Taiwan's national college entrance examination this week was embroiled in controversy over accusations that the questions showed "China bias." In the Chinese-language section, classical Chinese questions comprised 74 percent of the score. Forty-two percent of the history section was Chinese history, 40 percent was world history and a mere 18 percent covered Taiwanese history. There were even claims that the China-oriented theme permeated into the math and engineering tests.
While it's commendable that students are expected to have a broad view of world history, weighting Chinese history equally against the rest of world history while marginalizing the Taiwanese history section is obviously unacceptable.
Not surprisingly, the issue has become political. There have been accusations that the emphasis on classical Chinese and Chinese history was meant as a slap in the face to pro-localization Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (
Take classical Chinese, for example. The problem with teaching it is not so much that it is Chinese, but that the ability to understand arcane texts and grammar is not a suitable standard for selecting the best and brightest among Taiwan's future leaders. Classical Chinese has a rich tradition that deserves to be studied. However, it serves little purpose as a broad standard to test students' modern language ability.
The College Entrance Examination Center's reasons for choosing the test materials are beside the point. The bigger problem is that the emphasis in the exam is at odds with the trends in Taiwanese education. The ministry has worked to promote a more Taiwan-centric curriculum for students, with greater emphasis on Taiwanese history and modern Chinese language.
Not only is it unfair that students should have to show up for one of the most important exams of their lives and learn that they've been concentrating on the wrong material, but it also allows the center to have inordinate influence over the education system. Test creators should tailor their exams to what is being taught in class. However, as the exercises its power as an independent organization to choose whatever questions it likes, that relationship is reversed.
Students will naturally demand to be taught whatever materials will help them get into the best colleges, and their teachers will oblige. The ministry can pass whatever education policies it wants, but students will study what is going to be in the exam.
Tu said on Tuesday that as much as the ministry would like to shape the tests, it cannot interfere with what the center decides. As long as this arrangement continues, the center will be the tail wagging the dog.
Normally in government, separation of powers is a good thing. But in the case of education -- especially Taiwan's heavily exam-based system -- it's best not to have educators and testers pulling in opposite directions. If the center tries to act as a "check" on the ministry, it will only lead to more needless confusion among students. The ministry needs to have increased influence over the examination materials to ensure that education and examinations are in tune with each other.
Until that happens, test creators should remember that their responsibility is to students, not politics.
Taiwan is a small, humble place. There is no Eiffel Tower, no pyramids — no singular attraction that draws the world’s attention. If it makes headlines, it is because China wants to invade. Yet, those who find their way here by some twist of fate often fall in love. If you ask them why, some cite numbers showing it is one of the freest and safest countries in the world. Others talk about something harder to name: The quiet order of queues, the shared umbrellas for anyone caught in the rain, the way people stand so elderly riders can sit, the
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
Small and medium enterprises make up the backbone of Taiwan’s economy, yet large corporations such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) play a crucial role in shaping its industrial structure, economic development and global standing. The company reported a record net profit of NT$374.68 billion (US$11.41 billion) for the fourth quarter last year, a 57 percent year-on-year increase, with revenue reaching NT$868.46 billion, a 39 percent increase. Taiwan’s GDP last year was about NT$24.62 trillion, according to the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, meaning TSMC’s quarterly revenue alone accounted for about 3.5 percent of Taiwan’s GDP last year, with the company’s
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
RSS