Before the break of dawn, the streets are full of countless teens rushing to class with backpacks in hand — a scene that has long been part of Taiwan’s educational landscape. Recently, a citizen-initiated petition signed by more than 10,000 people calling for delaying junior-high and high-school class starting times to 10am and ending at 4pm has once again drawn society’s attention to students’ health and daily routines, triggering debate over topics from sleep and biological clocks to the pressures of the academic system.
Supporters and opponents of the petition have their own perspectives, but what is truly worth reflecting on is whether Taiwan’s education system has become trapped by its own structure and lost sight of what genuinely serves the well-being of students.
On the surface, the proposal’s focus appears to be on students’ sleep issues, but it in fact highlights the education system’s neglect of the physical and mental development of adolescents. According to medical observations, adolescents generally undergo a phase of biological clock shifts, tending to go to bed late and wake up late. Forcing them to wake up early can cause chronic sleep deprivation, leading to poor concentration and emotional instability. Some doctors have pointed out that allowing students to get a full eight hours of sleep each night would significantly improve learning efficiency and mental health, rather than arbitrarily treating 7am or 8am as the ideal starting point.
However, many principals and teachers have expressed reservations about the proposal, saying that the curriculum is densely packed and requires 35 classes per week. Simply delaying the start time to address sleep deprivation would require schools to compress even more content into an already tight schedule, potentially compromising the quality of instruction.
Some have argued that, rather than changing the schedule, we change the system itself because sleep deprivation has a variety of causes — cram school culture, addiction to digital devices and intense academic pressure are the main culprits behind students’ unbalanced routines. Time is merely a surface-level manifestation of these issues.
There also exists a deep divide between parents and public opinion. On one hand, some parents assert that students are not machines — frequent all-nighters and an exam-driven education system leave students physically and emotionally exhausted. Thus, they believe that delaying school start times could give students some much-needed breathing room. On the other hand, some parents worry that a later start time might not align with family schedules, and students might just spend their extra time at home glued to their phones or sleeping in — both unhelpful to discipline and growth. Opponents also warn that reducing class times would only worsen educational inequality, particularly for underprivileged students.
Particularly noteworthy is that the petition’s suggestion to cut “nonessential” courses has left educators puzzled. What exactly constitutes a “nonessential” course? Class meetings, weekly assemblies, art and music — such subjects cultivate democratic values and aesthetic appreciation. Would they be the first to go?
When the curriculum places emphasis on “core competencies,” yet policies pressure schools to revert to cramming and memorization, such a system attempts to force growth, but ultimately stunts true development.
Of course, not all opposing voices completely lack constructive input. Many school principals have suggested looking at the methods employed by Europe, the US and Japan, where school starts at 8am or 9am, and trimming some afternoon classes to give students more room for self-study and extracurricular activities. This approach could potentially offer flexibility, while taking into account student schedules and school operations.
Rather than simply asking if school start times should be delayed to 10am, perhaps we should ask a more pressing question — does the education system serve students?
Chang Ruay-shiung is a former president of the National Taipei University of Business.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
China last week announced that it picked two Pakistani astronauts for its Tiangong space station mission, indicating the maturation of the two nations’ relationship from terrestrial infrastructure cooperation to extraterrestrial strategic domains. For Taiwan and India, the developments present an opportunity for democratic collaboration in space, particularly regarding dual-use technologies and the normative frameworks for outer space governance. Sino-Pakistani space cooperation dates back to the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, with a cooperative agreement between the Pakistani Space & Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, and the Chinese Ministry of Aerospace Industry. Space cooperation was integrated into the China-Pakistan