Tsinghua University President Gao Weiyuan went to the United States to find a job, causing controversy over integrity. Scholars called for his resignation and a review of Taiwan’s education treatment.

Gao Weiyuan, president of Tsinghua University. (File photo, taken by reporter Hong Meixiu)

On the third day after Tsinghua University President Gao Weiyuan was re-elected, he took his job to the United States to look for a job, triggering an "integrity" storm, which also gave rise to controversy over whether Gao Weiyuan should step down or stay in office. Du Shengcong, a communication scholar at Mingchuan University, also posted on Facebook that Gao Weiyuan is an excellent scholar. No one doubts his academic achievements, and more than half of them agreed to renew his term. This shows that Tsinghua people once trusted him, but now the question is, why can't Taiwan retain a president?

Du Shengcong believes that although Gao Weiyuan publicly admitted his mistake and apologized at the September 10 briefing and donated his salary to stop the bleeding, he also said that he did not regard Tsinghua University as a "spare tire." However, the turmoil has not yet subsided. Liang Gengyi, an academician of Academia Sinica who was the convener of the Tsinghua University President Selection Committee, issued a joint statement with 14 academicians including Shi Wei, former president of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, pointing out that he "has lost his integrity and leadership model" and advised him to quit immediately. In terms of character, Gao Weiyuan should resign, because the convener who presided over the selection process all stood up and persuaded him to resign. This can no longer be said to be slander from the outside world. If Gao Weiyuan cares about Tsinghua, the most honorable thing to do is to resign.

Please read on...

But it's not fair to blame him alone. Du Shengcong also cited the salary of university presidents at home and abroad as an example. Taiwan claims to value education, but the salary of university presidents is tied to the salary scale of civil servants and cannot be moved. Universities in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States are beckoning with salary offers that are several times higher, but all Taiwan can offer is a sense of mission and moral persuasion.

He believes that the Gao Weiyuan incident should be viewed at two levels. The first level is the individual. Gao Weiyuan's choice hurt the hearts of Tsinghua people. He should be responsible and resign. This is non-negotiable. The second level is structure. With Gao Weiyuan gone, the next principal will face the same salary scale, the same heavy administrative burden, and the same international poaching. If the discussion only stops at "He has no moral integrity," you are just waiting for the next peacock to fly away, and then turn around and accuse it of being disloyal. What needs to be reviewed now is not only whether a principal should stay or leave, but also how much respect Taiwanese society is willing to give to education.