In the wake of the 2008 global economic meltdown, many governments slashed funding to institutions of higher education, a dent that has adversely affected research and teaching.
In Taiwan, the Ministry of Education has announced that it is decreasing funding to the nation’s universities by 15 percent, effective next academic year, a measure that has been put in place not necessarily because of the financial crunch, but because these institutions have failed to reach three major goals. This is particularly aimed at Taiwan National University for having slipped in the global academic rankings.
However, a decrease in funding will further dilute the quality of education and research, and lead to even lower rankings.
Due to the plummeting birth rate and subsequent fall in college enrollment, institutions of higher learning have been concocting teacher evaluative criteria that would make seasoned educators’ jaws drop. Hard work is celebrated and smart work is frowned upon. This has put unprecedented pressure on academicians to “pass” the valuation at the detriment of decent academic work.
The mania that is gripping the nation’s professors is creating a toxic atmosphere that debilitates even those who have published excellent academic research, for they need to concentrate on teaching, service and counseling to avoid the stigma of failure or potential dismissal. Scare tactics are typically experienced and morale is taking a severe beating.
Cutting funding will not have positive consequences; fear of being laid off is much greater than improving research and development. The abuse of funds needs to be addressed and evaluative measures that do not grant credit where credit is due.
Half-baked projects that are promoted in colleges and universities as projects of excellence — and funded by the ministry — are simply meant to sustain the flow of funding and give these institutions a name of academic “excellence.” (This is not to deny that some projects merit funds.)
Professors might lose their qualifications because of stringent evaluative measures that often celebrate unnecessary laborious work. Such educators might not have ceased to contribute to the education of the country’s youth, but they see no value in senseless labor. This system is an invitation to fraudulent practices and a departure from the education of the nation’s students.
Additionally, student evaluation of teachers is another issue that flies in the face of logic, especially in low-tier colleges and universities: How could students who are constantly dozing off, are glued to their electronic handheld devices and who are mediocre at best, evaluate a teacher — especially in departments that use English as the medium of instruction?
The ministry cannot solve the problem by cutting funding as a form of punishment for academic failure.
Rather, the terms and conditions for funding should be reformulated and the criteria for teacher evaluations should be redesigned so as to assign more credence to genuine academic efforts and ultimately the quality of college education. Aside from that, what have we got to talk about?
Mo Reddad is a lecturer in the applied English department at I-Shou University in iKaohsiung.
Apart from the first arms sales approval for Taiwan since US President Donald Trump took office, last month also witnessed another milestone for Taiwan-US relations. Trump signed the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act into law on Tuesday. Its passing without objection in the US Senate underscores how bipartisan US support for Taiwan has evolved. The new law would further help normalize exchanges between Taiwanese and US government officials. We have already seen a flurry of visits to Washington earlier this summer, not only with Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍), but also delegations led by National Security Council Secretary-General Joseph Wu
When the towers of Wang Fuk Court turned into a seven-building inferno on Wednesday last week, killing 128 people, including a firefighter, Hong Kong officials promised investigations, pledged to review regulations and within hours issued a plan to replace bamboo scaffolding with steel. It sounded decisive. It was not. The gestures are about political optics, not accountability. The tragedy was not caused by bamboo or by outdated laws. Flame-retardant netting is already required. Under Hong Kong’s Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme — which requires buildings more than 30 years old to undergo inspection every decade and compulsory repairs — the framework for
President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced a plan to invest an additional NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.8 billion) in military spending to procure advanced defense systems over the next eight years, and outlined two major plans and concrete steps to defend democratic Taiwan in the face of China’s intensifying threat. While Lai’s plans for boosting the country’s national security have been praised by many US lawmakers, former defense officials, academics and the American Institute in Taiwan, the US’ de facto embassy in Taiwan, they were not equally welcomed by all Taiwanese, particularly among the opposition parties. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman
President William Lai’s (賴清德) historic announcement on Wednesday, Nov. 26, of a supplemental defense budget valued in excess of US$40 billion is a testament to the seriousness with which Taiwan is responding to the relentless expansionist ambitions of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the Chinese Communist Party and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Lai is responding to the threat posed to Taiwan sovereignty along with US President Donald Trump’s insistence that American partners in good standing must take on more responsibility for their own defense. The supplemental defense budget will be broken into three main parts. The first and largest piece
RSS