精選內容

校慶系啦冠軍

恭賀 英文系大學部學弟妹 奪得中央大學108學年全校系啦競賽第一名!!!

若影片無背景音樂可能是版權問題被社群網站給消音😊
請系友見諒,我們上傳的是有聲原檔。

2020捐款芳名錄

  • 英文系系友會基金(含年費)
郭章瑞(28000)劉健清(6000)鄭美蓉(2000)顧英娜(5000)
胡亦瑜 (2000)吳慧娟(2000)涂秀玲(4000)彭慧君(2000)
顧嘉穎 (2000)劉美芽(1500)黃瀞萱 (200)張聯興 (200)
陳俊樺 (1000)林平康(3600)張百鈞.吳蕙瑜.李佳霓(4400)
  • 校務基金指定英文系系友會專款
張聯興(10000)陳俊樺 (3000)
  • 系友會獎學金基金
朱珮瑄(5000)李淑融(2000)顧英娜(5000)黃瀞萱(9800)
  • 魏淑慧紀念獎學金
莊麗莉(2000) 林澤男(16000) 陳俊樺(6000)
  • 車馬費、誤餐費及論文修改補助專款
郭章瑞(14000)
  • 系友會捐助專款
廖健雄(3000)朱珮瑄(6800)顧英娜(30000)郭章瑞(3000)
林澤男(3000)邱剛彥(2000)胡妙羽 (3000)劉美芽(3500)
匿名 (10000)   
  • 系友會指定捐款
楊秋香(2000)郭章瑞(8000)匿名(5000)

109學年度第2學期系友會獎學金公告

國立中央大學英文系系友魏淑慧紀念獎學金辦法

中華民國100年4月20日系友會幹部會議通過

第一條:為紀念優秀系友魏淑慧並獎勵在學同學,特設立本獎學金。

第二條:本獎學金係以捐款及勸募所得專款於每學年發放一次,每次若干名,每名三千至五千元,並頒發獎狀乙紙。

第三條:本獎學金之申請

1、 資格:大學部課業及品德優良之英文系學生,並對英文系有具體貢獻(如熱心參與系所、系學會、班級及系友會活動或工作等)者,單親或失親家庭者優先考量。獲獎者得請領系友會獎學金除外之其他獎助學金為原則。

二、繳交文件:1.申請表。2.上學年成績單(一年級學生僅繳交上學期成績單)。3.英文自傳。4.本系教師推薦函至少一封(每位教師請最多推薦3人)。5.其他資料。

三、申請手續:每學年第二學期開學後擇期接受申請,將所需文件及相關資料逕送至系友會或送至英文系辦公室轉交系友會。第四條:本獎學金之評審及頒發1、 獎學金審核委員由系友會會長、幹部及聯絡老師擔任。2、 評審標準為申請者前兩學期每學期之智育平均須達七十五分(含)以上,及每學期之德育成績平均須達八十分(含)以上,並不得有小過(含)以上之處分。

四、 每年於系友會會員大會、相關會議或活動中頒發表揚。

第五條:本辦法經英文系系友會幹部會議通過後實施,修正時 亦同。

* 申請表請向系友會辦公室(C2-421)助理領取,或點選以下網址下載。https://drive.google.com/……/0B……/view……

* 繳交方式: 請將申請表與應繳文件一併繳交至英文系系友會辦公室(C2-421),或將電子檔寄至系友會信箱alumnian@gmail.com。

* 申請截止日期: 2021/04/15(四) 17:00前

為公平起見,逾時不候,遲交缺件者概不受理!!!

2021中大英文系系友會英文寫作比賽辦法

民國107年6月9日會員大會訂定通過

  1. 宗旨: 提升本校學生英文創作能力,與獎勵優秀創作人才。
  2. 主辦單位: 中央大學英文系系友會(以下簡稱本會)。
  3. 參加對象: 本校在學學生。
  4. 文類與主題: 文類不拘,詩、小說、戲劇、散文、批評等均可,題目自訂,為長度不得多於A4紙六頁(以MLA格式,單行行距,12號Times New Roman字體)。分為文學創作組文學批評組每人以投稿一篇為限。
  5. 上述兩組各頒獎項: 第一名  3000元

                  第二名  2000元

                  第三名  1000元

                  佳作    500元(若干名)

  • 截稿日期: 20210415(星期四)下午17:00
  • 繳交方式: 請將書面稿繳交至英文系系友會辦公室(C2-421),並將電子檔寄至系友會信箱alumnian@gmail.com。此外,另可將稿件投至英文系辦公室隔壁之教師休息室(C2-336)中的系友會信箱。作品請匿名投稿,另外使用便條紙註明組別姓名系級學號聯絡電話,與e-mail
  • 出版: 得獎者需同意將作品刊載(作者可選擇刊登筆名)於本會會訊或網站,本會得對作品適度修改。如不同意,請勿投稿。
  • 頒獎: 得獎同學須於本學期本會聯誼暨會員大會親自出席或請人代理領取獎金及獎狀乙張,唯不得請系友會助理代領,若無故未出席領獎則取消得獎資格。(領獎時間及地點將另行通知)
  • 為了維護參賽者之權益,與比賽之公平性,稿件逾時不候。

1092學期起學位口試至少需有一名委員為校外委員

學位口試至少需有一名委員為校外委員。詳見系網頁業務辦理>碩士班 > 畢業 > 學位考試申請 。
1092學期起, 三名口試委員需要有一名校外委員。校外指導教授視同校外委員(即校外指導教授, 校內指導教授, 另覓一名口試委員, 合計3名)

1092學期起本學期起教務處實施學術倫理相關重要規定


【所務公告】 1092學期起本學期起教務處實施學術倫理相關重要規定 【置頂】
1092學期起實施研究生申請學位口試,必須先至圖書館電子資源查詢系統(請逕洽圖書館)進行論文比對,完成後下載比對結果,始得申請學位口試,其應繳交資料如下
1.以紙本申請學位考試者,應繳交論文比對電子回條至教學單位審查。
2.以線上申請學位考試者,應上傳論文比對電子回條至教學單位審查。
3.舉行學位考試時,應提供完整論文比對報告予口試委員參考,報告形式不拘,紙本或電子檔皆可。
二、研究生學位考試之校外委員人數,碩士學位口試者至少一位,博士學位口試者至少二位。
三、新訂本校「學生違反學術倫理案件處理原則」http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/rule/rule109/29-1.pdf
四、新修正畢業論文格式條例http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/Form/form/form03-02-1.pdf
相關檔案:0008-國立中央大學-研究生學位考試細則-修正對照表.pdf
相關檔案:學位考試申請系統-線上.pdf
相關檔案:學位考試紙本申請-紙本.pdf

2020年末募款信

親愛的系友:大家好!

又到了109年歲末,謹代表系友會向大家拜年,敬祝系友們闔家平安、萬事如意!   

    由於108年年底中國武漢發現新冠肺炎病毒,導致全球疫情擴散,一發不可收拾,進出國門均須經過自我隔離等健康管理措施。各國也因為防堵病毒流竄,紛紛祭出封城鎖國政策,許多行程、活動因而變更甚至取消。雖然造成國人許多不便,大家尚能共體時艱,一起度過這段疫情非常時期。系友會也不例外,幹部會議首次改以線上會議進行,所幸一切順利,會務運作仍屬正常。期望在最近的未來,疫情趨於平靜,讓大家回復正常生活,共創美好未來。

    回顧過去這一年,系友會援例舉辦了下列活動:一、三月間,舉辦英文寫作比賽,學弟妹們熱烈參與,遴選出(1)文學創作組前3名及佳作3名(2)文學批評組前3名等共9名優秀同學,特於6月3日在幹部會議公開頒發獎金予以表揚,得獎作品並公告於系友會網站。二、繼續辦理魏淑慧同學紀念獎學金甄選,共有五位同學經審查合格,於6月3日幹部會議當天各頒發獎學金五千元。三、由於因應 COVID19疫情,配合母校校慶停止舉辦集會活動措施,今年未於校慶當天舉辦系友回娘家聯誼餐敘,略有遺憾。四、繼續辦理系友會獎學金甄選,共有研究所一位、大學部四位同學經審查合格,於系友座談會當天頒獎,各獲頒獎狀及獎學金五千元(大學部)及七千元(研究所)。五、12月9日舉辦系友座談會,邀請在職場上表現優異的學長:於林口福朋喜來登酒店擔任總經理的89級黃柄鈞學長於法務部調查局屏東調查站擔任調查官的101級葉芷華學姊擔任轉轉影像事業有限公司負責人的103級薩禾豐學長回到母校,分享他們在職場上的工作心得與當初應考與入行的經驗,提供在校的學弟妹們參考,承蒙系主任與幾位師長、本會顧問蒞臨,全程參與,對於本會安排這種座談讚譽有加,留下美好印象。

 英文系系友會在國立中央大學算是歷史比較悠久的社團組織,系友會透過系友的推動與助理們的協助,持續不定期舉辦類似英文寫作比賽等活動,提升學弟妹基本學能;或補助英文系系學會舉辦之活動如西潮、畢業公演等,在中大師長眼中均有不錯評價。近年來由於對在校學弟妹之補助項目增加以及支付助理的自籌費用比例提高,系友會基金大部分仰賴系友會幹部與顧問們的經濟支援。去年成立的捐助專款,在本會提出呼籲後,承蒙系友們響應,所收專款確實協助幾位學弟妹解決了燃眉之急。除了再次感謝您過去對系友會的認同與支持,期盼您能繼續慷慨解囊、發揮愛心,撥款贊助系友會,尤其是系友會基金及會費(每年200元),小額捐款亦深表感激。您的熱情鼓勵,必能讓系友會的運作更加順利,詳情請參閱隨函檢附之劃撥單。

此外,第二十七期會訊已開始徴稿,竭誠歡迎系友們熱烈投稿,文體不拘,題材不限,投稿請透過以下方式:

1.傳真:03-426-3027(將由英文系系辦公室轉交系友會)

2.電子郵件: alumnian@gmail.com

3.郵寄:桃園市320中壢區中大路300號 中央大學英文系系友會

系友會網址如下:https://ncuengalumni.wordpress.com,歡迎各位前往搜尋瀏覽。

敬祝  Happy New Year! 闔家平安喜樂!

                                                 會長 劉健清 敬上12/12/2020

以下為郵局劃撥單

   因許多系友反應無法臨櫃辦理,以下為系友會匯款帳號,在此提供給不便臨櫃辦理之系友,但請系友匯款務必留下姓名與聯繫電話,並備註捐款使用之用途(如畢業公演、西潮補助、捐助專款…等),以便財務助理處理相關事宜,(也可直接致電至系友會或電郵以上資料至系友會信箱),謝謝!

   系友會電話:03-422-7151 轉系友會分機33214

   收款戶名: 劉健清

   銀行代號:007

   收款帳號: 093-51-129086

2020系友座談會公告

時間:2020/12/9 (三) 19:00-21:00

(18:20開始提供便當)

地點:文一館三樓A-302國際會議廳

......

特邀講者

89黃柄鈞 學長林口福朋喜來登飯店 總經理
101葉芷華 學姊法務部調查局
103薩禾豐 學長轉轉影像事業有限公司 負責人

......

全程參與的同學可獲生活知能時數兩小時

國立中央大學英文系暨英文系系友會 敬邀

國立中央大學英文系系友會公告

中華民國一百零九年十一月三日主旨:

公佈本系系友會獎學金一零九學年度得獎名單。

說明:

一、 得獎同學如後(依年級順序排列):

英研二 張聿明

英文四 曾芷睫

英文三 楊婷羽

英文三 劉佩菱

英文二 童怡嘉

二、恭喜以上同學。本會將於十二月九日(三)晚間七點文一館三樓國際會議廳(A-302)舉辦之系友座談會,頒發獎金及獎狀,以玆鼓勵。請得獎同學準時出席領獎,若不克出席,請務必派代表領獎 (唯不得請系友會助理代理);若未出席領獎則依據系友會一0九學年度第一次幹部會議決議,取消得獎資格,敬請配合,謝謝。

會長 劉健清

寫作比賽作品3

108 Curriculum- Current predicaments in English Learning

70 years. Yes, this is how long Taiwan has been committed to English education. For many adults, starting from junior high school, they have at least six years of learning English. As for children nowadays, most of them start their long path of English learning as early as elementary school. When one steps into society, the time span of English learning goes up to over ten years, with uncountable money and tremendous effort devoted. As most people would expect, Taiwanese English should be above the average of other countries of non-native speakers. Yet, things are just the reverse. According to global research done in 100 non-English speaking countries, the general English ability of Taiwan has gone down steadily to 38 in 2018 (EF EPI 2018), behind Mainland China and South Korea. Numerous private language institutions and cram schools have sprung up and students’ pressure has never seemed to be been abated, not to mention parents’ anxiety and the official’s burden. What in the world can one endeavor to learn for ten years but fail? What, in the end, is the real problem of Taiwanese English education? In this essay, I will point out the problems I see in 108 Curriculum English, based on my experience of tutoring and working in cram schools. 

108 Curriculum of English education is a huge topic. To analyze, we can see from the pros and cons of this new policy, as well as the roles of parents, students, and the government. In that education has never been a unilateral problem but an imbroglio implicating outer influences, more aspects should be taken into consideration.

The advantage of the 108 Curriculum, compared with the former, is obvious. Students will no longer simply memorize vocabulary for tests and forget them once they leave schools, for which the old curriculum is mostly denounced. The planned progress, if students act accordingly, ought to cater to the future trend in modern days, thereby stimulating the general competitiveness of Taiwan.  

The day when students painfully instilling thousands of words is over. In the future, English classes focus more on combinations of different subjects, such as history, mathematics, science, etc. The ability to solve problems is the upper hand which the students can acquire from schools, far from the inability of adapting to the social environment before. For instance, while most classes when I was in high school aimed at the use of words, phrases, and grammar, classes now link to cases in day-to-day life through English, such as news or personal hobbies, which students mostly find more intriguing. When ones’ passion is ignited, learning is no longer arcane vocabulary and intricate grammar; rather, it is the process of inquiring knowledge with learning happening synchronously. 

Meanwhile, electives, optimally, are free space saved for students to delve into their interests, meaning that they learn with curiosity. In lieu of comparatively tedious materials beyond one’s interest, students go deeper into sport English, mythology, exotic cultures, and so on. Outside of classrooms, learning may still go on inside each passionate mind. This is the main goal of the new curriculum and the eventual aim of education. Only when one’s interest has been attached enough importance to can students’ individuality stand out. When a student graduate, their experience in schools become their lifelong ability the traditional education is unable to give. 

Lastly, the diversity of learning is a huge advantage for students in the future. Learning not only English, which is more of a tool rather than a skill but also skills from various domains is essential in the future world. 

On the other hand, the disparity between the plan and the reality is still left for improvement; namely, there are obstacles not supposed to be taken lightly. Although the new program focuses on the ability of application and flexibility, a few learning steps are omitted, such as background knowledge. In the following paragraph, I have enumerated the major problems of the new curriculum I have witnessed in the year of teaching.   

What is expected is far cry from what is happening right now in classrooms- the gap between students’ English ability is too big. To exemplify, when I was part-timing in one mid-sized traditional cram school, there were junior high school students who even have a problem memorizing 26 English letters, and that is in a city. I can hardly imagine what it is like in distant areas of Taiwan. Meanwhile, pupils of wealthier backgrounds finish learning grammar and vocabulary of junior high school even before the entry of it. Seeing this, I doubt how the government can ensure the viability of the project, and how, after all, they can assure parents of the school education?  

Also, creative thinking, spontaneous learning, and individuality are all just vague and beautiful letters, which both students and parents find hard to follow and assess. Interacting with senior high school students, I was not surprised to see lots of them, not the very few haranguing on the media about how positive the new classes are, appear to be lost. Of course, those sitting on the decision-making table who never walk into a real classroom wouldn’t know this but are satisfied with their so-called “educational reformation”, flawed obviously. Seeing changes made and the eulogies written on the media, it seems to me that some teachers and the government officials are bewitching themselves as if they had made changes and students were improving. 

Electives are not serving their full function but oppositely undermining student’s general English ability. That is, the time for both English classes and outside materials is both far less than enough. The original purpose is fostering student’s ability to think and allow more time to explore, hoping that to adopt English speaking and willing to express their ideas, but there is no enough time. For instance, when I was in senior high school, we had five to six English classes, inclusive of supplementary classes; now, however, those of senior high school have been lessened to four English classes a week, with the extra time saved for elective classes. It turns out that time for both parts, basic learning and extra classes, is not enough. Some hold that the interest in different subjects will push students to learn themselves; however, that is the rarest quality only seen in very few but not the whole student body.   

Ideal may the new curriculum seems, I concur on the original motive too, what I witness is just the opposite. To illustrate, some public schools provide optional classes of other languages aside from English, such as Japanese or Korean, and give the young more time to “explore”. The real problem is, what can a fifty-minute Japanese class a week teaches students and will they learn spontaneously? Honestly speaking, they are not going to be Japanese experts just because of one class a week, nor will they become proficient in any subjects simply on their own. Instead, their English ability has gone down, and so are other major subjects. So far, students seem to have known everything- they have sundry electives to take-but actually know very little. With scarce dedication and little time investment in a single domain, it is of no use learning, let alone applying. 

Core competencies, as highlighted in the 108 Curriculum, is more of an omission of the learning process. The idea of the new policy is to have students foster the ability to collect, differentiate, organize, analyze, and ideally apply the information in real life. Though it is positive, most students haven’t yet nurtured this sort of ability. I consider that the application of knowledge should be preceded by a few years of studying what is traditionally dubbed “fixed and dead knowledge” and later learn to capitalize on the is to solve problems at last. The education method the state is putting the cart before the horse. Emphasizing thinking and flexibility, they care less about the fundaments. learning is like building; those who neglect the foundation of a building would never be able to build a skyscraper but a bungalow, and even some are struggling with the basement. To be exact, what the government is doing is making chicks fly when their wings are still fragile, or asking toddlers, who cannot even stand, to run. In the end, once students fail, they are very likely to collapse and abandon themselves. In short, despite the positive idea of the application of knowledge, the fundamental part of learning cannot and should not be ignored. 

Moreover, the college entrance exam still exists to burden students and open new gates for after-school programs. Under the stress of parents and tests, so-called electives have become self-learning or classes of quizzes, which, absurdly, may even be a positive situation. To extremes, a lot of students just dilly-dally in the extra time and give up their resting space to cram schools or after-school programs. At this, parents, obviously concerned with children’s education, are becoming tenser each year with the government’s ever-changing policy. The misgivings, in my opinion, is the reflection that people no longer trust the government. Schooling has lost a part of its function in Taiwan and if this goes on, parents trust private programs outside of school more but not the class of a school itself. Take my students as examples, half of them opt out of the eighth session of the school to come to private institutions, which costs far higher. As for those of better economic conditions, the easier way out is a private school, which runs at their own pace regardless of all education reformation. That’s the reason why the enrollment rate of leading private schools, in the teeth of low birth rate and high tuitions, remain incredibly high. At the end of the day, children of families unable to afford exorbitant tuitions generally perform behind others, deepening the gap of social classes consummated by the government. A failure to allay parents’ doubt is the failure of the teaching system. Should one day education become a prerogative of the well-off, education will no longer be education.  

The reduction of standard vocabulary is another huge issue. Some may argue that the required English words of high school have been lightened from 7000 to 4500, whereby the college entrance test is made easier. However, it doesn’t mean the other 2500 words disappear. They may still be tested in the reading parts as additional information students are required to learn. So what is the meaning of the reduction of vocabulary? Furthermore, when stepping into colleges, young learners face original texts which contain not the gentle 4500 words but ferocious academic terminologies, which even students adapting to 7000 words find overwhelming. How can students continue learning when they even have a problem reading? Admittedly, 7000 words are demanding; nonetheless, so long as people can read and understand more than 5000 words, they are naturally more advantageous than students learning only 4500. Setting the bar high at the stage of high school for the sake of the college, to me, is a lot more important than highlighting spontaneous learning. What high school education is now disregarding is the significance of literacy, which, in colleges, cannot be emphasized enough.

In Taiwan, the idea of higher education is deeply entrenched in people’s opinions, which has always been a controversy. Parents usually want their kids to be either lawyers, teachers, or doctors. The government is now focusing on the agility of children’s mindset and personal characteristics, endeavoring to diminish student’s pressure. Nevertheless, this takes time the society needs to adjust and new teachers have to be trained. Applying what a person has learned, in reality, is an ideal goal and how to foster students’ ability in thinking is the biggest problem in the system. Lacking time in adjustment will at last lead to the loss of students, teachers, and the whole country. Jumping from the most traditional learning environment, focusing on vocabulary and grammar, to the new model, which focuses more on core competencies, is a huge stride and I think more time and flexibility are needed. I suppose the new curriculum should be more explained to the public, in the interim, more teachers should be more trained. This process may take years, but it is necessary. Unfortunately, the government has discounted the reality. 

The long term goal of English education in Taiwan, together with 108 Curriculum, is developing Taiwan into a bilingual country by 2030. Frankly speaking, it is very unlikely that people can make it in the left ten years. The definition of a bilingual country is that everyone is able to speak English in everyday life, including little children and elders. Not to mention the younger generation, even the adults have problems with English. Of course, saying beautiful slogans and drawing promising vision simple, but ask yourself: Are you able to understand a whole English conversation? Can you interact and answer the questions of the foreigners? Are you, after all these years of learning English, confident in your English? If one of the answers to these questions is no, are we still living in the bubble of dreams and idealism? Are we still lying to ourselves that the new program can create a better future for the next generation? 

So far, a few professionals have listed out a few points, some even say the new curriculum shouldn’t even be put into practice. They are all worth consideration. The most viable one, I believe, is to explain the new curriculum to the public especially worrying parents and students; while more teachers have to be trained simultaneously. Since the project has been put into practice, what matters is no longer debating over the rights and wrongs of the plan but how it can be improved and in what way students can be helped.       

As all the above ideas mentioned, I feel concerned about the prospect of the new curriculum which no one can feel complacent about. Notwithstanding the advantages and positive changes of 108 Curriculum, many related issues are still left to be solved. There shouldn’t be more beautiful languages; rather, the key is admitting that virtual progress is not being made according to the plan. For the better future of the next generation, it is time that people came down to earth and thought with practicality.   

用 WordPress.com 建立自己的網站
立即開始使用