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.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS