See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/344477605

English as a medium of instruction

Article · June 2020

CITATIONS READS
0 4,150

1 author:

Mark Adams
Fachhochschule Technikum Wien
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mark Adams on 15 October 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

English as a medium of instruction
Abstract

The concept of English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) has become popular

throughout the world due to the importance of English as a communication tool,
especially in business and research, yet the efficacy of EMI is much debated. Research
has shown that attitudes towards EMI vary enormously and that lecturers using EMI
have strong reservations due to the difficulties of converting to an all English classroom.
In an attempt to reduce lecturer’s fears and to increase the efficacy at of EMI at
Technikum Vienna, the most relevant problems with EMI have been determined and
solutions have been suggested. Above all, EMI requires support for lecturers at an
institutional level, so that the lecturers are not left to fend for themselves.

Reasons and Motivation for EMI

Just as with many other Higher Education Institutions around the world, the University of
Applied Sciences Technikum Vienna plans on increasing its international reputation and
supports the goals of the Erasmus+ Policy Statement. One measure that the university
has adopted is English as a medium of instruction (EMI). In comparison to Content and
Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), where the focus is on language acquisition using
a specific topic, the focus in the EMI classroom is mainly on the content or topic with
little to no specific focus on language acquisition.

Various studies from around the world have mentioned the following reasons for teacher
and student support of EMI:

• English has become a lingua franca in the academic world (Dearden 2014)
• staff mobility and student exchange programs such as Erasmus (çAnkaya 2017)
• the belief in the beneficial effect of EMI due to the prestige of English (Hu, Li, and
Lei 2014)
• internationalization at home (Macaro et al. 2018)
• attracting more international students (Shimauchi 2018)
• perceived effect of English on employability (Shudooh 2017)
• lack of resources in the L1 (Kim, Tatar, and Choi 2014)
These are but a few of the main arguments given for the introduction of EMI programs at
university level.

Problems with EMI and possible solutions

It is interesting to note, however, that irrelevant of the positive motivations mentioned
above, the majority of EMI programs are implemented on a national level, for example,
China’s directive that EMI courses make up 5-10% of the specialization courses offered
at undergraduate level (MOE 2001) or at an institutional level, without consulting the
teaching faculty (Cho 2012). Regardless of the motivation, it seems that, for the moment
at least, EMI programmes are here to stay which is why understanding the advantages
and disadvantages of these programmes has taken on more and more importance.

At this preliminary stage of the EMI program at Technikum Vienna, it is more important
to analyse the disadvantages, both perceived and real, in order to reduce their impact.
With this in mind, this preliminary research identifies disadvantages of EMI and attempts
to provide possible measures to mitigate their negative impact.

One of the most commonly mentioned disadvantages from a student point of view is the
level of English of the non-native lecturer. It is generally agreed that for EMI to work, the
lecturer must be proficient in English and almost 50% of instructors asked in a study by
Briggs, Dearden and Macaro (2018) believed that advanced proficiency is required. The
University of Copenhagen, for example, has implemented a proficiency test for all
lecturers teaching in English. This test focuses on making sure that the lecturer has “the
necessary foreign language skills to cope with the communicative demands of teaching
in EMI programs (Soren, 2013).” Kling and Stæhr (2013) list the most important aspects
as follows:

• Presenting highly complex content material to students, on the basis of PPT

slides or other visual aids, but without a manuscript
• Explaining domain-specific terms and concepts
• Presenting a case or assignment, and
describing administrative details
• Clarifying, paraphrasing or restating
concepts and main points
• Asking questions to students
• Understanding student questions
• Responding to student questions
• Dealing with unclear questions or
misunderstandings, and negotiating
meaning

Technikum Vienna has also created a certificate

program for lecturers who are planning on or are
already teaching their subject matter in English.
The course is divided into several parts; the
English classroom and the Intercultural classroom.
The reasoning here is that any class that is taught
in English raises the likelihood of incoming students and that lecturers must also be
aware of intercultural differences, especially those relevant to the classroom
environment.

The English Classroom focuses on many of the points mentioned above. Firstly, one
session is given on breaking the idea that teaching in English is simply a matter of
translating the slides into English and to sensitizing lecturers to the added difficulties and
requirements of teaching in English. Subsequently, the lecturers are required to present
their own material, basically to “teach” the content to their peers in a group situation.
They receive feedback on two fronts; from their peers (teaching methods,
comprehensibility, language) and from a native speaker (language, methodology,
strategies). It has also proven very beneficial for the lecturers to summarize their own
experiences at a later date once they have taught their next class in English. Many have
realized that several of the strategies that they had learned within the input sessions
have improved their teaching dramatically. In this way the program validates teachers in
their belief that their proficiency is sufficient to navigate the EMI classroom.

There is also a belief on the part of many EMI lecturers that a certain percentage of the
content will be lost or will have to be simplified due to the topic being taught in a foreign
language. When asked whether they believed this to be the case, lecturers taking part in
the English Classroom session as described above were of two minds. On the one
hand, one lecturer explained how teaching in a foreign language meant he had to focus
much more on being succinct in what he was saying and saved much time as he was
less disposed to add anecdotes to his actual content. A consequent discussion about
whether it was the anecdotes that made the lesson more interesting ensued, but was
also not resolved. On the other hand, others believed that the students’ lower level of
English could impact severely on the amount of material that could be covered during
the semester.

Whether a lecturer adds anecdotes to their lessons while teaching in a foreign language
depends mostly on their capabilities with the second language. With more support for
lecturers teaching in English, with for example English speaking get-togethers, lecturers
should become more and more comfortable with the second language and this increase
in confidence will eliminate any reticence they should have in this regard. Also, making
English a more central part of the acceptance test at the university should help to reduce
the heterogeneity of proficiency in English levels.

Gröblinger ( 2017) suggests that a lack of motivation on both sides of the teaching
equation exists. For lecturers this lack of motivation is often attributed to the top down
implementation in EMI mentioned in Macaro et al (2018). Since the motivation is then
extrinsic, it can often be seen as more work for the same pay, or even worse a forced
requirement for keeping a position. From the student point of view, one question that
often is asked at the beginning of many EMI classes, is why teaching in English is
necessary. Their argumentation is that if the lecturer has the same L1 (native language)
as the whole class, why create an artificial situation which adds a further layer of
difficulty to the teaching process? In this case, lecturers often fall into the trap of
relapsing into their mother tongue when teaching. As an aside, the question of whether
mixing L1 and L2 (second language) has positive or negative results is still being openly
discussed.

The possibility of gaining a teaching certificate which “qualifies” lecturers to teach in

English has been very successful at Technikum Vienna. The majority of the lecturers
that have attended and completed the course have come with intrinsic motivation rather
than extrinsic. This has made them much more receptive to new strategies and methods
to improve their teaching. The hope is that through the certificate and the motivation of
their colleagues’, extrinsic motivation can be exchanged for intrinsic motivation.

The introduction of international students to a classroom automatically changes the

dynamics within the class. Students subsequently see the necessity for lessons being
taught in English and seldom even request the language be changed. However, for
more incoming students to choose the university more lessons first need to be taught in
English and therefore be available to incoming students. For this to happen, the
language of instruction needs to be included in the module descriptions and published
for international students to see. It is the hope of Technikum Vienna and especially the
International Office to increase the number of incoming students which should help to
make the previous argumentation redundant.

As part the of the internationalization project, IoCEST, a Handbook for

Internationalisation was created in which it was suggested that the targeted scope of
English-language subject modules should be defined in the form of a target value, the
attainment of which is the responsibility of the programme management. Several Double
Degree Programs running at Technikum Vienna require the lessons to be held in English
which also increases mobility but these subjects are, for the most part, very subject
oriented and therefore only of interest to a small subset of the incoming students.
 image 1. English as the language of instruction – questionnaire to students at
Technikum Vienna

(How do your rate the amount of English-speaking technical courses on you

program?

More than sufficient

Sufficient
Not sufficient)

image 2. English as the language of instruction (2) – questionnaire to students at

Technikum Vienna

(Would you still have chosen your course if it had been taught mostly in English?

Yes
No
Maybe)

Many students who fail in the EMI classroom “associate this failure with the
incompetency in the language, which results in not being able to comprehend and
internalize the subject matters to a full extent” (Sibel 2019). This adds a further level of
difficulty to teaching for the lecturer, who now must be even more aware of the
possibility of leaving students behind, not due to their ability to understand the topic
itself, but rather due to their lack of proficiency with the language. To combat this, the
EMI teacher may have to implement more “self-check” tests throughout the semester to
check on student progression. From a language perspective, this also shows the
importance of pre-teaching vocabulary that is to be used in the next lesson, in order to
reduce the students’ difficulties with understanding the words, allowing them to
concentrate more on the content.

If the lessons are taught in English, then it is logical to conclude that scripts are in
English and that the exam at the end of the course will also be in English. This however
does raise certain questions. How much, if at all, does passing the test require a good
level of English on the student’s part? Do mistakes in English mean less marks on the
test? How qualified is the L2 lecturer to correct the English? These and many other
questions related to language need to be addressed in advance so that they do not
become problems for the lecturer at the end of the semester.

