What began as a seemingly minor dispute on social media has unexpectedly highlighted forms of inequality within education systems that often go unnoticed. Late last year, a National Taiwan University (NTU) student shared observations on social media about classmates’ upbringing and life experiences, describing the intangible yet very real effects of “privilege” on campus and in everyday life. The post quickly ignited debate, centering on a key question: Does admission to Chien Kuo High School — long regarded as Taiwan’s most prestigious boys’ high school based on entrance exam scores — constitute a form of privilege in itself?
Underlying this discussion is an implicit assumption: the more resources and support a family can provide, the greater a student’s likelihood of entering higher-ranked schools.
Taiwan’s education system is built around highly standardized examinations, a feature it shares with other East Asian societies. Although education reforms since the 1990s have sought to reduce the decisive role of exams in determining students’ futures, this system remains firmly in place. In practice, it often amplifies disparities in family resources rather than neutralizing them.
“Privilege” extends beyond household wealth or spending on education. It includes whether students can devote themselves fully to studying without bearing responsibilities such as earning a living or caring for family members, and whether they live in urban areas, where long commutes do not drain time and energy. These conditions, rooted in one’s family background, frequently translate into academic advantages, giving students from more favorable circumstances a greater chance of success within the education system.
Academic research offers supporting data for these patterns. A series of studies titled Who Are NTU Students? (誰是臺大學生？) by Luoh Ming-ching (駱明慶), an NTU professor of economics, shows that students admitted to Taiwan’s highest-ranked university disproportionately come from a small number of elite high schools, such as Chien Kuo. These students’ families are heavily concentrated in Taipei. Such households are more likely to provide stable learning environments, including access to private tutoring, shorter commuting times and freedom from financial pressure, allowing students to devote nearly all their time and energy to exam preparation.
At the same time, Luoh’s research indicates that policies promoting diversified admission pathways have indeed improved access to top universities for students from rural areas and lower-income families. Even so, structural disparities within the system remain substantial.
Similar conclusions have been reached by international research. A study by US economists Nicholas W. Papageorge and Kevin Thom finds that higher socioeconomic status significantly amplifies the positive effect of genetics on the likelihood of completing a college degree. For individuals raised in lower socioeconomic environments, comparable potential is far less likely to be translated into educational attainment.
In discussions online, some have playfully rendered the Mandarin phonetic equivalent of “privilege” as “Thunderous Torque” (霹靂力矩), suggesting that those who have such privilege can effortlessly “turn the levers” of life in dazzling fashion. From a sociological perspective, such expressions are more than wordplay. They reflect shared perceptions of structural inequality and an intuitive awareness of the hidden stratification embedded in everyday educational experiences.
Privilege, in this sense, is not the product of any single factor, but the result of long-standing interactions among family background, institutional design and broader social structures. Taiwan’s case illustrates how education systems, even while promising equal opportunity, might reinforce inequality. When education is widely regarded as a symbol of fair competition, recognizing these subtle yet consequential differences becomes an essential part of public discussion.
Hou Liang-xuan is a writer based in Taiwan with a background in sociology, interested in education policy and social inequality.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS