The Future of English Teaching in Japan: Insights from Global Perspectives

Introduction

The role of English as a global language is continuing to evolve, shaped by shifts in education, and technology, brought on by globalisation. English education has long been considered a critical component of global competitiveness, and Japan is no different in this regard, with English education in Japan said to have entered a ‘new era to cope with the challenges of the global age’ (Hosoki, 2011, p. 200). This has not changed in the 13 years since this comment was made, with the continued, inevitable globalisation of Japanese industry (Yonezawa, 2020) leading to increased attention being paid to the idea of English as a lingua franca and how this can be seen to shape policies and practices in institutions throughout Japan (Kubota, 2015). As a result, educational institutions are expected to produce students who have a high level of English proficiency (Huffman et al., 2020). Yet, in general, Japan continues to struggle in terms of English education with fears that Japanese students are increasingly falling behind those in other Asian countries in terms of English proficiency (Take & Shoraku, 2018), perhaps threatening Japan’s position as an industrial leader in the Asian region thereby affecting Japanese economic prosperity (Samuell, 2023a).

While a reliance on traditional grammar-focused teaching methods, exam-driven learning, and low communicative proficiency have been issues facing English education in Japan for some time now (Nowlan & Samuell, 2020; Nishino & Watanabe, 2008), there has been a concerted effort from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) to introduce different teaching methodologies to improve English levels (Galloway et al., 2020). Methodologies such as communicative language teaching (CLT), and English Medium Instruction (EMI), as well as strategies such as introducing English as an official subject at elementary schools starting in 2020 have all been employed as possible answers to Japan’s struggles with English education.

Yet, the perceived difficulties of EMI classes and an over-reliance on English as a test subject for university entrance examinations has meant that many of these methodologies have struggled to take hold with overall progress continuing to be slow (Galloway et al., 2020; Nowlan & Samuell, 2020). Indeed, Japan’s position on the EF English Proficiency Index has steadily declined, falling from a “moderate” proficiency level in 2011 to “low” in 2023, where it now ranks 87th of 113 countries. With the possibility of this downward trend continuing, potentially placing Japan in the “very low” category in the coming years (EF, 2023), it is essential to continually reassess Japan’s approach to English education in light of global trends, so as to generate insights that can inform meaningful reform.

Japan has a strong cultural emphasis on education and is continually striving to develop new and innovative ways to further its global economic aspirations through English language education. Therefore, aligning with changes in global trends, it is important to continually analyse how the adoption of communicative approaches, such as content and language integrated learning (CLIL), and a focus on technology-enhanced learning could potentially help Japanese students develop the English skills necessary for a future as an increasingly globalised workforce. Japan’s situation must also be viewed in a wider East Asian context. South Korea has struggled to move beyond test-oriented classrooms despite communicative policy reforms (Choi, 2015), China’s top-down EMI expansion has often led to code-switching and uneven outcomes (Hu & Lei, 2014), and Taiwan’s ambitious Bilingual 2030 initiative demonstrates both the potential of bilingual education and the risks of insufficient localisation (Ferrer & Lin, 2021). These examples highlight that Japan shares many regional challenges, and that successful reform requires careful adaptation of global insights to national contexts.

Considering this, insights from the British Council’s The Future of English: Global Perspectives (Patel et al., 2023) could provide valuable directions for reevaluating English education in Japan. As trends in education are forever evolving and shifting as advances in technology increasingly facilitate the sharing of information between educators around the world, it can be difficult to keep up with commonly shared views on the ‘future of English education’. It is for this reason that The Future of English: Global Perspectives (Patel et al., 2023) report was chosen for use as the guiding framework for this paper, given its explicit aim of providing ‘a voice for stakeholders throughout the world’ and ‘shaping the agenda for further discussion, research and planning into the use of English, as well as approaches to English language teaching and learning’ (British Council, 2023b). To achieve this, the British Council invited 92 policymakers and policy influencers from 49 countries to take part in a large-scale study on ‘the future of English based on their future priorities and needs' (British Council, 2023a). The findings of this research were subsequently published in The Future of English: Global Perspectives (Patel et al., 2023).

After collating the data collected throughout the study, the authors were able to identify several major trends that highlight, among others, the need for educational systems worldwide to adapt to global markets that increasingly demand multilingual (read: English) competencies (Patel et al., 2023, p. 53). Furthermore, the report emphasises that English will continue to see a shift in its role from being a foreign language to being a global lingua franca that complements, rather than replaces, local languages (Patel et al., 2023, p. 174). Due to the comprehensive nature of the research carried out by the British Council, the book Future of English: Global Perspectives will form the guiding framework of this paper as it aims to explore how global trends identified in The Future of English can be applied to the Japanese context, with a particular focus on curriculum reform, teachers, and the role of technology. By examining these key areas, the paper seeks to provide a possible analytical lens for the future of English education in Japan, aligning it with both local needs and global demands.

2: Global Framework: The Future of English Report

While a range of global frameworks could be applied, such as the Council of Europe’s CEFR policy guidelines or OECD education reviews, as these tend to emphasise broad benchmarking or proficiency scales rather than the specific interplay of curriculum, teacher development, and technology, The British Council’s Future of English was therefore selected for this study for two key reasons. First, it reflects large-scale consultation with 92 policymakers from 49 countries (British Council, 2023a), offering perspectives that resonate with Japan’s concern for international recognition and alignment with global standards. Second, it directly addresses the three domains that Japanese scholarship identifies as persistent areas of struggle—curriculum, teachers, and technology (Oda, 2019; Samuell, 2021; Samuell, 2023a; Suzuki, 2021; Tooka et al., 2024). Importantly, the report foregrounds systemic and contextual adaptation, noting that reforms must be localised rather than copied wholesale (Patel et al., 2023). Thus, in this sense, the framework is best understood as a heuristic — or lens — for examining English education in Japan, integrating global insights with the necessity of local adaptation. This emphasis on localisation makes it particularly suitable in the Japanese context where global discourses of English are refracted through national policy priorities and societal constraints (Kubota, 2015; Yonezawa, 2020).

