My Opinion: A Review of Taiwan's High School Curriculum Controversy (Pt. 2)

My Opinion: A Review of Taiwan's High School Curriculum Controversy (Pt. 2)

          
With "Debatable Items" of the new curriculum guidelines (reported by Taipei Times):

This is a review of the Taiwan High School Curriculum Controversy. I tried to cull a  list of grievances opponents made to the modifications in textbooks content. In July 2013, three pro-unification publishers changed some content after directives from KMT consultants in the Ministry of Education. 

     In May 2014, a teacher from Taichung showed slides of photos from the textbooks to the DPP with the changes to content.
     In February 2015, the Taipei High Administrative Court on ruled against the Ministry of Education in a case involving the ministry’s controversial “minor adjustments” to high-school curriculum guidelines for history, civic and social studies, Chinese and geography saying its information should be more transparent and complete for public perusal. 
     The DPP claimed the changes “de-Taiwanization and Sinicization” of the education system tailored to the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) view of history. The DPP organized more than 50 protesters — joined by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Huang Wei-cher (黃偉哲) and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) Legislator Chou Ni-an (周倪安) who rallied in front of the Ministry of Education building.
     In April 2015 an alliance called for a textbook boycott because of the "conservative ideology of committee members."

     In May 2015 The chairman of the pro-unification Chinese Integration Association, has said that younger generations — without the cultivation of Chinese culture — have become empty, “with no identity, confidence, patience, vision, direction or viewpoint.”He also said that more Mandarin Chinese-language learning hours would equate to “more filial piety and sibling love.”

     The Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa (吳思華)  said that the new curriculum guidelines should be followed in new textbooks set to be printed and would be used to draw up college entrance examination questions. 
     High-school student protested against the Ministry of Education’s controversial adjustments to high-school curriculum guidelines with students from at least 16 high schools campaigning in nationwide, coordinated action.
     In June 2015, anti-curriculum groups said they would provide students protesting curriculum adjustments to mobilize their peers in staging a nationwide rally with the resources to arouse and mobilize their peers nationwide in the build-up to the rally, including legal assistance should the young people face prosecution over their actions. 
     Groups gathered outside the ministry to throw their support behind Wu, who they said is a “minister of courage” who dares to “right the wrong.”

     The Ministry of Education scheduled four hearings. The first at National Taichung First Senior High School fell into disarray as the audience drowned out the speakers. Wu apologized to students, teachers and parents who had signed up for the three cancelled hearings, adding that he would answer their questions during the “open mic” session.

     The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU)  were accused  by the KMT of manipulating students and said they were the source of discontent in schools nationwide in ongoing controversy surrounding the Ministry of Education’s planned adjustments to high-school curriculum guidelines.

The ministry has taken a step back and not insisted on the exclusive use of new textbooks.

     The textbooks used in the Japanese colonial era put great emphasis on familiarizing students with Taiwan and students even had to climb Yu-Shan as a graduation requirement. However, the textbooks used since the then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government retreated to Taiwan in 1949 have sought to make students memorize a slew of facts about Chinese history and geography, making students learn where the Yangtze River and Yellow River flow in China, without knowing where the Tseng-Wen River traverses Taiwan.
     On July 14, 2015, students forced their way into the K-12 Education Administration building in Taipei. Thirteen forced their way into building. By July 23, 2015,  high-school students camped outside the Ministry of Education gates rallying for the withdrawal of controversial high-school curriculum guidelines. More than 300 people participated in the rally with students piling textbooks outside of the ministry’s entrance to express their dissatisfaction.

The Ministry of Education said that 33 people were arrested, while video showed police dragging people from an office on the second floor. The handcuffing of students was said to be “disproportionate” and a breach of the Police Power Exercise Act.Three journalists arrested while covering the storming of Ministry of Education building late on Thursday night and early yesterday morning were released without bail by prosecutors after they insisted on pleading not guilty
     Wu also ruled out any temporary suspension of the controversial curriculum guidelines, stating that the administrative procedures for them to go into effect next month have already been completed and he could not reverse them. He said the ministry maintains that schools are to be allowed to use textbooks based on either the old or new versions of guidelines, with teachers using “supplementary materials” to lead discussion on both sides of the controversial portions.

     KMT Legislator Lin Te-fu (林德福) displayed a photograph that has been circulating online, showing a receipt for NT$1,495 worth of umbrellas, suggesting that the DPP had made the purchase.

Lin said the DPP likely masterminded the break-in, 

     On Thursday, July 30, 2015, a Taiwan Student protester committed suicide. Dai Lin (林冠華)  had been a prominent activist within the Northern Taiwan Anti-Curriculum Changes Alliance. Lin periodically served as one of the group’s spokespeople. In a final Facebook post, Lin wrote: "I have only one wish: Minister [of Education Wu Se-hwa (吳思華)] withdraw the curriculum guidelines.” Nearly 100 angry students storm legislature.

Debatable item #1: Problems with Taiwan's ethnic relations, “...partially originate from Taiwan’s frequent elections, in which certain political parties constantly incite disharmony among different ethnic groups that were just beginning to meld, causing polarization and breeding antagonism between the groups.”

Debatable item #2  In the chapter on cross-strait relations, the textbook praises the government’s policy of a “diplomatic truce” with China, saying that it has greatly improved cross-strait relations, as now the two sides no longer compete for diplomatic allies. 

Debatable item #3 - The curriculum stresses the contributions of the Qing Dynasty to Taiwan’s development and downplays the role of Japan. 

Debatable item # 4 - The curriculum also reintroduces an outdated term quan fu (光復) — meaning the recovery of Taiwan by the Republic of China from Japanese rule; the term is allegedly a throwback to former president Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) regime.

Debatable item #5 - Changes to the history curriculum included revising the term “Japanese-governed period” to “Japanese occupation period.” 

Debatable item # 6 - Naming the period during which Koxinga, also known as Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功) — who ruled Taiwan in the 17th century — the “Ming-Cheng period,” with “Ming” signifying China’s Ming Dynasty, despite the Ming not, in official terms, claiming sovereignty over Taiwan, a DPP education group alleged.

Debatable item #7 - Use of the phrase “Filipino servants” instead of “migrant workers” and replace “foreign spouses” with “foreign brides,” she said.

Debatable item #8 - It cut out sections on human rights and the White Terror era, while adding sections on the ‘family clan’ and Chinese culture that they felt were more important.

Debatable item #9- Curriculum reincorporates a high percentage of classical Chinese material while neglecting Taiwanese and contemporary literature, "percentage of classical Chinese has been raised from 55 percent to 65 percent." 

Debatable item #10 - The publisher’s history textbook used the controversial term “returning to the embrace of the motherland” twice. 

Debatable item #11 - The textbook suggests that former president Lee Teng-Hui’s (李登輝) formulation of the “two states theory” in 1999 hindered cross-strait negotiations.

Debatable item #12 - The “one side, one country” model proposed by Lee’s successor, Chen Shui-Bian (陳水扁), had destabilized Taiwan-US relations.

Debatable item #13 -  The textbook has two full pages on the so-called “1992 consensus” embraced by President Ma Ying-Jeou (馬英九) 

Debatable item # 14- The textbook also praises the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement for elevating cross-strait exchanges to the next level. 

Debatable item #15 - There is a lack of references in the books to democracy activist Deng Nan-Jung (鄭南榕), the 228 Incident and the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident  which allegedly covers up the former KMT regime’s disregard for human rights by creating the impression that the government had attached great importance to the issue.

Debatable item #16 - Textbooks were changed to identify Mount Everest as the nation’s highest peak rather than Jade Mountain (玉山) because the Constitution says the Republic of China includes all of China as its territory.

to be continued...

College Board Caves To Conservative Pressure, Changes AP U.S. History Curriculum

BY CASEY QUINLAN JUL 30, 2015 11:04AM UPDATED: JUL 30, 2015 9:48PM

CREDIT: LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Declaration of Independence, painting by John Trumbul

Share49,896

Tweet1,481

After backlash from conservatives that AP guidelines released last year by the College Board were unpatriotic, the new AP standards, which are effective immediately, will use the phrase “American exceptionalism,” and includes the founding fathers, according to Newsweek. The College Board said it “previously assumed it wasn’t something it needed to spell out as part of what would be taught in an American history course.”

Some of the main criticisms of the guidelines, conservatives voiced, were less emphasis on the founding fathers and more emphasis on slavery. The guidelines also included earlier American history that included violence against Native Americans and mentioned the growing influence of social conservatives. There were also complaints that World War II was not emphasized enough, but military victories will be given more attention in the new standards. Mentions of slavery will be “roughly the same” as previous standards, according to Newsweek.

Conservatives also took issue with the framework’s description of the term “manifest destiny.” The definition, according to The Daily Caller:

The idea of Manifest Destiny, which asserted U.S. power in the Western Hemisphere and supported U.S. expansion westward, was based on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority, and helped to shape the era’s political debates.

AP American history courses in particular became a political battleground when the College Board released new guidelines in October 2012. According to Talking Points Memo, the public controversy started with Larry Krieger, a retired history teacher. Then The Republican National Committee noticed Krieger’s remarks and campaigned against the new framework. The RNC asked Congress to stop funding the College Board, saying it “emphasizes negative aspects of our nation’s history while omitting or minimizing positive aspects.”

After the issue picked up momentum, more and more state legislators got involved in decrying the new guidelines. An Oklahoma legislative committee voted to ban AP history class and Oklahoma Rep. Dan Fisher (R) introduced legislation “prohibiting the expenditure of funds on the Advanced Placement United States History course.” In Colorado, the Jefferson County school board intended to create a committee to review the AP history course. Students protested revisions to the new standards and soon after, the Jefferson County school board cancelled a review of the standards.

In September of last year, Ben Carson, a pediatric neurosurgeon who is now running for president,said “most people” who take the course would be “ready to sign up for ISIS.”

For conservatives, many of whom actively oppose Common Core standards, it may have added insult to injury that the head of the College Board is David Coleman, one of the major leaders behind the Common Core standards, according to the Washington Post.

The AP standards are just one piece of the debate over how to accurately cover American history, especially if you intend to describe the actual experiences of people other than white, landowning men. Texas also recently changed its state academic guidelines, which means its new textbooks won’t mention the Ku Klux Klan or Jim Crow laws. Texas is a very influential textbook market, and publishers tend to look to Texas when deciding content for the textbooks they publish.

My Opinion: Taiwan Curriculum History From Inside Noah's Ark (Pt. 1)

My Opinion: Taiwan Curriculum History From Inside Noah's Ark (Pt. 1)

Wearing a T-shirt with the IWW message: “An injury to one is an injury to all,”
 Chu said the words reflected the attitude of the protesters,
adding that he wore the shirt to express his rage.

     The last few months in Taiwan has seen a roiling controversy about changes the Ministry of Education has made to the high school curriculum, particularly to history, literature, and geography of Taiwan's Republic of China. 
  
      In an editorial of July 25, "Twilight of China-centric Primacy" in the Taipei Times, not once did Noah Buchan mention the influence of the United States in Taiwan. "This place," he says, "that today is called Taiwan has been ruled at various points and at various places by Aborigines, Spanish and Dutch explorers, Chinese settlers, Japanese imperialists and a Chinese military." He forgot to mention the U.S. has been influencing Taiwan history since 1945. 
        I would like to report that high school student activists, added by the media to the "Sunflower" movement of college student activists last year, used  a popular Wobbly "silent agitator" sticker saying: "An Injury to One is an Injury to All," as their slogan; documentary maker Kevin Lee (李惠仁) introduced  a T-shirt which he wore with the anti-curriculum-changes slogan on it.   
     Mr. Buchan says the Taiwanese are " ...members of a nation that does not include China, Mongolia, Xinjiang, Tibet, Japan, the U.S. or any other place."  Noah Buchan is in a serious flood of denial.
     For the record, the United States handed Taiwan to the KMT Chinese in 1945, ignored the 228 massacre, kept over 60,000 troops here for thirty two years of the thirty-eight year martial law, set up an English radio station and other adult entertainment, put English on street signs and in public schools, exploited Taiwan's proximity to eavesdrop on China, then used Taiwan to outsource sweatshops for American industrialists here and throughout Asia.
      To Noah Buchan, there was no American imperialism happening in Taiwan and there is still no American influence. Noah marches his denials in, two by two, on the Taiwan ark. He is obviously out of touch with the ocean around him so he can criticize the KMT whose Department of Education recently modified  Taiwanese-Chinese history in high school textbooks.
     KMT Political Socialization in Taiwan is nothing new, but it has backfired into the newest "Sunflower" cause celeb, thanks to some dumb conservative advice and a little push from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) with nods of approval from U.S. think-tankers. 
     Students around the world have been misled by their governments take on history. Why should Taiwanese students be any different? There are thousands of erroneous facts in American history  that are  kept out of textbooks or glossed over. For example, in American history textbooks, Asian (which is referred to as the "Far East") and Middle World (they still call "Middle East") history gets all of one or two pages to the bulk of Euro-centric Christian history. 
     Also, in American textbooks, in the Asian history section, there is no mention of the US military having prior knowledge of an upcoming bombing of Pearl Harbor; they needed a pretense for declaring war on Japan. There is no mention in American textbooks that the war was won before needlessly dropping two atom bombs on Japanese civilians. In the Chinese history section, the KMT was America's 'friend' during World War II, helping defeat Japan when, in fact, they spent most of the money the U.S. senate gave them fighting the communists or pocketing the change. 

The CCP likes it when the KMT criticizes Japan, while the DPP and America curry Japan’s support in containing China. It all boils down to the United States government wanting to contain Chinese power to continue economic and military dominance of Asia and the world. Taiwanese people cannot deny  that Taiwan culture is influenced by Chinese any less than American culture is English.

...to be continued.