The invitation to immigrant women to visit schools and speak about their native culture has become an important part of the cultural diversity of Taiwanese schools in recent years. Indeed, this kind of course has been in use for many years in countries with large immigrant populations.
In Japan, the purpose of cultivating international awareness in school after World War II was to educate Japanese to be active on the global stage. Hence, there was not much interest in foreigners living in Japan. For formality’s sake, foreigners were invited to schools to talk about their native cultures and they were considered an important source of teachers for the promotion of international understanding in education, but the content of the classes could have been much better.
First, most classes are not held in the spirit of “social revolution.” They are not too concerned with the discrimination foreigners may face, or with human-rights issues. For example, foreigners rarely address how they are sometimes turned down when looking for a room to rent.
Some academics are critical of the classes, saying that inviting foreigners to schools to take part in the international awareness classes is nothing more than providing “assimilation classes” offering an understanding of and introduction to foreign cultures.
Second, most invited foreigners introduce a national culture. It is questionable if the culture of a person from a multicultural country can represent all the cultures in that country. Most classes consist of superficial talks on the “three F’s” — food, fashion and festivals. This is likely to have only a very limited influence on children’s real understanding of foreign cultures. At most it offers an opportunity for some contact with a foreign culture.
What is the point of inviting foreign residents to schools? If they are not to be mere representatives talking about their culture, then what other role can they play?
A better idea is participatory joint classes, in which foreigners are the teachers, but also the objects of student research. The foreigner and the teachers and students could deal with common issues and then find solutions by brainstorming and using the point of view of a foreign culture. This can provide a sound way of building connections between schools, communities and foreign residents. An example is a class on designing an imaginary community garden together with a foreign resident.
In Taiwanese schools, cultural diversity week has just begun and recent female immigrants, especially those with children at a school, should be encouraged to participate. But municipal and county education departments, schools and women themselves should develop a broader and more critical outlook on this type of class if it is to develop into something more than just a cultural performance at a school party.
Chiou Shwu-wen is an associate professor at Nanhua University’s Graduate Institute for Asian-Pacific Studies.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS