Somebody recently posted a proposal on the government’s Public Policy Network Participation Platform suggesting that classes for junior and senior-high school students should start at 9:30am.
The proposal passed the threshold for consideration by the government.
The person behind the proposal felt that students are asked to go to school too early in the morning — at 7:30am in most cases — and that this meant they were getting insufficient sleep. The result is that students nod off during class.
LEARNING EFFICIENCY
Starting the school day later in the morning, then, would significantly increase their learning efficiency.
The Ministry of Education responded by saying that this issue falls under the purview of local governments, but that it would look into it and give a response within two months.
For students to arrive before 7:30am, they need to leave home very early, unless they live close to school. If the journey takes half an hour, they need to start out at 7am, which means they would have to get out of bed by 6:30am at the latest.
If they want to get eight hours of sleep, they must be in bed by 10:30pm. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done, because before they turn in for the night, they are expected to do their homework, finish reading assignments and prepare for the next day’s tests.
Students finishing junior-high school or beginning senior-high school often study well into the night, and end up seriously sleep deprived. Over the days, year after year, this is certain to have an impact on their development.
There is no way of telling yet what the ministry’s decision would be, but if it does leave the decision to local governments, it could be a starting point for diversity in education.
IMPROVING EDUCATION
Indeed, the School-Based Curriculum and the School-Based Professional Development programs initiated with amendments to the General Guidelines of the Grade 1-9 Curriculum of Elementary and Junior-High School Education (國民教育九年一貫課程總綱) have made it easier to improve education at schools.
The situations and experiences of students vary widely, depending on where they attend school, be it in high-altitude areas or along the coasts. How great it would be for them to study subjects relevant to what happens in their lives.
For example, National Sun Yat-sen University repurposed an abandoned navy dormitory into a base for teaching staff and students about traditional Cijin sampan boats, an initiative that not only preserved a traditional craft, but also enabled them to develop a new style of boat by making models of the originals, an experience with significant educational value.
Taiwan is not a large country, and yet the climate in the north differs from that in the south, and lifestyles vary even more, depending on whether one lives in an urban or rural area.
AUTONOMY
This proposal, questioning our approach to teaching hours at the nation’s schools, can serve as a touchstone for how Taiwanese democracy is manifested, and how education is done.
It is not just local governments that should have some degree of autonomy in this, either — different approaches could be taken at the level of individual schools, too.
This would give students and their parents the ability to make their own choices and to be involved in the decisionmaking process.
Chang Huey-por is a former president of National Changhua University of Education.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS