The government’s “Bilingual 2030” policy is undeniably an ambitious blueprint aimed at enhancing Taiwan’s international competitiveness. However, as the policy trickles down to the classroom level, the gap between the lofty goals and the chaotic reality is widening. What was intended to be an educational transformation is devolving into a box-ticking exercise, characterized by fragmentation and excessive reliance on Mandarin Chinese.
A primary structural flaw is the inconsistency of the curriculum. In many schools, bilingual education is not implemented across all grade levels due to a lack of resources. A student might have a bilingual physical education class in third grade, only to return to a fully Mandarin-taught curriculum in fourth grade. This fragmented approach prevents students from gaining language proficiency and adapting to an immersive environment.
Furthermore, the quality of “bilingual” instruction is often compromised. Many subject teachers, forced to teach in English without adequate training or confidence, resort to a translation-heavy method. They speak a sentence in English, immediately followed by a Mandarin translation. Students learn to tune out the English and wait for the Mandarin instructions. This is not bilingual education; it is merely a performance that sacrifices the depth of subject knowledge and fails to improve English proficiency.
Rather than pursuing a superficial “coverage rate” in which schools merely claim to have bilingual classes to secure funding, the Ministry of Education should pivot towards quality and substance.
First, resources should be redirected to hire qualified teachers capable of delivering full English instruction. We need educators — local or foreign — who can create an immersive environment, rather than subject teachers who are struggling to translate their lesson plans. If the instruction cannot be delivered effectively in English, it is better to teach it well in Mandarin than to conduct a subpar bilingual class.
Second, there must be a shift toward developing cross-disciplinary English materials with a strong emphasis on reading proficiency. In an English as a Foreign Language environment like Taiwan, where opportunities for daily conversation are limited, reading is the most sustainable way to build language skills. Schools should be encouraged to develop their own English curricula that integrate topics from science, geography, or the arts, tailored to the students’ level.
The goal should be to foster the ability to acquire knowledge through English reading, rather than just learning English for tests. By prioritizing reading comprehension and recruiting teachers who can truly teach in the target language, we can move past the current “tokenism.”
The Bilingual 2030 policy should not be about how many schools have hung up a “Bilingual” plaque, but about how many students can actually use the language as a tool for learning. It is time to stop being satisfied with “just doing it” and start focusing on doing it right.
Kuo Chang-yi has a master’s degree in law from National Chengchi University. He is currently teaching English in an elementary school and training to become a bilingual teacher.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS