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
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