I would like to respond to Stephen Krashen's letter (Letters, Aug. 8, page 8).
He questions my support of so-called "Super High Schools" with English immersion programs that are being set up in Japan. I recommended this approach for Taiwan, with the specific aim of producing competent future teachers of English.
His chief complaint appears to be the expense that such an approach would incur. I cannot see in what way such schools, which should encompass both elementary and secondary levels, would be any more costly to run than regular schools, except for the expense of buying English-language textbooks. Having Taiwanese students undertaking their entire primary and secondary levels of education in an English immersion program and environment, with guidance from competent teachers, would produce students with much higher levels of English-language skills than is possible today.
As every teacher in Taiwan knows, the students who show greater ability in English are inevitably those who have lived abroad. In spite of all the research, the statistics and the experts, the low level of competency exhibited by Taiwan's English teachers is an inescapable and ubiquitous problem. Until it is solved, we will continue to need to import foreigners to do the job, although many of them have also proven to be less than truly competent at teaching.
I do, however, agree fully with Krashen when he promotes more reading of English books. As a professor of English literature, I more than appreciate the power of books to help improve language skills, and also support the idea -- the more reading the better. The issue that he does not address is why this is not the case, after all the research attesting to its validity.
The answer could be found in the facts that; too few hours are devoted to teaching English; classes are over-crowded and many teachers feel uncomfortable with students reading books that they themselves might have difficulty in reading or explaining.
Since the problem of low English language skills is both perennial and seemingly intractable in Taiwan, why not try a whole new approach? Specialized programs in specialized departments have long been the norm in tertiary education. Those who wish to become electrical engineers are trained in specific facilities to produce competent graduates. Why can't we do the same by setting up a series of elementary schools (and eventually secondary schools, as the students progress through the system) geared particularly for future teachers of English?
When these students graduate, they will be ready to serve as future teachers of English in Taiwan who are both Taiwanese natives and truly competent. Competent teachers will help to produce competent students. This is logical and long overdue. Otherwise, we may end up hiring Japanese graduates instead.
Chaim Melamed
Pingtung
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