Building beyond Bilingual 2030

Recent discussions about Bilingual 2030 have produced no shortage of disagreement. Educators do not always agree about education. More interesting is what happens when we look beyond those disagreements and consider what each perspective adds to the conversation.

Nigel Daly (“Taiwan wants bilingual, AI-ready graduates — but tests for yesteryear,” June 3, page 12) questioned whether assessment reflects the capabilities students increasingly need. Jye Smallwood (“Basic Misunderstanding of EMI,” Aug. 9, page 8) examined the pedagogical demands of English-medium instruction. Gerhard Erasmus (“Bilingual 2030: time’s up for opinions,” Sept. 5, page 8) emphasized rigorous research, stronger evidence and the need to adjust policy as that evidence emerges. My own contributions have focused on classroom experience and the connections between learning, assessment and teacher development.

Taken together, these perspectives begin to look less like competing diagnoses and more like different parts of the same education system.

Assessment matters, because what measure inevitably influences what students and teachers prioritize. As artificial intelligence (AI) changes the value of information retrieval and routine language production, greater attention to communication, judgement and the ability to use knowledge becomes increasingly important. Assessment can help signal those priorities while providing evidence of whether students are developing them.

The discussion around English as a medium of instruction (EMI) brings us closer to what happens when educational ambitions reach classrooms. Teaching academic content using English requires more than subject expertise or English-language proficiency. Teachers also need the pedagogical skills to make complex ideas accessible, check understanding and create opportunities for students to engage meaningfully with language and content.

If we expect classroom practice to evolve, teachers need opportunities to develop alongside the expectations placed upon them. Professional development can connect broader education goals with the daily decisions teachers make about tasks, interaction, feedback and learning.

Classroom experience and research provide evidence. Some of it can inform immediate adjustments; other patterns require systematic study over time. Evidence becomes most valuable when it can travel through the system and help inform what happens next.

These elements can reinforce one another. Stronger assessment can provide better information about learning. Teacher development can help educators respond to that information. Better-prepared teachers can create richer learning experiences. Classroom experience and research can then reveal where further development or adjustment might help.

An education system cannot communicate in only one direction. Policy travels from ministries toward schools, but classroom experience must also travel back through the system. Researchers, teachers, students, schools and policymakers each see something that others might not.

This raises a larger question about Bilingual 2030 itself. Governments need deadlines. Education needs direction.

The year 2030 is a useful milestone for setting goals, focusing investment and evaluating progress, but learning would continue long after it passes. A child entering elementary school today would still be in the education system after 2030. A teacher beginning a career now might still be teaching in the 2050s. AI, internationalization and changing workplaces would continue reshaping how English is learned and used.

Perhaps the most important legacy of Bilingual 2030 is not a final verdict on whether every ambition was achieved by a particular date. It is the education capacity Taiwan builds along the way.

The nation has already invested substantially in many of these areas. Bilingual 2030 has generated years of experimentation, professional development, classroom experience and public discussion from which to learn. Each contribution to that discussion helps illuminate another part of a complex picture.

None of these perspectives needs to contain the whole answer. Their value lies precisely in what becomes possible when we put them together.

The deadline 2030 would arrive soon enough. The larger opportunity is to ensure that everything Taiwan learns on the way helps its teachers, students and education system become even more capable in 2031, 2035 and beyond.

Daniel Eyrich is director of English studies at CenYing English in Keelung and has more than 15 years of experience in English-language teaching, assessment and teacher development in Taiwan.