Should I move to Taiwan?

Taiwan Moving to Taiwan
21

Feiren speaks the truth. I have actually ‘taught English’ in a junior high school
In Taiwan. Years ago I taught buxiban part time. I also visited about 50 schools last year in central Taiwan. My impressions are

Cons

  • Taiwan schools,
    Especially junior and senior high are stressful environments particularly in terms of hours needed for study and also weekly exams
  • lack of time for physical activity in most (but not all) schools
  • prison like environment in some schools (look below for pros) and lack of swimming pools and space
  • large difference between school resources and quality (same most places)
  • some suspicion of teachers who should not be around kids but nothing done about it
  • corruption in schools services such as poor food supply from local restaurants
  • military indoctrination in schools (fading presence but ridiculous)
  • highly authoritarian Confucius top down control in many cases, many assemblies and military type marching in some
    Cases
  • kids not encouraged to ask questions
  • curriculum highly biased to KMT and China history and geography
  • many temp younger teachers
  • very poor foreign language instruction
  • pupil teacher ratio is high , can sometimes be 40 or 50 in a class, although
    Usually less
  • very low diversity (also could
    Be pro) means kids graduate with little understanding of non Chinese or non East Asian cultures
  • school holidays often occupied by make-up study days and mandatory courses (some
    Kids in junior high and senior high have maybe two or three weeks off a year) and exams
  • emphasis on work to test not work to understanding
  • very few whiteboards in schools
  • far too much homework
  • parents now quickly gaining influence in schools (discipline, could be a pro too)
  • need huji in local area to send kids to the local school, system favours rich families who can buy houses or borrow huji
  • too many older teachers hanging around waiting to retire (large numbers are retiring in the few years)

Pro

  • being a nerd and class no.1 is often celebrated (celebrate knowledge and success)
  • teachers still respected by most students
  • relatively calm and productive classroom environment (but not for foreign English teachers , only
    For ‘proper’ teachers who give exams lol)
  • many schools around the country have been renovated and continue to be invested in as prestige local projects
  • younger teachers more open minded
  • student can interact with teachers with few barriers
  • relatively safe school environment
  • mixed schools the norm
  • almost no religious indoctrination
  • reducing student numbers allow more
    Investment per student and more space
  • public school resource often superior to all but the most expensive private schools. Private schools
    Unless most expensive ones have limited infrastructure although
    Sometimes better teachers.
  • have good art and music classes and
    Resources
    (Sometimes)
  • excellent Chinese language education
  • many schools supply free or subsidized lunch

I’m not an expert but these are my observations. I don’t think the school system
Is fit for purpose for 2010s and 2020s, it’s just a base to work off of. Many parents send their kids to extra curricular classes,
Elementary school student have some afternoons off although can still get burdened with homework. If no grandparents or parent available must send the kids to anqinban afternoon school which costs money also until can pick up in evening.

22

[quote=“pin2xbo”]
Isn’t Taiwan’s education the TOP 5 (or 10) in the Asia? It’s definitely wayyyy better than in the US. I do see a lot of people here that are anti TW public schools… I wonder why…[/quote]
Taiwan is usually at the top in Asia for almost everything. It’s not difficult to be on top when 90% of the continent are either dirt poor, Islamic, war-torn, authoritarian/communist, or all of the above. Then the ones that don’t have any of the aforementioned issues end up with moronic crap like terrible work/life balance, abhorrent working conditions, and laughable rote education, unless you count Australia and New Zealand as part of Asia.

Like many of the other posters have pointed out, the education here is just a fucking joke. It is a fucking torture for students. I am a victim of the system and let me tell you, it was not fun at all.

I don’t see how the Chinese language education could be called “excellent” either. It’s the same stupid rote shit like any other subject, except that the lectures are all about ancient Chinese bs that no one cares enough to remember after high school. If you’re talking about how kids are gonna be fluent in Mandarin after a few years in school, that’s entirely because of the Mandarin-speaking environment. Which I don’t think it’s worthwhile at all as I find the usefulness of Mandarin to be completely overblown. I’d feed my kids(if I have any in the future, which I think is unlikely) with French, Spanish, or German instead.

And forget about “better math”, that’s what calculators are for.

23

Taiwan is in the top 5 in Asia, which means the top 5 in the world, in maths and science anyway. bbc.com/news/business-32608772

What people who have only experienced one country’s education style fail to realise is that they all have their flaws.

24

[quote=“Petrichor”]Taiwan is in the top 5 in Asia, which means the top 5 in the world, in maths and science anyway. bbc.com/news/business-32608772

What people who have only experienced one country’s education style fail to realise is that they all have their flaws.[/quote]
Top 5 in terms of test results, not in terms of children’s learning process, the latter is what education should be about.
And it’s just math and science, Korean, Japanese, and Taiwanese kids are gonna look like a bunch of fools if the subject was English.

Obviously every country’s education system has its problems, but East Asian ones are in a whole different league of bullshit.

25

[quote=“Gain”][quote=“Petrichor”]Taiwan is in the top 5 in Asia, which means the top 5 in the world, in maths and science anyway. bbc.com/news/business-32608772

What people who have only experienced one country’s education style fail to realise is that they all have their flaws.[/quote]
Top 5 in terms of test results, not in terms of children’s learning process, the latter is what education should be about.[/quote]

Sure, but your original point was that Taiwan only looked good because It’s not difficult to be on top when 90% of the continent are either dirt poor, Islamic, war-torn, authoritarian/communist, or all of the above.

[quote=“Gain”]
And it’s just math and science, Korean, Japanese, and Taiwanese kids are gonna look like a bunch of fools if the subject was English.

Obviously every country’s education system has its problems, but East Asian ones are in a whole different league of bullshit.[/quote]

American, British and Australian kids are gonna look like a bunch of fools if the subject was Chinese (or any other foreign language). I’m not defending the worst educational practices in Taiwan or other Asian countries, but education in other countries is worse in different ways. Many Taiwanese students and parents have this fantasy that education is so much better in the U.S. Yet U.S. students also have their horror stories to tell and many parents bemoan the poor standard of education. In the U.K. 7 % of students are privately educated. Parents fork out thousands a year just to avoid the public education system (which they must also pay for through their taxes).

26

Education is always a compromise if like most schools in the world, there are more than five or six kids in a class. Taiwan manages to turn out a high level of literate, numerate people.

The UK too. There’s a lot of time-wasting in the UK but there’s a general level of literacy and numeracy in people living in Britain who were also educated there that is not too shabby.

27

Probably a bit off topic but one issue in the Taiwan and British system to be aware of is early streaming, which can block kids future options later on. I’m talking about the reduction in subjects starting from junior high school
Into high school or vocational school. Not having enough science or maths subjects can really limit one. Also Taiwan for all its faults is not ridden with private school supermocracy and that’s a good thing in my book. The public schools and public universities are often the best options or at least the most respected.

28

I think we should be listening to Gain since she attended Taiwanese public schools. I do hear from parents that the elementary schools are much less of a problem then the higher grades.

As for testing results, my understanding is that Taiwan 15 year olds had the fifth highest PISA scores not just in Asia, but in the world. PISA covers math, science, and reading.

Taiwanese kids scored 560 overall. The UK scored 494 and the US 481.

In reading, Taiwan scored 523 while the UK and the US scored 499 and 498 respectively.

Clearly, Taiwan is doing something right. Or is it? Let’s keep in mind that high school was not compulsory in Taiwan in 2012 and ( I believe) is still being phased in. Students who do not perform well academically are funneled into vocation schools around the age of 15.

Also, Taiwan is obsessed with this kind of ranking and I strongly suspect there is some cherry picking going on. The PISA scores probably reflect the strong academic foundation and test taking skills that students in Taiwan’s urban areas have and not the true state of affairs island wide.

Still, the PISA scores show that Taiwan is doing something right. Glancing through the report, I noticed that the “cultural values” of the parents are seen to be the key determinant of academic success. This might mean that if you don’t share the Confucian values and focus on academic achievement measurable by test scores that other parents have here, your child might not fare well despite the excellent schools.

oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pi … erview.pdf

29

Well, one variable that is different is that Taiwan has a very small number of non-Chinese speaking immigrant children. More than 50% of London’s inhabitants were not born in the UK. That affects our English literacy scores.

Cherry-picking and PISA … I love that ‘Chinese education’ is held up as an ideal when the scores are taken from urban Shanghai only. Maybe pick a couple of wealthy parts of north London and see how they compare to the world? The greatness of an education system is how it is exclusive of refugee kids and poor kids and the rural poor or what ever issue a country deals with it, and still provides a good, fair chance to everyone.

Of course, there is social inequality in the UK and Taiwan, but the kids do have a shot, through education, no? Is there a feeling that Taiwanese kids don’t?

30

They will waiste so much time on learning to write chinese characters. Which is a big disadvantage for young students here. It could be used to teach a second or even third language. History, geography, creative classes, and so on.

31

I agree with Gain that the way the Chinese language is taught is archaic , the most troublesome parts probably the amount of time required. Wastes huge amounts of time, as above poster just wrote.
To master writing along with the vision problems possibly associated with it.

I should have said going to public school in Taiwan will give one an excellent opportunity to gain
fluency in Chinese. Myopia is obviously a big problem in east Asia,
The Taiwan study claims its due to too little daily time exposed to the sunshine.

32

[quote=“Feiren”]I think we should be listening to Gain since she attended Taiwanese public schools. I do hear from parents that the elementary schools are much less of a problem then the higher grades.

As for testing results, my understanding is that Taiwan 15 year olds had the fifth highest PISA scores not just in Asia, but in the world. PISA covers math, science, and reading.

Taiwanese kids scored 560 overall. The UK scored 494 and the US 481.

In reading, Taiwan scored 523 while the UK and the US scored 499 and 498 respectively.

Clearly, Taiwan is doing something right. Or is it? Let’s keep in mind that high school was not compulsory in Taiwan in 2012 and ( I believe) is still being phased in. Students who do not perform well academically are funneled into vocation schools around the age of 15.

Also, Taiwan is obsessed with this kind of ranking and I strongly suspect there is some cherry picking going on. The PISA scores probably reflect the strong academic foundation and test taking skills that students in Taiwan’s urban areas have and not the true state of affairs island wide.

Still, the PISA scores show that Taiwan is doing something right. Glancing through the report, I noticed that the “cultural values” of the parents are seen to be the key determinant of academic success. This might mean that if you don’t share the Confucian values and focus on academic achievement measurable by test scores that other parents have here, your child might not fare well despite the excellent schools.

oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pi … erview.pdf[/quote]

I don’t think anyone is denying Gain’s experience. I know I’m certainly not because I know plenty of adults and kids who have been through the system here or are currently going through it (not only elementary school). But let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.

Cultural values are undoubtedly behind much of the success because students with Chinese backgrounds do well throughout the world.

33

Agree. I know of children with an international background who have thrived in Taiwan’s top public schools and then gone on to equal success at its universities and then to foreign graduate schools. Others have not. A lot seems to depend on whether the child is a good fit for Taiwan’s system and vice versa.

34

I have to take some issue with this stuff about “archaic” methods of teaching Chinese.

Taiwan’s school system has taught millions of people including non-Han people how to read and write Chinese. By all accounts, Chinese script with its thousands of character takes longer to master than 26 letters. As a result, kids in Taiwan have to spend a lot of time copying out characters. But the end result is the same. By the age of 7 or 8 almost all kids can read at the same level as kids in other countries and the same progression continues through primary and junior high school.

Is all that time spent copying characters a waste of time? Perhaps-- if you don’t care about your child becoming fully literate in Chinese. But if you do, it is a time-tested way that works. I’d be interested in learning about alternatives, but I think here most foreigners simply don’t know what they are talking about unless they themselves are literate in Chinese.

I wholeheartedly agree that the way classical Chinese (and composition) is taught in junior high school and high school is very poor and it’s a real shame that it wasn’t taught in a way that inspired Gain and others to keep reading in pre-modern Chinese. Then again, the high school English teachers I had who tried to teach Chaucer and Shakespeare failed pretty miserably with me. A teacher who can get teenagers to truly be interested in Zhuangzi or Shakespeare is a very rare and wonderful beast.

But this is entirely different issue than the teaching of basic Chinese literacy. Taiwan’s schools know how to teach this and they do a great job. It is premised on the assumption that becoming literate in Chinese is important. Not everyone agrees with that premise. That’s fine, but if so, maybe a Taiwanese school is not for your kids.

[quote=“headhonchoII”]I agree with Gain that the way the Chinese language is taught is archaic , the most troublesome parts probably the amount of time required. Wastes huge amounts of time, as above poster just wrote.
To master writing along with the vision problems possibly associated with it.

I should have said going to public school in Taiwan will give one an excellent opportunity to gain
fluency in Chinese. Myopia is obviously a big problem in east Asia,
The Taiwan study claims its due to too little daily time exposed to the sunshine.[/quote]

35

It depends on the teacher and the school, but nowadays many teachers no longer require the students to endlessly copy out characters. My son’s grade six and he copies new characters five times each.

I honestly think archaic Chinese should be an optional subject. It’s a good example of something that students spend lots of time on that’s virtually useless to them later. At least with subjects such as science and maths they provide an essential background for some further study subjects and they teach important principles of reasoning and logic. I also don’t think it’s necessary for students to learn 5000 years of Chinese history, especially when it’s at the expense of learning about other nations’.

36

[quote=“Petrichor”]It depends on the teacher and the school, but nowadays many teachers no longer require the students to endlessly copy out characters. My son’s grade six and he copies new characters five times each.

I honestly think archaic Chinese should be an optional subject. It’s a good example of something that students spend lots of time on that’s virtually useless to them later. At least with subjects such as science and maths they provide an essential background for some further study subjects and they teach important principles of reasoning and logic. I also don’t think it’s necessary for students to learn 5000 years of Chinese history, especially when it’s at the expense of learning about other nations’.[/quote]

The role of classical and literary Chinese especially in the high school textbooks has been the subject of great ideological controversy recently. On the pro-side you have the Ma administration and cultural conservatives like the noted poet Yu Kuang-chung say that the proportion of classical/literary Chinese is too low. Most humanist and pro-Taiwan reformers say it is too high.

It is important to keep in mind that rather more literary/classical Chinese is needed to read modern Chinese than the tiny smattering of Latin and Greek needed to at least enrich our understanding of English. The daily newspaper is larded with literary constructions as are most official and legal documents. One cannot write Chinese like an educated adult without some exposure to the classical register of the language. Plus, Tang and Song poetry as well as Ming/Qing fiction are very accessible with just a little work. Not being able to read these materials means that you are culturally illiterate. So I would question whether this is something that is virtually useless later.

Having said that, I think that these objectives can be met even if the proportion of literary/classical Chinese is reduced. Far more time should be spent learning to write clearly and persuasively in modern Chinese. Unfortunately, this would require a complete overhaul of the very poor teaching methods used to teach and test composition in Taiwan’s high schools.

Taiwan’s history textbook, btw, cover a surprising wide range of world and regional history. The stultifying teaching methods succeed in most kids remembering nothing about these subjects.

Finally, the most important ‘advanced’ Chinese subject is literary Chinese, which roughly covers the period from Roman times to the present. This is the equivalent of Latin in English. ‘Classical’ Chinese refers to the language of texts written during the five centuries before Christ. Predictably, it is more difficult. ‘Archaic’ Chinese refers to texts written between about 1200 BC and 700BC that are largely of archaeological interest and are not taught at all.

37

[quote=“Feiren”]I think we should be listening to Gain since she attended Taiwanese public schools. I do hear from parents that the elementary schools are much less of a problem then the higher grades.

As for testing results, my understanding is that Taiwan 15 year olds had the fifth highest PISA scores not just in Asia, but in the world. PISA covers math, science, and reading.
[/quote]
Actually primary schools are pretty bad as well. I personally wasn’t that scarred by the system as I tend to do ok in terms of scores and grades, I didn’t attend cram schools as much as many of my classmates. Many of them started to stay in buxibans till 8 PM since like 3rd or 4th grade, and it just got worse from there.

I remember when I was in middle school, once I was about to go home from the buxiban(it was a shitty one like 3 minutes away from the school, yuck. I should never have gotten near that piece of shit), I saw an old man paying the tuition fees for his grandson who was still in elementary school(like 5th or 6th grade). Quite frankly I don’t really think his grandson learned anything from the godawful cram school, but he was just…so desperate that he was willing to spend tens of thousands of money on his grandson’s education, and they were obviously not in the position of any luxury. The look on his face have haunted me till today and will keep doing so.

Oh and I’m a he.

38

[quote=“Feiren”]I have to take some issue with this stuff about “archaic” methods of teaching Chinese.

Taiwan’s school system has taught millions of people including non-Han people how to read and write Chinese. By all accounts, Chinese script with its thousands of character takes longer to master than 26 letters. As a result, kids in Taiwan have to spend a lot of time copying out characters. But the end result is the same. By the age of 7 or 8 almost all kids can read at the same level as kids in other countries and the same progression continues through primary and junior high school.

Is all that time spent copying characters a waste of time? Perhaps-- if you don’t care about your child becoming fully literate in Chinese. But if you do, it is a time-tested way that works. I’d be interested in learning about alternatives, but I think here most foreigners simply don’t know what they are talking about unless they themselves are literate in Chinese.

I wholeheartedly agree that the way classical Chinese (and composition) is taught in junior high school and high school is very poor and it’s a real shame that it wasn’t taught in a way that inspired Gain and others to keep reading in pre-modern Chinese. Then again, the high school English teachers I had who tried to teach Chaucer and Shakespeare failed pretty miserably with me. A teacher who can get teenagers to truly be interested in Zhuangzi or Shakespeare is a very rare and wonderful beast.

But this is entirely different issue than the teaching of basic Chinese literacy. Taiwan’s schools know how to teach this and they do a great job. It is premised on the assumption that becoming literate in Chinese is important. Not everyone agrees with that premise. That’s fine, but if so, maybe a Taiwanese school is not for your kids.
[/quote]
Just to clarify, personally I am a fan of classical Chinese, in fact I minor in Chinese literature in college(though I’m dropping it as finishing all the credits will take forever) and I actually wanted to major in it back in high school. And yeah it was mostly because of my teacher, she was really good, and the fact that I fared really really well in almost all exams, that gave me a sense of…pride. :roflmao:

I don’t think learning characters is a problem at all. One has to learn lots of vocabularies for any other language as well, it’s a process of learning a language. Now the thing I don’t like about the Chinese language education here is that not every student is like me. I’d go as far as saying that most have no interest whatsoever on the old literary stuff. We had to memorise the various meaning of words, various ancient articles or poets(some of them are really long), the history of Chinese literature(that’s when “5000 years of history” really means something cause it’s fucking enormous), which poet/literary figure did what at which point of his life etc. etc. etc. Personally, I enjoyed it, but it’s obviously not for everyone, but everyone is forced to take everything.

To me the worst part is the [u]writing skill mastery/u. I don’t know if you guys know this but for college entrance exams, students would have to write down stupid shit for both English and Chinese. The English one sort of makes sense as it is really about how well one can write down something in English. It usually consists of two Chinese-to-English questions(for translation) and one short paragraph(120-200 words long). It’s kinda like IELTS or TOEFL, just much easier.

