Official Language and Medium of Instruction in Pakistan: Exploring Urdu English Controversy


  • Fayyaz Hussain Assistant Professor, Incharge, Department of Punjabi, Government College University Faisalabad.
  • Mutee Ur Rehman Department of English, University of Education Lahore (Vehari Campus)
  • Hina Khan Assistant Professor, Department of Punjabi, Lahore College for Women University Lahore. (correspondence)


official language, medium of instruction, Urdu, English, Pakistan, Bangladesh


This study provides a thorough analysis of the controversy between Urdu and English as the country's de facto language and medium of instruction in education. Different people in various parts of Pakistan speak a wide variety of languages. The process of deciding on an official language and medium of instruction for Pakistan is fraught with challenges. While Urdu is widely spoken and understood across Pakistan, the significance of English in today's globalized economy cannot be overstated. Selecting a language that strikes a middle ground between globalism and nationalism is essential. Since its independence, Pakistan has struggled with linguistic issues, especially when East Pakistan split off to become Bangladesh due to linguistic differences. The research also delves into how English is used for government and how Urdu is used by the local press and the general public. Both students and educators in Pakistan have a favorable view of the English language, recognizing that without proficiency in and acceptance of the language, their country would be cut off from the rest of the world. This research also offers an in-depth review of the current discussion and a study of language regulations in the classroom. The views of curriculum designers are also reflected in this. This research might help authorities in Pakistan create a more efficient and effective medium of education.





How to Cite

Fayyaz Hussain, Mutee Ur Rehman, & Hina Khan. (2018). Official Language and Medium of Instruction in Pakistan: Exploring Urdu English Controversy. Al-Azhār, 4(02), 67–78. Retrieved from