Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

General education is closely tied to universities because the holistic and liberal elements of modern general education are key ideals of both traditional Chinese and Western universities. General education plays a key role in the sustainable development of universities and the realization of their educational ideals. This study discusses the development and challenges of general education in Taiwan’s universities, and the role of general education in the sustainable development of universities. According to a literature review, this study explores the following roles: (1) general education as the foundation of university professional education; (2) general education reform as the foundation of university education reform; (3) general education as the educational ideal of universities; (4) general education as a solution for the “knowledge-only” and “dehumanization” problems of universities; (5) general education as a buffer between technology and humanities in universities; (6) general education as a tool for the enrichment of university culture; and (7) general education as a means to achieve the goals of universities and promote their sustainable development.

Keywords

General education higher education professional education university

Introduction

Throughout human history, education has always been indispensable as a process of transferring knowledge and an activity that preserves human history. Thus, education plays a critical role in human development, and so that countries around the world continuously implement reforms to improve education. Moreover, we live in extraordinary times, in a more-than-human world; in the face of the globalization of education, many countries have tried to promote the quality of higher education in recent years, and cultivate students’ independent thinking and problem-solving ability. General education plays a pivotal role (Morse et al., 2021; Quay, 2021; Shih, 2019, 2020c; Shih and Wang, 2022; Tesar, 2020). Taiwan is no exception. For example, general education in Taiwan has undergone substantial educational reforms. Reforms such as the Ministry of Education’s 2007 Mid-range Program for General Education in 96–99 have been implemented to promote ability-based teaching, practice problem-solving-based learning, and develop students’ abilities to reflect and integrate knowledge, thereby enhancing Taiwan’s national competitiveness.

Generally speaking, “general education” is hard to define. As we know, general education originates from the liberal education of ancient Greece. Liberal education, as it took form among the Greeks, had several aspects. Perhaps the initial aspect to consider is the one revealed by the etymology of the word “liberal.” This word takes its root from the Latin word liber, meaning “free.” Furthermore, the cultivation of the holistic person has always been a topic of concern for general education. Hopefully, students can attain a more perfect human nature. This is the intention of general education (Shih, 2019). The main objectives of the program in general education are as follows: (1) Cultivate a model of general education; (2) build a solid public resource of general education; (3) improve the general education curriculum; (4) integrate professional and general knowledge fields; (5) encourage excellent teachers’ participation; (6) promote students’ participation; and (7) strengthen the atmosphere of general education. In the medium term, Taiwan intends to implement the Selection of an Outstanding General Teacher award to stimulate the morale of the general teacher, encourage outstanding teachers from professional departments to participate in general education, establish the National Outstanding General Education Teacher Award, and promote the improvement of general education in Taiwan (Ministry of Education, 2007).

One critical and neglected issue in Taiwan’s general education reform movement is that the professional education provided by universities has become increasingly out of touch with students’ changing lives. However, the purpose of general education is to cultivate a broad knowledge base so that students are not limited to professional disciplines, can think independently based on accessible knowledge, and are able to explore solutions to problems in a rapidly changing society, allowing students to live peaceful, meaningful, and valuable lives (Sun, 2008; Wang, 2010).

The purpose of education is to teach students, cultivate morals, and ensure students’ all-around development, so that they become individuals with meaningful and valuable lives (Yang and Yu, 2007). The holistic development of the individual has also become the foundation for general education at various universities in Taiwan. For example, the general education concept of the National Taiwan Normal University emphasizes the holistic development of individuals (Center of General Education at National Taiwan Normal University, 2019). Similarly, at Taipei City University, “constructing the content of holistic general education and cultivating the civic responsibility of students to participate in community services” is set as the general education concept with the aim of developing holistic education and fostering students’ broader perspective (Taipei City University, 2019).

In fact, general education emphasizes holistic and liberal education as ideals pursued by traditional Chinese and Western universities (Yang and Yu, 2007). General education plays an important role in the sustainable development of universities and influences whether universities can realize their educational ideals (King, 2008).

In philosophy a documentary analysis approach is used to obtain information through objective and systematic literature analysis (Tesar, 2021). This study intends to first illuminate the development of general education in Taiwan through literature analysis and then discuss the important challenges in Taiwan’s universities in the 21st century. Finally, thinking about general education can promote its sustainable development in Taiwan’s universities. Through this discussion, this study aims to contribute to the understanding of the relationship between general education and the sustainable development of universities.

The development of general education in Taiwan

To discuss the development of general education in Taiwan, scholars have divided the history of Taiwan’s education program into three periods: (1) 1956–1984; (2) 1984–1996; and (3) after 1996 (Chen, 2001; Huang, 2002; Jue, 2010; Wang, 2009).

General education in Taiwan (1956–1984)

In Taiwan, it is officially documented that the common subjects of universities began in 1903 under the Kui-Mao Educational System, followed by University Regulations in 1913. Compulsory subjects were successively revised in 1938, 1942, 1944, 1948, 1950, and 1952. In 1958, the Ministry of Education promulgated the Common Compulsory Subjects for Universities, which stipulated that subjects such as Chinese, English, Constitution, and History must be taught at colleges and universities. However, due to a lack of completeness, this legislation is generally not considered the beginning of the curriculum design of general education (Chen, 2010).

The most important element of the development of general education in Taiwan’s universities is the implementation of the core curriculum for universities, which can be traced back to when the Ministry of Education promulgated the common compulsory subjects of all universities in 1958 and then partially revised the policy in 1964, 1973, and 1977 (Huang, 2002; Wu, 2009). In Exploration of general education in universities: Taiwan’s experience and enlightenment, Huang (2002: 74–75) said:

In the 1950s, there was no academic freedom in universities and colleges under the political pressure at that time in Taiwan. In July 1956, Tunghai University, which was founded by the Christian Church in the United States, submitted to the Ministry of education for approval to carry out general education, and the Ministry of Education proposed to change to “generalist education.” In 1956, Tunghai University formally implemented “generalist education”. In 1957, the Education System Statement was published as the basis for curriculum development. In 1960, the “general education” of Tunghai University was regarded as the starting point of general education in Taiwan’s university system. In the 1970s, National Tsing Hua University in Hsinchu was the most successful university in Taiwan. Under the active promotion of Professor Jiun-San Shen (1932–2018), the National Tsing Hua University vigorously promoted the general education curriculum, invited famous scholars from abroad to attend the class, and compiled Introduction to Humanities and Introduction to Social Science and other books. In 1981, Professor Zhao-Zhong Yu (1915–2014), former Dean of the School of Engineering, National Taiwan University, took over as President of the National Taiwan University and began to promote general education at National Taiwan University.

In 1982, the Ministry of Education was planning to implement the elective subjects of generalist education from National Taiwan University. At that time, Professor Yuan-Zun Liu questioned the Legislature and suggested that Minister Hui-Sen Zhu should change “generalist education” to “general education.” Minister Zhu adopted the recommendation, resulting in the name “general education” (Ren, 2010).

Before 1984, general education was a characteristic of a few schools in Taiwan (Jue, 2010). The development of general education began with a few elite universities. Initially, some people were dedicated to promoting the independent reform of university education goals and curriculum content (Zhang, 2010). For example, both Tunghai University in the 1950s and 1960s and National Tsing Hua University in the 1970s implemented general education (Jue, 2010). Tunghai University, National Tsing Hua University, and National Taiwan University were among the few schools that the Ministry of Education designated for the general education program (Jiang, 2005).

General education in Taiwan (1984–1996)

In 1983, the Ministry of Education established the Common Subject Program Research in Universities to review common subjects (Huang, 2002; Wu, 2009). In 1984, the Ministry of Education announced the Implementation Points for Elective Subjects of General Education in Universities, which required universities to start implementation in 1984 (Ren, 2010). On this topic, Huang (2002: 74–75) stated

In April, in 1984, the Ministry of Education notified all public and private universities and independent colleges to implement courses in literature and art, history and culture, society and philosophy, mathematics and logic, life sciences, and applied science and technology, offering a variety of elective subjects and courses of 4–6 credits for general education. This is the beginning of the comprehensive implementation of general education in Taiwan’s universities.

Therefore, university education reform in Taiwan began in 1984, when the Ministry of Education reviewed the common education issues of domestic universities and formulated the Implementation Points for Elective Subjects of General Education in Universities (Sun, 2009). Since then, the term “general education” has been widely used, and general education has been comprehensively managed in domestic universities. Various universities and colleges have established relevant units and launched curriculum planning, enabling the improvement of general education (Wang, 2000; Wu, 2009). Moreover, since the introduction of general education in Taiwan in 1984, all universities and colleges have set up special units (such as a General Education Center) responsible for coordinating and promoting general education courses (Lai, 2010). However, Jue (2010: 2) said:

The Ministry of Education required universities across the country to implement it in September 1984. Obviously, they overestimated the resilience of universities. Most universities did not know what “general education” was, and to be asked to offer 4 to 6-credit general course was really overwhelming. In a hurry, the embarrassing situation at that time happened in almost every university, and even the National Taiwan University was no exception. Therefore, what is meant by general education became the topic of concern at the time and the focus of a series of seminars.

In 1989, the Ministry of Education released the University Compulsory Subject List, which broke the previous disciplinary form and changed the design to “curriculum field” to include general courses in the common compulsory subjects. Additionally, this policy increased the general education requirement from 4 to 6 credits to 8 credits and gave each school more freedom in the curriculum design. In October 1992, the Ministry of Education re-published “Implementation Points for University Compulsory Subject List,” integrating common compulsory and general electives and opening another era of general courses (Wu, 2009).

In April 1994, a group of scholars interested in general education established the Association for General Education of Republic of China. The first chairman was Yih-Yuan Li. The association mainly engaged in researching the theory and practice of general education and assisting in the planning of general education. In addition, the group published the academic journal Journal of General Education and held seminars to provide information on general education and encourage the exchange of experiences (Wang, 2013; Wu, 2009). In short, the establishment of the Association for General Education of Republic of China marked a new era of general education in Taiwan’s higher education (Wang, 2013).

In 1994, the Ministry of Education held a meeting of principals and decided that the total common and general education compulsory credits of all schools should not be fewer than 28 credits. Since then, under the principle of academic autonomy, each university can individually determine the credits and contents of their students in general education and professional subjects. However, in practice, most universities still maintain the framework of common compulsory subjects and general education electives. The sum of the credits of the two is generally more than 128 credits (Jiang, 2005).

To cope with the new situation, Taiwan’s Ministry of Science and Technology and Ministry of Education jointly implemented a research and teaching improvement program to promote university general education and officially announced the implementation of general education in Taiwan’s universities. In 1994, the “Education Reform Committee” of the Ministry of Education promoted institutional reforms, amended the University Act, encouraged multiple pathways to college admission, and expanded universities. In the past years, university education in Taiwan has been transformed from elite education to popular education, making general education even more important (Sun, 2009).

The planning of compulsory courses and general education should be shifted from the one-size-fits-all approach stipulated by the Ministry-mandate to diversified courses developed by each school. Overall, the trend of diversification has emerged gradually since 1996 (Jue, 2010).

General education in Taiwan since 1996

In 1999, Chun-Chieh Huang published the book The Idea and Practice of University General Education, which discussed the meaning, goals, theory, challenges, design, and implementation of university general education (Huang, 1999). In 2000, Taiwan’s educational authorities launched the “Teaching Excellence” project following the “Research Excellence” project in an attempt to improve the basic teaching of Taiwan’s higher education. General education was included among the five major items. Each project received approximately 20 million new Taiwan dollars in 4 years. This funding also supports some experimental projects, such as Song-Chu-Yang-Mei Multiple Intelligence Learning Circle, which advocates Our Common Campus (Wang, 2013).

In 2002, the Ministry of Education established the General Education Committee to develop specific plans to promote general education and instructed a team of consultants to develop long-term improvement strategies (Wu, 2009). In the same year, the Ministry of Education also adopted the “Plan to respond to the development of higher education project report,” which stated that universities should pursue excellence, rebuild the university president’s responsibility system, and reform and deepen general education, emphasizing the importance of general education on university campuses (Chang, 2002a).

The Ministry of Education then implemented the first phase of the University General Education Evaluation Pilot Project from 2003 to 2004, subsidizing seven benchmark universities with The Plan to Promote the Integration of Research-Type Universities. The seven universities chosen for the evaluation were National Sun Yat-sen University, National Central University, National Cheng Kung University, National Chiao Tung University, National Tsing Hua University, National Yang-Ming University, and National Taiwan University. The period from 2004 to 2005 coincided with the teachers’ college being restructured into a university. The Ministry of Education then aimed for the three national normal universities and six teachers’ colleges to enter the general education evaluation, which was called the second phase of the Pilot Project of University General Education Evaluation (Lin, 2013).

In 2005, the Masterpiece Study of General Education was established as a long-standing, planned, and sustainable reading group (Huang, 2010). In the same year, to share the concept and experiences of general education, the Chinese Association for General Education issued the monthly publication General Education Online (Wu, 2009). To meet the needs of schools in Tainan and strengthen the integration of the overall resources in southern Taiwan and to construct the General Education Circle concept, the resolution was expanded to become the General Education Strategy Alliance for College and University in Southern Taiwan, which covers colleges and universities in Kaohsiung City, Pingtung County, and Tainan City (Liu, 2006).

In 2007, the Ministry of Education promoted the General Education Mid-Term Outline Program (96–99), hoping to encourage general education that involves ability-based teaching, practices problem-solving–based learning, and develops students’ ability to reflect on, integrate, and innovate knowledge to enhance Taiwan’s overall national power and international competitiveness (Ministry of Education, 2010).

In 2009, the Ministry of Education completed the Advisory office of the Ministry of Education General Education Mid-Term Outline Program Results Report, which indicated that the cultivation of innovative, cross-disciplinary, and integrated talent combined with the improvement of the basic quality of higher education was the key to the current breakthrough in the cultivation of scientific and technological talents. General education is a whole-school, cross-disciplinary education. If universities can build a high-quality, systematic, and integrated curriculum system centered on general education, they may effectively integrate various knowledge domains and become the core mechanism for the cultivation of scientific and technological talents (Ministry of Education, 2009).

In 2014, Chen and Yu (2014) studied how holistic education is interpreted by the majority of universities as the idea of general education, and how it is presented in the G. E. curriculum design at each university. In 2019, Chou (2019) pointed out that in the 21st century, universities are operated with support from the government and society, and they are expected to interact with the people and society more often than before, and take on more obligations. In this view, it will be the trend of time that Taiwan’s universities should bear social responsibilities, and general education is an important way to fulfill this goal.

In 2021, the industry is changing rapidly, and European and American universities have gradually increased the proportion of general education to cultivate “a life-long ability.” According to the General Education Association of the Republic of China, the Ministry of Education has canceled general education assessments in recent years, reducing the importance of general education in schools, and top universities have fewer than five administrative staff. Most students also think that professional subjects are “useful courses,” and general education courses are not valued by students. It is hoped that the government and various institutions should recognize the importance of general education (Pan, 2021).

Overall, the development of general education in Taiwan is similar to that in the United States and Japan in response to the challenges posed by professional education (Shen and Huang, 1995). From a historical perspective, at the beginning of the 21st century, Taiwan’s Ministry of Education mainly promoted the reform of higher education through two strategies: the first was to participate in the globalization of higher education competition, with the specific goal of improving the world ranking of its universities; and the second was to develop educational characteristics aimed at boosting the reform and effectiveness of university teaching. The former is mainly based on the “Fifty Billion within Five Years” plan, wherein the funds were allocated to the subsidized schools to improve the overall school affairs and various world ranking indicators (mainly research papers); the latter is focused on higher education and is supplemented by the “Teaching Excellence Project.” Funding for general education is mainly led by the Ministry of Education for expenses such as general education network platforms, outstanding course grants, and civic literacy projects (Ministry of Education, 2014; Shen, 2012).

As the world is changing and transforming at a fast pace, students today are expected to face more challenges in the future. For example, they need to prepare for jobs that do not yet exist, use technologies that have not been invented yet, or even solve problems that have not been discovered yet (Lin et al., 2021). General education is cultivating students’ broad knowledge and the ability to solve problems. Therefore, general education has its importance and significance (Shih, 2019).

General education challenges in Taiwan’s universities in the 21st century

The idea of the holistic person is ignored

General education is a vital part of the overall education of universities (Liu, 2006), and the core spirit of general education in universities is to cultivate students’ humanity, artistic sentiment, wisdom, analytical thinking ability, communication skills, and life-long learning for sustainable growth (Chen, 2012).

General education is a crucial challenge in Taiwan’s universities in the 21st century. Although the concept of modern universities did not originate with the Chinese universities, Taiwan’s universities incorporate Chinese and foreign educational concepts from Plato (428/427–348/347 BC) to Confucius (551–479 BC). General education emphasizes not only vocational training, but also cultivating a holistic person with noble morals, a sense of responsibility, and independent thought (Zhang, 2006). However, Wu (2009) argued that the development of university education in Taiwan has been affected by social changes and pragmatism. It has increasingly focused on the cultivation of professional talents and neglected the practice of holistic education. Therefore, we advocate that universities should strengthen their programs to correct the current lack of general education and effectively cultivate students who think independently, learn various subjects, and become open-minded individuals with broad insights and humanity. In other words, holistic education is needed, which focuses on the development of the whole person (Liang and Cai, 2006).

Professional education overrides general education

One theme of general education is that modern education produces too many “experts” who only have specialized knowledge and know nothing about life, society, current affairs, national affairs, and world affairs. These experts cannot adapt to the challenges of contemporary society. Through general education, we hope to cultivate a holistic person. We consider the purpose of university and general education to be developing a person’s potential, personality, and kindness. However, because university subjects are so divided, many students have professional knowledge but lack the ability to adapt to life after university (Hsieh, 2002).

To address these concerns, recent school-wide curriculum planning centered on general education has been implemented, which has provided new hope for innovation in general education in past years. However, when planning a school-wide curriculum, conflicts may arise between general and professional courses regarding the different levels of teaching units and the distribution of course credits between the general and professional programs in universities. In this context, the question of how to comprehensively plan courses, cultivate students’ life-long abilities, and develop cross-field general education and professional courses may easily be overlooked), which results in poor general education practice and the ineffective nurturing of students’ character, general knowledge and wisdom. Professional education overrides general education (Chen, 2010; Shih, 2019).

General education courses are not valued by students

Universities are a vital place for cultivating national talent. The quality of education may affect the competitiveness of the society or the country. However, with the trend of globalization, the connotation and quality of university education are already facing major challenges. The recent emphasis on general education by universities in various countries reflects a wave of change in higher education to meet the challenges of globalization; it is increasingly important to cultivate students’ future career development ability (Lin, 2011).

University general education cultivates the basic knowledge that students must possess for the survival and development of a group. The content focuses on the necessary common experiences and knowledge of all, such as the understanding of living environments, the awakening of historical experiences, rational thinking, and moral critical ability. Therefore, general education is a critical element of education in addition to academic majors and career education at universities. However, returning to the historical context, since the Ministry of Education issued the Main Points for the Implementation of General Education Elective Courses in Universities in 1984, universities in Taiwan have implemented general education for more than 30 years. However, the effectiveness of general education practice is still widely criticized. Students not only complain about the poor course content but also ridicule them as “nutrition credits” that are time-consuming and easy to pass (Chen, 2010; Shih, 2019).

If we want to overcome the above challenges of general education, we must deeply understand the following role of general education in promoting the sustainable development of universities.

The role of general education in promoting the sustainable development of universities

General education as the foundation of university professional education

According to Ancient Chinese education, the ultimate goal of education is “To cultivate one’s moral character, to govern one’s family, to rule a country, to pacify the country.” We often think that general education contradicts professional education. It is not enough to educate people with professional knowledge because students can only become useful machines through professional education. Yu-Liang Yang once said, “Scientists should not be just a machine that can engage in scientific research.” The shortcoming of professional education is that it cannot help people develop a harmonious mind. The most basic education is to help students understand community values and generate passionate feelings, providing a clear distinction between beauty and morality. And a humanistic spirit is a universal force that is manifested in the pursuit, maintenance, and safeguarding of human dignity, value and potential. A humanistic spirit is critical for university students (Shih and Wang, 2022; Yang, 2010).

From the perspective of pedagogy, as the former president of National Tsing Hua University Yi-Chi Mei (1889–1962) stated in his book An Explanation of The Great Learning that in this society, generalist is the foundation, and expertise is the last, and stated that people are in need of generalists in our society (Hu, 2006).

The view of general education as the basis of professional education is rooted in the belief that university students are often affected by social mainstream values such as the job market, and they seldom choose professional development based on their own interests, abilities, and potential. Therefore, the function of general education is to enable students to obtain an introductory level of general education before choosing a department. This allows students to gain basic knowledge of various majors and they can cultivate a broader interest (Chang, 2002a).

This view is reflected in the design of the general education curriculum. The most notable example is the “School of Liberal Studies” at universities in Japan, which is responsible for teaching students in their first 2 years of enrollment, whereas in the next 2 years, they enter the “School of Professional Studies.” In recent years, Taiwan has also embraced the idea of promoting universities in both freshman and sophomore departments. In addition to being affected by the Japanese educational system, they also hope that general education will become the basis of professional education to promote the sustainable development of universities in Taiwan (Chang, 2002b).

The reform of general education as the foundation of university education reform

The quality of education systems needs to be improved to promote their development of students. General education, which originated from traditional liberal arts education in the West, emphasizes the subjectivity of the educated and aims for the educated to achieve spiritual awakening to enhance their vision of life, develop independent thinking skills, and create meaning in life. Because general education directly influences students’ philosophy of life and perspective on society and politics, these courses have a profound impact on students’ lives. For example, general education at National Taiwan University includes common education, namely, Chinese language, foreign language, sports, service learning; additionally, it includes general education, namely literature and art, historical thinking, world civilization, moral and philosophical thinking, civic awareness and social analysis, quantitative analysis and mathematical literacy, material science, and life science (Center of General Education at National Taiwan University, 2019).

Likewise, the core competencies of general education at National Central University include logic and scientific reasoning, language expression, appreciation and comment, international perspective, profound historical view, civic moral literacy, creative thinking, and self-learning ability (Center of General Education at National Central University, 2019).

Another example is the core literacy of general education at National Taiwan Normal University. The curriculum’s content includes communication and teamwork, multicultural and international perspectives, critical reflection and humanistic cultivation, esthetic experience, scientific thinking and information literacy, active inquiry and life-long learning, innovative leadership and problem solving, social care, and civic practice (Center of General Education at National Taiwan Normal University, 2019). This type of program is the fundamental basis for the education reform and allows the university to continuously develop (Huang, 2002).

Under the present circumstances, in which general education does not serve as the core of education, it is difficult to build a deep academic foundation for students. This also makes the professional education of universities (and even research institutes) exceptionally fragile. Therefore, the reform of general education is the foundation of university education reform so that general education and professional education may complement each other and promote the sustainable development of universities (Liu et al., 2006).

General education can achieve the educational ideals of universities

Entering into the 21st century, the ideals of universities began to be overshadowed by the rapid development of technology and economy, which became the driving force behind the development of university education. In the past, universities were small in scale and practiced an elite system, with a small number of teachers and students seeking knowledge together in school. In the modern world, this type of classical university model may naturally be eliminated and replaced by a large-scale modern university with an extensive division of disciplines and a capacity for thousands of teachers and students. The development of division of knowledge has been the inevitable result of the scientific revolution since the 17th century (Zhang, 2007).

American educator Clark Kerr (1911–2003) wrote that the modern university is a “multiversity” rather than a “university” because modern universities have lost a shared goal even though students and professors still share a campus. Nonetheless, these institutions only focus on the pursuit of undergraduates, losing their common interest and care. Some scholars have criticized this trend and predicted that once the so-called comprehensive university loses its due internal communication links, it will become a “divided universities” and lose its integral character as a university (Zhang, 2007).

Lin (2007) pointed out that the common subjects in Taiwan were originally politicized and ideological, but we now know that common subject teachers in universities are less politicized and ideological. However, although Taiwan’s ideology and authoritarianism have collapsed, the authoritarian mentality still exists in a society that has been dominated by this ideology for decades.

The politicized and ideological authoritarian education seems to be slowly diminishing. The result of its decline is that everyone has neglected general knowledge, but authoritarianism still exists. However, this authority has shifted to the “new professional authoritarianism,” of utilitarianism. The new professional authoritarianism has become the greatest stumbling block to the promotion of general education. Additionally, the exaggeration of modern tools and rationality has formed a new scientism. This is an obstacle to the implementation of general education in Taiwan (Lin, 2007).

In fact, general education is holistic education. General education, for everyone in the university community, may be a good remedy for “divided universities,” which explains why universities have vigorously promoted general education in the past decade. This discussion reflects that the role of general education in university education is not auxiliary, but a key element that reflects the ideals of universities (Zhang, 2007). In the current university teaching scene that emphasizes scientific majors and neglects humanities, the practice of general education can realize the universities’ educational ideal of “holistic education” and allow the university to develop sustainably.

General education prevents the “knowledge-only” philosophy and “dehumanization” of universities

Taiwan has excellent global competitiveness in spite of limited land and natural resources. The key reason is its quality human resources and higher education. The current university education system in Taiwan uses knowledge as a tool for consumption, and individuals have become tools for research, teaching, learning knowledge, obtaining degrees, and gaining the ability to earn a living in the future, creating a strong sense of instrumentalization and intellectualism. Consequently, individuals have become alienated from one another. For example, many universities focus exclusively on the number of Science Citation Index (SCI) papers published by the school, the number of key laboratories added, and the use of various indicators such as the SCI index and the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI index) to assess the level of teacher, which clearly illustrates the tendency of “intellectualism” and “instrumentalization” to motivate teachers to only produce SCI and SSCI papers. Thus, the faculty becomes a tool to improve the school’s research ranking (Chen, 2010; Lin, 2007; Shih, 2019; Ministry of Education, 2014, 2021; Yang, 2010).

Supporters of general education believe that modern education produces too many experts who have no knowledge of a multicultural society and cannot cope with the challenges of the future. Therefore, they hope to use general education to cultivate well-rounded individuals, halting the overemphasis on professionalism in university education. In addition to providing a particular professional field as for career development, university education must provide broader knowledge to enrich student life, cultivate a healthy personality, and expand the minds students. General education plays a vital role in cultivating holistic education to change the intellectual nature of universities (Tao, 2008; Ministry of Education, 2014, 2021).

In addition, in universities, many classmates meet each other on campus but are regarded as unfamiliar. Students who are afraid to greet the teacher demonstrate a lack of an appropriate “liberal relationship” (Lin, 2007), suggesting that the interaction between teachers and students has lost its kindness, and the interactions between people lack compassion. The practice of general education can improve students’ humanity (Lai and Wu, 2020).

In addition, the National Cheng Kung University hopes to cultivate students with humanity through the practice of general education and promote the sustainable development of the university (Center of General Education at National Cheng Kung University, 2019). Therefore, general education can allow universities to eliminate “intellectualism” and “dehumanization” and encourage the sustainable development of universities.

General education dispels the opposition between technology and humanities

The core purpose of general education is to develop the subjectivity of individuals. In the book The Idea and Practice of University General Education, Huang (1999: 32) writes: “The so-called general education is an education that promotes the awakening of people’s subjective consciousness.” In other words, general education aims to complete the self-liberation of students and develop a mutual subjective relationship between the humanity and the natural environment in which man lives, thereby completing the “human awakening.” Most domestic commentators also accept this view. Nonetheless, subjectivity is as difficult to understand as human nature is.

However, the main contribution of modernity and modernization to mankind lies in the establishment of human subjectivity and rationality. This human-centered subjectivity is manifested in thoughts and practices such as self-awareness, self-determination, and self-realization. In other words, human society must aim to discover the ultimate meaning of man (Hsu, 2002). Therefore, when discussing humanities and technology, the focus is not to emphasize that humanities are a reaction to technology, but that we should not prefer certain values over others. Humanistic literacy helps people’s awakening, but technology has promoted the specialization and efficiency of the division of labor in human society, allowing individuals to enjoy unprecedented quality of life. The key question is how people may face the social risks of alienation that technology poses. In other words, society must learn how to consciously realize the meaning of being human in the age of technology and preserve our humanity. Therefore, university education cannot avoid the study of a specific profession, but the implementation of general education courses can allow students to understand their humanity in this technological age and eliminate the opposition between technology and humanities (Hsu, 2002).

For example, a student in the Department of Information Engineering at a university rarely has the opportunity to access art appreciation courses. By taking elective courses through general education, he or she may enhance his/her esthetics and artistic sensibility, understand the connotation and philosophy of art, and gain background knowledge of humanities and art. In this way, general education can allow students to learn both science and humanities, dispelling the opposition between university departments and promoting the sustainable development of universities.

General education can enrich university culture and promote the university’s cultural mission

Actively developing general education is an effective means to enrich university culture. University general education can compensate for the shortcomings of professional education and accomplish the cultural mission of the university by inheriting and introducing cultural development (Lu, 2009). For example, Hsu (2011) pointed out in her performing arts course that society is constantly changing and progressing, and education struggles to keep up with the times. To promote students’ artistic ability and improve the quality of humanities and arts, the course uses diverse arts. Appreciation and cognition guide students to respect the esthetic values of art. This implementation of general education leads students to value Taiwan’s performing arts industry and cultural trends. Another example, incorporation of rich local cultural resources from Changhua into the course “Ocean Civilization and Taiwan” to inspire students to respect the wisdom and efforts of their ancestors, value cultural assets, and appreciate diversity and open-mindedness. This general education practice of introducing culture allows students to understand the local culture of Changhua. These examples demonstrate how general education courses can enrich university culture.

Furthermore, university education and curriculum planning should adopt a pragmatic approach that nonetheless proceeds from the cultural construction aspect of the overall planning. The active development of general education can help promote the transformation of higher education values, enable the university to accomplish its historical and cultural mission, and promote the sustainable development of the university (Lu, 2009).

General education emphasizes that higher education should combine professionalism and liberal arts so that students have strong self-awareness and interdisciplinary thinking skills. Institutions should also advocate for the harmonious development of man, nature, and society to eliminate the opposition between scientific progress and the humanities (Lu, 2009).

If general education can truly achieve the spirit that it advocates, reflect the essence of higher education goals, and promote the transformation of contemporary educational values, it can enable universities to cultivate an academic culture with both scientific literacy and rich humanistic literacy. General education is vital for the enrichment and development of a sustainable university culture in Taiwan (Lu, 2009).

General education can achieve the goals of the university and promote university sustainable development

Derek Bok advocated that the goals of university education should not be singular, and university education should not be limited to intellectual development. In modern society, the goals of university education should be multifaceted. The educational goals of universities include: (1) accurate and beautiful written expressive skills, as well as clear and persuasive oral expressive skills; (2) clear thinking and critical thinking skills; (3) moral reasoning skills and a clearer and stronger sense of moral principles; (4) civic awareness and knowledge of the process of democratic self-government; (5) multicultural literacy and respect for different cultures with tolerance and understanding; (6) global literacy aspects and an awareness of international affairs and foreign cultures; (7) a wide range of interests to enjoy a colorful life; and (8) preparation for employment. Current students may struggle to understand their aspirations if they do not think carefully about what industry they can engage in in the future.

From the goals of university education advocated by Bok, university education clearly should cultivate students’ comprehensive capacities. Therefore, in addition to the development of professional education, universities should also focus on general education. General education inherits the ideals of classical universities and is the soul of university education. As psychologist Kuo-shu Yang said, “Many goals of university education must be achieved through general education.” General education can achieve the goals of the university and promote its sustainable development (Lee, 2007; Ministry of Education, 2014).

Conclusion

In Taiwan, encouraged by the philosophy of neo-liberalism and the expansion of universities, higher education was requested to provide more educational opportunities to the general public from the late 1980s. With the massification and universalization of higher education, teaching excellence, and students’ learning quality have also become matters of sincere concern. Moreover, facing the challenges of economic globalization, Taiwan’s higher education sector has attempted to improve its competitiveness to attract more international students (Kuo, 2016). The implementation of education affects the development and promotion of the country (Shih et al., 2020). Education can change the future of individuals and is key to raising the competitiveness of a nation.

In view of the changing ideals of Taiwan’s current system, Taiwan’s universities are gradually moving toward dehumanization and intellectualism. However, general education can improve the above situation (Shih, 2019, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Shih and Wang, 2022). General education can eliminate the confrontation between science and humanities, but first, general education reform is the foundation of university education reform. The effectiveness of the implementation of university general education is critical to the future career development of students. Many goals in universities must be achieved through general education. Therefore, general education clearly plays a valuable role in universities that affects whether the institutions can realize their ideals. In this context, this study considers the role of general education in the sustainable development of Taiwan’s universities using an analysis of the literature related to general education. This discussion makes contribute to understanding the relationship between general education and universities as well as the functions of general education in universities.

After reading and analyzing the relevant literature, these roles are as follows: (1) general education as the foundation of university professional education; (2) general education reform as the foundation of university education reform; (3) general education as the educational ideal of universities; (4) general education as a solution for the “knowledge-only” and “dehumanization” problems of universities; (5) general education as a buffer between technology and humanities in universities; (6) general education as a tool for the enrichment of university culture; (7) and general education as a means to achieve the goals and promote the sustainable development of the university.

Finally, general education in higher education originates from 19th century. At that time, quite a few scholars think that students in university receive professional knowledge instead of wide knowledge. Therefore, general education is designed to cultivate students to develop independent analytical thinking and communication skills. Later, it becomes a compulsory course from 21st century (Li, 2017). General education is similar to the United States and Japan in response to the challenges posed by professional education (Shen and Huang, 1995) Harvard University has launched “The New Gen Ed” in 2019, trying to arouse students’ enthusiasm for the courses of general education (Chang, 2021). In Japan, universities are now undergoing development and changes in accordance with the needs of the real society. Departments that take “general education” as the pillar of education continue to emerge. It is indispensable to carry out general education and to cooperate with outstanding foreign universities. It is hoped that can bring new ideas and stimulation to general education in Japan (KANAYAMA Tsutomu, 2021). In Taiwan, we should also try to arouse students’ enthusiasm for the courses of general education. We hope that through the discussion in this study, the essence of general education can be illuminated and its practice in Taiwan may be improved.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Yi-Huang Shih

Author Biographies

Yan-Hong Ye is an Assistant Professor in the Teacher education center, Ming Chuan University. He received his PhD at National Taiwan Normal University in Taiwan. His research interests are mainly in philosophy of education and teacher education.

Yi-Huang Shih is an Associate Professor in the Department of Early Childhood Education and Care, Minghsin University of Science and Technology. He received his PhD at National Taiwan Normal University. His research interests are mainly in early childhood education, general education, life education, and educational philosophy.

Ru-Jer Wang is a Professor in the Department of Education, National Taichung University of Education. He received his PhD at the University of Manchester. His research interests are mainly in educational administration, comparative education, higher education, knowledge economy and education, and educational knowledge management.

References

Center of General Education at National Cheng Kung University (2019a) Course maps. Available at: http://course-query.acad.ncku.edu.tw/crm/course_map/(accessed 7 July 2019).

Center of General Education at National Central University (2019b) General education core competencies. Available at: http://140.115.103.29 (accessed 7 August 2019).

Center of General Education at National Taiwan University (2019c) General education ideal and goals. Available at: http://cge.ntu.edu.tw/?page_id=167.

Center of General Education at National Taiwan Normal University (2019d) General education concepts and goals. Available at: http://www.cge.ntnu.edu.tw/web/about/about.jsp?cp_no=CP1566287216393.

Center of General Education at University of Taipei (2019e) University of Taipei - General education concept. Available at: http://genedu.utaipei.edu.tw/files/11-1021-3372.php (accessed 7 August 2019).

Chang

(2002a) General education in our hi-tech era. Journal of General Studies 1: 1–16.

Chang

(2002b) The strategies of developing general education of the universities - A case study of National Taiwan University of Arts. Journal of National Taiwan College of Arts 70: 225–237.

Chang

(2021) It was once ‘sweet’ as the courses of general education in Taiwan. How does Harvard University reverse the course selection culture? Available at: https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5113266 (accessed 7 July 2021).

Chen

(2010) Rectifying university courses: solving problems due to dichotomy of general and professional courses. Journal of Educational Research and Development 6(3): 257–287.

10.

Chen

(2012) Du Fu and general education. Journal of Humanities and Social Science 2(10): 35–64.

11.

Chen

(2014) Holistic education as the idea of general education: an analysis of ideas and curriculum design of general education from 14 comprehensive universities in Taiwan. Taiwan Journal of General Education 14: 24–43.

12.

Chen

(2001) General education in Taiwan’s universities: retrospect and prospect. Bulletin of Educational Research 47: 283–300.

13.

Chou

(2019) Action research on general education curriculum for implementing the university social responsibility. Journal of General Education: Concept & Practice 7(1): 1–35.

14.

Hsieh

(2002) The philosophy and practice of general education in university: a case study of Yuan Ze University. Journal of the Chinese for General Education 2: 27–54.

15.

Huang

(1999) Chinese Association for General Education. Taipei, Taiwan: Chinese Association for General Education.The Idea and practice of general education in universities

16.

Huang

(2002) Exploration of General Education in Universities: Taiwan’s Experience and Enlightenment. Taipei, Taiwan: Chinese Association for General Education.

17.

Huang

(2010) The origin and growth of the masterpiece study of general education. General Education Online 30: 15–16.

18.

Hsu

(2002) General education and our future: the development of general education at Van Nung Institute of Technology - where we stand and where we want to be. Journal of the Chinese for General Education 2: 71–90.

19.

Hsu

(2011) The development of performing arts courses in the field of humanities and arts for higher general education. Chung Chou Journal of Management and Hunmanity 1(1): 213–222.

20.

(2006) Ten years of exploration and ten years of development—exploration of cultural literacy education in Mainland China. University General Education 1: 1–25.

21.

Jiang

(2005) From liberal education to general education: the development of an idea of university education. A Journal for Philosophical Study of Public Affairs 14: 37–64.

22.

Jue

(2010) The development and status of general education in Taiwan. Available at: http://www.hfu.edu.tw/president/talk/20100726.doc (accessed 7 July 2019).

23.

KANAYAMA Tsutomu (2021) General education: a new trend in Japanese Universities. Available at: https://www.nippon.com/hk/in-depth/d00471/(accessed 7 July 2021).

24.

King

(2008) The position of general education in modern universities. University General Education 4: 1–12.

25.

Kuo

(2016) Taiwan universities: where to go. Humanities 5(12): 1–13.

26.

Lai

(2020) A study of social care course design and the evaluation of learning outcomes under different final assessment: taking two classes of general education at National Chung Hsing University as an example. Journal of General Education: Concept & Practice 8(2): 71–105.

27.

Lai

(2010) Seminar on reflections on higher education ideals and goals. General Education Online 28: 42–43.

28.

Lee

(2007) University idea and general education under the marketization of higher education. University General Education 3: 39–60.

29.

(2017) The study of general education in Japan—Concurrently discuss the development college of arts and sciences in the University of Tokyo. School Administrators 110: 165–179.

30.

Liang

Cai

(2006) Overview of the status of general education in Hong Kong universities. University General Education 1: 69–90.

31.

Lin

(2007) The dilemma of general education in universities and the possible rebirth—a glance at Taiwan as an example. University General Education 2: 23–38.

32.

Lin

(2013). University general education evaluation pilot project [The third phase] Class A plan. Available at: http://get.nccu.edu.tw:8080/getsmr/retrieve/60/report_3A_schools.pdf (accessed 7 July 2019)

33.

Lin

(2011) Survey on the status of implementation of general education in Taiwan’s colleges and universities. Educational Resources and Research 99: 1–36.

34.

Lin

S-Y

Chen

H-C

Chen

I-H

(2021) Creating a better future: Implications from futures imagination education in Taiwan. Policy Futures in Education 19(7): 844–858.

35.

Liu

(2006) General education strategic alliance of colleges and universities of southern Taiwan –Origin, status and future prospects. General Education Online 1: 23–25.

36.

Liu

Tsai

Tang

, et al. (2006) On the analysis of the evaluation of general education in research-oriented universities. Journal of General Education: Concept & Practice 1(1): 261–301.

37.

G-S

(2009) Culture, university culture and general education. University General Education 5: 175–203.

