«I became aware that we are not simply

teaching an Italian course in English»

The disruptive potential of EMI:

a case study from Italy

Francesca Helm

University of Padova, Italy

•University of Oxford

•19th June 2015

• Higher education in Europe

• EMI and the Italian context • The case study – University of Padova

• The LEAP Project • Phase 1 - lecturers’ perspectives from a needs analysis • Phase 2 – support courses • Phase 3 – lecturers’ views post-support and awareness

raising

• Considerations

Outline

• Over the past three decades, the number of students enrolled outside their country of citizenship has risen dramatically, from 0.8 million worldwide in 1975 to 4.5 million in 2012

• http://www.oecd.org/edu/EAG2014-Indicator%20C4%20%28eng%29.pdf

• Europe is the top destination for students at the tertiary level of education enrolled outside their country of origin, hosting 48% of these students

• The nineteenth-century model of teaching at higher level still holds sway and teaching ‘has not changed much since. Fundamentally, higher education is still a process of imparting knowledge by means of lectures to those who want to acquire it.’

• Hooker, M. (1997). The transformation of higher education. In Diane Oblinger and Sean C. Rush (Eds.) (1997). The Learning Revolution. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. Cited in European Commission, 2013)

Higher education in Europe

• The shift from L1 to EMI is often reduced to a mere change in the vehicle of

communication, and does not take into account the adaptation of the teaching methodology to this new context

• (Cots, 2013)

• EMI also requires lecturers to become aware of the difficulties of their students who may need support and guidance to access and negotiate knowledge

• (Klaassen and De Graaff 2001: 282)

• acquisition and application of knowledge are fundamentally social acts: social interaction is a key component of learning [...] But formal learning too often discourages social interaction’

• (European Commission, 2013 p. 40).

EMI and methodology

The status of EMI in Italy

• OECD (2014)

• Jenkins: “European antipathy to EMI” (2014: 131)

• Costa and Coleman’s survey on EMI in Italian HEIs (2012), with 50% response rate

• Economics and Engineering were most common subject areas for EMI • Mostly at MA level, and doctoral • North-South divide

• Findings related to language were that:

• 90% lecturers are Italian • lecturers often “forced to teach through English regardless of their target language competence” • Lecturers’ and students’ level of English considered potential problem by 30% of respondents • Linguistic and/or methodological training is rarely offered • Formal monologic lectures still prevail: “…changing the language of delivery has not led to any

change in teaching style” However lecturers were not among the respondents, who were mainly international relations offices and language centres

Costa & Coleman 2012 study

c64,000 students

c. 2,000 international students (mainly from Albania, Moldavia,

Romania and China)

Erasmus 2014/2015: 1161 outgoing 686 incoming

c.2000 lecturers Almost all Italian

• Started in the academic year 2009/2010 Financial incentive for individual lecturers who taught their courses in English – to attract Erasmus students

• 2011/2012 Incentives only for English taught programmes (ETPs) Funding for visiting international lecturers

• Academic year 2014/2015: 28 ETPs delivered entirely through English

275 individual courses held in English across the 8 Schools of the University

EMI at Padova University

• Organises language courses and testing for departments across the university, though mostly for the Modern Foreign Languages Department

• Mainly ‘native speaker’ teachers (lettori, collaboratori ed esperti linguistici, tecnico linguistico), only 14 English teachers

• In 2012 the CLA was asked by International Relations to develop a project which would seek to «maintain the quality» of the university’s teaching when courses are taught in English

Role of the Language Centre

• LEAP = Learning English for Academic Purposes

• Developed by the Language Centre and the International Relations Office

• Aims: • to support lecturers involved in EMI…

• by identifying their concerns and needs…

• …and by offering training and support

• to develop a medium-long term support programme

The Project

• Survey sent to all lecturers (May 2013) as part of an application form for EMI training

• Aims: • identify experiences, concerns and expectations of lecturers involved in EMI

• support the development of a variety of different training options

• select participants for training options

• Open questions about experience, perceived concerns, strengths and weaknesses in EMI and expectations

• Qualitative, thematic analysis of responses supported by NVivo

Phase 1

• 115 lecturers from the 8 Schools of the University responded to the survey:

• 86 were teaching at MA level

• 19 at BA level

• 11 at PhD level

• 75 already had experience with EMI • 48 had already taught several courses

• 27 had already taught one course

• 40 had never taught through English

• 86 were going to teach through English in the a.y. 2013-2014

The lecturers

• For 21 lecturers teaching through English has been a totally positive experience

• 21 lecturers expressed both positive and negative sides of EMI

• For 6 lecturers teaching through English has been a negative experience

The experience was not satisfying, both for the low approval from the student and for the selfevaluation of my english (R27)

I feel fine about the experience, it is a good way to open our University to international students and help to build a reputation in teaching abroad. However, it is an hard work and it takes much more time than an Italian course (D06)

The experience is

exciting (LA08)

Survey findings: previous experience

with EMI

Writing – indicated by 24 respondents

Academic English – (21)

Vocabulary (16)

Oral comprehension (19)

Reading (13)

Pronunciation (6)

Survey findings: strengths

“strengths: (possibly) pronounciation” “I think my pronunciation is decent, although hampered by my Venetian inflection.”

“I would say that my ‘scientific English’ is rather good” (LA01)

Mainy related to spoken language: pronunication, accent fluency, informal interaction and notions of «correctness» in grammar and pronunciation

Survey findings: weaknesses

I love it but I have an

orrible pronunciation

(SS15)

I feel I have to (…)

correct my accent

which is definitively

not good (D10)

My weaknesses are in

understanding mother tongue

speakers and, in general, to

understande people when the

conversation occurs in a noisy

environment.

• The main concerns are linked to: • Oral skills, which include informal teacher-student interaction, fluency and

pronunciation

• Teaching methodology

There are also some

difficulties in the

student-professor

interaction (B12)

My English is still

not fluid enough to

allow me express a

concept in different

manners (D04)

Being not a mother

tongue, both my

accent and my

grammar could be

improved a lot (B18)

Survey findings: concerns about EMI

• By appliying for training, the lecturers were expecting to improve: • Oral skills, including spoken skills, fluency and informal uses of English

• Teaching methodology

• English in general

• Grammar and vocabulary

• Confidence

…greater awareness in using

English in social situations and

in interaction with students

(B15)

It would be very important for me

to receive guidance on how to

organise my lectures (…), on the

way I can involve more the

students in the course (I am

trying to implement a more active

and participating modality of

teaching) (D04)

…most of all I expect the course

will much increase my confidence

and therefore my fluency in

English (D08)

Survey findings: expectations

• On the basis of survey findings, four support options were developed

• Each option had a focus on both communication skills and methodology

• A total of 70 lecturers were selected 1. Dublin - intensive course (2 weeks, 10 participants)

2. San Servolo – intensive course (2 weeks, 19 participants)

3. 100 hr Blended Course (60hrs f2f + 40hrs OL, 24 participants)

4. Language Advising service ( 5 individual sessions, 17 participants)

LEAP: Phase 2

• Feedback on the three training courses (Blended Course, S.Servolo Summer School, Dublin intensive course)

• Aims: • In the short-term: to improve future EMI training; • In the long-term: to help develop a medium-long term strategy to support EMI • To explore awareness of language issues

Dataset

1. Feedback survey: 28 respondents (12 from BC, 9 from UCD, 7 from SS)

2. Open, written feedback: 24 respondents (8 from BC, 16 from SS)

3. Semistructured interviews: 17 interviewees (6 from SS, 6 from BC and 5 from UCD)

LEAP: Phase 3

• Changing methodology by giving the course a more international character

• Adapting methodology to EMI is a learning process for me

• I am more aware of issues such as posture and gestures

• Problematic issues linked to language/methodology change

• Change in methodology stimulates students to change learning approach

“this is something I learnt at S.Servolo . that

it’s not just a matter of translating my Italian

course (…) I had to change all my examples

(…) using another language automatically

puts you into a different wider context . you

no longer speak only about Italy . you

automatically think but in Germany but in

Sweden but in Finland (…)” (Int, SS07)

“ (…) ho dovuto . portarmi

dietro il . vecchio corso in

italiano e spogliarmi di lui”

(Int, SS07)

“this year I tried to engage my students

more (…) engaging them also depends on

your language proficiency (…) if you have

a good level of English you can (…) lead

the group to have discussions because .

you need to be able to understand

everyone’s English” (Int, D02)

Methodology and language

• Learning from other participants was something that lecturers particularly appreciated and that led to the emergence of a Community of Practice

• ‘Disciplinary tribes’ were not an issue, more important was the shared experience

“I have really shared

impressions and discovered

that we could improve our

teaching activity simply

sharing our experiences

(Sur, B11)”

“the brilliant way as CLA teachers

create a friendly environment

without losing the main aim of the

course” (Opf, SS03)

Community of Practice

• Opportunity to think about internationalization and EMI policies

• This theme embraces the following aspects: • something interesting to learn about/ an unexpected

discovery

• something that does not touch me much

• favourable views on EMI for internationalization

• critical observations on EMI and language policies

“I have understood

that I'm engaged in an

internationalization

process” (Sur, B11)

“there should be a wider debate on this and various

stakeholders should be included in it not necessarily only

those formally in charge of of deciding on

internationalization policies because then it may happen that

these [policies] are imposed from above without taking into

account the drawbacks or the difficulties that lecturers have

to face when teaching in this way” (Int, B16)

Institutional EMI policies and

internationalization

• Awareness of students’ difficulties in EMI (9)

• Multilingualism - allowing Italian during lessons and/or exams (11)

• “Englishes” and ELF (3)

“I feared that there could be less . interaction

during lessons (…) so I overcame this fear by

allowing them erm if they wanted erm to interact

in Italian or better they could ask me questions

in Italian and I then answered in English

anyway” (Int, B12)

“I therefore had to structure it [the

course] erm in a more erm in a less

monologic way . and make sure that

there were moments in which the

students could think and do things

themselves some breaks . some

moments in which they could rest

because [attending such a course] is

tiring” (Int, D02)

“a further benefit that these courses can have on students is

to help them get used to the use of English as a Lingua

Franca (…) because then you may have to work I don’t know

where . where you’ll have to speak with people who use

English their own way (…)” (Int, SS13)

Attention to language issues

• The courses stimulated the participants’ confidence in their language and communicative abilities in English

• “I really thank Charlotte for the support she gave me (…) in being more confident about my English, mistakes can be admitted (…). The real goal is to communicate to students in the most effective (and professional) way” (Opf_B15)

Confidence

Disrupt: to cause (something) to be unable to continue in the normal way: to interrupt the normal progress or activity of (something)

The introduction of EMI has caused considerable disruption

• There is a strongly felt need for support, not just linguistic • Community of practice

• With experience and awareness raising, lecturers recognise students’ difficulties and sense of responsibility towards them

• More student-centred teaching

• Lecturers have become interested in teaching methodology • Moving from EMI to CLIL?

• EMI in Europe has implications for pedagogy and language practices • Translanguaging and plurilingual practices

Considerations

• Helm, F. & Guarda, M. (2014) «Improvisation is not allowed in a second language»: a survey of Italian lecturers’ concerns about teaching their subjects through English. Language Learning in Higher Education

• Helm, F. & Guarda, M. «I have discovered new teaching pathways»: the link between language shift and teaching practice. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.

• Guarda, M., Ackerley, K., & Helm, F. Sharing Perspectives on EMI. Peter Lang: Bern (Linguistic Insights series)

Forthcoming publications

Thank you!

Francesca.helm@unipd.it