A stunning academic ethics scandal erupted last week after two professors at National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology were accused of taking money from students to help search for thesis ghostwriters so that the students could obtain their master’s degrees.
As a result, a renewed, scathing conversation is taking place about the management and quality of in-service programs at universities and graduate schools, especially executive master of business administration (EMBA) programs. Incidents of academic ethics failures are rooted in in-service program instructors lacking awareness about their role as high-level management educators.
From my own observations over the years, many professors are easily cowed by EMBA students, as they generally hold privileged positions in society and the workplace, and educators are at a loss concerning what to do.
However, no matter how powerful an EMBA student is in the outside world, they are still just a student when they are on campus. They should not be allowed to simply throw their weight around and buy academic credentials.
As a self-aware educator of higher-level management, not only do I need to be able to respond to students’ challenges, but I also have to be able to defend my own professionalism. More than that, I also have to be able to give critiques on biased attitudes toward studying. Cultivation of this type of practice requires the consensus and support of academic professors. This approach also comes from what academic educational bodies call an “environment of learning.” This is the greatest challenge in-service master’s programs face within Taiwan’s higher education system.
Some might say it is not easy to run EMBA and in-service programs, and that competition is fierce. In actuality, these are just normal expectations — to aim high and try hard. Instructors involved in scandals such as this are a classic example of people lacking self-awareness as higher education management professionals. Despite in-service education being an important part of a university’s social responsibility in providing lifelong learning, if educators are unable to instruct their in-service students in word and by example, then they should not be teaching.
As for the lack of market demand for in-service programs, schools might want to consider winding down operations. If instructors are just in it for the money and cannot help their students attain the educational goals of their program, it erodes academic rigor and respect, and damages academic development.
Such deterioration could result in severe damage to the entire institution’s reputation.
If these programs fall back by even one step, they end up flat against a wall with nowhere to run. Higher-level management school educators have no choice but to be prudent and circumspect in their curricula and standards.
Lin Hsuan-chu is the executive director of the executive master of business administration program at National Cheng-Kung University’s School of Management.
Translated by Tim Smith
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
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS