1

English Medium Instruction as a Tool of Internationalization in Higher Education

Ernesto MacaroUniversity of Oxford: Department of Education

2

Overview

• What should be the ‘approach’ with regard to EMI in HE? (Implementation <->Research)

• What are the methodological challenges presented by EMI research ?

• Some initial findings from a survey of 54 countries

• A research agenda for EMI Oxford

3

Aims of EMI policy in Universities

• To internationalise universities?• To facilitate learning of subjects by home students?• A way of ensuring that home students can

compete in a world market?• To build/improve English language capacity of

home country?

Are these aims shared by all participants?

4

Aims of EMI policy in universities

• A new multilingual and multicultural tool for developing intercultural communication?

• Authentic language learning?• A way of forcing change in HE pedagogy?

Are these aims shared by all participants?

5

EMI Oxford: End-user research-driven approach to EMIEnglish Medium Instruction

University faculty

Secondary school teachers

University students

School students

Parents

RESEARCH EVIDENCE

Policy makers

Employers

Evolution

7

Phase 1 of project

Aims:• To map the current situation• To identify future trends

• Phase 2: online questionnaire investigating lecturer/teacher attitudes to EMI in their subject

• Phase 3: in depth analysis of smaller number of countries: Turkey; Italy; Austria

8

Phase 1 Method

• Open ended (essentially qualitative) questionnaire• Sent to British Council staff in 60 countries

worldwide• Primary analysis of data• Follow up request to plug gaps• Secondary analysis of data: attempt to quantify• Caveat: Reliability of data

9

The Field: Public vs. Public Education

Israe

l

Greece

Sri La

nka

Netherl

ands

South Afri

ca

Cypru

s

Hong Kong

Qatar

Bulgaria

Japan

Argentina

Azerbaij

an

Bahrai

n

Vietnam

German

ySp

ainSe

rbia

Pakist

an

Estonia

Saudi A

rabia

Venezu

ela

Macedonia

Seneg

al

Hungary

Croati

aGhan

a

Mainlan

d China

Taiw

an

United St

ates

Bosnia

and Herz

egovin

a

Malaysi

a

Bangla

desh

Afghan

istan

Kazakh

stan

Brazil

Monteneg

ro0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percentage of public vs. private universities

Private universitiesPublic universities

Countries and regions (n=36)

10

The Field: Public vs. Public Education

Malaysi

a

Azerbaij

an

Sri La

nka

Netherl

ands

Vietnam

Serb

ia

South Afri

ca

Macedonia

Afghan

istan

Czech Rep

ublic

Hong Kong

Greece

Croati

a

Saudi A

rabia

Cypru

sQata

r

Kazakh

stan

Mainlan

d China

German

yJap

an

Taiw

an

BulgariaGhan

aIta

ly

Argentina

United St

ates

Bahrai

n

Venezu

ela

Hungary

Bosnia

and Herz

egovin

a

Indonesia

Pakist

an0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percentage of public vs. private secondary schools

private secondary schoolspublic secondary schools

Countries and regions (n=32)

11

In ‘your country’, is EMI officially ‘allowed’ in public sector?

Primary Education

n percent

Allowed 29 52.7Not allowed 21 38.2

Secondary Education

n percent

Allowed 39 70.9Not allowed 13 23.6

Universities n percentAllowed 43 78.2Not allowed 10 18.2

13

Do official policies or statements on EMI exist?

Yes

No

Not known

14

Policy Changes in Past 10 Years?

Yes

No

Not known

15

General trend in each country

More

Less

Same

Mixed

Not known

16

Examples of “Mixed Trends”

Argentina “More, there is a trend towards increasing EMI at primary and secondary levels. State schools have mostly stayed away from it, despite some talks of including EMI in Buenos Aires.”

Azerbaijan “Public primary: less; public secondary: the same; public HE: more. Private primary, secondary and HE: more. “

Israel “More, universities want to teach more in English. Schools are not moving in this direction.”

Turkey “In HEIs, more. In state schools has become less with the abolishment of an initial year of EMI in the elite state Anadolu High Schools. The stated reason for abolishing EMI here is that pupils were performing poorly in science and mathematics.”

17

Official backing for ‘trends’

• Croatia: “In the context of the Bologna Process and increased international mobility as one of its priorities, the Ministry [has] Action Plan for the removal of obstacles and strengthening of the international mobility in education … including the increase in the number of study programmes offered in foreign languages”

18

Official backing for ‘trends’

• Uzbekistan: “The presidential decree of 2012 encourages English to be taught, spoken, and used for business communication at all levels and at any institution of Uzbekistan be it journalism, economics or staff of a ministry.”

19

Equivocal official backing

• Hungary: “Government recognises the efficiency of EMI programmes, ….however, it claims that EMI affects only a small number of learners (equal opportunities), and it is costly to operate (exams, qualified teachers including native speaker teachers, and materials and textbooks). New government’s quality assurance measures might even lessen the number of currently run programmes.”

21

Public Opinion on EMI

In favour

Controversial

Not known

22

Reasons for public opinion to be in favour

23

Reasons why public opinion is divided

24

Yes

No

Not known

Are there enough qualified teachers to teach EMI?

25

Yes

No

Not known

Are there any written guidelines specifying how to teach in EMI?

26

Yes

No

Not known

Are there any written guidelines that specify English-only or permit/encourage codeswitching?

30

Yes

No

Not known

Any stated expectation of language proficiency to qualify as EMI teachers ?

31

Yes for both public and private

Yes for private only

No

Not known

Is there any provision for EMI on ITE?

Yes for both public and private

Yes for private

only

No

Not known

Is there any provision for EMI on TPD?

32

Initial conclusions from Phase 1

• Long way from a ‘global’ definition (and consensus!) of EMI and its purposes or objectives

• Need: a research-driven process approach which consults stake-holders

• Introduction of EMI in tertiary is opportunistic & instrumental: effect on secondary

33

Initial conclusions from Phase 1

• Trend is towards much more EMI• There is official backing but with some ‘interesting’

exceptions• Public opinion not wholehearted support:

‘controversial’ rather than ‘against’• Concerns relate to: lack of qualified teachers; no

stated expectations of English language proficiency; lack of structural or pedagogical guidelines; little EMI content in ITE and TPD courses

35

EMI OxfordResearch Agenda

• What is the current and predicted uptake of EMI globally?• Who or what is driving EMI implementation?• What are the different forms of EMI currently being

developed? • What kind of English? Who owns the language?• What are the implications for teacher education,

teacher educators and materials developers?• What are the most sustainable mechanisms of teacher

education and development beyond the immediate period of engagement on a course?

36

EMI OxfordResearch Agenda

• What levels of English competence enable EMI teachers to provide quality instruction?

• How would we measure the success of an EMI programme? Is the learning of academic subjects improved by EMI? Will it lead to deeper understanding? If so by which groups of students?

• To what extent do language assessment systems need to change (for teachers & students)? Validity of bilingual examinations?

38

EMI OxfordResearch Agenda

• How does classroom interaction change as the medium of instruction changes?

• What are the psycholinguistic representations in the mental lexicon of abstract concepts encountered in academic subjects through EMI?

• Do abstract concepts result in restructuring of a developing bilingual lexicon?

39

EMI OxfordResearch Agenda

• What strategies are used by students in EMI classrooms in oral and written comprehension tasks?

• What are the psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic effects on students’ home language resulting from EMI used in various phases of education?

40

EMI OxfordCentre for Research and Development on English as Medium of Instruction

Department of EducationUniversity of Oxford

For further information and particularly if you can help us publicise theonline questionnaire contact: julie.dearden@education.ox.ac.uk

Thank you for listening!