The salaries of the nation’s professors fall well below those in neighboring nations, while the government’s controversial reforms have cut pensions for civil servants, public-school teachers and the military.
Consequently, Taiwan is facing a higher education crisis.
Not that government ministers are indifferent to the problem: The government’s educational incentive plan, called the “Yushan Project” — which aims to raise salaries of top academics — reflects officials’ concern over the “brain drain” problem in higher education.
The government hopes the policy would placate increasingly anxious teachers while stemming the outflow of high-level talent.
Will the plan work, or will it — as some commentators are predicting — simply hasten the collapse of higher education?
The Yushan Project comprises two components: First, it provides funding for 500 “Yushan Scholars,” who are to receive an annual salary starting at NT$6 million (US$198,965). Second, professors engaged in academic research at public universities are to receive an additional monthly allowance of NT$5,445.
As the average worker in Taiwan struggles to put food on the table, teachers’ complaints might appear somewhat crass.
However, because the government has cut teachers’ pension payments — including for those already in retirement living off their retirement income — working teachers must expend significant time and effort increasing their savings, managing investments and perhaps working a second job.
Most university teachers do not come from wealthy families and few benefit from an inheritance. The pension cut will therefore have a serious effect on the quality of teachers and academic research.
To make ends meet, only those with a passion for their subject will choose to pursue a career in teaching and research. The effect this could have on the quality of these fields is worrying.
Only raising the research allowance for professors will not solve the crisis. The correct approach is to substantially raise the salaries of all university teachers, including those at private institutions. This would somewhat offset the pension reductions.
Moreover, adding only a meager NT$5,445 per month to teachers’ salaries is an idiotic policy.
From the teachers’ perspective, the increase provides little real benefit. Since the sum would be given as an allowance and not added to their basic salaries, their pensions will not benefit. An additional NT$5,000 a month works out to NT$60,000 per annum, or NT$900,000 over 15 years — not enough to serve as a relief fund, let alone boost morale.
The annual starting salary of NT$6 million being offered to 500 academics is also problematic.
The Ministry of Education has said that the nation’s top academic institutions are to propose nominees, who are to be reviewed by a national inter-departmental committee.
Why are academic institutions not trusted to nominate these academics and then apply for funding made available by the government, like a regular scholarship program? All the ministry would need to do is make regular checks.
Furthermore, the committee seems obsessed with “linking industry with academia.” Such thinking has been disastrous for academia as the humanities are invariably overlooked.
If the ministry insists on advancing the project, university teachers will continue to be filled with pessimism and higher education will suffer as a result.
While pursuing such a course of action might be politically expedient, the nation’s development will be severely damaged.
Allen Houng is a professor at National Yang-Ming University’s Institute of Philosophy of Mind and Cognition.
Translated by Edward Jones
Having returned to the UK late last year and with a Taiwanese spouse remaining in Taiwan, I have been afforded the chance to compare and contrast the UK and Taiwanese governments’ responses to the COVID-19 crisis. My early conclusions are that Taiwan benefits from a rational, competent government, which quickly recognizes, adapts to and confronts large-scale disasters. It is led by a government that does more than just talk of respecting democracy and human rights, one that is scrutinized and responds to criticism, one that is concerned about public opinion, and one that is used to dealing with emergencies on
The “Wuhan pneumonia” outbreak has become a pandemic, but many countries have yet to come to grips with the worsening severity of this medical crisis. Historian Robert Peckham has studied how the ecology of deadly diseases has changed from the late 19th century until today and, in his 2016 book titled Epidemics in Modern Asia highlights the intrinsic link between global connectivity and emerging infections. The frequency of outbreaks — from SARS in 2003 to swine flu in 2009 and today’s COVID-19 — and their rapid rate of transmission owe much to globalization. Better and cheaper transportation and communications technology have empowered
Early last month, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) was elected party chairman, winning with a seven-to-three majority over pro-Beijing former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), a two-time KMT vice chairman. Chiang’s victory has been interpreted as a generational change and the beginning of major party reform. In his inauguration speech on March 9, Chiang did not mention the so-called “1992 consensus.” Analysts believe that his most urgent task is to attract more young people to the party and win voter trust, and that he does not care about Beijing’s reaction. After joining the party chairmanship by-election, Chiang made his