‘Education fever’ drives the demand for English in South Korea today. One professor of politics has recently deplored the current pursuit of ‘English education’ (yeongeokyoyuk) in South Korea as a ‘collective neurosis of English fever’ (Y-M. Kim, 2002). What has brought this current English boom to South Korea? It can be traced back to the traditional ‘education fever’ (kyoyukyeol) or ‘preoccupation with education’ (Seth, 2002). The English boom resulting from the Korean education fever has led to a strong antipathy toward Koreans – even in English-speaking countries.

This article explains how the current English boom in South Korea has been founded on the long tradition of education fever in the country, and why more and more Korean children are sent abroad to learn the English language. In addition, I also attempt to show the connection between this English boom and an associated antipathy toward the Korean language and Korean speakers in English-speaking countries.

In the mid-1980s, Crystal (1985) lamented that there were no reliable figures available for the number of learners to whom English is taught as a foreign language in many regions of the world, and that ‘China has always been excluded from the statistical reviews, because of the shortage of information from inside the country’ (Crystal, 1985: 9). More recently, Bolton (2008: 6) similarly notes that because of ‘the absence of accurate language surveys’ academics have to make educated guesses regarding the total number of those learning/knowing English. The figure of the total English learners/users in China has been estimated to be somewhere between 200 and 350 million (cf. Bolton, 2003: 48; Kachru, 1997; McArthur, 2003; Zhao & Campbell, 1995; Graddol, 2006: 95). Fortunately, a national language survey in China conducted at the turn of the century does provide some hard statistics on the number of English language learners/users in the world's most populous country, and also sheds some light on the realities of use of English and English proficiency among the Chinese people.

According to a 2010 China Daily article, the number of English learners in China is now around 400 million, approximately one third of China's population (see also Wei and Su, this issue). The importance of English in the state education system has been supplemented by the rapid growth of privately-run language schools and training institutes across the country in recent years. The same article quoted a comment by Ms Xiao Yan, the public relations manager of the Wall Street English language school chain, who gave her explanation for the current popularity of English in the following terms:

The text of a lecture delivered at the JALT (Japanese Association of Language Teachers) Conference in 1988.

Updates on the statistics of English. Starting with excerpt from David Crystal, How many millions use English? (ET1, 1985). The author says: Reading this article again, that almost a quarter of a century on, the most noticeable change, it seems to me, has been in the amount and colour of the author's hair! That aside, I am struck by my final comment: ‘I shall stay with this figure for a while’ – a billion. It appears I stayed with it for a decade. In the first edition of my English as a Global Language (1997: 61) I raised my estimate, suggesting a middle-of-the-road figure of 1,350 million. In the second edition (2003: 69), a ‘cautious temperament’, I said, would suggest 1,500 million. And these days, having read the more sophisticated assessments by David Graddol and others, I am prepared to revise upwards again in the direction of 2 billion. In short, we have moved in 25 years from a fifth to a quarter to a third of the world's population being speakers of English.

The contemporary visibility and importance of English throughout the Asian region coupled with the emergence and development of distinct varieties of Asian Englishes have played an important part in the global story of English in recent years. Across Asia, the numbers of people having at least a functional command of the language have grown exponentially over the last four decades, and current changes in the sociolinguistic realities of the region are often so rapid that it is difficult for academic commentators to keep pace. One basic issue in the telling of this story is the question of what it is we mean by the term ‘Asia’, itself a word of contested etymology, whose geographical reference has ranged in application from the Middle East to Central Asia, and from the Indian sub-continent to Japan and Korea. In this article, my discussion will focus on the countries of South Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia, as it is in these regions that we find not only the greatest concentration of ‘outer-circle’ English-using societies but also a number of the most populous English-learning and English-knowing nations in the world.

A reply to ‘Language varieties and standard language’ by Sir Randolph Quirk in ET21 (Jan 90)

Will ‘native speakers’ of English have to change some of their most cherished and least examined assumptions as the language approaches the 21st century?

The problematic of the use of English as a teaching medium in China.

This paper presents a critical review of the Chinese-English bilingual education initiative from a sociological perspective. It consists of three major sections. The first section briefly discusses French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu's (1986, 1991) theoretical work which informs the current critical review. The second section examines some of the major driving forces behind the runaway expansion of English-medium instruction. The final section analyses the implications and consequences of such instruction for China.

In recent years there have been suggestions that English could break up into mutually unintelligible languages, much as Latin once did. Could such a break-up occur, or are we in need of a new appreciation of the nature of World English?

ENGLISH as the world's lingua franca has become a focus of attention for many scholars. Since China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO), the motivation to learn English has dramatically increased. This paper questions the need for English in China to conform to any of the existing standard varieties, arguing that this objective is both undesirable and virtually unattainable, especially in respect to pronunciation, and that Chinese learners should therefore be learning ‘China English’. In an investigation with over 1,200 Chinese students at her university, the writer discovered that the vast majority had never heard of either World English or China English, believing instead that proficiency in standard American or British English should be their goal. She proposes both a reorientation of English language learning in China and a radical revision of the materials used there for both practical and cultural reasons.

A novel view of how English might or should be modelled at the turn of the millennium – followed by some solicited comments

The use of the English language in China, and especially in Chinese education has been increasing for several decades, despite various attitudes towards its use (Hu, 2009; Niu & Wolff, 2003; Wang, 2015). In the traditional perspective of world Englishes (Kachru, 1992), China lies in the expanding circle, where English is regarded as a foreign language. However, since China's implementation of the opening-up policy, the teaching of the English language has gained momentum by becoming a key subject in China's education system. Currently, policies in China make English a subject of study from grade three at primary school and as one of the three compulsory subjects in the national university entrance exam (Gaokao), and a compulsory course for university students of all majors (Hu, 2003; Li, 2016).

Some observations on the possible indigenization of English in mainland China. China boasts the largest English-learning population in the world. ‘It seems there are more people learning to speak English in China than there are English speakers in the whole of the United States’. Over 200 million children, about 20% of the total in the world, are learning English in schools, and about 13 million young people at university. The Chinese government has decided to offer English as a compulsory course nationwide from the third year at primary school. While schools in rural areas are trying to find qualified English teachers, those in large cities like Beijing and Shanghai have begun to do so as soon as the children start school at the age of six.

First describing the rapid growth of English as a lingua franca in Europe and East Asia, and having drawn attention to similarities and differences in the evolution of the varieties of English worldwide, the author focuses on China where, as in so many other domains, growth and change are currently very rapid. She reports in particular on an investigation into 586 Chinese English teachers' attitudes to both the standard varieties of the language around the world and a new variety, China English. A majority of the teachers surveyed considers that China English will eventually become a standard variety of the language in its own right, and at least stand alongside the current national favourite, American English. In addition, the teachers' views on both the cultural content of teaching materials and the use of native speakers of English in Chinese institutions of education reflect both China's openness to the world and a strong adherence to its own culture. The signs are, she argues, that China English is on its way to becoming another world variety, which will happen when it has been adequately described, codified and officially recognized.

Language policies generally seek to establish, regulate, and conform linguistic practices – whether explicit or implicit – that occur within an ‘authorized’ domain. While there are multiple levels (societal, institutional, and interpersonal) at which such policies are enacted (Hornberger & Johnson, 2007), academic institutions are often significant policy arbiters as they serve as crucial switchboards (Blommaert, 2010; De Costa, 2010) that connect policies at the societal and interpersonal levels. In particular, English medium of instruction (EMI) policies that mandate English as the primary means of academic content delivery have played a pivotal role in enabling universities in countries such as Bangladesh (Rahman & Mehar Singh, 2019), China (e.g., Hu, 2009; Song, 2019; Zhang, 2018), Saudi Arabia (Barnawi, 2018; Phan & Barnawi, 2015), and Vietnam (Phan, 2018) to establish themselves on the world stage and engage with the global community. Even though several scholars (e.g., Coleman, 2006; Jenkins, 2019a; Knight, 2013, 2016; Macaro et al., 2018) have investigated EMI policies across different contexts, the following central question concerning these policies still persists: in what ways has the implementation of EMI policies transformed the higher education sector, and subsequently affected primary social actors, such as students, teachers, and administrators embedded within these shifting contexts? These concerns, we posit, are amplified by the transnational movements of people and institutions (Duff, 2015) and the ever-increasing speed and agility with which TESOL as a field has to respond to the shifting tides of globalization (Barnawi, 2020). Given this conspicuous gap in an ever-evolving English language policy landscape, we set out to critically review previous works that have examined the implementation of EMI policies within a transnational higher education (TNHE) context. TNHE is characterized by the transformation of higher education across the globe (Knight, 2013; Kosmützky & Putty, 2016) as Western-based universities export models – driven by a neoliberal agenda to maximize financial profit – through the establishment of overseas branch campuses. In reviewing works that examine TNHE, we aim to stimulate dialogue on this contemporary phenomenon.

Rural failure in English learning and the socioeconomics of ELT. Over 24 million children learn English as a second/foreign language in primary and secondary schools in Bangladesh. These children start learning the language as a required subject in Grade 1 and continue learning it (if they don't drop out) until Grade 12, and later at the tertiary level. Officially, they are taught English communicatively using Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) methodology, as it was envisaged that CLT would develop learners' ‘communicative competence’, and thereby strengthen the human resource development efforts of the Government of Bangladesh (NCTB, 2003). Nearly a decade has passed since CLT was first introduced in the national curriculum. It now seems appropriate to ask to what extent has it developed learners' competence and improved the declining standards of English in the country (Rahman, 1991).

ENGLISH is the most commonly used language in the world. As it has become the language that provides access to higher education and job opportunities, and has become almost exclusively the language of diplomatic discussion and business negotiation (cf. English APEC Strategic Plan, 2004), there has been a growing interest in hiring native-speaking English Teachers (NSETs) in Asian countries. The aim of this paper is to report policies and practices that invite NSETs to Asian countries, including China and Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, with emphasis on public education sectors. Through surveying both similar policies and the implementation of policies in several Asian countries, we seek to find practical suggestions for hiring NSETs. We survey policy goals, recruitment procedures, and the qualifications of NSETs. The analysis will be based on the premise that ‘language planning cannot be understood without reference to its social contexts’ (Cooper, 1989:3).

According to the Institute of International Education, China has become a major receiving country of international students, like the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. The rapid development of international education in China evidences a major progress in the infrastructure of Chinese higher education. While internationalization creates unprecedented opportunities for the knowledge economy in China, it simultaneously poses unparalleled challenges for Chinese higher education (An & Chiang, 2015) and one of these challenges is the medium of instruction (MOI). While English has been widely taught in China since 1978 (McArthur, 2005), it was not until the turn of the century that English was endorsed as the medium of instruction for the so-called Chinese-English bilingual education.

The 2016 World Bank report on worldwide per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) identified Bangladesh as a lower middle-income country based on its consistent GDP growth throughout last decade (World Bank, 2016). To maintain this growth rate and meet the radical demand for human resources in increasingly globalised world markets, the country needs to communicate more effectively with the outside world. Inevitably, this means improving the quality of English teaching and learning. The significance of English, as the global lingua franca, to Bangladeshi learners is at its zenith. In this developing country, however, economic constraints mean that funds allocated to education are limited compared to many other Southeast Asian countries (Habib & Adhikary, 2016). Even given the generally low level of educational standards in Bangladesh (Islam, 2015), the standard of English language teaching and learning has decreased alarmingly in recent years (Hamid, 2011). English language education in Bangladesh has always been problematic, despite various attempts to initiate curriculum reform. As Hamid & Baldauf (2008) point out, the first of these major shifts in the ELT curriculum took place in the mid-1990s, when the traditional Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) was replaced with a curriculum based on a Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) model. The principal objective of this article is to review the major problems associated with ELT in Bangladesh that have hindered the implementation of the new CLT curriculum from the perspective of teachers, and eventually to make recommendations for more effective ELT curriculum reform.