Abstract

This paper critically reviews and reflects on the interplay between Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (Mother -Tongue Education) policies and English Medium Education practices (Other-Tongue education) in Nepal. It aims to explore their implementation and evaluates the implications for equity and inclusion within the educational system. Based on the review of related literature like policy documents, implementation reports, and field-based studies, it identifies the challenges of balancing linguistic diversity, national identity, and global competitiveness. It highlights the discrepancies between policy ideals and grassroots realities, such as insufficient resources, lack of teacher training, and sociocultural biases favoring dominant languages. The paper argues for a context-sensitive approach that bridges policy and practice, ensuring linguistic rights and educational access for marginalized communities while accommodating broader educational aspirations.

Keywords: Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE), Other-Tongue Education (EME), Language Policy, Equity in Education, Access and Quality in Education

Introduction

Nepal introduced a mother-tongue-based multilingual education (MTB-MLE) policy in 2009, allowing local languages as mediums of instruction up to grade 3 (Fillmore, 2020). The 2015 Constitution recognizes all mother tongues as national languages, upholding the right to education in one’s mother tongue and supporting language and cultural preservation. The Ministry of Education’s Curriculum Development Center has produced educational materials in 26 languages. However, the implementation of MTB-MLE faces challenges, including resource limitations, lack of stakeholder involvement, and ideological opposition (Awasthi, 2011; Phyak, 2016; Poudel & Choi, 2021). In this regard, there is a big controversy between the policies in favour of mother tongue education and practices in favour of other tongue education such as English Medium Education especially in the contexts of school education in Nepal.

This situation has sparked a debate between policies favoring mother-tongue education and the growing preference for other tongue education (EMI) in Nepal, especially in school settings. The policy document such as School Sector Reform Plan (2015) granted schools the autonomy to choose their medium of instruction, resulting in a significant shift towards EMI. Despite doubts about its direct impact on educational quality, EMI is often perceived as a symbol of higher education standards, putting pressure on schools, communities, and individuals (Dearden, 2015; Erling, 2014; Sah & Li, 2017; Phyak, 2016). Many government schools of Nepal have adopted EMI (other tongue) to enhance their competitiveness with private institutions, with reports indicating an increase in student enrollment following the adoption of English as the medium of instruction (UNESCO, 2023). This highlights the ongoing tension between the desire to preserve linguistic diversity through MTB-MLE and the prevailing preference for English in educational practices.

The debate over the choice of Medium of Instruction (MOI) in Nepalese education—whether to prioritize Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) or adopt English as the Medium of Instruction (other tongue)—is central to addressing issues of equity, inclusion, and educational quality. MTB-MLE is aligned with Nepal’s constitutional provisions and international commitments to safeguard linguistic rights, cultural preservation, and equitable access to education for marginalized communities. It supports early cognitive development and improves learning outcomes, particularly for students from diverse linguistic backgrounds. In contrast, other tongue education (EMI) is seen as a means to enhance global competitiveness, providing opportunities for socioeconomic mobility and integration into the global economy.  However, the shift towards EMI in many schools often neglects critical factors like teacher preparedness, resource availability, and student readiness, which can lead to unintended negative outcomes. Similarly, the implementation of MTB-MLE faces challenges such as ideological resistance, limited institutional support, and inadequate funding. These challenges highlight the need for a balanced approach that aligns policy ideals with the realities on the ground.

This paper is justified by its focus on exploring the discussion between these contrasting educational paradigms in Nepal. It aims to critically analyze policy frameworks, implementation practices, and their implications for equity and inclusion in the context of language education. The paper uses a review-based methodology, systematically examining existing literature and research to assess the effectiveness of both MTB-MLE (mother tongue education) and EMI (other tongue education) in Nepal’s educational system, with a particular focus on their impact on marginalized communities and educational outcomes.

Reviews and Discussion

In the context of Nepalese education, the choice between mother-tongue-based multilingual education (Mother-Tongue Education) and English Medium Instruction (Other-Tongue Education) is not merely a pedagogical decision; it is deeply intertwined with the broader social, cultural, and political implications of language. Language, as noted by UNESCO (2008), plays a pivotal role in shaping communication, societal development, and inclusion. The perspectives on language, as discussed by various scholars, provide important frameworks for understanding the significance of the medium of instruction in Nepal’s educational system.  For many students, English represents an opportunity for upward mobility and participation in the global economy, aligning with the utilitarian view that language is a bridge from local contexts to global engagement (Khadka, 2007).  However, from the perspective of marginalized language groups, language is much more than a tool for social mobility; it is a marker of identity and shared understanding (Koirala, 2007). In this regard, the push for MTB-MLE (Mother-Tongue Education) becomes crucial, as it enables students to learn in a language they understand and value, thus fostering better cognitive development and learning outcomes. This is particularly significant for students from linguistically diverse backgrounds, who might otherwise be excluded from meaningful participation in education if taught in a language that is not their own.

Furthermore, knowledge advocates argue that language serves as a means to uncover marginalized wisdom (Guha, 2005). The promotion of MTB-MLE is a way of reclaiming and preserving indigenous knowledge systems that are often overlooked in favor of global languages like English. Linguists, too, emphasize the importance of preserving languages, which are key to maintaining cultural heritage and fostering diversity (Khadka et al., 2006; Khadka, 2007). The promotion of local languages through MTB-MLE not only serves the immediate needs of students but also contributes to the broader goal of language preservation and cultural sustainability.

The debate over the medium of instruction (MOI) in Nepalese education—whether to prioritize Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (mother-tongue education) or adopt English Medium Instruction (other-tongue education)—is complicated by several factors that challenge both policies’ successful implementation. Despite the constitutional recognition of linguistic rights and policy support for MTB-MLE, its practical implementation has been fraught with difficulties. Key barriers, such as limited resources, inadequate teacher training, and ideological resistance to the use of local languages in formal education, hinder MTB-MLE’s potential to foster linguistic and cultural inclusion. The lack of sufficient institutional support and funding further exacerbates these challenges, preventing MTB-MLE from realizing its promise of improving educational access and quality for marginalized communities.

Moreover, the increasing dominance of EMI (other-tongue education), especially in private schools, raises concerns about the equity of access to quality education. English-medium education, often associated with higher status and better opportunities, requires significant financial investment, making it an option primarily accessible to wealthier families. Sah and Karki (2023) describe this phenomenon as “elite appropriation,” where English-medium education becomes a marker of social status and opportunity, further reinforcing social and gender disparities. The high tuition fees associated with private EMI schools, coupled with gendered preferences for investing in boys’ education, lead to gender imbalances in enrollment and access to educational opportunities.  The shift towards EMI has been particularly pronounced in the private sector, where English is increasingly viewed as synonymous with quality education (Phyak & Sharma, 2020). This neoliberal approach, driven by market forces, has led to a rise in private schools that use English as the default medium of instruction.

Research suggests that mother-tongue-based education has led to improved learning outcomes for marginalized language speakers, enhancing their classroom participation and reducing grade repetition (Phyak, 2013; Rai et al., 2011). However, the lack of government support, particularly in private schools, hinders its broader success (Phyak, 2024). As Nepal seeks to become a middle-income country by 2030, achieving equity in education is critical (Ministry of Education, 2016). The rise of private schools using EMI as the default has created a perception that English equals quality education marginalizing public schools (Phyak & Sharma, 2020). This has led to increased private school enrollment, exacerbating educational inequalities.  Mother-tongue education, particularly in rural areas and for girls, helps disadvantaged groups stay in school longer and perform better academically (Hovens, 2002; UNESCO Bangkok, 2005). However, despite the multilingual nature of Nepal, foreign languages, especially English, dominate education systems, leading to submersion (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000). While parents often advocate for mother-tongue education, they often misunderstand its cognitive and linguistic benefits, seeing it merely as language instruction rather than a medium for broader learning. Parents prioritize English for its perceived connection to better job opportunities, leading them to favor EMI schools, even if they support mother-tongue education in principle.

The research suggests that while both MTB-MLE and EMI have their merits, a balanced approach is necessary. MTB-MLE can promote equity, particularly for marginalized groups, but must be better supported by the government and schools. At the same time, EMI should not be the sole focus of educational reform, as it risks deepening social and educational divides, particularly for those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. To achieve true educational equity, Nepal should prioritize policies that support both linguistic diversity and global competitiveness, ensuring all students, regardless of their background, have equal opportunities for success.

Conclusion

The debate over the medium of education in Nepal highlights a critical tension between Mother-Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) and English Medium Instruction (EMI). While MTB-MLE aligns with goals of equity and linguistic diversity, its practical challenges hinder effective implementation. Conversely, EMI offers prospects for global competitiveness and socioeconomic advancement but often disregards local contextual needs, such as teacher and student preparedness. This underscores the need for a balanced approach that addresses the strengths and limitations of both systems to create an inclusive and context-sensitive education framework.

To achieve educational equity and quality in Nepal, it is essential to address the gaps in implementing both MTB-MLE and EMI. Adequate funding, teacher training, and resource allocation are needed for effective MTB-MLE policies, while EMI should be introduced with strategies that support students’ transition to English without undermining their foundation in the mother tongue. A balanced, context-sensitive approach that integrates MTB-MLE with selective EMI can help promote linguistic rights and inclusive education, particularly for marginalized groups like rural and indigenous communities. Policymakers should focus on multilingual education models that enhance cognitive and linguistic skills while also addressing the demand for global engagement. Raising public awareness about the benefits of mother-tongue education, strengthening teacher training programs, and fostering collaboration among stakeholders are vital steps in bridging the policy-practice gap. Moreover, encouraging research on the impacts of MTB-MLE and EMI will provide valuable insights for sustainable reforms that prioritize equity, inclusion, and quality in education.

References

Adhikari, B. R., & Poudel, P. P. (2023). Countering English-prioritised monolingual ideologies in content assessment through translanguaging practices in higher education. Language and Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2217804

Awasthi, L. D. (2004). Exploring monolingual school practices in multilingual Nepal (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Danish University of Education, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Axinn, W. G., & Pearce, L. D. (2006). Mixed method data collection strategies. University Press.

Bandhu, C. M. (2009). Strategies for teaching mother tongues in Nepal. InNepalese Linguistics, 24, 1-10. https://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/nepling/pdf/Nep_Ling_24.pdf 

Benson, C. (2005). Girls, educational equity, and mother tongue-based teaching. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000146952

Berliner, D. C. (2006). Our impoverished view of educational research. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 949-995.

Bolton, K., & Kuteeva, M. (2012). English as an academic language at a Swedish university: Parallel language use and the ‘threat’of English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(5), 429-447.

Choi, T.-H. (2023). English fever: educational policies in globalised Korea 1981–2018. History of Education, 52(4), 670–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0046760X.2020.1858192

Choi, T. H., & Adamson, B. (2021). Toward an effective transition to adopting English as the medium of instruction: A case from Hong Kong. In Rethinking EMI (pp. 161-176). Routledge.

Choi, T.-H., & Leung, C. (2017). Uses of first and foreign languages as learning resources in a foreign language classroom. Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(4), 587–604. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.4.1.587

Choi, T. H., & Poudel, P. P. (2024). Enactment of English medium instruction in under-resourced educational contexts: A case of multilingual public secondary schools in Nepal. System, 121, 103223.

Fillmore, N. (2020). Mother tongue-based multilingual education in Nepal: Past, present, and emerging trends. Annual review of comparative and international education 2019, 231-254.

Fillmore, N., & Paudel, J. R. (2022). Policy to practice, national to local: Multilingual education at the meso and micro levels of Western Nepal. In L. Adinolfi, U. Bhattacharya, & P. Phyak (Eds.), Multilingual Education in South Asia: At the Intersection Between Policy and Practice (pp. 69–92). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003158660

Khadka, B. K. (2018). Mother Tongue Education: A Quest of Quality and Access in Education. Journal of NELTA Surkhet, 5, 65-74.

Khadka, B. K. (2024). English in Education in Nepal: A Comprehensive Overview. Journal of NELTA Gandaki, 7(1-2), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.3126/jong.v7i1-2.70184

Khanal, B., Biswokarma, A., Acharya, S. P., Acharya, D., & Bhatta, L. D. (2020). Report on National Assessment of Student Achievement in Mathematics, Science, Nepali and English for Grade 8. Education Review Office.

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [MoEST] (2016). School Sector Development Plan 2016/17–2022/23. https://moe.gov.np/assets/uploads/files/SSDP_Book_English_Final_July_5, 2017.pdf.

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [MoEST]  (2022). School Education Sector Plan- 2022/23- 2031/32.

National Statistics Office [NSO]. (2021). National population and housing census-2021. https://censusnepal.cbs.gov.np/Home/Details?tpid=5&tfsid=17.

Phyak, P. (2015). Language ideologies and local languages as the medium-of-instruction policy: A critical ethnography of a multilingual school in Nepal. In Language Planning for Medium of Instruction in Asia (pp. 127-143). Routledge.

Phyak, P. (2020). Neoliberal placemaking and ideological constructions of standardized tests in Nepal’s linguistic landscape. In S. A. Mirhosseini & P. De Costa (Eds.), The sociopolitics of English language testing (pp. 208–230). Bloomsbury.

Phyak, P. (2021). Epistemicide, deficit language ideology, and (de) coloniality in language education policy. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2021(267-268), 219-233.

Phyak, P., & Ojha, L. P. (2019). Language education policy and inequalities of multilingualism in Nepal: Ideologies, histories and updates. In The Routledge international handbook of language education policy in Asia (pp. 341-354). Routledge.

Phyak, P. (2024). English-medium instruction in higher education in Nepal. In The Routledge Handbook of English-Medium Instruction in Higher Education (pp. 394-409). Routledge.

Poudel, P. P., & Choi, T.-H. (2021). Policymakers’ agency and the structure: the case of medium of instruction policy in multilingual Nepal. Current Issues in Language Planning, 22(1–2), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2020.1741235.

Poudel, P. P., & Choi, T.-H. (2022). Discourses shaping the language-in-education policy and foreign language education in Nepal: an intersectional perspective. Current Issues in Language Planning, 23(5), 488–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.2013063

Poudel, P. P., & Costley, T. (2023). Understanding the impact of languages and language policies on children’s learning outcomes in Nepal. UNICEF Nepal

Sah, P. K., & Karki, J. (2023). Elite appropriation of English as a medium of instruction policy and epistemic inequalities in Himalayan schools. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 44(1), 20-34.

UNESCO. (2011). Multilingual Education in Nepal: Hearsay and Reality. UNESCO Kathmandu office.

Author’s bio: Dr. Bishnu Kumar Khadka serves as an Assistant Professor of English Education at the Central Department of English Education within the Graduate School of Education at Mid-West University. He has successfully completed tenure as the Assistant Dean of the Faculty of Education and has undertaken significant responsibilities, including serving as the Chairperson of the English Education Subject Committee and the Coordinator of the Research Management Cell. A life member of the Nepal English Language Teachers’ Association (NELTA), he is the founding President of the Karnali Province Committee and the former Chairperson of NELTA, Surkhet. Dr. Khadka recently earned a Ph.D. in English Education from Tribhuvan University. His scholarly interests focus on English education, inclusive education, research, teaching, and professional leadership.