This past Saturday, 16 April 2005, Deputy Minister Lu Mu-Lin and Higher Education Director Chen Teh-Hua of the Ministry of Education (MOE) came to our University at our invitation to conduct an open forum on the 5-year 50 billion NTD initiative, which has as its top priority the promotion of 1 to 2 Taiwan institutions to the top ranks of the world's research universities. Except for an incident or two (see below), the presentation, followed by a lengthy period of questions and answers, went well, and the occasion served its primary purpose of an exchange of views, a clarification of misunderstandings, an expression of diverse opinions, and an understanding of the boundary conditions in the government's position on the new funding initiative.

       I would be neglecting my duty as the Head of Tsing Hua, however, if I did not express my disappointment at the low turnout for the forum. Perhaps people feel that the final decision is pre-ordained and that there is no need for them to become better acquainted with the facts of the issues, no matter how important they might be for the future of the university. If that is so, I would still wish that everyone would welcome the new initiative as an opening of a window to achieving our finest aspirations rather than as a closing of the door on our past traditions.

       I would also remind everyone that at open forums where there are reporters present, participants should be careful to voice their criticisms in a positive, constructive fashion. It is quite counter-productive, for example, to criticize MOE data as inaccurate without understanding the basis of their calculations. Thus, Deputy Minister Lu presented a figure of Tsing Hua support of about 4,000 USD per student, which he said was well below the 10,000 USD and 20,000 USD spent at the best public universities in Japan and the United States . A professor in the audience criticized the Deputy Minster's figures as inaccurate, and that Tsing Hua's figures had already exceeded 10,000 USD per student. All this was duly reported in today's papers. However, the Deputy Minister was probably referring to the direct support from the MOE (or its counterparts in Japan and the US ), not to the total funding for Tsing Hua (the basis for the professor's claim), a major part of which comes from research grants. If one includes research funding, then the ratios of the total funding of funding per student at Tsing Hua and the best public universities in Japan and the United States are still roughly the same as the Deputy Minister portrayed. It was unhelpful to have given the public the impression, no matter how temporary is that impression, that Tsing Hua is already supported at the same level as the best public universities in Japan .

       In the crucial weeks ahead, there will be other open forums and opportunities for informal, honest, and productive debate. However, given how sensitive is the negotiation process with the MOE on how Tsing Hua and Chiaoda should apply for the new funds, and how much room exists for counter-productive misunderstandings to develop when disparate professors voice their incomplete views, I hope that the university community can agree that official communication with the MOE and its committees must be channeled through the two Presidents, who were, after all, elected for this type of responsibility. I also hope that the university community will use the open forums better, as an advisory mechanism to reach better-informed decisions, so that we can arrive at a consensus on what is the best course of action for the future of Tsing Hua. Let us resolve here and now to set aside factional infighting and to march into that future as a united and inspired family.