This paper looks at four key issues concerning quality college English Language Teaching (ELT) in Taiwan. Although there are various factors to be considered such as teacher training, student motivation, cultural differences, etc., it is important for ELT policy makers, teachers, test designers and stakeholders to address issues beyond these concerns when the national college ELT education is taken into consideration. Strategically, quality college ELT education of a country is considerably related to the four key issues of 1) what is to be assessed, 2) a national curriculum, 3) a national testing system, and 4) a national scale of English language ability. Starting with the first issue, the writer argues that it is language performance rather than competence is to be assessed. It is still a question for some test designers, especially under the influence of Bachman’s latest AUA (Assessment Use Argument, 2010) test model, to wonder whether they should focus on a testee’s language ability or language performance. This paper argues that the notion of “language ability” in Bachman’s AUA test model is psycholinguistic, and impractical. It could be a misunderstanding for people to wrongly use Bachman’s psycholinguistic “language ability” to mean language performance. Foreign language test designers should have a clear understanding of what language ability truly means so as to focus on observable language performance rather than invisible psycholinguistic language competence. As for the other three key issues of a national curriculum, a national testing system, and a national scale of English language ability, they are three approaches to the best guarantee of quality college ELT education for a country. Any one or two of the three approaches could implement the effective safeguard for quality college ELT education. Looking around the world situation, we can see many countries, including the US, Canada, Mainland China, the European Union, Australia, etc. have established their own national or regional standards of foreign language education. In addition, this paper examines the college ELT education in Taiwan, and argues that, comparatively, there is a distinct lack of any of the three key issues concerning its college ELT education. Therefore, this paper calls on national ELT policy makers, teachers, test designers and stakeholders to be fully aware that quality college ELT education in Taiwan should actually be more related to the adoption of at least one of the three approaches.