Last year, the Ministry of Education (MOE) revised regulations on the dismissal, non-renewal or termination of teachers at senior secondary level and below, stipulating that teachers involved in corporal punishment, bullying or inadequate instruction should be investigated by school affairs councils.
Since its implementation more than one year ago, the number of complaints against teachers has surged — schools feel like they are handling criminal cases, with teachers as suspects.
Being a teacher is difficult — many jokingly refer to themselves as “teaching laborers” or say that they work in a “high-risk” profession. Some even wear hidden body cameras to protect themselves.
Their biggest challenge lies in choosing whether to intervene when a student oversteps boundaries. Correcting students when they speak or behave inappropriately is a teacher’s professional duty and a matter of conscience.
Aside from verbal persuasion, a teacher might resort to measures such as temporary separation or negative reinforcement — both reasonable disciplinary actions that comply with the policy of no corporal punishment.
However, for students who lack the ability to self-reflect and parents who do not know the full truth, such disciplinary actions might be seen as discriminatory, isolating or unfair labeling. Complaints against teachers often cite reasons such as “unreasonable disciplinary action” or “emotional harm to the child.”
However, the core issue is not parents filing excessive complaints, but in how the authorities handle each case — do they stand on the side of education and defend teachers’ rights? A valid complaint should be addressed according to the law, but if it is unreasonable or the result of a misunderstanding, the school should take a firm stance and tactfully explain the issue. Hardworking teachers should not be unjustly punished.
Once, a third-grade student was told by their teacher to stand outside in the hallway for 10 minutes after teasing the classmate sitting next to them. Coincidentally, the child’s parent happened to witness this and angrily confronted the school principal to protest the teacher “depriving their child’s right to education.”
After class, the principal spoke with the teacher to get a proper understanding of the situation, and later told the parent: “You say that the teacher deprived your child of the right to education, but your child was disturbing his classmate and disrupting the class, thereby impacting other students’ ability to learn. So who exactly was depriving whom of that right?” Upon hearing this, the parent left apologetically.
The principal in this scenario demonstrated true leadership by immediately clearing up the parent’s misunderstanding and resolving the risk of a potential complaint being filed against the teacher. If he had instead followed procedure by formally convening a school affairs council meeting and launching a full investigation, one has to wonder — would that teacher still have any passion left for teaching?
Teachers are responsible for not only imparting knowledge, but teaching students how to behave. If a student does not complete their homework, neglects their class responsibilities, bullies their classmates or talks back to teachers, yet teachers are forbidden from taking any action in response, can they still be considered educators?
It is understandable that parents have an instinct to protect their children, but indiscriminately filing complaints against teachers should not be encouraged. The ministry should provide support for teachers and grant them greater instructional autonomy, not cater to the demands of a few irrational parents, forcing schools and teachers to waste their time and energy on trivial matters.
Shiao Fu-song teaches at National Taitung University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS