competence research groups in, for example, the fields of nanotechnology, biophysics, bioengineering and infectious diseases. These groups should integrate commercial funding and invite international scholars and experts to lecture. They should also send Taiwan's top talent to leading research laboratories overseas to learn new concepts and technologies.
Reflection and self-realization among university presidents and professors are the touchstones for the success of educational reform. Beginning today, we should direct our efforts toward thinking anew of how to cultivate the next generation, to enable them to face the challenges of the modern world.
The slower the reform in higher education is, the more serious the problem of unemployment and the threat to our living standards will be.
As the late scholar Hu Shi (
When will higher education in Taiwan be able to move forcefully ahead toward dynamic reform?
King Chwan-chuen is a professor at the Institute of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS