The Ministry of Education in 2019 implemented a 12-year compulsory curriculum, also called the “108 curriculum.” Under the scheme, university admission requires not only taking the General Scholastic Ability Test, but also submitting an electronic learning portfolio. This year marks the introduction of the portfolio as a part of university admission.
The learning portfolio, also called an e-portfolio, includes records of courses, extracurricular activities and a catalogue of experiences that a student acquires during the final three years of high school.
The portfolio is meant to reduce emphasis on test-oriented education by relieving the pressure of achieving a high marks on exams. It is meant to help students present themselves to universities in the way a resume presents the best side of a person to an employer. This means that students need to begin exploring their interests and passions early in their high-school years by taking part in activities and groups.
The National Federation of Teachers’ Unions had concerns. For example, it said that National Taipei University of Technology was using the learning portfolio to create a commodity. The school was reportedly offering a five-day course priced at NT$8,000 to teach students how to prepare their portfolio documents and perform in an oral interview.
Although the university pulled the course from its Web site, the course was criticized for contravening admission ethics and turning the portfolio into an “arms race.”
Parents, teachers and students have shared concerns about the necessity and fairness of the portfolio since it was launched.
One criticism is that the portfolio favors wealthy families who can pay to put their children through elite extracurricular activities. Students from affluent families could send their children abroad to study during summer breaks, or enrol them in courses that offer respected certificates.
Another concern is that families in urban areas are said to have an advantage over those in rural regions, given the opportunities and resources available in cities.
A gap between private and public education also provides uncertainty. Private schools reportedly put more effort into motivating students to build their portfolios, partly by requiring a minimum number of activities to be completed each semester.
Teachers have concerns about how to coach students to write the reflections and essays the portfolio requires. Others wonder how seriously university professors would consider these writings during the admissions process.
For students, their workload becomes more burdensome. They must juggle academic subjects while feeling required to feign passion in subjects in which they might have no interest. In other cases, students might feel compelled to divert energy away from their true interests, and toward more rigorous clubs and activities that might look better in their portfolio.
One student said that the submission process was like turning their life into a story that could be compared with those of their peers.
While the portfolio of the “108 curriculum” was designed with good intentions, the ministry must monitor how the program is carried out, and whether its unintended consequences outweigh its proposed benefits.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS