Fatigue and exhaustion, both physical and psychological, not only plague the workplace in Taiwan, but also the classroom.
According to a chart compiled last year by Taoyuan City Councilor Wang Hao-yu (王浩宇) of the Green Party Taiwan, students in elementary, junior and senior-high schools are required to stay in school longer than their counterparts in other countries.
They have to stay in school for nine-and-a-half hours per day, from 7:30am to 5pm, compared with six hours for Japanese students (9am to 3pm) and 6.5 hours for both UK (9am to 3:30pm) and US (8:30am to 3pm) students.
That figure is only the tip of the iceberg, as Taiwanese students, especially those in private schools, are either required to stay at school for a few hours of the so-called “evening study session” or have to go to a cram school after official school hours.
Keeping children in school or cram schools for long hours gives usually anxious and controlling Taiwanese parents peace of mind, because it spares them the torture of having to wonder whether their children are off somewhere doing God-knows-what while they are at work.
People’s generally long working hours, coupled with the growing number of double-income families, are major reasons why previous calls for shortened school hours did not prevail.
Some parents have complained that a shortened school schedule would put them in a difficult position, as they would not be able to pick up their children, while others believe that it would undermine their children’s competitiveness.
However, a netizen recently submitted a petition to the National Development Council’s public policy participation platform to change the school hours for elementary, junior and senior-high students to between 9am and 3pm.
Sleep deprivation and a lack of free time to explore their interests are detrimental to children’s learning and development, they said.
The petition quickly received the 5,000 signatures required for a government agency to officially respond, renewing the debate about the feasibility of such a change in policy.
Most of those who have spoken against the proposal argue that reducing school hours would be a waste of time.
Such an argument is valid, given that many Taiwanese have to work long past the time when they are meant to clock out and can forget about getting off work earlier.
However, why should young students have to pay for the nation’s work ethic, which habitually dismisses people’s need for a healthy work-life balance and praises selfless sacrifice at work?
There might be a compromise to the problem.
While it is nearly impossible to shorten average working hours, the government could reduce the number of hours each day that students are required to sit still and be fed textbook knowledge.
An ideal alternative would be allowing students to engage in activities of their own choosing between 3pm and 5pm, whether it be sports or other hobbies. Those activities could either be offered by schools as electives, much like in colleges, or as freely accessible activities that do not require a long-term commitment.
Change is not only necessary for young students to maintain a healthy school-life balance; it is imperative in that it would allow them to discover earlier what they do and do not like.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS