Nantou County commissioner candidate Hsu Shu-hua (許淑華), of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), has been accused of plagiarism on a thesis, and the allegations are backed by plenty of evidence.
However, Feng Chia University’s academic ethics review committee has said that Hsu’s thesis did not seriously contravene academic ethics, so it did not revoke her degree, despite the document including passages that were apparently copied from other sources without citation.
On the other hand, former Democratic Progressive Party Taoyuan mayoral candidate Lin Chih-chien’s (林智堅) master’s degrees were revoked by National Taiwan University and Chung Hua University for plagiarism, which shows that universities have drastically different review processes and standards. The differences are beyond comprehension.
Lin’s case highlights a double standard at his alma maters, as the universities have handled other cases concerning academic ethics more leniently.
Due to the Ministry of Education’s ineffective regulations, academic ethics review committees lack a common standard and transparency.
The ministry should take full responsibility. Ministry officials, including Minister of Education Pan Wen-chung (潘文忠), Chief Secretary Liao Hsin-kuo (廖興國) and those in the Department of Higher Education, failed to act.
The ministry should take the issue seriously and take the initiative now, because it is better late than never.
The “Principles for Handling Academic Ethics Cases at Junior Colleges and Institutions of Higher Education” (專科以上學校學術倫理案件處理原則) should be amended immediately. Every review committee should include a member appointed by the ministry and a representative of the university’s faculty evaluation committee.
There is also no reason that the names of the committee members should be kept confidential, and their findings should be open to the public.
The reason is simple: Should, for example, lay judges be required to wear a mask to ensure that defendants and other attendants of trials cannot recognize them so that they cannot seek revenge? Of course not. It would also be unacceptable to inform those involved in a criminal trial of the court’s decision without providing the full verdict.
Should the person whose thesis is being reviewed by an ethics committee disagree with the result, they should be able to appeal directly to the ministry, rather than apply for another review by the university. The ministry should organize a standing reconsideration committee to investigate such cases. Once it finalizes a decision, the university should handle the case accordingly.
A special budget should be allotted for universities and colleges to assess the quality of their students’ theses and dissertations. In the first half of each year, all theses and dissertations of in-service degree programs should be examined, and in the second half, those of regular degree programs should be reviewed. The assessments should be handled impartially, and the ministry should be informed of the results.
These measures would help preserve the reputation of the higher education system and prevent plagiarism from taking center stage every election cycle.
It is imperative to review the system of recurrent education. If in-service master’s programs remain as popular as they are, the Degree Conferral Act (學位授予法) should be revised, and universities should be authorized to determine whether a thesis is required to complete master’s programs.
This would solve the problem once and for all.
Huang Rongwen is a professor at National Changhua University of Education.
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
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