FCR: Many of the criticisms leveled at the educational system hinge on the joint high school entrance exam. Is the MOE preparing to change this system?
Yang Chaur-shin: Actually, Taiwan's secondary schools – including high schools, vocational schools, and five-year junior colleges [which students enter directly from junior high] – can accommodate all junior high graduates. Approximately 350,000 to 380,0000 junior high students graduate each year, but there are more than 400,000 positions open for them to continue schooling. The problem is that all students want to go to one of the few top-ranked high schools so they can get into college. Each year, 70 to 80 percent of those who pass the joint university entrance exam come from thirty to forty of the best high schools. This has led to fierce competition to get into these schools.
The way to solve this problem is to encourage students to apply to high schools near their homes rather than leaving home to try and test into a top-ranked high school in one of the metropolitan centers. We already have one successful example of this: Changhua High School [in Changhua city, central Taiwan] has recently attracted quite a few students who originally intended to go to Taichung First High School [located more than twenty kilometers away]. As a result, the ratio of Changhua High School students entering college has doubled, to more than 85 percent.
We also need to encourage more students to go to vocational school or junior college instead of high school. Making skill-oriented schools attractive is very important. For the past two years, we've been working to change the system so that graduates of vocational schools and junior colleges can continue their education. To do this, we've increased the number of technical colleges and specialized two-year colleges. Already, among graduates of junior colleges and vocational schools, 30 to 40 percent now continue their schooling – almost the same ratio as for high school graduates who continue on to college [44 percent of test -takers were admitted into a university or college for the 1993-94 school year].
We've also developed several alternatives to the high school entrance exam. For instance, the “scholastic achievement qualification system” has recently been expanded to allow junior high graduates who excel in math, or science, or in non-academic subjects such as art, music, drama, or athletics to apply to high schools without taking the entrance exam. Those who have a special talent for math or science can take an IQ test, plus a test in their area of specialty; those who are star athletes or artists take a general knowledge test, then go through an audition or portfolio review to get into either high school, vocational school, or junior college.
Revising the entrance exam system is a complex task because the education system is tied into the society's values. Why do most people want to go to high school?
Tradition! The social stratification system of old China placed scholars above farmers, workers, and merchants. An ancient saying goes, “No occupation is better than being a man of letters.” If we don't change this one-track mindset, it will be difficult to reduce the pressure to enter high school. After all, not all students are cut out for going to high school and college. Our society should value other choices as well.
Reform movement supporters are demanding that more high schools be built in order to ease the competition for admission. How is the MOE responding?
We agree with the need to build more high schools. But new schools require land, which is impossible to find in urban areas such as Taipei. Our answer is to create “complete middle schools” that combine junior and senior high. These schools would share facilities and pool their resources, the curriculum at both levels would be coordinated, and they would allow junior high graduates to enter their own high school without testing in. We already have some complete middle schools, but the students still must test into high school. The problem with this plan is that we can't provide opportunities just for a few lucky students. To be fair, we would have to expand more junior high schools into complete Middle schools or find some other way.
Many parents and teachers support extending the compulsory nine-year education system to a twelve-year one. Does the MOE have a timetable for this goal?
We have been working on extending the compulsory education system since 1982. Our first concern is for those who do not intend to go to high school. So the project has emphasized opportunities in vocational training. Between 1982 and 1991, the opportunities to attend vocational schools increased substantially.
Even though we don't have a twelve-year system, 86 percent of our junior high graduates continue their education at a high school, vocational school, or junior college. This is not ideal, of course, but our junior high graduates do have many opportunities to continue their studies. Again, there are enough openings for everyone, although most prefer to try for high school.
The biggest problem lies in the 30,000 to 50,000 students who do not continue past junior high. ,How can we prepare them for the job market? To address the needs of this group, we are now promoting vocational training during junior high. Currently, some junior high schools have cooperative programs with vocational schools in which eighth-graders who don't plan to continue their education past ninth grade [the final year of compulsory education] can spend their ninth year studying a vocation. To better prepare these students for the working world, we are now planning to extend tills program from one to two years [ninth and tenth grades] starting in 1996.
What steps has the MOE taken toward educational reform? What are its future goals?
The education reform movement has three main goals besides increasing the number of high schools, which I already mentioned: to create smaller classes and smaller schools, to modernize the educational system, and to develop a comprehensive Education Law.
The MOE agrees with the first goal, to reduce class and school size. We have been working on this for some time, but the problems are funding, teachers, and land. Cutting class size to thirty students would add 12,100 junior high classes and 23,700 primary school classes. We would also need an additional 25,000 junior high school teachers and 36,000 primary school teachers. It would cost more than US$2.3 billion just to build additional classrooms.
I agree that teachers and students should interact more and that teachers should pay more attention to their students' individual needs. But smaller classes and smaller schools do not guarantee good educational quality. In some rural areas, classes are extremely small but the educational quality is not necessarily higher than in a big class in Taipei. The U.S. is known for its small-sized classes, but its educational system is also plagued with problems. Instead of just looking at class size, the whole educational environment must be taken into consideration. We also need good textbooks and a good curriculum to go along with small classes and schools.
Concerning modernizing the education system, let me emphasize that we want to change, but we also want to maintain some traditions. For example, throughout Chinese history, the relationship between teachers and students has been very special. A teacher can be like a parent. Such a good tradition should not be discarded. The relationship between teacher and student is one of the best traditions the Chinese have. We should try to maintain it.
The reformers have also called for revising the textbooks. As an alternative to the books edited by the government, we are already allowing schools to use approved private textbooks for subjects not included on the high school entrance exam. These private versions will replace old versions in all subjects within two years. We have also added a required Taiwan history course to help students understand their roots. And the MOE is revising sections of the textbooks that include gender stereotypes and incorrect or insensitive depictions of minorities. But in the process of opening up, we have to avoid causing new problems. If we allow more than one version of the textbooks to be used, it will increase the burden on students.
Concerning the Education Law, I don't feel that this is urgent. We already have a chapter on education and culture in the ROC Constitution, plus individual laws covering preschools, compulsory education, high schools, vocational schools, colleges, universities, and many others. These already cover most aspects of education.
As far as our future goals, we are supporting the ideas voiced at the Seventh National Conference on Education. For instance, we are allowing more educational experimentation. Only through experimentation can education really be reformed. But the subjects of educational experiments are human beings – if experiments are not well-planned and controlled, they could fail. We have to be careful. That's why we decided to create a law concerning educational experimentation. The Taipei city government has also approved plans in sixteen schools to begin experimental classes in which the size will be kept to under twenty students and the teachers will determine their own curriculum, set their own schedule, and use their own teaching methods. We agree with such projects, but we want them to be regulated.
Before the national conference, in order to hear from the public directly, we held forty-two local meetings around the island and invited about 2,300 people. Then at the conference, we invited 455 people and heard many opinions. Now, we have organized a special committee to oversee educational reform. It will be comprised of representatives from various educational sectors but no MOE representative. It will therefore be free to look at the issues from all perspectives and to give us feedback.
Actually, the MOE's ideas are quite close to those of the private sector. It is just that the private sector demands results immediately, and the MOE has to consider all sides of the situation.
-Interviewed by Eugenia Yun