The government’s blueprint and investment decisions for the development of higher education are crucial to Taiwan’s future national competitiveness.
Due to the rapid expansion of higher education over the past two decades, the number of universities and students has surged.
However, the national government’s and local governments’ financial difficulties, and the focus on new education policies — including the extended 12-year national education program and efforts to create a smooth transition from kindergarten to elementary school — have crowded out resources to higher education.
As a result, many public and private universities are forced to operate on a tight budget.
The free market economy’s focus on competition has resulted in a battle for resources among universities, which has resulted in an even more unbalanced distribution of resources.
Due to budget shortages, the quality of higher education is now in gradual decline.
Although the Ministry of Education is looking for a solution, its new policies and methods are old wine in new bottles.
It has failed to reform budget allocation and achieve equal treatment, coexistence and shared prosperity.
The ministry recently unveiled a method for budget allocation and resource application, releasing detailed regulations for the budgeting of the higher education development project, which was launched in July.
It has also suggested that, as universities apply for funding under the project, their budget proposals should be based on the amount of competitive funding for continuing projects that they have received for this academic year — such as the Aim For The Top University Project (邁向頂尖大學計畫), the Plan to Encourage Teaching Excellence in Universities (獎勵大學教學卓越計畫), the Teaching Empowerment Project (教學增能計畫), the Featured University Project (特色大學計畫) and the Innovative Teaching Project (教學創新計畫) — increasing the budget by no more than 30 percent on top of previous funding.
This passive adjustment might be repeating the mistake of the teaching excellence plan, under which strong schools become stronger and weak schools weaker.
A closer look at the ministry’s approach shows where the problems lie. Take, for example, universities funded by the teaching excellence plan between 2005 and this year: Out of the nation’s 71 universities and colleges, 42 universities were funded more than three times.
Among the funded schools, 13 universities — 18 percent — were funded at least 11 times, with total funding reaching almost NT$10.3 billion (US$343.2 million), or 52 percent of the total budget.
One university alone received NT$1.2 billion, almost 6 percent of the project’s total budget. The resources were clearly only lavished on a few schools, strengthening already strong institutes.
Moreover, analysis of the budgeting for the first and second component of the project shows that all universities are allowed to compete for the NT$4.4 billion budgeted under the first component, which aims to promote the overall quality of universities and diversity in higher education.
As for the NT$6 billion budgeted under the second component to help universities pursue first-class international status and develop their research centers, as the application threshold is so high, only a number of top universities are qualified to apply.
Top universities funded under the project’s second component are allowed to simultaneously receive funding under the first component.
The project is thus very similar to the teaching excellence plan and is likely to continue the uneven distribution of educational resources.
Dana Tai is president of the University of Taipei.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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