38.

Ministry of Education (2007) Outline program in general education. Available at: http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/∼cyberlin/download/download/9699geproject.pdf (accessed 7 July 2019).

39.

Ministry of Education (2009) The Results Report of General Education Mid-term Outline Program in the Advisory office of the Ministry of Education. Taipei, Taiwan: Ministry of Education.

40.

Ministry of Education (2010) Mid-range outline project of general education. Available at: http://hss.edu.tw/plandetail.php?class_plan=163 (accessed 20 July 2010).

41.

Ministry of Education (2014) Education in Taiwan (2014–2015). Taipei City: The Ministry of Education.

42.

Ministry of Education (2021) Education in Taiwan (2021–2022). Taipei City: The Ministry of Education.

43.

Morse

Blenkinsop

Jickling

(2021) Wilding educational policy: hope for the future. Policy Futures in Education 19(3): 262–268.

44.

Pan

(2021) Cultivating talents who can keep up with the times--Many universities are undergoing general education reforms. Available at: https://news/story/6928/5301115udn.com/(accessed 27 November 2021).

45.

Quay

(2021) Wild and willful pedagogies: education policy and practice to embrace the spirits of a more-than-human world. Policy Futures in Education 19(3): 291–306.

46.

Ren

(2010) Professor Yuan-Zun Liu and general education of Soochow University general education. General Education Online 30: 46–47.

47.

Shen

Huang

(1995) General education in the 21st century. Journal of General Education 2(1): 1–5.

48.

Shen

(2012) Whenever roots were established, the way grows - Suggestions on general education evaluation. Available at: http://www.chinesege.org.tw/geonline/html/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=282 (accessed 7 July 2019).

49.

Shih

Y-H

(2019) An examination of the functions of a general education art curriculum in universities. Policy Futures in Education 17(3): 306–317.

50.

Shih

Y-H

(2020a) Learning content of ‘multiculturalism’ for children in Taiwan’s elementary schools. Policy Futures in Education 18(8): 1044–1057.

51.

Shih

Y-H

(2020b) Searching for educational ideas for children in F. W. Parker’s life path and its implications for Taiwan’s education. Universal Journal of Educational Research 8(7): 3251–3258.

52.

Shih

Y-H

Chen

S-F

Y-H

(2020) Taiwan’s “White Paper on Teacher Education”: vision and strategies. Universal Journal of Educational Research 8(11): 5257–5264.

53.

Shih

Y-H

(2020c) Encounter with Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy: visiting the Brazilian social context (1950s-1970s). Universal Journal of Educational Research 8(4): 1228–1236.

54.

Shih

(2021) Exploring F. W. Parker’s notions regarding child education. Policy Futures in Education (OnlineFirst).

55.

Sun

(2009) Concepts of general education and professional education - reflections on global localization of university knowledge. In: Wang

(ed) Global Local Culture Discussion - General Knowledge World. Taoyuan, Taiwan: Yuan Ze University College of General Studies, 35–52.

56.

Shih

Y-H

Wang

R-J

(2022) Incorporating gender issues into the classroom: study on the teaching of gender-related courses in the general curriculum of Taiwan’s universities. Policy Futures in Education 20(1): 44–55.

57.

Sun

(2008) General education with life education as its core. General Education Online 19: 3–5.

58.

Tao

(2008) Introduction. In: National Taipei University of Business Common Discipline (ed) Humanistic Spirit and Holistic Education. Taiwan, Taipei: Wenchin Press, i–ii.

59.

Tesar

(2020) Towards a post-Covid-19 ‘New Normality?’: physical and social distancing, the move to online and higher education. Policy Futures in Education 18(5): 556–559.

60.

Tesar

(2021) “Philosophy as a Method”: tracing the histories of intersections of “philosophy,” “methodology,” and “education”. Qualitative inquiry 27(5): 544–553.

61.

Tunghai University (2011) Tunghai general education. Available at: http://ge.thu.edu.tw/v2/2_origin.php (accessed 7 August 2011).

62.

Zhang

(2006) Issue words. University General Education 1: i–iii.

63.

Zhang

(2007) General education as a place to embody the concept of a university: the practical model of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. University General Education 2: 39–52.

64.

Zhang

(2010) On general education and technological and vocational education. General Education Online 29: 24–25.

65.

Wang

(2000) The connection between general education and sustainable development education: issues and prospects. Environmental Education Quarterly 43: 8–17.

66.

Wang

(2009) Old photos telling short stories: the first general education teacher learning camp. General Education Online 21: 57.

67.

Wang

(2013) The trajectory of general education in Taiwan: whole person flower = professional flower bud + general flower petal. Available at: http://140.114.40.12/faculty/regular/juju/main/3article/04.html (accessed 7 July 2019).

68.

Wang

(2010) Social science and general education. General Education Online 31: 6–7.

69.

(2009) Taiwan university general education evaluation: challenges, countermeasures and prospects. Journal of Education Research 178: 5–23.

70.

Yang

(2007) The same expectations of cultural literacy education and general education, mutual learning and joint efforts. University General Education 2: 1–14.

71.

Yang

(2010) University’s humanistic spirit and general education. University General Education 6: 69–89.

General education in Taiwan’s universities: Development,challenges,and role

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

The development of general education in Taiwan

General education in Taiwan (1956–1984)

General education in Taiwan (1984–1996)

General education in Taiwan since 1996

General education challenges in Taiwan’s universities in the 21st century

The idea of the holistic person is ignored

Professional education overrides general education

General education courses are not valued by students

The role of general education in promoting the sustainable development of universities

General education as the foundation of university professional education

The reform of general education as the foundation of university education reform

General education can achieve the educational ideals of universities

General education prevents the “knowledge-only” philosophy and “dehumanization” of universities

General education dispels the opposition between technology and humanities

General education can enrich university culture and promote the university’s cultural mission

General education can achieve the goals of the university and promote university sustainable development

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Author Biographies

References