Introduction
Taiwan, an island nation located in East Asia, has a population of approximately 23.4 million (National Statistics 2025). While Taiwan is linguistically diverse, it is often described as a pseudo–monolingual society due to the dominant role of Mandarin Chinese in most public and private domains, despite the government’s recent efforts to revitalize local languages such as Hokkien, Hakka, various Formosan languages and Taiwan Sign Language (Tai and Tsay Reference Tai and Tsay2015; Kobayashi Reference Kobayashi2020; Rüdiger et al. Reference Rüdiger, Leimgruber and Lydia Tseng2023). The sociolinguistic environment thus reflects a complex interplay between linguistic diversity and Mandarin hegemony. Language policies in Taiwan have long been influenced by broader sociopolitical forces such as nationalism, economic modernization, and globalization (Tsao Reference Tsao2000). These forces are also critical in shaping the trajectory of English language education in the country.
Taiwan’s education system spans from preschool to doctoral studies and is designed to support inclusive, lifelong learning (Taiwan Ministry of Education 2024). Preschool education, reformed in 2012, integrates childcare and early learning for children aged two to six. Compulsory education covers six years of primary (Grade 1–6) and three years of junior high school (Grade 7–9), focusing on core academic and vocational skills. Senior high school (Grade 10–12) lasts three years and includes general, vocational, comprehensive, and specialty tracks. Students may also pursue junior college programs, either five–year (after junior high) or two–year (after vocational high school). Higher education includes four–year bachelor’s programs, one to four years for a master’s, and two to seven years for a doctorate. Taiwan also provides special education, teacher training, arts education, and supplementary and experimental learning programs to ensure flexibility, equity, and innovation in education across the country.
English education in Taiwan has developed across distinct historical and political contexts (Rüdiger et al. Reference Rüdiger, Leimgruber and Lydia Tseng2023). Kobayashi (Reference Kobayashi2020) outlines this development in three major periods: the pre–Japanese era, Japanese colonization, and the post–World War II period. Although Taiwan was never under an Anglophone power’s colonial rule, English has emerged as a critical form of cultural, economic and symbolic capital (Seilhamer Reference Seilhamer2019). Rüdiger et al. (Reference Rüdiger, Leimgruber and Lydia Tseng2023) have traced the evolution of language education policies in Taiwan from the 17th century up to the year 2000. Prior to the 17th century, no written records exist concerning language use in Taiwan (Rüdiger et al. Reference Rüdiger, Leimgruber and Lydia Tseng2023). Since then, four major governing regimes – European colonizers, the Qing Dynasty, the Japanese Empire and the Kuomintang (KMT) – have each shaped the island’s language education landscape (Wu and Lau Reference Wu and Lau2019). Dutch and Spanish colonizers made a limited impact, except for the Dutch–driven creation of the Sinkang script for religious conversion. The Qing Dynasty promoted Mandarin Chinese as a lingua franca for governance. During Japanese rule (1895–1945), a Japanization policy banned vernacular languages and enforced Japanese in education, producing linguistic hybridity (Simpson Reference Simpson2007).
Following World War II, Taiwan came under the control of the KMT regime, which promoted Mandarin Chinese as a nationalist tool while sidelining local dialects (Tsao Reference Tsao2000). It was not until the lifting of martial law in 1987 and the political shift to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2000 that Taiwan’s language policy began to emphasize diversity and global engagement. Wu (Reference Ming-Hsuan2011) describes this trend as ‘Taiwanization’, which included policies such as Local–Language–in–Education (LLE) that introduced local vernaculars into primary school curricula while simultaneously increasing support for English instruction (Wu and Lau Reference Wu and Lau2019; Chen Reference Chen2006).
Ke (Reference I-Chung2024) identifies three major milestones in postwar English education policy: the implementation of 9–year compulsory education in 1968, the introduction of English in elementary schools in 2001, and the 12–year basic education policy launched in 2019. Each of these policies contributed to a greater institutionalization of English instruction in Taiwan’s public education system. English curricula are not merely tools for communication but serve as instruments of sociopolitical vision, projecting an imagined globalized future for Taiwan’s citizens (Gough Reference Gough2000; Ke Reference I-Chung2024).
More recently, with the introduction of the Bilingual 2030 policy, the government has intensified its efforts to promote English as part of its broader agenda for economic competitiveness and internationalization (Hsieh et al. Reference Hsieh, Huang and Hetherington2020; Lin et al. Reference Lin, Wen, Ching and Huang2021) . As part of this initiative, English–medium instruction (EMI) is expanding in higher education to improve both domestic and international student outcomes and promote global mobility (Huang Reference Huang2011). Full English degree programs are gaining traction in disciplines such as engineering and medicine, while standalone EMI courses are increasingly common across all fields (Chang Reference Chang2017; Tsou and Kao Reference Tsou and Kao2017). Taiwan’s approach mirrors global trends, where EMI is embraced not only as a teaching strategy but also as part of broader internationalization frameworks aligned with UNESCO’s Education for Sustainable Development goals (Dearden Reference Dearden2014; Peng and Xie Reference Peng and Xie2021; Ramaswamy et al. Reference Ramaswamy, Marciniuk, Csonka, Colò and Saso2021).
Taiwan Bilingual 2030 Policy
The Taiwan Bilingual 2030 Policy, as outlined by the National Development Council (2021), presents a comprehensive framework for English language education reform; this section summarizes its key points relevant to English language education in Taiwan.
Taiwan’s Bilingual 2030 Policy is a national strategic initiative aimed at enhancing the country’s global competitiveness through the promotion of bilingual capabilities, particularly English proficiency (Figure 1). The policy is a response to global trends such as the digital economy, the fourth industrial revolution, and Taiwan’s demographic challenges, notably a declining birth rate. These factors are reshaping the higher education landscape and labor market demands. In this context, the Bilingual 2030 policy seeks to elevate the English proficiency of Taiwan’s citizens to ensure that future generations are equipped with the skills needed to thrive in international professional environments.
Taiwan Bilingual 2030 plan, captured from the presentation of the National Development Council (2021).
One of the policy’s central aims is to align Taiwan’s workforce with global standards by integrating English education more deeply into the national education system. English is no longer viewed merely as a subject but as a functional tool for professional and academic engagement in global contexts. The policy promotes the development of EMI across all educational stages, with a particular emphasis on higher education. It targets both students and civil servants, aiming to foster a bilingual workforce capable of navigating transnational collaboration and global labor markets.
The higher education sector plays a crucial role in this initiative. To build Taiwan’s reputation as a bilingual hub and attract international talent, universities are expected to increase their EMI offerings. The policy outlines ambitious goals: by 2030, at least 50% of university sophomores and first–year master’s students should take 50% of their credits in EMI courses, and 50% of these students should reach Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) B2 proficiency across all four language skills.
However, significant challenges remain. While many high school graduates have achieved high listening and reading proficiency, their speaking and writing skills lag. Only 8.27% of grade 12 students are at CEFR B2 level in speaking, compared to 27.32% in reading (National Development Council, 2021). This discrepancy highlights the need to focus on productive skills, which are essential for academic discussions and written assignments in EMI contexts. To address this, universities are encouraged to offer English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) courses during students’ first year, preparing them for discipline–specific EMI coursework.
Faculty preparedness is another area of concern. While many instructors are capable of teaching in English, they require structured training, teaching support, and incentives. The Ministry of Education (MOE) is addressing this through partnerships with the British Council and international institutions to provide consulting and training. Selected universities are designated as beacon bilingual institutions, tasked with developing successful bilingualization models that can guide the rest of the sector.
In parallel, efforts are being made to expand digital English learning opportunities. The government is leveraging platforms like ‘Cool English’ and forming regional centers in beacon universities to support EMI course delivery across the country. This is particularly important for bridging urban–rural disparities in English education. Students in remote areas often lack exposure and access to qualified teachers and immersive English environments. The policy emphasizes equitable access, supporting disadvantaged schools with mobile devices, online resources, and tutoring partnerships with university students.
At the K–12 level, the policy supports immersive English learning by integrating bilingual elements into the curriculum. It maintains the 2019 curriculum framework while supplementing it with bilingual resources, particularly in science, technology, and other subjects. Emphasis is placed on enhancing students’ oral communication skills and expanding opportunities to use English meaningfully in the classroom. By 2030, 100% of schools are expected to conduct all–English classes, and 33% are to offer bilingual instruction in other subjects.
Teacher development is a cornerstone of the policy. The government aims to cultivate 15,000 bilingual teachers by 2030 through in–service training, overseas programs, and credit courses in bilingual instruction. Foreign teachers and assistants are also being recruited to co–teach and model English usage. Their collaboration with local teachers is designed to foster a communicative classroom environment and build student motivation. In tandem, efforts are being made to establish partnerships between Taiwanese and overseas schools for virtual bilingual exchanges.
Digital learning also serves as a major tool for democratizing access to English education. Investments in broadband infrastructure and mobile learning devices have been prioritized to ensure all students, including those in rural or underserved areas, can benefit from English learning resources. Public–private collaborations are being promoted to expand digital content and mechanisms for recognizing online course credits are being introduced to encourage broader participation.
The Bilingual 2030 policy also extends to English proficiency testing. The government seeks to expand access to affordable and reliable assessments, such as Taiwan’s own General English Proficiency Test (GEPT), and increase testing venues and frequency. These tests will serve both as benchmarks for individual progress and as tools for policy evaluation. For students and job seekers from disadvantaged backgrounds, subsidies are being considered to reduce financial barriers.
Civil servants are another target group under the policy. To reflect the growing need for international communication in public service, the government is integrating English requirements into civil service exams and training. New recruits may be required to present proof of English proficiency, especially in positions related to international affairs. Over time, professional development programs and scenario–based English training will be introduced to improve the communicative competence of existing staff. These efforts are meant to align public sector language capabilities with Taiwan’s broader internationalization goals.
To ensure long–term continuity and coherence, the government establishes a Bilingual Policy Development Center. This administrative body is responsible for policy implementation, coordination across agencies, and collaboration with private and international partners. It focuses on underserved areas, supports schools in creating English–friendly environments, and helps track and evaluate progress. The center’s establishment is intended to prevent policy disruptions caused by changes in government personnel and ensure sustained investment in bilingual education.
In summary, Taiwan’s Bilingual 2030 Policy represents a comprehensive, multi–sectoral effort to integrate English education into the fabric of Taiwanese society. Through EMI expansion, digital learning, teacher training, and institutional reform, the policy aims to prepare Taiwan’s youth for global participation. The initiative acknowledges the country’s linguistic and cultural identity while promoting English as a practical tool for access to international opportunities. By addressing disparities across regions and learner groups, the policy strives for inclusive, equitable, and sustainable bilingual development.
Taiwan Bilingual 2030 policy: Criticisms and changes
Educational impact and top–down implementation
Educators and unions have expressed concern that the policy was promoted too quickly and without sufficient consultation or resources (Hioe Reference Hioe2022). Critics say that it was implemented in a top–down manner, disregarding the input and needs of frontline educators (Hiciano Reference Hiciano2024). Teachers have reported confusion and inconsistency, with many likening the initiative to ‘experimental education’, where they were left to figure things out on their own. Moreover, teachers noted that the increase in foreign English teachers, meant to improve bilingual teaching, did not always meet actual classroom needs. For example, some English classes were already effectively taught by local teachers, while other subject areas lacked the English–speaking support they required.
A major critique relates to the imposition of EMI in subjects outside of English itself (Everington Reference Everington2022). Teachers argue that this shift complicates instruction and comprehension for students, particularly when both learners and instructors lack native–level English proficiency. This can result in poor subject learning, superficial bilingualism, and an erosion of students’ ability to think and express themselves clearly – concerns raised notably by Professor Liao Hsien–Hao, Dean of the National Taiwan University Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Science, who likened the potential outcome to the ‘poor bilingualism’ seen in Singapore (Everington Reference Everington2022).
Equity, resource gaps and linguistic diversity
The policy has also drawn criticism for exacerbating educational inequality (Chou Reference Chou2025). Many observers point out that while schools in urban centers have better access to bilingual resources and foreign teachers, schools in rural or culturally disadvantaged regions are being left behind. The current approach risks deepening Taiwan’s urban–rural educational divide, especially as local governments scramble to meet central mandates, sometimes hiring underqualified English teachers just to hit targets.
Another concern involves Taiwan’s rich multilingual heritage (Hioe Reference Hioe2022). Critics argue that the emphasis on English as a gateway to global competitiveness sidelines local languages and cultural identities. This has led to resistance from groups such as the Taiwan Languages and Literature Society, which advocates for a ‘Multilingual Taiwan’ that promotes English proficiency without marginalizing native languages.
Practical and policy–level concerns
On a practical level, critics argue that the policy lacks clarity and concrete benchmarks for student achievement. Although there are plans to train 5,000 English teachers, there is no clear roadmap for achieving widespread English fluency among the next generation (Hioe Reference Hioe2022). Furthermore, early elements of the ‘Bilingual Nation’ initiative, such as making English an official language and translating all government documents into English, were ultimately abandoned due to logistical impracticalities.
Concerns also extend to the structural pressures the policy places on Taiwan’s education system (Chou Reference Chou2025). With a declining birthrate leading to a shrinking student population, many universities have turned to EMI and bilingual branding as a strategy to attract international students. This shift, however, raises concerns about whether institutions are prioritizing quantity over quality in EMI implementation. Some universities have been criticized for marketing themselves as ‘bilingual’ without ensuring the necessary instructional quality or support systems.
Shifting the policy narrative and educational approach
Newly appointed Minister of Education Cheng Ying–Yao has acknowledged these concerns and signaled a recalibration of the policy (Lin and Chin Reference Lin and Chin2024). While affirming the long–term value of English for international engagement, Cheng emphasized that implementation should not be rushed. He advocates for a phased and well supported rollout that includes curriculum design, qualified faculty recruitment, and better coordination with local governments.
Cheng also stressed the importance of making bilingual education more inclusive, especially for students in underserved regions. Initiatives under consideration include using university social responsibility programs to send university students to teach English in rural areas and providing incentives for children to use English in everyday settings. For example, collaborations with McDonald’s and local clinics in Kaohsiung have rewarded children for placing orders or speaking with doctors in English (Lin and Chin Reference Lin and Chin2024).
At the same time, Cheng has highlighted the need to reform Taiwan’s vocational and higher education systems (Lin and Chin Reference Lin and Chin2024). He argues that Taiwan must shift from diploma–centered systems to skill–based education models that promote practical competencies, including English communication. As part of this vision, adult and vocational learners are also being targeted for English training, ensuring that Taiwan’s future workforce, across all age groups, is prepared for global challenges.
Broader pedagogical challenges
Beyond policy execution, critics argue that Taiwan’s exam–driven education culture undermines the goals of bilingual education. Current assessment models prioritize rote memorization and grammar over communicative competence. This creates a gap between students’ passive understanding of English and their active ability to use it in real–life situations. Many Taiwanese students, while technically proficient, lack the confidence and critical thinking skills needed for spontaneous interaction.
Commentators and researchers advocate for a transformation in classroom pedagogy (Chen and Gau Reference Chen and Gau2022; Yeh Reference Yeh2023; Chang Reference Chang2025). They suggest shifting from vocabulary and grammar drills to interactive, student–centered learning that emphasizes soft skills, such as problem–solving, creativity, and cultural awareness. According to Yeh (Reference Yeh2023), the focus on English proficiency for economic purposes should not eclipse Taiwan’s complex multilingual identity. Rather, English should serve as a communication tool that supports, not replaces, other linguistic and cultural forms.
In its current form, the Bilingual 2030 policy remains a contested initiative. While its ambition to prepare Taiwan’s workforce for global engagement is widely recognized, the policy has faced criticisms for its rushed implementation, insufficient resources, and potential cultural trade–offs. As the government shifts toward a more measured and inclusive approach under new leadership, the focus must remain on equitable access, pedagogical innovation, and a balanced recognition of Taiwan’s multilingual reality. Only through thoughtful and sustained investment can the Bilingual 2030 policy achieve its intended goals without compromising educational quality or cultural integrity.
Emerging trends shaped by the Bilingual 2030 policy
Internationalization in higher education: A strategic response to demographic and policy pressures
Taiwan’s higher education sector is confronting major structural challenges, most notably the dramatic decline in birth rates, which has led to a so–called enrollment cliff threatening institutional sustainability (Hou and Lu Reference Hou and Lu2024; Chiang et al. Reference Chiang, Liu, Shih, Sun, Wang and Bendraou2025). In response, universities have increasingly adopted internationalization strategies to stabilize enrollment and boost institutional relevance in a competitive global landscape. These efforts include the recruitment of international students and faculty, as well as the expansion of English–taught academic offerings. Such strategies not only respond to demographic constraints but also align with the goals of the Bilingual 2030 policy, which aims to enhance Taiwan’s international competitiveness by promoting English proficiency and bilingual capabilities across the education system.
A central tactic within this internationalization agenda is the expansion of EMI programs. Universities are developing EMI courses and degree programs to attract international students who prefer English as the language of instruction, while also supporting the government’s bilingualization objectives. Simultaneously, international faculty are being hired to teach content–based courses in English, contributing to both instructional diversity and talent development.
Alongside these academic changes, universities have invested in global outreach and student services (Lin Reference Lin2025). For example, National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) serves as a leading case. In 2023, it hosted 7,648 international students – 12.05% of its degree–seeking population – and offered six EMI undergraduate and 62 EMI postgraduate programs, totaling 886 EMI courses annually (Lin Reference Lin2025). NTNU President Wu Cheng–Chih attributed the university’s success in attracting international students to its deliberate planning and the execution of three key strategies: advancing bilingual education, implementing targeted approaches for talent recruitment and retention, and promoting comprehensive campus internationalization. NTNU’s initiatives in international student services, Mandarin training, and cultural integration exemplify broader sector–wide practices aimed at achieving the dual objectives of internationalization and bilingual policy implementation.
Across Taiwan, similar patterns are evident as universities seek to embed global engagement into long–term institutional planning. This includes the expansion of international support offices and the strategic alignment of academic offerings with global standards. As the Bilingual 2030 policy continues to shape national education priorities, the internationalization of students, faculty, and curricula is poised to intensify, offering new opportunities while also raising questions about quality assurance, resource allocation, and cultural identity in an increasingly globalized academic context.
Expansion of EMI courses: Policy adjustments and pedagogical shifts
The expansion of EMI courses in Taiwanese universities has gained further momentum following recent policy adjustments to the Bilingual 2030 initiative. Originally launched in 2018 to promote bilingual instruction and encourage the daily use of English, the policy has been modified in response to feedback from educators (Hiciano Reference Hiciano2024). The revised framework now places greater emphasis on teaching English–language classes exclusively in English, while de–emphasizing the more ambitious plan to use English as the medium of instruction in non–language academic subjects. To implement this revised direction, the Ministry of Education plans to establish ‘English villages’ in schools and support universities in developing fully English–taught programs.
The policy maintains its three core goals: broad–based improvement of English proficiency, narrowing the educational resource gap between urban and rural regions, and fostering long–term language cultivation. Implementation strategies include expanding all English instruction within English courses, selectively applying bilingual instruction in other subjects, and leveraging digital tools to increase accessibility. For instance, the Bilingual Digital Learning Companion program, launched in 2023 in collaboration with Taiwanese universities, engages both local and international university students to teach English online to primary school learners (Ministry of Education 2024; Jade Reference Jade2025). Additional efforts focus on fostering English–friendly environments on school campuses and promoting community–based opportunities for English communication (Hiciano Reference Hiciano2024).
Despite these reforms, Taiwan’s education system remains heavily shaped by high–stakes testing. Academic and career progression still largely depends on standardized exam scores (Shubat Reference Shubat2024), reinforcing a culture that prioritizes rote memorization over communicative competence and critical thinking. To fulfill the aspirations of the Bilingual 2030 policy, particularly the goal of cultivating globally competent citizens, a pedagogical shift is essential. English language education must move beyond memorization and instead create opportunities for authentic, interactive use of the language, even at the risk of imperfect accuracy.
Frequent practice in supportive, communicative environments can help students develop the confidence to express themselves independently (Shubat Reference Shubat2024). Introducing these approaches early, during elementary or junior high school, can enable students to participate in peer dialogue, articulate their opinions and use English meaningfully beyond the classroom. This shift from accuracy–focused instruction to fluency and communication–based learning will ultimately prepare students more effectively for global engagement and lifelong language use.
Conclusion
Taiwan’s English language education has evolved through complex historical, sociopolitical, and economic processes, culminating in the ambitious Bilingual 2030 policy. Framed as a strategic initiative to boost national competitiveness, the policy repositions English not just as a subject, but as a tool for global engagement. It targets multiple sectors, including K–12, higher education, and public service, through an expansive framework that includes EMI, digital learning, teacher training, and civil service reform. At the heart of the policy is the goal of equipping future generations with the communicative skills needed for participation in international academic, professional, and civic domains.
However, as implementation unfolds, the Bilingual 2030 initiative has faced considerable pushback. Concerns about top–down policymaking, equity gaps, cultural displacement, and the unintended consequences of expanding EMI have prompted revisions and calls for a more inclusive and pragmatic approach. Recent adjustments emphasize strengthening English instruction within English–language classrooms, rather than hastily extending EMI to all subjects.
In response to the low birth rate and policy pressures, Taiwan’s universities have adopted internationalization strategies that align closely with the policy’s goals. The recruitment of international students and faculty, expansion of EMI offerings, and investment in student support services illustrate a sector–wide transformation aimed at maintaining institutional viability while advancing Taiwan’s global visibility.
Moving forward, the success of Taiwan’s bilingual ambitions will depend on sustained investment, inclusive policymaking, and a pedagogical shift from exam–driven instruction to communication–centered learning. Achieving these goals will not only support students’ language development but also ensure that Taiwan’s multilingual and multicultural identity is preserved amidst its global aspirations.
NGUYEN B. NGOC JADE is currently a Doctoral Candidate in Management and an Adjunct Lecturer at Yuan Ze University (Taiwan), where she obtained a Master of Business Administration in Leadership and a Master of Arts in Language Studies. Jade teaches undergraduate EMI courses such as English Communication Technique, Digital Applications in Humanities, and others. Her research interests include Technology Management, Education, and Applied Linguistics. Her research work can be found in International Journal of Management Education, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Technology in Society, English Today, and many others.
