2016.03.31
Controversy Surrounds Exam Question
【By Rachel Lin & Jake Chung】
The National Taiwan University student council on Monday called on the university to look into possible breaches of the Gender Equality Education Act by a professor who penned a controversial question for the entrance exam for the university’s Department of Mechanical Engineering.
The professor asked students to write about the “social responsibilities” of an engineer based on the concept of family as described in the Book of Genesis — the formation of a family by Adam and Eve.
The question was made public via a post on Professional Technology Temple, the nation’s largest online academic bulletin board.
The preamble to the question read: “Man must eventually leave his parents and marry a wife. A family is formed by a man and a woman, a husband and a wife; these are the standards of society and family. An engineer’s creative innovations cannot go against social standards, nor can they go against social harmony.”
The department said it would not grant free points for the question, despite the controversy, adding that it did not know about the exam questions beforehand out of respect for academic freedom.
No one except a few members tasked with setting the questions knew the exam’s questions before they were printed, the department said.
The department said that it would step up efforts to make clear to its staff and contributors to refrain from setting controversial questions, but added that plurality of values was a guiding principle of the university and it hoped university staff would be able to respect each other.
Director of student affairs Kuo Hung-chi said the question was extremely inappropriate, adding that the institution aimed to exclude the professor who penned the question from the grading process.
The university should apologize to society for the question’s lack of respect for plurality of values, Kuo said, adding that faculty would meet to discuss whether the professor should be investigated by a gender equality committee.
Sources said the professor is Christian, often talking about his religion and inviting other Christians to speak in class.
Students said the professor’s course was considered an “easy A,” as there were no examinations and grading was relaxed, but added that the downside was a prevalence of religion-related topics.
Other students said the course was nothing more than a sermon and was a waste of time to attend.
Taiwan Higher Education Union secretary-general Chen Cheng-liang cited the Mosuo people in southwest China, a matrilineal society and whose families are not formed by a husband and a wife, but a mother with many children.
If the school wanted to find out examinees’ views on “social responsibilities of engineers,” it could have raised Taiwan’s major construction projects as examples, he said, adding that there was no need or legitimate reason to cite the Bible in the exam, Chen added.
Well-known blogger and writer Kris Chu said on Facebook that the department’s exam question was on the verge of violating students’ freedom of self-expression and of discriminating against people of different sexual orientations and religious beliefs.
He called on the professor who penned the question to apologize and promise that his faith would not be a factor in his teaching.
[Taipei Times, 2016-03-31]
The National Taiwan University student council on Monday called on the university to look into possible breaches of the Gender Equality Education Act by a professor who penned a controversial question for the entrance exam for the university’s Department of Mechanical Engineering.
The professor asked students to write about the “social responsibilities” of an engineer based on the concept of family as described in the Book of Genesis — the formation of a family by Adam and Eve.
The question was made public via a post on Professional Technology Temple, the nation’s largest online academic bulletin board.
The preamble to the question read: “Man must eventually leave his parents and marry a wife. A family is formed by a man and a woman, a husband and a wife; these are the standards of society and family. An engineer’s creative innovations cannot go against social standards, nor can they go against social harmony.”
The department said it would not grant free points for the question, despite the controversy, adding that it did not know about the exam questions beforehand out of respect for academic freedom.
No one except a few members tasked with setting the questions knew the exam’s questions before they were printed, the department said.
The department said that it would step up efforts to make clear to its staff and contributors to refrain from setting controversial questions, but added that plurality of values was a guiding principle of the university and it hoped university staff would be able to respect each other.
Director of student affairs Kuo Hung-chi said the question was extremely inappropriate, adding that the institution aimed to exclude the professor who penned the question from the grading process.
The university should apologize to society for the question’s lack of respect for plurality of values, Kuo said, adding that faculty would meet to discuss whether the professor should be investigated by a gender equality committee.
Sources said the professor is Christian, often talking about his religion and inviting other Christians to speak in class.
Students said the professor’s course was considered an “easy A,” as there were no examinations and grading was relaxed, but added that the downside was a prevalence of religion-related topics.
Other students said the course was nothing more than a sermon and was a waste of time to attend.
Taiwan Higher Education Union secretary-general Chen Cheng-liang cited the Mosuo people in southwest China, a matrilineal society and whose families are not formed by a husband and a wife, but a mother with many children.
If the school wanted to find out examinees’ views on “social responsibilities of engineers,” it could have raised Taiwan’s major construction projects as examples, he said, adding that there was no need or legitimate reason to cite the Bible in the exam, Chen added.
Well-known blogger and writer Kris Chu said on Facebook that the department’s exam question was on the verge of violating students’ freedom of self-expression and of discriminating against people of different sexual orientations and religious beliefs.
He called on the professor who penned the question to apologize and promise that his faith would not be a factor in his teaching.
[Taipei Times, 2016-03-31]
