While the commitment by the people of Taiwan to emphasize their independence grows daily, there remains a very serious threat to our status that is unfortunately lower on our leader's agendas than debates about the nomenclature to be used on passports. We face a crisis of perpetual economic dependence on China.
This dependence grows by the day, based to a degree on the gross lack of development of truly innovative approaches to English-language education. We must not get distracted by the recent protests accusing the government and educators of failing to prepare our children for the future.
While some arguments are valid, our dangerous dependency on China will not be solved merely through the allocation of new education budgets or by hiring new teachers. The harrowing English-language education situation is real and is widely appreciated and discussed by academics, parents, professionals and students.
Great fear exists that our children will enter the working world speaking only Mandarin or Tai-wanese, limiting their employment options to the shrinking domestic job market or a post in China and perpetuating a growing reliance and economic dependence on China's future.
For young adults about to enter the workforce, this fear is even more real, but we have found that this can and must be addressed.
Vast sums have been and will continue to be spent on English-
language education. Parents who fear their sons or daughters' futures are limited to being a manager in a Chinese factory allocate small fortunes to years of private English instruction. Why? Because they say the best non-China alternative is for their children to be educated overseas or work at home or abroad for a Western company.
In Taiwan we hire high-paid foreign teachers (who often have questionable experience and motivation) while continuing to utilize standard, outmoded curricula.
While many cutting-edge schools offer computer-aided approaches and other technology tools, they are simply that, tools, not new learning experiences based on the multidisciplinary approaches being developed worldwide.
Through decades of experience and research in the US and in Asia, we have had the benefit of working with some of the greatest minds and utilizing the best contemporary thinking in areas of education, psychology, linguistics, brain research and arts education.
It is through this exposure that we have developed a new way far removed from the Asian rote-learning approach. We encourage others to examine our new methods, perhaps inspire their own methods and invigorate discourse on the topic.
We recently completed a study using a music-education-based curriculum to promote linguistic and cultural acquisition in a group of 150 university students. The 22-week program included singing, playing instruments, visual aids, storytelling and the use of take-home bicultural materials.
All activities greatly improved student's linguistic skills and cultural knowledge, and vastly enhanced their use of English both in class and out. While the scope of the course and its activities are quite detailed, a short summary of the results will suffice in demonstrating the power of such an approach.
Pre and post-assessments showed the following: 67 percent of students showed considerable progress in the ability to read and speak English. Prestudy, only 1 percent of subjects spoke English at home;, post-study, this rose to more than 60 percent. Before the course, 15 percent said they spoke English with their friends, while 100 percent said they did so after the program.
The motivation to study and acquire a language often comes from an appreciation of the language's native culture. It is important for educators and authorities to recognize the value in selectively exposing students to Western culture, as it is a valuable motivator and language-learning tool. Our study found that prior to exposure to our curriculum, only 7 percent of students said they enjoyed listening to English-
language or American songs, rising to 45 percent at the conclusion.
Strikingly, the number of subjects reporting an interest in British or American culture soared from 4 percent to 96 percent through the program. In short, this curriculum worked not because of some new high-tech approach, but due to a rethinking of motivation and the learning process, using the best from every school of thought and the old cliche of "thinking outside the box."
We must think outside our own Chinese box. It's time for us to join together to explore new methods, not try to rework old ones.
The answer may not be found in textbooks, but in cooperation among those in the Chinese diaspora who share a commitment to the advancement and promotion of our people and seek a future with opportunities unbound by self-imposed language boundaries in a borderless world.
As with other recent issues, our independence is threatened. How-ever, if we fail at the task of preparing our young for a globalized future, we will have only ourselves to blame, not Beijing.
Liza Ling-Yu Lee is an assistant professor at Chaoyang University of Technology. Jonathan Gardner is the director of international development at the New York Institute for Social Research.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS