Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been recruiting business intelligence analysts. Candidates must have a doctorate in politics, economics, international politics or a similar field; more than four years of experience with and an understanding of statistical analysis, data science or market research; and a grasp of the political and economic trends in US-China relations.
That TSMC is so focused on finding talent with a background in international relations and economics must come as a slap in the face to the Ministry of Education, universities nationwide and many company heads.
The question is: Will TSMC be able to find people with this kind of academic background in Taiwan?
First, the cramming, rote learning, exam-oriented model of education in Taiwan is a major problem, as well as the nature of the content taught.
Second, heads of companies in traditional industries are obsessed with coupling politics and business to maximize profits. In this context, what use would a company boss have with business intelligence analysts?
The high-tech sector is more interested in techies who are continually innovating and the market demand for what they come up with. It does not bother with changes in political trends and economic policies.
As a result, there is next to no demand for business intelligence analysts, and Taiwan’s education system would be hard-pressed to produce this kind of talent even if there were.
Until parents no longer demand that their children get straight As, schools stop clinging to standard course curricula, teachers cease cramming impractical information down students’ throats, politicians stop buying off talk show hosts to spout their untruths and propaganda, and the media desist from distracting from what lies behind political events in Taiwan and abroad, nothing is going to change.
For Taiwan to be able to produce the kind of skillset that TSMC is looking for, society must be more open and enlightened in what schools teach children, and parents must allow them to study what they want, and to accumulate their knowledge and experience according to their own needs.
Otherwise, no matter how many doctorates Taiwan’s universities churn out, the nation will still lack business intelligence analysts with solid theoretical knowledge, as well as practical research on the effects of political trends and economic policies. If schools lack instructors with theoretical knowledge and practical experience, how can society expect academic institutions to cultivate talent with these skills?
Of course, TSMC will find the skilled business intelligence analysts that it needs, because truly exceptional students ignore their parents’ demands, view with disdain the brainwashing that passes for education in schools and reject fabrications in the media.
Such students would have been thinking for themselves from a young age, breaking out of traditional ways of thinking, allowing their creative thoughts to fly, disciplining themselves, rejecting structures forced upon them and striding ever forward.
They would have cultivated for themselves a multifaceted portfolio of knowledge and expertise, waiting for such a time as when TSMC comes calling.
Taiwan should hope that it has more of these exceptional young people, who reject systematic brainwashing in education and who train themselves to be the elite, armed with independent thought.
Society will need them if Taiwan is going to remain competitive in the future.
Tsai Chi-yuan is a retired associate researcher, formerly at Academia Sinica’s Institute of Sociology.
Translated by Paul Cooper
On Feb. 7, the New York Times ran a column by Nicholas Kristof (“What if the valedictorians were America’s cool kids?”) that blindly and lavishly praised education in Taiwan and in Asia more broadly. We are used to this kind of Orientalist admiration for what is, at the end of the day, paradoxically very Anglo-centered. They could have praised Europeans for valuing education, too, but one rarely sees an American praising Europe, right? It immediately made me think of something I have observed. If Taiwanese education looks so wonderful through the eyes of the archetypal expat, gazing from an ivory tower, how
China has apparently emerged as one of the clearest and most predictable beneficiaries of US President Donald Trump’s “America First” and “Make America Great Again” approach. Many countries are scrambling to defend their interests and reputation regarding an increasingly unpredictable and self-seeking US. There is a growing consensus among foreign policy pundits that the world has already entered the beginning of the end of Pax Americana, the US-led international order. Consequently, a number of countries are reversing their foreign policy preferences. The result has been an accelerating turn toward China as an alternative economic partner, with Beijing hosting Western leaders, albeit
During the long Lunar New Year’s holiday, Taiwan has shown several positive developments in different aspects of society, hinting at a hopeful outlook for the Year of the Horse, but there are also significant challenges that the country must cautiously navigate with strength, wisdom and resilience. Before the holiday break, Taiwan’s stock market closed at a record 10,080.3 points and the TAIEX wrapped up at a record-high 33,605.71 points, while Taipei and Washington formally signed the Taiwan-US Agreement on Reciprocal Trade that caps US tariffs on Taiwanese goods at 15 percent and secures Taiwan preferential tariff treatment. President William Lai (賴清德) in
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Deputy Chairman Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑) earlier this month led a delegation to Beijing to attend a think tank forum between the KMT and Chinese Communist Party (CCP). After returning to Taiwan, Hsiao spoke at length about “accumulating mutual trust” and letting matters “fall into place,” portraying the forum as a series of discussions focused on cooperation in tourism, renewable energy, disaster prevention, emerging industries, health and medicine, and artificial intelligence (AI). However, when the entire dialogue presupposes the so-called “1992 consensus — the idea that there is only “one China,” with each side of the Taiwan
RSS