Recalling 12 Year Compulsory Education's Teething Pains

Recalling 12 Year Compulsory Education's Teething Pains
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 17, 2014

Summary: The 12 year compulsory education program is our nation's established educational policy. If we agree that extending compulsory education will improve the quality of our citizens, then we should not spin our wheels on admissions policy. We should concentrate on the person to be educated. Warren Buffett said that the difference between himself and others is that after he gets out of bed each morning, he has a chance to do what he wants to do. Call it diversity. Call it special characteristics. Call it any name you want. The most important thing 12 year compulsory education can do is give children the space to do what they need to do. Let them discover their own talents, and learn to be happy.

Full Text Below:

The Taipei City Government has abolished the Academic Ability Test for Admission to Senior High School. To avoid controversy, some elite schools have also ceased using the Academic Ability Test. The controversy over 12 year compulsory education has finally been settled. But many people, including Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa, insist that the Academic Ability Test should be retained. After all, diversity in admissions is a core value of 12 year compulsory education. Wu Se-hwa has even encouraged second tier schools to offer the Academic Ability Test in order to compete with first tier schools. Some parent organizations believe that the Ministry of Education exerted political pressure to force schools to abolish the Academic Ability Test, and to eliminate elite education for the sake of ersatz egalitarianism. The rush to adopt 12 year compulsory education has indeed led to endless aftereffects. Now that the political controversy over student recruitment has finally been settled, we need to look back and ask ourselves what was the purpose of 12 year compulsory education?

The purpose of 12 year compulsory education was to improve the quality of our citizenry. The 12 year compulsory education program stressed admissions without entrance exams. The intent was to reduce academic pressure on students and allow senior high schools to become standardized community senior high schools. Students would simply attend the nearest school. Children would be spared academic pressures and commute long distances. Diversity in admissions would encourage senior high schools to offer specialized curricula. The Academic Ability Test was a student recruitment method that would introduce specialized curricula to senior high schools. The goal was to create an environment in which students could fulfill their expectations. So many well-intentioned goals were hitched to the wagon of an admissions test, that its original nature became blurred by controversy.

This year, for the first time, senior high schools will not require entrance examinations. This has led to considerable controversy. Just how many senior high schools that do not require entrance exams must a student apply to before being admitted? Allowing schools to recruit students has already led to confusion and complaints by schools, parents, and students. The brutal reality is that academic pressure on students has not been relieved. Instead new pressures have been created. According to 1111 Job Bank statistics, online tutoring numbers show that between January and August, 10,000 more students applied. This represents a 45% surge over the same period in 2013. It also established a record high since the tutoring network was established. The 12 year compulsory education enrollment program is too complicated. Parents and students are at sea. They must seek help on their own. They can seek help from tailor made tutoring programs. Under the circumstances how can students possibly reduce academic pressure on themselves? Before they had to bone up on English, math, physics, and chemistry. Now they must learn Japanese, take violin lessons, and volunteer for community service. Diversity in admissions and Academic Ability Tests have become distorted. They have become alternative sources of income for cram schools or home tutors.

The Academic Ability Test was supposed to give students with different strengths the opportunity to receive specialized training. Instead, its implementation has merely provided elite schools with a pipeline by which to recruit students more adept at taking tests. It has merely muddied the waters. It has left the Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students in a state of uncertainty, and students and parents in a state of anxiety.

The Academic Ability Test has morphed into a back door for elite senior high schools. It has already violated the spirit of diversity. It has even less to do with education tailored to the student's potential. It merely perpetuates academic test scores as an admissions threshold. It merely engages in pretense. Schools have blind faith in test scores. Parents continue to have blind faith in the values held by elite schools. It will probably be a long time before students on Taiwan can receive an education tailored to the student's potential.

Everyone is suggesting cures for the problems caused by 12 year compulsory education. The cures suggested include more "specialized curricula" once the Academic Ability Tests are abolished and insufficient diversity becomes a problem. The school districts for Taipei and Keelung will be reduced in size. A student will first obtain Comprehensive Assessment Program test scores, then arrange for Academic Ability Tests. The 12 year compulsory education program has just been launched. Yet patchwork repairs are already required. One can safely predict that the situation will soon be even more fragmented and confusing. Worse still, the suggested cures are mere technicalities. The 12 year compulsory education program has become a big brawl over school admissions. How can this possibly be the object and purpose of education?

If we really want diversity, if we really want education tailored to the student's potential, we must begin by respecting individual differences and traits. In the book "Now, Discover Your Strengths," Donald Clifton, the "the Father of Strengths Psychology," proposed that education should transform talent into ability and enable people to feel a sense of accomplishment. Our society does not need perfect people with perfect test scores. If a person can find and use his innate talent, he can make a meaningful contribution to himself and to society. The book "Talk Like TED:The 9 Public-Speaking Secrets of the World’s Top Minds," mentions a touching example -- the story of "Phantom of the Opera" choreographer Dame Gillian Barbara Lynne. When Lynne was young, her mother discovered that she liked to move around and couldn't concentrate. So she took her to see a doctor. The doctor discovered that Lynne loved dancing. She told the mother to send Lynne to dance school to learn dance. As a result, Lynne became a superstar in the dance world. Just imagine what would have happened if Lynne's mother had insisted that Lynne quiet down, read books, and study for exams?

The 12 year compulsory education program is our nation's established educational policy. If we agree that extending compulsory education will improve the quality of our citizens, then we should not spin our wheels on admissions policy. We should concentrate on the person to be educated. Warren Buffett said that the difference between himself and others is that after he gets out of bed each morning, he has a chance to do what he wants to do. Call it diversity. Call it special characteristics. Call it any name you want. The most important thing 12 year compulsory education can do is give children the space to do what they need to do. Let them discover their own talents, and learn to be happy.

社論－回頭想想十二年國教的初衷
2014年09月17日 04:11
本報訊

台北市宣布取消特招，一些明星學校為了省事、也為了減少爭議，相繼宣布放棄特招後，吵吵嚷嚷一陣子的12年國教問題，總算暫時塵埃落定。但包括教育部長吳思華在內的不少人又回頭說，特招不該廢，畢竟多元入學是12年國教的核心價值。吳思華甚至鼓勵所謂的「第二志願」學校應辦理特招，好搶第一志願學校的學生。也有家長團體認為教育部用政治壓力強逼名校放棄特招，消滅菁英教育，是追求假性公平，匆促上路的12年國教果然留下無窮的後遺症。現在招生方式的政治爭議終於塵埃落定，應該回頭想想：為什麼要辦理12年國教？

國民教育的目的在提升國民素質，12年國教標榜免試入學，是希望減輕學子的升學壓力，並讓高中均質化成為社區高中，讓學生就近就讀，免除孩子的升學壓力及就學的舟車勞頓；多元入學則希望鼓勵高中辦出教學特色，特招是為達成高中特色化目標而產生的招生方式，期望創造學生適性揚才學習的環境。這麼多立意良好的目標最後統統被壓縮在「入學方式」的爭執中而變得面目模糊。

今年首次辦理高中免試入學，發生非常多爭議，到底要「幾免」才能讓學生找到學校讀、讓學校招收到學生，已搞得學校、家長和學生人仰馬翻、怨聲載道，更殘酷的現實是，學生的升學壓力未見減輕，反而滋生出新的壓力。根據1111人力銀行統計線上家教網的數據顯示，今年1到8月徵求家教的案件數超過了1萬件，比102年同期大增45%，也同時創下家教網成立以來的新高紀錄。這是因為12年國教的入學方案實在太複雜，家長、學子無所適從，只得自力救濟，尋求家教幫忙量身訂做教學方案。在這種情況下，學子的升學壓力怎麼會減輕？從前補英數理化，如今補日文、小提琴外加志工服務。多元入學、特色招生走樣，成為補教業或家教老師的另類財源。

特色招生本來是為了讓有不同專長的學生有機會藉此得到不同的造就，不過，實施的結果只是讓明星學校有個管道，可以招收到比較會考試的學生，更因此攪亂一池春水，讓一般會考的招生程序充滿了不確定性，讓考生和家長飽受煎熬。

特色招生變相為明星高中開後門，早已違背多元精神，更與所謂的適性揚才無關，只是維持以學科考試成績做為招生門檻的掩耳盜鈴做法。學校迷信分數、家長迷信名校的價值觀不改，台灣學子要得到適性學習的機會，恐怕還是一條遙遠的路。

目前各界紛紛針對12年國教所引發的問題提出建言，包括停止特招後，多元性不足的問題，可以「特色課程」予以補強；將基北區切小；拿到會考成績單再辦特招等，12年國教才剛剛推出，就必須要補破網，可以預料未來可能愈趨於零碎與混亂；更何況，目前的種種建議方案，其實都只是在「技術面」打轉，12年國教淪為入學方式大車拚，豈是教育的宗旨與目的？

真要多元、真要適性揚才，恐怕要從尊重個人的差異與特質開始。在《發現我的天才》這本書裡，作者之一的「天賦心理學之父」唐諾．克里夫頓提出一個理念：教育應該「化天賦為能力，在適當的位置上發揮所長，更能讓享受滿足的成就感。」 這個社會不需要十項全能、每一科都考高分的人，如果一個人能找到並運用自己與生俱來的天賦，對個人、對社會都更有意義與貢獻。在《跟TED學表達，讓世界記住你》這本書裡提到一個動人的例子是《歌劇魅影》編舞家林恩的故事。林恩小時母親發現她喜歡動來動去、注意力不集中，於是帶她去看醫生，結果醫生發現林恩熱愛舞動，建議母親，應該把林恩送去舞蹈學校學舞。如此造就了這位舞蹈界的巨星。試想：如果當初林恩的母親硬是要她安靜念書考試，結果會如何？

12年國教已是既定的教育政策，如果我們同意延長義務教育的目的在提高國民素質，就不應該在招生、入學方式上打轉，應該回到受教者的主體性來思考。華倫．巴菲特曾說：「我與其他人的差別，是我每天起床後，有機會作自己想要作的事情。」不論是多元還是特色，或是什麼其他名稱，12年國教最重要的是給孩子做自己的空間，讓他們找到自己的天賦，並能夠快樂學習。