Universities offer academic programs beyond a high-school level. A university education should not only provide education for those wanting to enter professional careers, but also develop students’ creativity, insight and analytical skills.
By acquainting students with complex ideas in an intellectually stimulating environment, universities offer opportunities for personal enrichment.
Employers increasingly seek college graduates who have gained the critical thinking and problem-solving skills necessary to adapt to changing economic conditions.
Because universities in Taiwan are often expected to perform a wide variety of roles, many institutions are experiencing difficulty in meeting all the needs of competing interests.
Businesses and government count on universities to provide occupational training professional and public life. However, many educators also expect colleges and universities to provide students with a broad-based liberal arts foundation that might have no direct vocational application.
Universities therefore must decide whether to establish educational standards that would integrate liberal arts and professional objectives or to separate academic and vocational curricula.
Admissions standards in Taiwan’s universities have also become controversial. Some institutions — such as national universities — have highly selective admissions from competitive examinations. Others admit virtually any high-school graduate able to meet minimum requirements.
Education policy must find a balance in the conflicting tension between the right of every student to access higher education and pursue a college degree and the necessity of combating compromised education quality as a result of lax admission standards.
Contentious in secondary education is the competition between localization, such as learning about Aboriginal languages or cultures, and globalization, such as learning foreign languages and world history.
This question also extends to whether a Taiwan-centric or Chinese-centric perspective should take precedence in history curricula.
Many educators have advocated a more diverse undergraduate curriculum at universities. They argue that traditional college curricula focus too much on the history and culture of the Chinese tradition, and advocate either a more multicultural or global curriculum.
On the other hand, critics emphasize the core of knowledge that lies within the cultural tradition, which informs moral, intellectual and aesthetic judgement.
Three directions for change could address these issues. First, education should be cultivated for its own sake and provide a bastion in which young people can learn without corruption from the public order. In her 1938 work entitled Three Guineas, English modernist writer Virginia Woolf expounds her value of education.
In her view, administrators “must consider very carefully before you begin to rebuild your college what is the aim of education, what kind of society, what kind of human being it should seek to produce.”
She discusses the need for institutions that teach “the arts of human intercourse” and “the art of understanding other people’s lives and minds.”
In cultivating citizens and civic virtue, Woolf’s vision of education is one in which learning is sought for itself and competition and jealousy are best avoided. Hence, individual universities and schools must decide whether liberal arts or professional objectives are to be emphasized and attract interested students based on respective strengths.
Second, the long-term overhaul of admissions requirements can enhance the overall quality of Taiwan’s universities. The relative success of colleges and universities in the US suggests that the US’ admissions model might be worthy of emulation. Instead of entrance by competitive examination only, the standardized test should be a factor deciding student admission.
In the US, nearly all colleges require students to submit transcripts of grades from high school and scores on standardized tests. They also require an application form, written essays of their accomplishments and goals, and letters of recommendation from teachers who are familiar with the applicant’s academic background. The US model provides universities greater latitude in making a holistic selection of the entering class.
Finally, Taiwan should arrive at a consensus of “one curriculum, many textbooks and adoption by respective schools,” as well as an institutionalized procedure of discussion and reform to promote diversity in secondary education.
There should be more elective flexibility for high-school students and course offerings that focus on traditional Chinese culture in addition to others that explore multicultural or global themes.
Broadly, history or civic education should adhere to the “concentric zone model” with Taiwan as the nucleus, China and Asia as the inner core and the world as the outer core.
A robust history curriculum equips students with the critical ability to respect others, understand society, tolerate differences and appreciate diversity and enables them to decide whether they are more convinced by a Taiwan-centric or Chinese-centric view.
Within this understanding, textbook publishers enjoy freedom in their portrayals of history, while educators and parents exercise discretion as to which books should be adopted.
Alfred Tsai attends Columbia University, where he is studying economics and political science.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS