English Medium Instruction as a Tool of Internationalization in Higher Education Ernesto Macaro University of Oxford: Department of Education
1
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
2
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? 3
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?
4
EMI Oxford: End-user research-driven approach to EMI English Medium Instruction
Evolution
University students University faculty
Policy makers School students
Secondary school teachers Parents
Employers
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
5
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 7
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
8
The Field: Public vs. Public Education Percentage of public vs. private universities
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%
Private univer
30%
Public univers
20%
10% 0%
Countries and regions (n=36)
9
Pakistan
Indonesia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Hungary
Venezuela
Bahrain
United States
Argentina
Italy
Ghana
Bulgaria
Taiwan
Japan
Germany
Mainland China
Kazakhstan
Qatar
Cyprus
Saudi Arabia
Croatia
Greece
Hong Kong
Czech Republic
Afghanistan
Macedonia
South Africa
Serbia
Vietnam
Netherlands
Sri Lanka
Azerbaijan
Malaysia
The Field: Public vs. Public Education Percentage of public vs. private secondary schools
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30% private secondary schools
20% public secondary schools
10%
0%
Countries and regions (n=32)
10
In ‘your country’, is EMI officially ‘allowed’ in public sector? Primary Education Allowed Not allowed
n
percent
29 21
52.7 38.2
Secondary Education Allowed Not allowed Universities Allowed Not allowed
n 43 10
n
percent
39 13
70.9 23.6 percent 78.2 18.2
11
Do official policies or statements on EMI exist?
Not known Yes
No
13
Policy Changes in Past 10 Years? Not known No Yes
14
General trend in each country Not known Mixed Same
Less More
15
Examples of “Mixed Trends” Argentina
Azerbaijan Israel Turkey
“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.” “Public primary: less; public secondary: the same; public HE: more. Private primary, secondary and HE: more. “ “More, universities want to teach more in English. Schools are not moving in this direction.” “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.”
16
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”
17
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.”
18
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.” 19
Public Opinion on EMI Not known In favour
Controversial
A
21
Reasons for public opinion to be in favour In favour
Globalization Modernization
Social elite
Status of English
Diverse linguistic needs
Employment / Education market
Attitudes of parents
22
Reasons why public opinion is divided Controversial / Against
Political reasons
Equality / Freedom of study
Poor comprehension
Demanding to learn many languages
Incompetent teachers / generation gap among teachers
Lack of policies
Protecting national languages / cultures
23
Are there enough qualified teachers to teach EMI?
Not known
Yes
No
24
Are there any written guidelines specifying how to teach in EMI?
Not known
Yes
No
25
Are there any written guidelines that specify Englishonly or permit/encourage codeswitching?
Not known
Yes
No
26
Any stated expectation of language proficiency to qualify as EMI teachers ? Not known Yes
No
30
Is there any provision for EMI on ITE?
Not known
Yes for both public and private Yes for private only
No
Is there any provision for EMI on TPD?
Not known
Yes for both public and private
No
Yes for private only
31
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
32
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 33
EMI Oxford Research 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? 35
EMI Oxford Research 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? 36
EMI Oxford Research 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? 38
EMI Oxford Research 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?
39
Thank you for listening! EMI Oxford Centre for Research and Development on English as Medium of Instruction Department of Education University of Oxford
For further information and particularly if you can help us publicise the online questionnaire contact:
[email protected]
40
