A critical analysis of English language policies in Mongolia

Abstract

Abstract This article systematically and critically examines three English language policies enacted in Mongolia from 2001 to 2025. Using critical discourse analysis (CDA) as an overarching analytical framework, the study analyzes the policy texts to identify and unpack the priorities established in these policies, the problems represented through these priorities, and the ideological orientations that shaped their construction. We employed an integrated multilevel multimethod approach (IMMA) that brings together three interdisciplinary methodological approaches: thematic coding grounded in qualitative content analysis, the What the Problem Represented to be (WPR; Bacchi, 2012) from critical policy analysis, and Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA; Reisigl & Wodak, 2009; Wodak, 2001) in critical discourse studies. Our analysis situates the policies within their social and historical context, traces their historical progression, examines the discursive practices and patterns that reflect the underlying contextual dynamics that shape the policy construction. First, we use qualitative coding to identify central themes that reflect key priorities. We then use the WPR approach to uncover the problems that are represented through these priorities and the DHA to unpack the underlying ideological orientations and social forces that shape the policy discourses. Our analysis shows that the policies institutionalized English within the Mongolian educational system, built on and expanded the priorities of preceding policies, and introduced new priorities in response to evolving social, economic, and educational conditions. Across successive policies, we identify a progressively intensifying neoliberal discursive orientation that constructed English as a strategic form of linguistic capital and an essential resource for educational advancement, economic development, workforce competitiveness, and global participation. At the same time, this neoliberal orientation remains in tension with Mongolian nationalism and broader nationalist discourses.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Language Policy, 2026 · DOI ↗