Over the past few decades, Taiwan’s education system has undergone numerous significant reforms to meet the demands of modern society and economic development. The curriculum guidelines play a crucial role in designing curricula, textbooks and entrance examinations.
However, reforms to the guidelines have always been accompanied by considerable controversy.
Unlike previous guidelines, the 108 curriculum primarily emphasizes core competencies and autonomous learning. It encourages students to choose their elective courses and includes learning portfolios as part of the evaluation criteria. This approach aims to help students not only learn in the classroom, but also to discover their interests through clubs and elective courses.
However, the new curriculum has introduced multiple evaluation methods, such as learning portfolios, autonomous learning and cross-disciplinary exams. These requirements mean that students must meet more diverse criteria, leading to increased stress. The multiplicity of evaluations adds layers of complexity to students’ academic life, often resulting in a continuous accumulation of pressure.
One major concern is the resources needed for autonomous learning. These resources, such as tutoring and study materials, are dependent on a family’s financial status, putting less affluent students at a disadvantage. Students from financially constrained backgrounds often lack direction and support in their autonomous learning process, leading to poor learning outcomes and, in some cases, a complete abandonment of the effort.
Furthermore, the exam-centric evaluation approach lacks diversity and flexibility, failing to comprehensively reflect students’ learning achievements. The predominant reliance on exams means that many aspects of a student’s abilities and talents are not adequately assessed. This one-dimensional evaluation method can be particularly disheartening for students who might excel in non-academic areas.
Another significant issue is the time and effort required to prepare learning portfolios. Students must invest a substantial amount of time and energy into compiling these portfolios, which detracts from their ability to focus on regular studies. The inconsistent evaluation standards for these portfolios also create a sense of unfairness among students, as they feel their efforts are not judged on a level playing field.
Teachers have also voiced their concerns about the 108 curriculum guidelines. Many educators argue that the curriculum does not consider the practical realities of the classroom. For example, the autonomous learning and flexible courses proposed often become “ineffective learning” in practice, as students struggle to find direction and frequently submit subpar reports just to meet the requirements.
The emphasis on cross-disciplinary cooperation and mandatory school-specific courses that are not included in major exams further complicates the situation, leading to superficial learning experiences that do not delve deeply into any particular subject.
Educators from different regions have pointed out the disparities in implementation. For instance, urban schools often have better resources and support systems compared with their rural counterparts. This discrepancy exacerbates the inequalities in educational outcomes and opportunities for students across different regions.
Curriculum reform should place greater emphasis on the opinions of educators and learners. By involving teachers and students in the reform process, the guidelines can be more attuned to the needs and realities of the classroom.
There should be a concerted effort to help students find clear learning directions. This can be achieved by providing comprehensive guidance and support systems that help students navigate their educational paths.
Additionally, providing psychological counseling services is crucial to help students cope with the increased stress brought about by the new curriculum. Schools should ensure that students have access to mental health resources to manage their stress and maintain a healthy balance between their academic and personal lives.
Establishing a unified evaluation standard for learning portfolios is essential to ensure fairness and consistency. A clear and transparent evaluation system would help mitigate feelings of injustice and allow students to understand what is expected of them.
By implementing these changes, Taiwan’s curriculum reform can move toward a more equitable and effective educational system that truly meets the needs of all students and prepares them for the challenges of the future.
Lee Pei-chi is a student in the Department of International Affairs at Wenzao Ursuline University of Languages.
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS