Last week a government source revealed that the Ministry of Education is embarking on an ambitious program to rapidly increase the number of university courses taught in English.
Starting with a pilot program involving four universities, the ministry aims to have 90 percent of doctoral degree courses, 70 percent of master’s degree courses and 50 percent of undergraduate courses taught in English within the next few years.
The government’s motivation is to “internationalize” education to attract more foreign students, the source said.
On the face of it, this seems plausible, as it would help plug a severe shortfall in student enrollment caused by Taiwan’s declining birth rate.
However, there might be other, more strategic motivations behind the government’s desire to boost English-language tuition.
The policy is better understood as the fruition of Vice President William Lai’s (賴清德) plan, unveiled in 2018 when he was premier, to transform Taiwan into a full-fledged bilingual nation, with Chinese and English as its official languages.
Lai’s aim to elevate English as an official language — and the ministry’s push to increase English-
language teaching at universities — could be interpreted as part of a wider strategy of the Democratic Progressive Party to desinicize Taiwan and develop a unique indigenous identity for the nation.
President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) flagship New Southbound Policy is about decoupling the nation’s economy from China’s, as much is it was about transforming Taiwan into a truly international trading nation. In the same way, the push to create a bilingual nation is about decoupling Taiwan from the linguistic and cultural ties that bind it to China, as much as it is an attempt to internationalize the education system.
Prior to Tsai’s ascent to power in 2016, the eight years of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration saw Taiwan move away from the US to engage more closely with China. The current emphasis on boosting English proficiency is perhaps a reflection of Taiwan’s return over the past four years into the orbit of “Uncle Sam.” As the nation’s center of gravity shifts back to the West, we are seeing a renewed emphasis on English.
Aside from the political and strategic rationale, there may be other tangible benefits to creating a truly bilingual nation. The lingua franca of a globalized world, fluency in English has given Singaporeans, Malaysians and Indians a distinct advantage over their Taiwanese counterparts.
It should be possible to teach classes primarily in English, with additional classes in Mandarin, Hoklo, Hakka and Aboriginal languages. It might even be an improvement on the current situation, where Mandarin is afforded a special status over other local languages.
Singapore provides a model: English is the primary language of instruction, but ethnic Malay, Chinese and Tamil Indian students also learn their own languages.
However, is it feasible to drastically increase the number of courses taught in English without a root-and-branch reform of the education system? Are there enough university instructors who can teach in English? In addition, if Taiwan becomes a truly bilingual nation, would its status as a vital depository of traditional Chinese culture, free from the corruptions of communism, be irreparably damaged?
As Beijing does its best to strip Hong Kong of its unique identity, it is likely that the next generation of Hong Kongers would be taught simplified Chinese characters. This would leave Taiwan as possibly the sole remaining area of the Chinese-speaking world using traditional characters.
As the government wrestles with unpacking a complex linguistic legacy left by successive waves of colonization, it must chart a course that preserves Taiwan’s unique linguistic heritage, while also adequately equipping future generations with the skills that they need to thrive in the world outside.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS