The recent joint petition by more than 100 academics calling for a "restructuring of the education system" listed 13 perceived failures of the last decade of educational reform and four general appeals. The petition criticized educational reform as being guided by "figures in the liberal faction," thereby seeming to imply that the critics have themselves adopted a conservative stance.
Conservatism is not necessarily bad. However, at the conclusion of the press conference publicizing the petition, directly calling on Academia Sinica President Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲) to take responsibility for the failure of educational reform and, especially, emphasizing that no aspect of educational reform has been done right showed that they are in fact throwing down the gauntlet and have no intention of seeking compromise.
Has educational reform really been a complete failure? Is it such a threat that it must be ferociously repudiated in this manner? Stated simply, our feelings about the 13 listed "failures" and the proposals to rectify them is that basic principles of education have been confused. We believe public opinion is being misled with an intent to deceive. The standards used to criticize reform reek of opportunism, as they encompass only superficial issues that resonate with the perceptions of a shallow audience. There is no attempt to solve problems by proposing practical and effective solutions.
For example, the definition of "quality education" presented among the four appeals raises doubts, because while no one would quibble with the apparent meaning of the words, further explication reveals that the last decade of educational reform has been labelled "universal education" for the masses. Thus, wouldn't so-called "quality education" be precisely the opposite of universal education -- ie, elite education?
Reading down the list, we see the demand for a return to class formation based on ability and opposition to the proliferation of senior-high schools and colleges. These aspects of reform, which were originally intended to look after the underprivileged and realize the ideal of universal education, have now come to be reviled in the eyes of those most privileged as "forcing the hare to wait for the tortoise."
They claim such policies will hurt the nation's international competitiveness. They utterly fail to comprehend that learning in an environment of equality won't necessarily obstruct the progress of the most talented students and may even liberate them from narrow-mindedness.
Apart from groundless libel about "eradicating the star high schools" and "abolishing vocational schools," the critics have even trumped up charges about the already scrapped "high-school admissions preferences plan" and the unrelated issue of "constructivist mathematics." Perhaps this could be dismissed as scraping the bottom of the barrel, but most strangely of all they have also proposed "class formation based on proficiency in each subject" and "including [in the calculation of admission grades] class performance in junior-high school."
Anyone with the slightest concern for education issues knows that the side-effects of such policies are very serious. Can't "class formation based on proficiency in each subject" easily become a form of "class formation based on proficiency?"
Don't junior-high students complain that including class performance [in grade calculations] forces them to worry about every quiz and test, a fate even worse than having one's entire future decided by a single exam?
We had thought the critics might have found a magic cure to the education system's ills, but all they have presented is this kind of material. How persuasive can it be? Looking at the spirit of these proposals, it is clear that they hope the schools can return to the days of being a jungle in which students compete with one another on the basis of their own prowess. Urban students and those with abundant resources could then enjoy advantages and parents could brazenly enter the campuses and seize educational resources. These are the bygone nightmares of the "liberal faction," and they are what this group of academics hopes to restore as the status quo.
Taiwan's education circles, having hardly emerged from the shadow of this nightmare, are just beginning to see some progress, and now this group has appeared in conjunction with the political old guard to wreck it all. They even whisper enticingly about "looking after underprivileged students and safeguarding social justice" as well as reviving "the spirit of helping others" in education. What kind of malicious intent do they harbor? Do the principles of education in this plan have any persuasive power at all?
We do not deny that the process of educational reform has indeed been messy at times due to inadequate preparation or communication, insufficient complementary policy measures and overly hasty policy implementation. However, these problems can be attributed to the shortcomings of past policy. Even if the DPP has not always implemented policy effectively, most of the setbacks have been on the technical level and given sufficient time they can be overcome.
But this time it's different. This criticism repudiates everything about reform. Technical problems that could have been discussed rationally have already been labelled intractable differences. Hatred stemming from the loss of the presidential election four years ago is still so raw that a certain person can be singled out for criticism, and there is no willingness to confine discussion to the matter at hand.
Members of the conservative political faction have invited ruling figures from the authoritarian era. For the sake of election victory, they prefer to let their two parties run a "three-legged race" and claim that there is no risk of taking a fall in doing so. What regard do they have for the welfare of the people and the country?
Now that the old guard has seen its cries of economic mis-management muffled by the rise of the stock market, they have shifted the focus of their attacks to education where they harp on minor issues. These 100-plus academics who are willing to act as the flank of the political old guard have presented an incongruous petition to mislead the public. With so little to offer, they will undoubtedly soon be shown for what they are.
We would welcome a clarification of the ideas of the conservative faction. If they think elite education is a good idea, then they should openly advocate elite education. If they think class formation based on proficiency is the best way to maximize the effectiveness of education, then they should openly advocate that.
Don't speak of looking after underprivileged students and safeguarding social justice even as you work to increase the gap between rich and poor and claim falsely that this is the policy of the ruling party. Academics should have standards, after all. If these academics can debate on the basis of principles of education, then it is the people's privilege to decide the matter. We hope the concern of these academics really is the people.
The Taiwan Association of University Professors, The Northern Taiwan Society, The Central Taiwan Society, The Eastern Taiwan Society, The Southern Taiwan Society, Taiwan PEN, The Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
In a meeting with Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste on Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) vowed to continue providing aid to Haiti. Taiwan supports Haiti with development in areas such as agriculture, healthcare and education through initiatives run by the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF). The nation it has established itself as a responsible, peaceful and innovative actor committed to global cooperation, Jean-Baptiste said. Testimonies such as this give Taiwan a voice in the global community, where it often goes unheard. Taiwan’s reception in Haiti also contrasts with how China has been perceived in countries in the region
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
On April 13, I stood in Nanan (南安), a Bunun village in southern Hualien County’s Jhuosi Township (卓溪), absorbing lessons from elders who spoke of the forest not as backdrop, but as living presence — relational, sacred and full of spirit. I was there with fellow international students from National Dong Hwa University (NDHU) participating in a field trip that would become one of the most powerful educational experiences of my life. Ten days later, a news report in the Taipei Times shattered the spell: “Formosan black bear shot and euthanized in Hualien” (April 23, page 2). A tagged bear, previously released
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
RSS