Whereas the Chinese one is just 48017592583495 kinds of pointless. The topics of the exams are usually laughable cliches such as 寬與深(Width and Depth, topic of 2011’s exam), 逆境(Tough Times, topic of 2009’s exam), 惑(Perplexity, topic of 2010’s exam), 自勝者強(He Who Prevails upon Himself Is the Strongest, topic of 2012’s exam). Students would bs about things such as their grandparents’ or parents’ death(which hasn’t happened yet) or utilise the life experiences of various ancient historical figures in order to get a good grade. Seriously how sick is that? And really, what’s the point? It’s like a competition of cheesiness, and you are supposed to “practice” this in order to get into a prestigious college. :loco:

Maybe it’s the same shit in the UK or the US, Idk.

39

[quote=“Feiren”][quote=“Petrichor”]It depends on the teacher and the school, but nowadays many teachers no longer require the students to endlessly copy out characters. My son’s grade six and he copies new characters five times each.

I honestly think archaic Chinese should be an optional subject. It’s a good example of something that students spend lots of time on that’s virtually useless to them later. At least with subjects such as science and maths they provide an essential background for some further study subjects and they teach important principles of reasoning and logic. I also don’t think it’s necessary for students to learn 5000 years of Chinese history, especially when it’s at the expense of learning about other nations’.[/quote]

The role of classical and literary Chinese especially in the high school textbooks has been the subject of great ideological controversy recently. On the pro-side you have the Ma administration and cultural conservatives like the noted poet Yu Kuang-chung say that the proportion of classical/literary Chinese is too low. Most humanist and pro-Taiwan reformers say it is too high.

It is important to keep in mind that rather more literary/classical Chinese is needed to read modern Chinese than the tiny smattering of Latin and Greek needed to at least enrich our understanding of English. The daily newspaper is larded with literary constructions as are most official and legal documents. One cannot write Chinese like an educated adult without some exposure to the classical register of the language. Plus, Tang and Song poetry as well as Ming/Qing fiction are very accessible with just a little work. Not being able to read these materials means that you are culturally illiterate. So I would question whether this is something that is virtually useless later.

Having said that, I think that these objectives can be met even if the proportion of literary/classical Chinese is reduced. Far more time should be spent learning to write clearly and persuasively in modern Chinese. Unfortunately, this would require a complete overhaul of the very poor teaching methods used to teach and test composition in Taiwan’s high schools.

Taiwan’s history textbook, btw, cover a surprising wide range of world and regional history. The stultifying teaching methods succeed in most kids remembering nothing about these subjects.

Finally, the most important ‘advanced’ Chinese subject is literary Chinese, which roughly covers the period from Roman times to the present. This is the equivalent of Latin in English. ‘Classical’ Chinese refers to the language of texts written during the five centuries before Christ. Predictably, it is more difficult. ‘Archaic’ Chinese refers to texts written between about 1200 BC and 700BC that are largely of archaeological interest and are not taught at all.[/quote]

Thanks for the explanation. I’m just going by what Taiwanese friends have told me.

40

[quote=“Gain”]To me the worst part is the [u]writing skill mastery/u. I don’t know if you guys know this but for college entrance exams, students would have to write down stupid shit for both English and Chinese. The English one sort of makes sense as it is really about how well one can write down something in English. It usually consists of two Chinese-to-English questions(for translation) and one short paragraph(120-200 words long). It’s kinda like IELTS or TOEFL, just much easier.

Whereas the Chinese one is just 48017592583495 kinds of pointless. The topics of the exams are usually laughable cliches such as 寬與深(Width and Depth, topic of 2011’s exam), 逆境(Tough Times, topic of 2009’s exam), 惑(Perplexity, topic of 2010’s exam), 自勝者強(He Who Prevails upon Himself Is the Strongest, topic of 2012’s exam). Students would bs about things such as their grandparents’ or parents’ death(which hasn’t happened yet) or utilise the life experiences of various ancient historical figures in order to get a good grade. Seriously how sick is that? And really, what’s the point? It’s like a competition of cheesiness, and you are supposed to “practice” this in order to get into a prestigious college. :loco: [/quote]
This is way off-topic now, but thanks for explaining this. You’ve explained so much about the way my university students write. Poor kids - they spend years learning how to write for exams, and then someone like me comes along and tells them, no, don’t do that.