The Ministry of Education has released the Basic English Vocabulary for Elementary and Junior High School Students(
How should the public react to this initiative?
First, there would be no problem with using the vocabulary list as a reference source for textbook publishers. But it is a mistake to use the list as material for language-proficiency tests. This is because English-language education in elementary and junior- high schools emphasizes the cultivation of students' overall communicative competence rather than any discrete aspect of the language.
Second, from a more academic perspective, Canadian scholars Michael Canale and Merrill Swain argued in 1980 that communicative competence involves four elements -- grammatical, socio-linguistic, discursive and strategic competence. By using the list as material for competency tests, the ministry risks misleading parents and their children to equate "basic English proficiency" with "English lexical ability."
Eventually, the test-oriented approach to teaching will force teachers and students to yield to reality and lay particular stress on the training of isolated, fragmentary language skills. This would undoubtedly contravene the ministry's curriculum guidelines, which clearly stipulate that the goal of English-language education is to "lay a foundation for the public's communicative competence in English and promote an international view as well." Is this situation what the public would like to see?
According to the ministry, another purpose in publishing the list is to resolve the differences between the urban and rural areas. Thus, a threshold of Eng-lish learning has been stipulated as a way of ensuring that students with less resources can also reach the minimum requirement. While the intentions behind this are good, good intentions will not carry one far
This is the biggest obstacle to promoting English-language education in Taiwan today. Ever since English was officially introduced to elementary schools, the central government has neglected its duty to supervise its teaching, allowing each local government to play its own tune. As a result, many of the cities and counties have indulged in head-start programs for younger learners. This has increased disparities among students and made it even more difficult to overcome the gap between the urban and rural areas.
The goal of launching English-language education as part of the Nine-Year Coherent Educational Program was to narrow the gap between rich and poor, to give every student an equal opportunity. Unexpectedly, the promotion of English has become an accessory that deprives students of their equal right to an education and broadens the gap between the urban and rural areas.
Another problem is that the vocabulary list fails to differentiate between the numbers of words required for elementary and junior-high students. This created unnecessary confusion. It also means that parents who are obsessed with "elite education" will certainly not let their children simply learn the minimum requirement.
The ministry's vocabulary list serves at least one purpose -- placing Minister of Education Huang Jong-tsun (
Su Fu-hsing is an associate professor in the department of foreign languages at National Chiayi University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS