Many aspects of Taiwan's education are similar to what we have in America, yet a prevailing respect for teachers, school and learning separates the Taiwan education experience from what is generally found in other nations.
Perhaps the Chinese word for education, chiao-yu, sums up well the pervasive attitude that teacher, parents, administrators and students share towards the educational process. Chiao, the first character in the compound, can be translated to mean to guide, enlighten, educate. Yu, the second ideograph, means to nourish, care for, encourage, and nurture. When put together these two characters define both a pedagogical and humanistic attitude and system. The Chinese of all peoples value education, learning and scholarship most, and their history suggests that educational excellence can be used as a conduit for effecting good and ethical government, great art and literature, and an open, mobile society.
A major dimension of Chinese education that separates it from schooling in America is the National Examination System. On my various visits to Taiwan I spoke with numerous teachers, administrators, students and parents about the yearly examinations…
In the U.S. virtually any student who holds a high school degree or an equivalency diploma has a very good chance of being accepted at one of America's economically besieged colleges or community colleges. The quality of their scholarship as high school students and their ability to pass an entrance examination reflecting their intelligence and motivation are in many cases irrelevant to being accepted at America's colleges. State and even private institutions have begun the "open door policy" for admitting all students. The ideal behind this uniquely American phenomenon is the notion that, in a democratic society, equality of educational opportunity must constantly be enhanced; that socioeconomic factors that do often deprive youngsters of a chance to compete academically must be considered; and that the best way to equalize opportunity is to open the doors of colleges to students whose academic performance has been weak. The reality of the open admission policy is that American universities greatly over-expanded their resources in the 1960’s and 1970’s and, as student enrollment has decreased, an effort has been made to recruit youngsters who in years past could not possibly have been admitted. Incidentally, many of these products of open-door admission do become late bloomers and graduate with a wealth of knowledge; most probably drop out or are dismissed after one or two years. One could question the ethics of the open-door policy on numerous grounds. Whether the true reason for open admission in America is idealistic or economic or a realistic combination of both is quite impossible to say.
In Taiwan, as is true in all other nations, a competitive selective process for admission to colleges and universities takes place. I believe America can learn a distinct lesson from the historical and contemporary model used in China.
Colleges and universities in Taiwan select their freshman classes through the Joint Competitive Entrance Examination which is held annually in the months of July and August. All students who wish to be admitted to any of the 101 institutions of higher education must sit for this examination. Children are exposed to the concept of the examination system early in their education. To matriculate into an academic senior high school one must successfully pass a competitive test after completing ninth grade. Admission to a prestigious institution or an average one depends strictly upon the score the student achieves on the high school entrance examination. Unlike the public free schools (grades l-9), high schools are rated in order of quality, and admission is selective. Getting into the better high school (public or private, for they are both under the examination system) is a good indicator of one's chances of being accepted by a better college. The examination system has been criticized for the heavy psychological burden it places on both children and their families; there is no question, even from the severest critics of Taiwan, that favoritism and special treatment are not given to children in these tests no matter how wealthy or powerful their parents. Ever the most vociferous critics are unable to suggest a better admissions system considering the economic constraints of the society and the great eagerness youngsters have for education success. Discrimination, suggests Ralph N. Clough in Island China, does not exist in the examination process; and all the children of Taiwan have equal chances of success on these government-administered and computer-graded tests.
To qualify to sit for the college entrance examination one must have graduated from an academic (private or public) high school. Special consideration is given to children of diplomats who have been in foreign school systems and to overseas Chinese, who may take the examination in the country in which they reside. This is a very small percentage of all those who compete. In 1978-79, under the watchful eye of proctors selected by the Ministry of Education, which has responsibility for the fairness and honesty of the procedure, approximately 100,000 youngsters took the test, held at public facilities, e.g., government high schools.
When a high school graduate registers for the examination he states the basic field in which he would like to study. There are four curriculum areas: (1) Physical sciences, (2) biological sciences, (3) arts and humanities, and (4) social, commercial and legal studies. On this same form the youngster indicates his preference in schools and specifically the department, e.g., National Taiwan University, agriculture. The score on the exam determines which schools of the ones listed and which departments the freshmen may enter. Needless to say, all students put the best schools first and the more completive department as their primary choice; few are accepted into the school they select first and few are given the major they choose. Rather, the test score, the ranking of the schools from the best to the weakest, and the competitiveness of the department are all evaluated vis-à-vis the test results, and the students are informed of where they have been accepted and their field of study. Newspapers, wall posters and personal letters carry the information throughout the island. Because only one third of the students taking the examination pass and are admitted to any college, few eligible students express open disappointment that their first choices were not honored. They seem to respect the examination system and realize that it is fairly and honestly administered.
Behind closed doors - The moment of truth for aspirants. (File photo)
The only dispute to this general thesis that I heard while in Taiwan was from a music professor. Students wishing to enter that field must perform in a refereed recital with two instruments. This professor suggested that a student could work with a privately well-paid music tutor who might also be part of the examination team and that a potential conflict of interest could occur.
I had the opportunity to see the examination scores posted on large bulletin boards. Students would gather, find their number and their score, and either cheer with joy or walk tearfully away. The tension could be sensed by anyone in the vicinity.
The examination system as it now exists in Taiwan is based upon historical tradition and predicated on a theoretical education framework and philosophy. Chinese educationalists believe that if all children and parents are fully aware of the nature and importance of the examination system, motivation for success will be enhanced. The school, child and family environment become a single and united force with the goal of all three being the same-successful academic achievement; homework and study are viewed with sanctity. The examination symbolizes the objectivity of the college selection process and hence promotes the view that social and economic classes are transient in nature, and that through study, diligence and intelligence one can overcome great obstacles. It also greatly assists the educational community in developing a single-purpose curriculum, courses and pedagogical technique that will allow the student to focus his attention on subject matter and intellectual inquiry relevant to the examination process. Because the entrance exams are nonspecific in nature, a broad high school education is needed. But specialization in one of the four areas previously mentioned is also needed. The examination certifies that youngsters entering college have the ability to master their subjects and that they will not find that the material in their college courses is beyond their intellectual grasp. Professors at universities know that their charges have a foundation of learning upon which they can build and that going over materials supposedly covered in high school is not necessary. Scholarships and government grants for less affluent students can also be given in an objective fashion.
Though about 60 to 70 percent of the students sitting for the examination do not qualify for admission into a college or university, they may, after a year of intensive tutoring or a period in the military service, retake the joint admission examination. The policy of Taiwan is to use the examination as a device for fair, open and equal competition for admission to higher education. The government also, by periodically raising or lowering minimum entrance requirement scores, can channel persons into what it views as economically and socially important fields. Teachers are in less demand now than in the 1960's and 1970's and, consequently, the examination for admission into teacher education programs requires an increasingly higher score. The need for social and community development workers has become greater. The entrance examination score for entering this field is lowered to allow more students the opportunity to further their studies and thence take positions in this socially relevant career. Individuals who may have wished to go into education are now encouraged to enter social work or community health programs.
Because the Ministry of Education, one of the branches under the Executive Yuan (the cabinet), has direct central authority over all higher education in Taiwan and de facto authority over all education planning, quality control and money allocations, national needs are relatively easy to assess and effect. The U.S. with its local control has no national standards for scholarship and academic integrity. Children living in one community or neighborhood may not have the educational advantages that another town affords its youngsters. America would be wise to learn from Taiwan, Japan and other nations and place pre-college education totally under the new U.S. Department of Education. Though it would certainly bring about a standardization of quality and take educational power from locally elected or selected politicians, it would enhance the overall deportment of the system that now exists and assure that all children are given an equal opportunity for successful academic experiences and career potential. The regional accreditation agencies are in theory responsible for this at the higher education level. A national accreditation body would better serve America’s higher education needs, help eliminate duplication and discrimination and enhance the prestige of research and teaching at the universities and colleges in America. The Taiwan and Japan models are worth investigating as a means to revitalize U.S. education. -The author, Douglas C. Smith, is a professor and coordinator at West Virginia University. He is a frequent visitor to the Far East.