Over the past few decades, Taiwan’s education system has undergone numerous significant reforms to meet the demands of modern society and economic development. The curriculum guidelines play a crucial role in designing curricula, textbooks and entrance examinations.
However, reforms to the guidelines have always been accompanied by considerable controversy.
Unlike previous guidelines, the 108 curriculum primarily emphasizes core competencies and autonomous learning. It encourages students to choose their elective courses and includes learning portfolios as part of the evaluation criteria. This approach aims to help students not only learn in the classroom, but also to discover their interests through clubs and elective courses.
However, the new curriculum has introduced multiple evaluation methods, such as learning portfolios, autonomous learning and cross-disciplinary exams. These requirements mean that students must meet more diverse criteria, leading to increased stress. The multiplicity of evaluations adds layers of complexity to students’ academic life, often resulting in a continuous accumulation of pressure.
One major concern is the resources needed for autonomous learning. These resources, such as tutoring and study materials, are dependent on a family’s financial status, putting less affluent students at a disadvantage. Students from financially constrained backgrounds often lack direction and support in their autonomous learning process, leading to poor learning outcomes and, in some cases, a complete abandonment of the effort.
Furthermore, the exam-centric evaluation approach lacks diversity and flexibility, failing to comprehensively reflect students’ learning achievements. The predominant reliance on exams means that many aspects of a student’s abilities and talents are not adequately assessed. This one-dimensional evaluation method can be particularly disheartening for students who might excel in non-academic areas.
Another significant issue is the time and effort required to prepare learning portfolios. Students must invest a substantial amount of time and energy into compiling these portfolios, which detracts from their ability to focus on regular studies. The inconsistent evaluation standards for these portfolios also create a sense of unfairness among students, as they feel their efforts are not judged on a level playing field.
Teachers have also voiced their concerns about the 108 curriculum guidelines. Many educators argue that the curriculum does not consider the practical realities of the classroom. For example, the autonomous learning and flexible courses proposed often become “ineffective learning” in practice, as students struggle to find direction and frequently submit subpar reports just to meet the requirements.
The emphasis on cross-disciplinary cooperation and mandatory school-specific courses that are not included in major exams further complicates the situation, leading to superficial learning experiences that do not delve deeply into any particular subject.
Educators from different regions have pointed out the disparities in implementation. For instance, urban schools often have better resources and support systems compared with their rural counterparts. This discrepancy exacerbates the inequalities in educational outcomes and opportunities for students across different regions.
Curriculum reform should place greater emphasis on the opinions of educators and learners. By involving teachers and students in the reform process, the guidelines can be more attuned to the needs and realities of the classroom.
There should be a concerted effort to help students find clear learning directions. This can be achieved by providing comprehensive guidance and support systems that help students navigate their educational paths.
Additionally, providing psychological counseling services is crucial to help students cope with the increased stress brought about by the new curriculum. Schools should ensure that students have access to mental health resources to manage their stress and maintain a healthy balance between their academic and personal lives.
Establishing a unified evaluation standard for learning portfolios is essential to ensure fairness and consistency. A clear and transparent evaluation system would help mitigate feelings of injustice and allow students to understand what is expected of them.
By implementing these changes, Taiwan’s curriculum reform can move toward a more equitable and effective educational system that truly meets the needs of all students and prepares them for the challenges of the future.
Lee Pei-chi is a student in the Department of International Affairs at Wenzao Ursuline University of Languages.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS