There is a serious education gap between Taiwan’s urban and rural areas. Take for example the Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students: About 30 percent of all Taiwanese students receive a “C” — which is not a passing grade — in English and mathematics in this annual joint entrance examination. However, the figure is much higher than those in rural schools.
In one school in a remote area, 82 percent of the students received a “C” in English and 92 percent a “C” in math.
Students with poor academic performance are at a disadvantage. Many of them come from disadvantaged families, and they remain disadvantaged when they grow up. If junior-high school students stop their studies after graduating, it would be difficult for them to find decent jobs, and the economic pressure they face could easily lead them to gangs.
Even if poor-performing students choose to continue their studies, it could be difficult for them to catch up. Due to Taiwan’s large number of universities, schools with a student shortage admit first-year students who lag behind academically, giving university professors a headache.
For instance, if English professors find that a student majoring in English lacks basic grammar knowledge, should they waste their time teaching basic grammar in university courses?
Although the nation’s elite are not expected to pay attention to this education gap, the Ministry of Education should.
As the government repeatedly emphasizes the importance of “big data,” the ministry must have seen this gap in its data, but it has unfortunately failed to address the problem.
If the ministry is to improve rural students’ performance, it should at least ensure that every elementary school in rural areas has enough English teachers.
At the moment, many such elementary schools are sharing English teachers with one another, and most of these teachers are substitutes, not full-time teachers.
Although the recruitment of teachers is decided by local education bureaus, the ministry must take responsibility as well.
Rural children are not less intelligent than urban children, but the education they receive is quite different than that of students from high-income households because of a variety of economic factors.
If rural children encounter difficulties in English or math, their parents are often unable to help. Urban children, on the other hand, can often seek guidance from tutors and can afford to go to cram schools. These are areas where rural children are losing out.
The Boyo Social Welfare Foundation said that its research shows that children in rural areas are also able to perform well in school. Most importantly, there should be precise curriculum guidelines for them.
Take the subject of English as an example: The ministry should demand that all elementary-school students be able to write simple, grammatically correct sentences before graduation.
They do not necessarily need to learn present perfect tense in this phase, but they should at least know how to write correct interrogative sentences and negative sentences.
Hopefully, the government understands that most rural elementary-school students are unable to do this when they graduate.
Rural children are also Taiwanese, and there is no reason the government should ignore them. They have the right to high-quality education, and the government is responsible for providing it for them.
Lee Chia-tung is an honorary professor at National Tsing Hua University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS