Bashing education useless
After reading G.C. Allan’s letter to the editor, I was torn between whether to agree or disagree with the author’s point of view (Letter, July 20, page 8).
Allan begins with the niceties that most people, including Taiwanese, like to hear from visitors by mentioning Taiwan as “a country full of warmth and hospitality,” but then pulls no punches when it comes to his opinion of Taiwan’s English education system and its people’s command of the language.
Having lived and worked in Taiwan for 15 years, I understand his views. I have seen my fair share of foibles when it comes to Taiwan’s public display and use of the English language.
Yes, Taiwan can do better in terms of how English materials, brochures and signage gets presented to foreigners either living in or visiting the nation. Still, is there really a need to continually bash Taiwan for its efforts? Language acquisition is an incremental process.
Allan rightfully claims education in the West and education in Taiwan have differences.
In my English essay writing class of 20 students at a university in southern Taiwan, which, when I began teaching there many years ago, had 55 students enrolled in the course, I have used materials pointing out such differences to my students.
I have also advocated in class and while presenting at conferences the need for guided self-selected silent reading with the aim of promoting free voluntary reading in Taiwan.
However, pointing out problems without making clear suggestions on how the issue could be rectified, as Allan seems to have done, sounds like sour grapes to me.
English is not Taiwan’s native or even official second language. Foreigners visiting and living in Taiwan need to remember this.
I agree that the English education system within Taiwan’s schools should continue to reform.
Rather than rely on outdated teacher-centered models, memorization of materials, overemphasis on testing and a reliance on bushibans, to fix the problem, if Taiwan’s Ministry of Education would instead focus on implementing experimentally-proven second-language acquisition concepts such as Stephen Krashen’s “comprehension hypothesis” and more recently the “conduit hypothesis,” including Beniko Mason’s “story listening,” English language proficiency in Taiwan could become even better than it already is.
Pointing out that there is room for improvement is fine, but bashing the English education system in Taiwan gets us nowhere.
Ken Smith
Wellington, New Zealand
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS