When I mentioned “civic competence” and “democratic competence” during a lecture on social awareness not long ago, I asked my students jokingly whether I should test their “competence” on the final exam. My question caused a commotion in the classroom as they all shouted: “No.”
Some students wondered how such competence could be tested, and I answered, with a smile, that it was something I also wanted to know, and I would therefore like to give it a try.
I asked if they could explain what literacy was. After a lively discussion, some said “competence” refers to a person’s temperament, sophistication or culture, while others said that it refers to self-respect, self-discipline or being a law-abiding citizen. All the answers were right, but they seemed to be quite different from the Ministry of Education’s emphasis on “competency education” in the new curriculum guidelines implemented last year.
One student said that competency education in the new curriculum guidelines existed in name only. I was surprised by the remark, but had to admit that they had a point.
The competency education pushed by the ministry is not intended to teach students how to develop such competence, but rather what they should do to pass competency tests. When the National Academy for Educational Research (國家教育研究院) invited teachers to its workshops on competency education, it did not instruct them on how to integrate it into their teaching. Rather, it instructed them how to devise test questions about students’ competency skills.
Teachers who did not know how to create test questions, or those who tend to give questions regarding applied use, were frustrated at the workshops, and wondered why they did not get it.
Competency education is a headache for teachers, and it is making students and parents nervous. Is the ministry cultivating future talent, or is it giving the nation’s children a hard time?
Learning from Finland and Japan, Taiwanese academics have proposed a total of nine “core competencies” in three sections, and the goal is to cultivate students’ knowledge, attitude and ability to face an uncertain future.
In Finland, for example, the seven key competencies taught are: thinking and learning to learn; cultural competence, interaction and self-expression; self-care and managing daily life; multimedia literacy; information and communications technology; working life skills and entrepreneurship; and participating in, influencing and building a sustainable future.
If Taiwan followed the Finnish criteria, its next generation would be outstanding, and would become cross-disciplinary talent, statespeople, entrepreneurs or scientists. Is this really possible?
Competency is an abstract concept. If it is not put into practice and internalized into awareness and attitude, it will be difficult to cultivate a well-educated citizenry.
As Lee Chia-tung (李家同), an honorary professor at National Tsing Hua University, has said: “We should talk about students’ knowledge before we talk about their competencies.”
Without first laying a foundation of knowledge, competency education would be nothing but a slogan.
A Chinese saying goes: “The greatest truths are the simplest.”
The push for competency education is well-intended, but it seems unnecessary to complicate simple competency education to the point that it becomes so complicated that even teachers do not know how to assess their students properly.
It is important to follow the conventions of everyday life and learn how to conduct oneself. Surely this is the real goal of competency education.
Shiao Fu-song is a lecturer at National Taitung University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwan is not an orphan nation in need of someone to adopt it. Taiwan is not a foundling nation wandering the streets of the world looking for a home. It is not even a poor waif of a nation unable to take care of itself in that same big, bad world. Finally, Taiwan is certainly not terra nullius, a nationless land that is open and waiting to be explored and possessed by those who dare. Taiwan is a mid-sized, democratic nation that by GDP, profitability, location and even microchip production punches far above its weight in its region and in international commerce.
When analyzing Taiwan-China tensions, most people assume that the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) consists of rational actors. Embedded within this belief are three further suppositions: First, Beijing would only launch an attack on Taiwan if it were in China’s national interest; second, it would only attack if the odds were overwhelmingly in its favor; and third, Chinese decisionmakers interpret information objectively and through the same lens as other actors. These assumptions have underpinned recent analyses — including by Minister of National Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) — concluding that there is no
Do you remember where you were last year at this time? Do you remember what it was like? Here in the leafy suburbs of Washington, D.C., we were in lock-down mode. The streets were bleak and empty. Schools, offices, malls, theaters, churches … all were closed. The essentials were in short supply. Grocery stores rationed the good stuff. Signs read: “One jumbo pack of toilet paper, two cartoons of eggs per family please!” Some days those signs mocked us from barren shelves. It was a lonely and anti-social time. Families and friends had to weigh the rewards of gathering together to celebrate Christmas
While Taiwan still has a long way to go regarding cultural sensitivity and respecting differences, an incident last week involving discrimination against Aborigines was malicious and should not be condoned. It is even sadder to see that the offenders are students at Fu Jen Catholic University (FJU), one of the top private schools in the nation, and that not only did their hateful words not receive any mainstream media coverage, but most of them remain unapologetic. Aboriginal members of the Fu Jen Lumah Association were practicing singing outside due to a lack of space. Their late-night practice bothered some students in
RSS