The government’s Bilingual 2030 policy, which aims to improve nationwide English-language proficiency, has proved unpopular with teachers, a teachers’ union representative has said.
Teachers said that focusing on English-language performance would negatively affect learning in other subjects, while not guaranteeing fluency in English, National Federation of Teachers Unions chairman Hou Chun-liang (侯俊良) said.
Meanwhile, National Taiwan University professor Sebastian Liao (廖咸浩) has said that artificial intelligence (AI) tools might replace foreign-language learning within a decade.
Even if Taiwanese were to become more proficient in English, this would not necessarily result in greater international competitiveness, Liao said. Many Filipinos, from a country where English is widely spoken, still have to go abroad to find work, while Japan, where English is not commonly used, boasts a strong economy, technological prowess and cultural influence, Liao added.
As one of the four Asian Tigers that underwent rapid industrialization and economic growth from the 1960s to the 1990s, Taiwan today dominates the global semiconductor industry. Senior US officials have said that an attack on Taiwan by China would devastate the global economy, given the world’s reliance on Taiwanese chips.
One would be hard pressed to argue that company-wide fluency in English would make companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co even more competitive. Insistence on company-wide use of English for internal communications could be conversely detrimental to a tech company, as it could result in miscommunication or hamper discussions of technical topics. Foreign-language ability would only be a soft skill for engineers, scientists or people in other highly technical professions. English or foreign-
language skills might only be needed in such professions during international meetings on trade or cooperation, and even then, it would be more apt for the company to hire an interpreter, rather than require all staff to speak a foreign language.
Most schools and major companies in Taiwan test new hires on their English-language ability, or at least pay employees more if they demonstrate English proficiency. The result is a lot of time and money spent on cram schools, grade-school and university language classes, test preparation and other things, when that time and money could instead be spent on developing skills that would be more meaningful to an individual’s career interests.
If the government is truly motivated to promote widespread fluency in a foreign language, it would need a radically different approach than just adding more grade-school language classes. For example, the English-language ability of a Taiwanese student who attends one of the country’s international schools is nearly on a par with that of a native speaker. The reason for that is the language environment of such schools, in which all courses are generally taught in a foreign language. Teachers and students also generally interact in that language outside of the classroom.
Developing nationwide fluency in English would be a monumental task if the government were to do it properly. It would have to invest tens of billions of NT dollars to create a more natural environment for learning English. Whether English should be made a medium of instruction at all public schools should be carefully reassessed. For sure, there would be widespread opposition to such a policy. For precedent, Taiwan need only look at its own past as a colony of Japan, when Japanese was imposed as the language of all public and official communications, and school curricula.
Aside from promoting English-language learning, the government should seriously consider putting more effort into preparing Taiwanese students for future global trends like AI development. Language can be a tool, but what is more important is equipping young people with the right tool to aid their career, as well as national development.
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