The Future of English project builds upon previous work by linguist David Graddol, whose seminal report, The Future of English? (1997) and English Next (2006) explored the evolving role of English as a global language. Graddol’s studies were commissioned by the British Council to examine the impact of globalisation on English language use, predicting key trends such as the increasing demand for English proficiency, the rise of English as a medium of instruction, and the growing importance of multilingualism. His work provided insights into how demographic, technological, and economic forces were shaping the global status of English, with his 2006 report identifying 14 major trends that would influence the future of English. These included the shift away from native-speaker norms and the growing competition from non-native English teachers, something that has been near universally accepted by many countries but continues to be an issue in Japan, where the idea of the native speaker as the ideal English teacher continues to be an area of much discussion (Freunberger et al., 2022; Samuell, 2023b). However, in the years following the publication of English Next, the English teaching landscape has continued to shift due to rapid advancements in technology, changing geopolitical landscapes, and the growing influence of emerging economies (Patel et al., 2023).  Therefore, to reassess these predictions, the British Council launched the Future of English project in 2021. 

The new project utilised Graddol’s findings as a foundation but expanded its scope to include updated research methodologies, including global surveys and expert roundtables. The authors describe the new project as:

an invitation to engage in thinking and discussions about English in its various roles and what the future holds for it’ as well as a description of ‘the inception, implementation and findings of a long-term research project that has started to generate evidence about the use and role of English in education around the world (Patel et al., 2023, p. 41).

The research focuses on how English will evolve in the context of a globalised world, with particular attention to the roles of technology, education policy, and economic drivers, all issues that are often the subject of much academic discussion within the Japanese context. By engaging experts, policymakers, and educators from diverse global regions, the project aims to provide an evidence-based framework for future educational reform, reflecting the current and emerging trends in global English use and working to inform future English language policy and teaching practices. It is for this reason that insights from this book may be of great use to policymakers and educators in Japan when considering the role English will play in Japan in the years to come. While British Council publications can be read as Anglocentric, this paper works to mitigate that risk by using The Future of English as a lens rather than a template, and by foregrounding Japanese scholarship and system constraints in each domain. In short, the lens frames the questions, but Japanese evidence provides the answers.

3: The Future of English in Japan

3.1: Curriculum, Policy, and Evolving Assessment Practices

Any discussion of the future of English in Japan should start with a discussion of Japanese policy and curriculum, as the highly centralised nature of Japanese education (Butler, 2021) sees top-down policy decisions affecting ‘the whole breadth of society’ (Seargeant, 2008, p. 139). Oda (2019, p. 56) argues that learners, and the general public as a whole, tend to accept policy decisions as long as it is seen to be coming from the ‘authority’. This has resulted in ELL policy being seen as a ‘problematic issue’ that extends beyond the boundaries of education and can instead be increasingly seen to be associated ‘with wider social changes, especially those relating to Japan’s international relations and its role and status within the global community’ (Seargeant, 2008, p. 122).       

Increased attention to a country’s status and role within the global community is certainly a key issue and one which appeared as a prominent theme in the Future of English study. The study notes the increasing need for policymakers to consider their curricula in relation to the global nature of English shifting emphasis from traditional models towards more integrated and communicative approaches (Patel et al., 2023). The report suggests that better to prepare students for practical use of English in global contexts, we are increasingly seeing the traditional focus on grammar and vocabulary being replaced by more integrated methods of teaching English, such as English-medium instruction (EMI) and Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL).

In response to the increased call for the adoption of such methodologies, the Japanese government (through MEXT) has implemented various reforms aimed at improving English communicative skills. The basis of many language policies in Japan is the oft-cited 2003 MEXT Action Plan. While this policy document is now over 20 years old, it remains an important part of any English language policy discussion in the Japanese context as it is one of the first documents to outline its rationale and aims explicitly, thereby becoming the blueprint for language (read: English) education policy (Seargeant, 2008).

MEXT has continued to update its language policies, notably in 2008, 2013, 2014(b), and 2017, ‘with the general goal of improving students’ communicative skills for corresponding to current globalisation in Japan’ (Nakao et al., 2019, p. 17). These reforms have included the introduction of English as an official subject for elementary school students starting in 2020 and several Government-sponsored reforms aimed at internationalising higher education (HE). A highly publicised example of this was the Global 30 initiative, which ran from 2009 to 2014 with the explicit aim to internationalise Japanese HE through EMI and the recruitment of foreign students (Aizawa & Rose, 2019). This was followed by the Top Global University Project (TGUP), another large-scale, well-funded initiative (Rose & McKinley, 2018, p. 112) that ran from 2014 to March 2024 which aimed to ‘enhance the international compatibility and competitiveness of higher education in Japan’ and to provide ‘prioritized support for the world-class and innovative universities that lead the internationalization of Japanese universities’ (MEXT, 2014a). Although these programs often speak of ‘international compatibility’ and ‘internationalization’, they often conflate the terms with English language learning (ELL), and as such, English is a prominent feature (Rose & McKinley, 2018).

Through these policies and initiatives, the adoption of EMI in Japan has been seen to increase in recent years, with the potential of EMI programs to alleviate ‘the perceived poor English proficiency level of Japanese university students’ often espoused as one of the driving forces behind the increase (Chapple, 2015, p. 3). Indeed, the number of universities offering EMI programs jumped from 190 (25%) to 222 (29.2%) from 2008 to 2010 (Chapple, 2015, p. 3). However, there remains a number of challenges facing the implementation of EMI in Japan. While EMI is certainly continuing to gain traction (both locally and globally), there are significant debates about its effectiveness, and the need for proper implementation for it to be successful.

A number of researchers have even posited that there is little to no conclusive evidence that solely relying on EMI classes will lead to any improvements in English proficiency (Dearden et al., 2016; Galloway et al., 2017; Galloway & Ruegg, 2020; Patel et al., 2023; Rose et al., 2019). It has even been argued that ‘current EMI implementation produces more challenges than opportunities to both parties and that this may be a by-product of a rapid implementation of the policy and a lack of adequate support for students' and instructors' linguistic academic needs’ (Williams, 2015, p.1).

This is certainly true in Japan, where ‘positive outcomes are not guaranteed, and there is a fear that a lack of planning can lead to unrealistic expectations’ (Galloway et al., 2017, p. 6). Galloway et al. (2017, p. 6) go on to note that in countries like Japan, ‘careful planning is required when considering embarking upon or perhaps expanding, EMI’ due to a number of challenges, including language-related issues such as English proficiency, cultural issues, social issues, and management, administrative and resource issues. These global debates echo concerns raised by Japanese researchers who have cautioned that these ambitious reforms face systemic challenges at the classroom level, suggesting that global recommendations must be carefully adapted to Japan’s context.

While the Future of English report emphasises a global shift toward more communicative and flexible curricula, Japanese researchers suggest that such reforms face serious obstacles locally. Nishino and Watanabe (2008) discuss how policies designed to promote communication are routinely undermined by classroom realities, while Oda (2019) highlights how Japan’s top-down policymaking often stifles local adaptation. These perspectives suggest that the report’s recommendations cannot simply be transplanted, as structural barriers — particularly the dominance of entrance exams — continue to constrain change. Indeed, the entrance examination system is a major issue in terms of English language education in Japan. The rigid, and outright dominant nature of the system acts further to constrain curriculum development, making it more difficult to update and implement curriculum reforms more in line with global trends. Almost all students seeking admission to universities in Japan must first sit the State-mandated Daigaku Nyūgaku Kyōtsu Tesuto (Common Test for University Admissions)—which replaced the Daigaku Nyūshi Sentā Shiken (National Center Test for University Admissions) in 2021, meaning that teachers locally remained constrained in what they can teach in their own classrooms (Nowlan & Samuell, 2020).

In addition to this test, many universities require students also to sit university-specific entrance examinations between January and March, which creates a period of intense competition and pressure colloquially termed juken jigoku, or ‘examination hell’ (Entrich, 2015; Kariya, 2009; Ono, 2007). Entrance examinations constitute a notable feature of Japan’s educational landscape (Samuell 2023a), with success or failure on these tests potentially influencing a student’s life profoundly due to Japan’s ‘academic career-based’ or ‘credentialist’ (gakureki-shugi in Japanese) society which emphasises career selection based on educational background (Nakamura, 2018, p. 274). While English is a major part of these examinations, there is no real test of communicative ability, instead testing only English comprehension through reading and listening activities. Despite a failed attempt to add a speaking component to the entrance examinations in 2020, this well-established system has operated relatively unchanged for many years.

However, there are signs that the situation may start to shift in accordance with global trends and an increased need for communicative ability as ‘Japanese college admissions practices are becoming both more diverse and more complex’, working to ‘provide applicants with a variety of pathways and opportunities to access higher education’ (Ishikura, 2021, p. 129). This is evidenced by the increasing popularity of the Admissions Office (AO) and Recommendation-based exams, now accounting for roughly 9% and 35%, respectively, of all university admissions (MEXT, 2023). This shows a marked increase in the popularity of the AO exam, which only accounted for approximately 1.4% in 2000 (MEXT, 2018). This is an important trend, as it shows how, over time, the system has moved better to accommodate students’ diverse strengths and interests.

While the general entrance exam remains dominant (around 55%; MEXT, 2023), the AO exam, which focuses more on interviews, essays, and motivation rather than pure academic performance, can be seen to offer students alternative pathways to university that are perhaps more ‘appropriate for their unique academic and personal background’ thereby allowing students to select the university that is best matched with their interests, learning style, and aspirations, rather than choosing a university simply because it is highly ranked’ (Ishikura, 2021, p. 129). While these changes are slow to take effect, Ishikura (2021) notes that they represent an important step in addressing ongoing challenges in Japanese higher education policy. If Japan is to retain its status as one of the largest economies in the world, policy changes need to reflect urgent issues such as the shrinking population of 18-year-olds, changing student demographics (read: increasingly globalised), and the ‘shifting conception of knowledge’ (Ishikura, 2021, p. 130) by bolstering its ELL efforts and continuing to recruit international students.

Thus, the rigid entrance exam system remains a difficult obstacle to overcome, and while the growing use of AO and Recommendation-based exams certainly offers a glimpse at a possible future for entrance examinations, the continued dominance of the traditional examinations means that aligning Japan’s curriculum with global trends by incorporating communicative approaches such as CLIL and EMI remains a difficult task. Therefore, the adoption of such policies and practices in Japan must be well considered because if we are to equip educators with the skills needed to implement these new methodologies and foster students’ communicative competence in alignment with global demands, effective teacher training is crucial.

3.2: English Language Teachers

The Future of English report argues that ‘Teachers are responsible for educating the next generation; their jobs are important for both individual student success and national growth and progress’ and that ‘English language teachers will continue to be of vital importance’ (Patel et al., 2023, p. 219). Following on from the previous section, the report further states that, while there ‘is no real evidence that the growth of English medium instruction (EMI) has led to a need for English teachers to be retrained’, the report does emphasise the importance of lifelong professional development, highlighting that ongoing teacher education is crucial given the dynamic nature of ELT practices (Patel et al., 2023, p. 55).

According to the report, there ‘is a general consensus that in the next 15 years, teachers will need to learn new skills as the attitudes towards and models of ELL and communication change, with a lot more emphasis on the position of local languages and varieties of English’ (Patel et al., 2023, p. 219). In addition to this, it notes that while teachers will remain central to the learning of English for the foreseeable future, there is a continuing need for them to ‘upskill’ in order to deal with issues such as multilingualism and technological advancements (Patel et al., 2023, p. 219).

Despite global trends highlighting the importance of lifelong teacher development and the need for diverse English teaching models, Japan finds itself in a difficult position, with an ELT landscape shaped by longstanding structural elements clashing with contemporary demands. The teacher education system has evolved since the post-war era to what Yamasaki (2016) describes as an ‘open system’ where teachers are government officials and gain certification through competitive exams. While MEXT has institutionalised professional development opportunities, practical implementation varies significantly across regions, with teachers required to adhere strictly to the national curriculum using government-approved textbooks (Yamasaki, 2016).

Further, teachers are often required to move between schools to maintain quality and standardisation across the local prefecture, thereby affecting teachers’ long-term professional development by constantly changing their teaching environment. Therefore, while there are opportunities for professional development, these often fall short in equipping teachers with the practical tools needed for modern classroom environments and the teaching of communicative English. This is highlighted by Steele and Zhang (2016) and Nowlan and Samuell (2020) when they examine the difficulties that schools have had in Japan when implementing more communicative teaching practices such as Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and, more recently, EMI. As they note, one of the primary issues is the inconsistency between policy and practice, where due to strict (read: forced) adherence to government-mandated textbooks and having to teach for entrance examinations has resulted in many teachers still defaulting to grammar-translation methods, at the expense of more communicative methodologies such as CLT and EMI (Steele & Zhang, 2016; Nowlan & Samuell, 2020). This disconnect is further exacerbated by insufficient teacher training in communicative methods of English teaching, leaving many teachers ill-prepared to teach English communicatively (Steele & Zhang, 2016; Nowlan & Samuell, 2020).

In addition to this, Suzuki (2021) notes that Japanese teachers often lack meaningful intercultural exposure, a gap in their education and training that affects their ability to teach language as a tool for global communication. According to her findings, ‘nearly 44 percent of about 53,000 secondary school English teachers surveyed in 2017 had no study abroad experience at all’ (p. 398). While lack of study abroad experience does not necessarily mean that teachers in Japan are not able to teach English effectively, it is certainly indicative of broader issues with ELT and teacher training in Japan, especially when considering how difficult it is to find opportunities to communicate meaningfully with people from different cultures locally (Samuell, 2021).

Additionally, teachers in Japan find themselves stuck between preserving national identity, adapting to global trends, and the persistence of native-speakerist ideologies (Matikainen, 2020). As Morikawa (2019) observes, the notion that native speakers (NSs) inherently possess advantages over non-native speakers (NNSs) persists in Japan, even though, as he argues, empirical evidence has long since debunked these beliefs. This perception fosters an ‘us vs. them’ dichotomy, casting NSs as having a ‘superior Western teaching methodology,’ while NNSs are viewed as ‘culturally inferior and in need of training in the ‘correct’ Western methods of learning and teaching’ (Lowe & Kiczkowiak, 2016, pp. 2–3).

Beyond academic analysis, practitioner accounts highlight the daily pressures that shape classroom practice. Surveys and case studies consistently cite heavy workloads and the rigid pacing of government-approved textbooks as major obstacles to implementing communicative approaches (Butler, 2015; Tahira, 2012). The effects of overly-dominant entrance examinations further constrain practice, pushing teachers back toward grammar–translation despite policy aims (Nishino & Watanabe, 2008). Many teachers also report limited access to sustained, classroom-embedded professional development, with training often fragmented or overly theoretical (Nishino, 2012; Sato & Oyanedel, 2019). These practitioner perspectives confirm that systemic constraints, not just pedagogical preferences, limit teachers’ ability to adopt global innovations, underscoring the need for reforms that address working conditions and provide accessible, practical professional learning opportunities.

The drive for ‘perfection’ in English language education locally exacerbates the situation, reflecting an adherence to ‘standard’ language ideology, with little recognition for local language variations, which impacts the acceptance of the Japanese English accent as a legitimate form, instead seeing many teachers and students striving to sound like native speakers (Galloway & Rose, 2015). This, in turn, leads to some teachers having difficulty reconciling their identity as language teachers with their cultural identity. Indeed, as Kubota (2023, p. 10) argues, the identities of both teachers and learners are often ‘negotiated with native/nonnative speakerness and cultural identity’, producing ‘raciolinguistic identities’, which often leads to people doubting their linguistic abilities leading to a general perception that NSs are more ‘competent and thus superior’ (p. 7). This is certainly at odds with the findings of The Future of English report that espouses the ‘doom’ of monolingualism.

This discourse on teacher training, classroom realities, and native-speakerism naturally leads to a discussion of multilingualism, as global trends emphasise the integration of multiple languages and the recognition of English as a lingua franca, Japan must consider the implications of a multilingual educational framework. Teachers need to be equipped with the skills to navigate this reality, understanding and embracing the diverse linguistic landscape, including wider acceptance of Japanese English as a legitimate form of English (Samuell, 2023b). NNS teachers need to be recognised for their successes with language learning, which are a direct result of their abilities gained through their own personal experiences.

Indeed, as Matikainen (2020, p. 112) states, it ‘is time for Japanese ELT to move forward, in order to prepare Japanese students for the reality of English outside of the classroom and outside of Japan’. One area of interest to be studied in the coming years is the number of students, and perhaps future English teachers, taking part in study abroad programs. As part of state plans to combat market concerns and to reap the benefits of globalisation, in 2023, then-Prime Minister Kishida Fumio pledged to increase the number of Japanese students studying abroad to 500,000 by 2033 (Yamamoto, 2023), thereby potentially strengthening the intercultural communicative competence of Japanese students within the next 10 years.

Taken together, these dynamics illustrate how Japanese teachers face not only structural pressures but also identity-related challenges that complicate the adoption of global teaching models. Consequently, while the Future of English report stresses the importance of lifelong professional development for teachers, Japanese scholars suggest that such goals face distinctive challenges in Japan. Suzuki’s (2021) finding that nearly half of Japanese secondary school English teachers lack meaningful intercultural experience shows how teachers may struggle to frame English as a global communication tool, revealing that the report’s emphasis on global preparedness cannot be achieved without addressing local gaps in teacher training. Further, Kubota’s (2023) discussion of “raciolinguistic identities” adds further evidence of the difficult situation in which Japanese English teachers currently operate. Similarly, Morikawa (2019) and Matikainen (2020) argue that moving beyond native-speakerism is essential if Japanese teachers are to be recognised as legitimate English educators in their own right. In this way, we can see how Japanese scholars both echo the report’s call for teacher upskilling but add a further dimension by foregrounding issues of identity and legitimacy that the global framework largely leaves unaddressed.

Therefore, if we view The Future of English report as a lens for considering potential reforms in Japanese English language education, MEXT needs to move away from rigid practices—such as arbitrary teacher rotations and over-reliance on mandated textbooks—and instead prioritise meaningful professional development. In particular, training in integrating communicative methods into classroom practice, recognising ‘Japanese English’, and incorporating technology will be crucial to align policy with both global trends and local realities.

3.3: Technology and Language Teaching

In conjunction with its focus on professional development, the report also emphasises the need for substantial investment in infrastructure and training for new digital technologies, driven by the rapid digital growth prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic (Patel et al., 2023). The report discusses how technology can greatly expand access to language learning, making English more affordable and accessible than traditional in-person classes. Further noting that while the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated online learning, empowering many students, this shift also risks widening inequalities, as access to technology often divides along economic and urban-rural lines, negatively affecting students and teachers in poorer or rural areas who may lack necessary devices or Internet access, limiting educational opportunities (Patel et al., 2023).

The need for more training effectively to utilise digital technologies in the English teaching classroom is certainly echoed in Japan, where it has been said that many faculty members are unprepared for the digital shift, struggling with technological skills and in need of more professional development (Tooka et al., 2024). According to a 2018 survey by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Japanese learner’s computer literacy lagged behind fellow member nations (OECD, 2018), with Japanese faculty showing limited comfort when it came to training in educational technologies (Clavel, 2019; Rifai et al., 2021). Yamada (2022) further elaborates that both faculty and students faced challenges in digital readiness, impacting the effectiveness of online language classes especially in terms of engagement.

To address this, there is a need for enhanced, targeted professional development for teachers effectively to integrate ICT into their teaching practices, as many teachers lack the confidence and skills to use technology in classrooms (Rifai et al., 2021); this is especially true in the case of EFL classrooms (Colpitts et al., 2021). However, current educational frameworks do not place sufficient emphasis on ICT literacy, which may hinder the development of digital skills among students from an early age. The curriculum needs updating to better support the acquisition of these essential skills (Rifai et al., 2021). Therefore, Yamada (2022) argues that maintaining digital transformation in higher education, especially within English-based programs, requires sustained institutional and governmental support, including investment in infrastructure, policy alignment, and ongoing digitalisation initiatives. Building on this need for systemic backing, Japan has already promoted digital infrastructure in response to broader societal challenges such as population decline and the government’s vision for Society 5.0. Initiatives such as the GIGA School Program, which provides one device per student and introduces digital textbooks, exemplify these efforts (Horita & Nagahama, 2023). Tooka et al. (2024) further highlight MEXT’s ongoing support through policy reforms, expanded funding for digital projects, and greater flexibility for remote learning.

However, there remain issues in the implementation and standardisation of these policies across institutions, with Colpitts et al. (2021) suggesting that Japanese institutions lack the adaptability required for the successful adoption of digital practices in English education. They further posit that greater institutional flexibility and stronger leadership are necessary to support an evolving digital learning ecosystem. The same can be seen at the classroom level, where Japan’s traditionally lecture-centred approach presents a significant barrier to effective digital integration. As Tooka et al. (2024) suggest, a cultural shift toward student-centred approaches is necessary fully to harness the potential of digital tools. Indeed, wider adoption of digital resources and interactive technologies, such as mobile-assisted language learning, could offer significant opportunities to make learning more engaging and responsive to evolving student needs (Colpitts et al., 2021).

MEXT is also aware of the need for such changes as there has been a shift from collective to individualised approaches, emphasizing self-regulated and competency-based learning, yet practical applications of such policy remain slow (Horita & Nagahama, 2023). This, however, should remain a priority for English education in Japan, as adapting such tools for use in EMI programs could also enhance global competitiveness by fostering greater linguistic competence (Yamada, 2022). Additionally, digital transformation offers significant opportunities for lifelong learning, expanding access to tertiary and non-tertiary education. Nevertheless, logistical and financial challenges remain a barrier to implementing these initiatives (Tooka et al., 2024). The acceleration of digitalisation during the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the potential to create new lifelong learning pathways, provided that institutions and governments continue to invest in infrastructure and support (Yamada, 2022). A flexible and inclusive digital education ecosystem, supported by institutional adaptability, can benefit adult learners and promote continuous skill development (Colpitts et al., 2021). Yet, despite improvements in digital infrastructure brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, a persistent digital divide between urban and rural schools affects equitable access to technology and IT skill development, with this disparity impacting both students and educators, emphasising the need for comprehensive policies to bridge this gap (Rifai et al., 2021).

Japanese researchers echo these concerns, showing how the promise of digitalisation is tempered by uneven implementation and institutional rigidity. Although the Future of English report highlights technology as a driver of accessibility and innovation in English education, Japanese scholars caution that, as with many of the issues discussed within this paper, its implementation is shaped by local constraints. As Yamada (2022) notes, faculty and students alike faced difficulties adapting to digital learning during COVID-19, reflecting deeper gaps in digital readiness, suggesting that Japan’s transition to digital learning has been uneven and shaped by pre-existing institutional contexts. Additionally, Tooka et al. (2024) argue that while government initiatives such as the GIGA School project have expanded infrastructure, uneven implementation across institutions continues to hinder progress. Colpitts et al. (2021) further caution that the rigidity of Japanese universities limits the potential of digitalisation unless stronger leadership and flexibility are introduced. Together, these perspectives show that while Japanese educators recognise the opportunities technology brings, they also highlight cultural and institutional obstacles that complicate the optimistic narrative offered by the global framework.

Therefore, the integration of technology into English education in Japan must be supported by policy, institutional flexibility, and a cultural shift towards interactive, student-centred approaches. Equipping teachers with the skills effectively to incorporate ICT into classrooms, updating curricula to prioritise digital literacy, and addressing the digital divide are essential steps toward aligning Japan’s educational practices with global trends. As highlighted in the Future of English report, utilising technology will be critical for equipping learners with the skills necessary to succeed in an increasingly global, interconnected world.

4: Conclusion

The future of English education in Japan is at a pivotal juncture, as the nation seemingly struggles to align its educational practices with global trends while still addressing local challenges. Japanese scholars seem broadly to echo the report’s priorities yet consistently point to the fact that localisation of these policies is the key to addressing many of the issues raised throughout this paper. Accordingly, the report’s value in the Japanese context is best understood as diagnostic and directional rather than prescriptive. If Japan is to redefine the role of English as more than a subject to be studied for tests and instead as a tool for global communication, then it must revisit its curriculum, enhance teacher training, and further integrate digital technologies into English language classrooms. If we are to see the Future of English document as a potential lens for envisioning the future of English education in Japan, we can see how Japan needs to address structural barriers, such as reliance on comprehension-focused entrance exams, and align its curriculum with global trends by further embracing entrance examinations that put more emphasis on communication, thus allowing wider adoption of communicative teaching methodologies like CLIL and EMI.

In addition to this, a shift is needed toward valuing Japanese English teachers’ unique strengths, while MEXT should provide these teachers with adequate training and support to prepare them for increasingly multilingual, globalised classrooms. Finally, a shift toward interactive, student-centred approaches using digital tools, supported by institutional flexibility and investment, could go some way to improving both English linguistic ability and issues with digital literacy while aligning Japan with global trends in the role of digital technologies in the English classroom. These strategies not only respond to Japan’s unique sociocultural and institutional context but also reflect broader global shifts toward multilingualism and interconnectedness.

Seen in this light, and as mentioned in the introduction, Japan’s situation is not unique, with other education systems in East Asia facing similar tensions between adopting global frameworks and adapting them to local constraints. In South Korea, the Teaching English through English policy faltered because exam pressures continued to dominate classroom practice (Choi, 2015). The lesson for Japan is clear: curriculum innovation will fail if high-stakes entrance examinations continue to privilege grammar–translation over communicative skills. In China, a rapid top-down expansion of English-medium instruction led to widespread code-switching and uneven outcomes when teachers and students lacked sufficient support (Hu & Lei, 2014). Japan should therefore avoid replicating reforms without ensuring adequate teacher training and institutional support, as rapid policy shifts can exacerbate inequalities and disillusion both teachers and learners. In Taiwan, the ambitious Bilingual 2030 policy demonstrates both the potential of bold bilingual goals and the necessity of flexible, localised implementation (Ferrer & Lin, 2021). Here, Japan can learn that large-scale bilingual initiatives must be adapted to local realities, not imposed as one-size-fits-all policies, and that success depends on aligning reform with teacher capacity, community expectations, and gradual adaptation. Together, these comparisons highlight that Japan’s challenges are not unique, but they also show that solutions cannot be imported wholesale: they must be tailored to Japan’s institutional structures, cultural values, and equity concerns.

The British Council’s framework is therefore useful not as a blueprint, but as a lens for asking the right questions about curriculum, pedagogy, and technology. Japanese educators’ own critiques point to the conditions under which reform will succeed: equity of access, teacher empowerment, and careful localisation of global models. If reforms prioritise communicative competence and adapt global insights to Japan’s specific context, English can be redefined from a test-driven subject into a practical tool for global participation. These comparisons underscore the need to localise global models rather than import them wholesale.

This study has highlighted the need for Japan to embrace a forward-thinking vision of English education, one that overcomes traditional paradigms and prioritises the real-world applicability of language skills and the role of English as a global communication tool. By doing so, Japan can better prepare its citizens for life in an increasingly globalised and digitalised world. Future research should explore the implications of practical implementations of the suggestions outlined throughout this paper, assessing their impact on learners, educators, and Japanese society. Equipping students with effective English communication skills is crucial for Japan to enhance its regional competitiveness, attract international business, and better prepare its workforce for a globalised economy. While it would appear as though many of the issues discussed here are deeply ingrained into the Japanese educational landscape, if Japan would like to keep its position as a world-leading economy, Japan must adapt to the evolving role of English and the associated global trends. Ultimately, The Future of English is most productive when treated as a lens rather than a template: it can highlight questions for Japanese English education to ask, but the answers must be grounded in local scholarship, societal contexts, and classroom realities.

 

References:

Aizawa, I., & Rose, H. (2019). An analysis of Japan’s English as medium of instruction initiatives within higher education: the gap between meso-level policy and micro-level practice. Higher Education, 77(6), 1125-1142.

British Council. (2023a). The future of English. https://www.britishcouncil.org/future-of-english

British Council. (2023b). The future of English: Research summary. https://mktgfiles.britishcouncil.org/hubfs/FoE_Research%20Summary_single%20page_for%20download_revisedV2.pdf

Butler, Y. G. (2015). English language education among young learners in East Asia: A review of current research (2004–2014). Language Teaching, 48(3), 303–342. doi:10.1017/S0261444815000105

Butler, Y. G. (2021). Struggling for a diverse but fair policy: Policy challenges to implementing English at the primary school level in Japan. In V. Murphy & M. Evangelou (Eds.), Early language learning policy in the 21st century (pp. 41–59). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76251-3_2

Chapple, J. (2015). Teaching in English is not necessarily the teaching of English. International Education Studies, 8(3), 1-13.

Choi, T. H. (2015). The impact of the ‘Teaching English through English’ policy on teachers and teaching in South Korea. Current Issues in Language Planning, 16(3), 201–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2015.970727

Clavel, T. (2019). World Class: One Mother's Journey Halfway Around the Globe in Search of the Best Education for Her Children. Simon and Schuster.

Colpitts, B. D. F., Smith, M. D., & McCurrach, D. P. (2021). Enhancing the digital capacity of EFL programs in the age of COVID-19: The ecological perspective in Japanese higher education. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(2), 158-174. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0123

Dearden, J., Macaro, E., & Akincioglu, M. (2016). English medium instruction in universities: A collaborative experiment in Turkey. Studies in English Language Teaching, 4(1), 51–76.

EF Education First. (2023). EF English proficiency index: Japan. https://www.ef.com/wwen/epi/regions/asia/japan/

Entrich, S. R. (2015). The decision for shadow education in Japan: Students’ choice or parents’ pressure? Social Science Japan Journal, 18(2), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1093/ssjj/jyv012

Ferrer, A., & Lin, T. B. (2021). Official bilingualism in a multilingual nation: a study of the 2030 bilingual nation policy in Taiwan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(2), 551–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.1909054

Freunberger, D., Bylund, E., & Abrahamsson, N. (2022). Is it time to reconsider the ‘gold standard’ for nativelikeness in ERP studies on grammatical processing in a second language? A critical assessment based on qualitative individual differences. Applied Linguistics, 43(3), 433-452.

Galloway, N., & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing global englishes. Routledge.

Galloway, N., Numajiri, T., & Rees, N. (2020). The ‘internationalisation’, or ‘Englishisation’, of higher education in East Asia. Higher Education, 80(3), 395-414.

Galloway, N., & Ruegg, R. (2020). The provision of student support on English Medium Instruction programmes in Japan and China. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 45, 100846.

Galloway, N., Kriukow, J., & Numajiri, T. (2017). Internationalisation, higher education and the growing demand for English: An investigation into the English medium of instruction (EMI) movement in China and Japan. British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/H035%20ELTRA%20Internationalisation_HE_and%20the%20growing%20demand%20for%20English%20A4_FINAL_WEB.pdf

Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub_learning-elt-future.pdf

Graddol, D. (2006). English next. British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/english-next

Horita, T., & Nagahama, T. (2023). A perspective from educational technology research trends in individualization of learning in elementary and secondary education in Japan. Information and Technology in Education and Learning, 3(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.12937/itel.3.1.Inv.p004

Hosoki, Y. (2011). English language education in Japan: Transitions and challenges. Kokusai Kankeigaku Bulletin, 6(1/2), 199–215.

Hu, G., & Lei, J. (2014). English-medium instruction in Chinese higher education: A case study. Higher Education, 67(5), 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9661-5

Huffman, J., Inoue, M., Asahara, K., Oguro, M., Okubo, N., Umeda, M., Nagai, T., Tashiro, J., Nakajima, K., Uriuda, M., Saitoh, A., & Shimoda, K. (2020). Learning experiences and identity development of Japanese nursing students through study abroad: A qualitative analysis. International Journal of Medical Education, 11, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5e47.cf1b

Ishikura, Y. (2021). Undergraduate Admissions: Shifting Trends. In P. Snowden (Ed.), Handbook of Higher Education in Japan (pp. 122–132). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1zckxc3.15

Kariya, T. (2009). From credential society to ‘learning capital’ society. In H. Ishida, & D. H. Slater (Eds.), Social class in contemporary Japan: Structures, sorting and strategies (pp. 87–113). Routledge.

Kubota, R. (2015). Foreword. In Horiguchi, S., Imoto, Y., & Poole, G, S. (Eds.), Foreign Language Education in Japan: Exploring Qualitative Approaches (pp. vii-x). Sense Publishers. 

Kubota, R. (2023). Introduction to language learning, teaching, and reclamation in Japan: Diversity, inequalities, and identities. In Mielick, M., Kubota, R., Lawrence, L. (Eds.), Discourses of identity: Language learning, teaching, and reclamation perspectives in Japan (pp. 1–14). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Lowe, R. J., & Kiczkowiak, M. (2016). Native-speakerism and the complexity of personal experience: A duoethno-graphic study. Cogent Education, 3(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1264171

Matikainen, T. (2020). Moving past native-speakerism in English language teaching (ELT) in Japan. Keio SFC Journal, 19(2), 102–113.

MEXT. (2003). MEXT action plan 2003. http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/ html/hpac200201/hpac200201_2_015.html

MEXT. (2008). Shogakko gakushu shido yoryo kaisetsu gaikokugo hen. Tokyo: Toyokan Press.

MEXT. (2013). Guroobaruka-ni taio-shita eigo kyoiku kaikaku jisshi keikaku [Reforming English education for a globalized world]. http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/25/12/__icsFiles/afield-file/2013/12/13/1342458_01_1.pdf

MEXT. (2014a). Selection for the FY 2014 Top Global University Project. https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/26/09/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2014/10/07/1352218_02.pdf

MEXT. (2014b). Kongo no eigo kyōiku no kaizen jūjitsu hōsaku ni tsuite: Gurōbaruka ni taiō shita eigo kyōiku kaikaku no itsutsu no teigen [Concerning strategies to improve English education in the future: Five suggestions for English language education reforms for globalization]. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/102/houkoku/attach/1352464.html

MEXT. (2017). Shochuko-wo tsujita eigo kyoiku kyoka-ni kansuru torikumi-ni tsuite [Efforts to improve English education through primary, secondary and high schools]. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/058/siryo/__icsFiles/afield- file/2015/12/17/1365351_3.pdf

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). (2018). Admission policies and practices of Japanese universities. https://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/other/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/09/11/1407998_05.pdf

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). (2023). Admission trends and university selection methods in Japan for FY2023. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20230123-mxt_daigakuc02-000027141_03.pdf

Morikawa, T. (2019). Native-speakerism or English as a lingua franca?: on the future direction of English as a foreign language education in Japan. Komaba Journal of English Education, 10, 25-46.

Nakamura, T. (2018). Achievements and future challenges in Japan’s sociology of education: Sociologization, pedagogization, and resociologization. In A. Yonezawa, Y. Kitamura, B. Yamamoto, & T. Tokunaga (Eds.), Japanese education in a global age (pp. 263–280). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1528-2_15

Nakao, K., Oga-Baldwin, W. Q., & Fryer, L. K. (2019). Expanding Japanese elementary school English education: Native and nonnative speaking team-teachers’ perspectives on team-teaching quality. The Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education of Waseda University, 29, 17-31.

Nishino, T., & Watanabe, M. (2008). Communication-oriented policies versus classroom realities in Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 133–138.

Nishino, T. (2012), Modeling Teacher Beliefs and Practices in Context: A Multimethods Approach. The Modern Language Journal, 96, 380-399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01364.x

Nowlan, A., & Samuell, C. (2020). Communicative language teaching: Contemporary applications in Japan. Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 24, 77-87.

Oda, M. (2019). Behind the sand castle: Implementing english language teaching policies in Japan. Second Handbook of English Language Teaching, 51-71. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58542-0_4-2

OECD. (2018). Education policy in Japan: building bridges towards 2030. Reviews of National Policies for Education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/19900198

Ono, H. (2007). Does examination hell pay off? A cost–benefit analysis of ’ronin’ and college education in Japan. Economics of Education Review, 26(3), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.01.002

Patel, M., Solly, M., & Copeland, S. (2023). The future of English: Global perspectives (B. O’Sullivan & Y. Jin, Eds.). British Council.

Rifai, I., Setiadi, C. J., Renaldo, J., & Andreani, W. (2021). Toward society 5.0: Indonesia and Japan on the 21^st century literacy skills. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 729(1), 0–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/729/1/012102

Rose, H., Curle, S., Aizawa, I., & Thompson, G. (2019). What drives success in English medium taught courses? The interplay between language proficiency, academic skills, and motivation. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2149–2161. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1590690

Rose, H., & McKinley, J. (2018). Japan’s English-medium instruction initiatives and the globalization of higher education. Higher Education, 75(1), 111-129.

Samuell, C. (2023a). Shadow education, Bourdieu, & meritocracy: towards an understanding of Juku and inequality in Japan. Current Issues in Language Planning, 25(1), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2023.2209467

Samuell, C. (2023b). Native speakerism and the Japanese ideal of English language teaching: globalisation, ideology, and practice. Language and Intercultural Communication, 24(2), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2023.2248962

Samuell, C. (2021). Learner Attitudes Towards English: Considering the Japanese Context. 阪南論集. 社会科学編, 57(1), 21-33.

Sato, M., & Oyanedel, J. C. (2019). “I think that is a better way to teach but …”: EFL teachers’ conflicting beliefs about grammar teaching. System, 84, 110–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.06.005

Seargeant, P. (2008). Ideologies of English in Japan: The perspective of policy and pedagogy. Language Policy, 7(2), 121-142.

Steele, D., & Zhang, R. (2016). Enhancement of teacher training: Key to improvement of English education in Japan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 16-25.

Tahira, M. (2012). Behind MEXT’s new course of study guidelines. The Language Teacher, 36(3), 3-8.

Take, H., & Shoraku, A. (2018). Universities’ expectations for study-abroad programs fostering internationalization: Educational policies. Journal of Studies in International Education, 22(1), 37-52.

Tooka, T., Uchida, N., Takenaga, K., Maruyama, K., & Kato, M. (2024). Digitalization of Higher Education in Japan: Challenges and Reflections for Education Reform. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 16(2).

Williams, D. G. (2015, April). A systematic review of English medium instruction (EMI) and implications for the South Korean higher education context [Special issue on CLIL]. ELTWorldOnline.com. http://blog.nus.edu.sg/eltwo/?p=4822

Yamada, A. (2022). Globalization and internationalization of higher education reform in Japan: Pre and post Covid-19. In Discourses of Globalisation and Higher Education Reforms: Emerging Paradigms (pp. 93-112). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83136-3_6

Yamamoto, C. (2023, April 2). Kishida sets goal of 400,000 international students in 2033. The Asahi Shimbun. https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14873637

Yamasaki, H. (2016). Teachers and teacher education in Japan. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima University. Part III, Education and Human Science, (65), 19–28. https://hiroshima.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/2032255

Yonezawa, A. (2020). Challenges of the Japanese higher education amidst population decline and globalization. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 18(1), 43-52.

Article copyright Christopher Samuell.

Back to top