I was recently invited to serve on a foundation’s selection committee to choose the winners of a grant for low-income university students. Having to select 72 students out of more than 400 applicants made my heart sink.
Each choice was extremely difficult, because these applicants were all in harsh situations. Their predicaments were far beyond what the phrase “low-income” could accurately describe.
Having read the backgrounds of these students, I immediately started looking for information online about funding programs for low-income students provided by the Ministry of Education or universities, and I discovered two models worth further examination.
The regulations for national university funding programs for low-income students stipulate: “The grant pays NT$10,000 per semester to each sponsored student. The number of sponsorship places available is decided by a quota, which is 1.5 to 2 percent of the total student population of a university, or up to 2.2 percent, should it be necessary.”
This means that if the total number of students in a university is 12,000, at least 240 students per semester would benefit from the program. If a subsidy system were available at all universities, this would not only benefit disadvantaged students financially, but would also help them in other areas, such as providing them with support systems outside the school.
For example, a university could help students contact social welfare departments and apply for a family allowance, or contact medical institutions or long-term care services. This would allow the financial providers of a student’s household to continue working to look after any ill family members, which could otherwise result in an even worse financial situation.
The other model is a Ministry of Education program for the reduction and exemption of tuition and other fees, which was launched in 2007. The program aims to encourage disadvantaged students to attend school.
Students from families in the bottom 40th percentile of household income could be subsidized by the government. The program is implemented in four ways: scholarships, supplemental living stipends, emergency financial aid and accommodation discounts.
The aid programs should be expanded by increasing the universities’ self-raised funds and the subsidies provided by the ministry.
Moreover, according to regulations, disadvantaged students who receive a monthly living allowance of more than NT$6,000 are obliged to work as interns for the university, should the university provide such opportunities.
A common practice in these types of programs is to collaborate with the university’s part-time working system, giving subsidized students priority to work. By doing so, the students obtain opportunities to acquire practical skills and experience that could be applied to life and work.
People can refer to the three winners of this year’s Nobel Prize in Economics for a possible solution to provide timely help for young people who are pursuing degrees and help them ride out the storm, turning difficulty into hope.
Based on scientific evidence, the studies of Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer provide insights for government ministries, departments and schools into how to establish a comprehensive support system for disadvantaged students.
Chang Huey-por is a former president of National Changhua University of Education.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS