Ever since the government proposed that Taiwan be transformed into a bilingual nation by 2030, people have been debating the policy’s pros and cons. Experts and academics have offered various theoretical arguments, but one standard answer has not surfaced. In my view, as a teacher, achieving the policy requires a review of the issues from a practical perspective, from the viewpoint of Taiwan’s educational structure and characteristics.
The education system is dominated by test-oriented learning. Most regular teachers view bilingual instruction as extra work, while teachers of subjects tested in the joint entrance exams even view it as a threat.
The paradox of bilingual education lies in the incompatibility between the new policy and the classroom situation. Schools have long emphasized academic performance for the sake of being accepted to the next tier of education. To guard the academic reputation of schools and have graduates accepted to their preferred universities, students are trained to strive for high test scores. Test-taking skills are the focus of this educational environment.
For example, with this test-oriented instruction, most students learn English just to pass English listening, reading and writing tests. As spoken English is not included in the joint entrance exams, students generally do not practice speaking it.
As a result, in real-life situations — such as watching English-language movies, listening to English-language radio stations or interacting with foreigners, students find it difficult to translate what they have learned in class into actual conversation.
Students might be good test takers, but that does not mean that they know how to apply the language. This is especially true in Taiwan’s education system.
This situation makes implementing the bilingual policy difficult, because it is not taken into consideration by the Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students, or by the General Scholastic Ability Test and Advanced Subjects Test for senior-high school students. For example, all of the questions in these exams are in Chinese.
Teachers, who are the executors of the will of the state, have long been conditioned by these exams. The authorities’ will might satisfy parents’ fantasies about bilingual education, but they are overlooking teachers’ hard work in the classroom as they add additional education measures.
What about the children? Due to the country’s long-standing “credentialist” approach, they continue to take the same tests in new forms, generation after generation.
The government’s bilingual policy and Taiwan’s test-oriented education system clash with each other. Unless half of the questions are given in English on exams, it will be difficult to promote bilingual education in tested subjects.
On the other hand, many schools have started the bilingual teaching of non-tested subjects. For example, elementary and junior-high schools in Taipei are recruiting a large number of bilingual teachers this year for non-academic subjects not tested in the exams.
This highlights how inconsistent the education system is, and the lack of equivalence between subjects. One could hope that the bilingual policy will be more pragmatic, and that top decisionmakers will be more idealistic and down-to-earth.
To create a solution that benefits everyone, the authorities should visit schools and listen to what teachers have to say. Bilingual education needs a balance between the goal and the actual, detailed implementation.
Tao Yi-che is a teacher at Affiliated High School of National Chengchi University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
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.
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