The future

What has also become clear from research is that support programs for EMI have been
limited in the past. At Technikum Vienna the hope is to support the lecturers as much as
possible with this transition. As the IoCEST internationalization project has been
extended for a further year, several supporting activities such as language workshops,
individual support for lecturers (especially those teaching in English for the first time),
help with translating scripts, and also intercultural training should be available.

Preparing and teaching in a foreign language is, as mentioned previously, not simply a
matter of translating the slides and script, but requires thorough preparation and an
awareness of a whole new range of difficulties which need to be dealt with. One reason
for the lack of motivation could be that lecturers are expected to do substantial extra
work but are still only paid for the unit that they teach, irrelevant of whether it is in their
own language or a foreign one, requiring more thought and input. Consideration could
be given to increasing motivation through, for example, higher hourly rates to
compensate the extra work, some form of incentive program or a reduced teaching load
for internal lecturers.

As stated above, EMI is generally a top-down decision, meaning that many lecturers do
not actually decide for themselves to teach in English. This decision is often made for
them by the course directors or even higher up in the hierarchy. In many cases, the
lecturers themselves feel insecure in English and for this reason alone some form of
quality control needs to be implemented. This is, however, a difficult situation that needs
to be handled with care as the implications of negative testing could be catastrophic for
the lecturer. However, if certain standards are not met, then the goals of EMI are not
reached and the lessons become worthless.

EMI is an intensively discussed subject. The research is still in its infancy, the first paper
to even mention EMI only appearing in the early 2000s. An assumption has been made
to the efficacy of EMI in increasing the students’ linguistic ability, in turn improving their
marketability. Yet little evidence has been collected to prove this assumption. Despite
this lack, English as a medium of instruction has gained support on a national and
institutional level and is perceived by many students as a positive turn of events. It
remains to be seen whether this phenomenon has already reached its peak or will
further grow in importance.
Bibliography

Briggs, Jessica G., Julie Dearden, and Ernesto Macaro. 2018. “English Medium
Instruction: Comparing Teacher Beliefs in Secondary and Tertiary Education.”
Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 8 (3): 673–96.
https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.3.7.
çAnkaya, Pınar. 2017. “Challenges in English Medium of Instruction from the Teachers
and Students’ Eyes.” International Journal of Languages’ Education 1 (Volume 5
Issue 4): 830–39. https://doi.org/10.18298/ijlet.2096.
Cho, D. 2012. “English-Medium Instruction in the University Context of Korea: Trade-off
between Teaching Outcomes and Media-Initiated University Ranking.” The
Journal of Asia TEFL 9 (4): 135–63.
Dearden, Julie. 2014. “English as a Medium of Instruction – a Growing Global
Phenomenon,” 40.
Gröblinger, Katharina. 2017. “What Are the Benefits and Challenges of EMI in
(International) Study Programs at UAS in Austria?,” 7.
Hu, G, L Li, and J Lei. 2014. “English-Medium Instruction at a Chinese University:
Rhetoric and Reality.” Language Policy 13 (1): 21–40.
Kim, J, B Tatar, and J Choi. 2014. “Emerging Culture of English-Medium Instruction in
Korea: Experiences of Korean and International Students.” Language and
Intercultural Communication 14 (4): 441–59.
Kling, J, and L Staehr. 2013. “The Development of the Test of Oral English Proficiency
for Academic Staff (TOEPAS) (Technical Report). Retrieved From.” Centre for
Internationalisation and Parallel Language Use: University Of Copenhagen.
http://cip.ku.dk/forskning/cip_publikationer/CIP_TOPEPAS_Technical_Report.pdf/
.
Macaro, Ernesto, Curle Samantha, Pun Jack, An Jiangshan, and Dearden Julie. 2018.
“A Systematic Review of English Medium Instruction in Higher Education.”
Language Teaching 51 (1): 36–76.
MOE. 2001. “教育部关于印发《关于加强高等学校本科教学工作提高教学质量的若干意见
》的通知 - [Guidelines for Strengthening Undergraduate Education and Improving
the Quality of Undergraduate Programs].”
http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_18/201006/88633.
html.
Shudooh, Eman. 2017. “Attitudes Towards English as a Medium of Instruction and the
Perceived Effect of English Proficiency on Employability in Kuwait.”
 Sibel, Cagatay. 2019. “Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology, 4(2),
2019,” 37.
Soren, Joyce Kling. n.d. “Teacher Identity in English-Medium Instruction: Teacher
Cognitions from a Danish Tertiary Education Context,” 225.

View publication stats