Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article critically examines ‘bilingualism without mother-tongue’ in China’s Minzu higher education, focusing on Tibetan language education at Western Minzu University through the lenses of social and linguistic justice to examine the relationship between official bilingual education commitments and their implementation. Employing critical language policy theory and language ideology, the study analyses the disjunction between the official rhetoric of ‘Tibetan-Chinese bilingualism’ and its implementation in Minzu institutions. Drawing on classroom observations, student and faculty interviews, and institutional documents, the research examines the prominence of Mandarin Chinese in core academic subjects and the more restricted role of Tibetan in academic instruction. The analysis considers how institutional governance, curricular arrangements, and language ideologies shape opportunities for Tibetan-medium learning within the programs examined. It also distinguishes persistent structural disadvantage from implementation difficulties that do not necessarily imply deliberate discrimination. The findings highlight a gap between policy goals and their implementation and identify the need to distinguish symbolic recognition of Tibetan from sustained opportunities to use it for academic learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dak Lhagyal (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: