These days, bullying frequently occurs on campus. Students feel anxious about going to school, their parents worry about them and the schools are under a great pressure.
To address the problem, the Ministry of Education proposed amendments to the Regulations Governing Prevention and Control of Bullying on Campuses (校園霸凌防制準則), but many say that it should focus more on counseling, rather than paying too much attention to investigating incidents of bullying.
Since “bullying on campus” became a common phrase, the relationships between teachers and students, and between the students themselves, have become tense. They have to interact with one another in a more sensitive way.
Teachers communicate with students and students play every day, but the contact and joking might result in humiliation or injury. If that happens, it might be portrayed as a bullying case.
If there are obvious and persistent humiliating and injurious actions, that undoubtedly should be called bullying, but if the case has only emotional or incidental consequences — while an investigation might be necessary — there should be room to discuss the situation without branding it as bullying.
Some people accuse teachers of bullying when they properly and responsibly discipline students, while some call some of the antics that students get up to during play bullying. This creates unnecessary misunderstandings and tension.
Since the “zero corporal punishment” policy was implemented, the right for teachers to discipline students has been strictly limited. They dare not to correct students’ unruly behavior.
At the same time, parents want to protect and defend their children, and they tend to believe their child’s account rather than that of the teacher.
This makes it more difficult for teachers to discipline students, leading to more bullying.
Parents want their children to be able to study with peace of mind and grow up in a carefree environment. Of course they do not want their children to be bullied.
However, unless the bullying is serious and ongoing, excessive intervention in a child’s school life might have unintended consequences. Children might lose an opportunity to improve their self-reliance and their ability to deal with others.
Should people coddle their children and insulate them from harm, or should they be educated, guided and trained so that they can become brave enough to confront the outside world?
Children need to be protected, but they also need to be mentally strong and trained to endure pressure and frustrations. If parents only ever protect them, it is likely they will be incapable of facing society and dealing with challenges.
The ministry has attempted to regulate bullying incidents on campus, but the key is prevention.
Teachers should be endowed with adequate rights and be respected when they discipline students. Teachers understand students the best. They know how they learn, how they react emotionally and how they interact with their classmates. Teachers can correct their behavior directly while teaching them concepts of equality, respect, mutual help and friendship.
In this way, bullying can be nipped in the bud.
Parents should also trust teachers to be professional. Both sides should collaborate to facilitate proper education while keeping an eye on the mental and physical health and behavior of the children.
In doing so, children would not be bullied, and it would be unlikely for them to bully others.
Shiao Fu-song is a lecturer at National Taitung University.
Translated by Emma Liu
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