English Medium Instruction in Multilingual and Multicultural Universities

Academics' Voices from the Northern European Context

Birgit Henriksen, Anne Holmen, Joyce Kling

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429850639
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education Theory & Practice

English Medium Instruction in Multilingual and Multicultural Universities analyses the issues related to EMI at both a local and international level and provides a broad perspective on this topic. Drawing on field studies from a Northern European context and based primarily on research carried out at the University of Copenhagen, this book:

• 
  
  

• introduces a topical global issue that is central to the higher education research agenda;

• 
  
  

• identifies the issues and challenges involved in EMI in relation to central linguistic, pedagogical, sociolinguistic and socio-cultural concepts;

• 
  
  

• captures university lecturers' experiences in the midst of curricular change and presents reflections on ways to navigate professionally in English to meet the demands of the multilingual and multicultural classroom.

English Medium Instruction in Multilingual and Multicultural Universities is key reading for researchers, pre- and in-service teachers, university management, educational planners, and advanced students with an interest in EMI and the multilingual, multicultural university setting.

Chapter 1

English medium instruction in higher education in non-Anglophone contexts

Central issues related to the introduction of EMI in tertiary education

Research into English medium instruction (EMI) has been one of the growing areas of English for specific purposes studies in recent years. With the spread of English as the lingua franca of academia, more and more countries where the national language is used in the educational system at primary and secondary school level, are introducing English as the medium of instruction in tertiary education. Universities across the globe have introduced EMI as a response to the forces of globalization to ensure increased internationalization of the educational system. The increase in EMI programs and the student enrollment in those programs are particularly strong in Northern Europe. According to a recent survey produced by the European Academic Cooperation Association, ACA, “the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden, in that order, are the European leaders in the provision of higher education in English” (Wächter & Maiworm, 2014, p. 46). In the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden), the introduction of EMI is seen as an important element in an official or semi-official parallel language strategy which aims at maintaining a balance between the national language(s) and English in academia (Gregersen, 2014b). This is followed by efforts to develop both languages for academic purposes, including using both as medium of instruction and for research dissemination. Due to the leading role these countries have played in the introduction of EMI in tertiary education and in ensuring research-based knowledge and evidence of the challenges EMI has created for lecturers¹ and students, this book mainly deals with research conducted from this geographical area, but the findings are relevant for a wider international audience.

One of the key motivations for the shift to EMI has been to attract funding, i.e., universities increasingly view higher education institutions as corporations governed by market forces, so initiatives to attract tuition paying students in a tougher and tougher global competition have become more and more important. In Denmark, as in other universities across the world, a central tool has been to offer an English-language work environment for both students and staff. The hope has been to attract highly qualified international academics and to increase student mobility, e.g., through international PhD and foreign student exchange programs. Moreover, the intention has been to prepare local researchers, lecturers, and students to become better and more successful global players on the international university scene by giving them the opportunity to operate in English in a range of specialized situations, which call for advanced English-language skills. The use of English, not only in research contexts but more and more in relation to teaching and student supervision, has meant an increased influx of researchers and students with different language backgrounds and different cultural and educational experience and expectations. Thus, the drive for increased internationalization and mobility has created rich and fruitful work contexts, but also very complex and challenging multilingual and multicultural university settings for all stakeholders.

Universities across the globe have had to find ways of dealing with a number of issues and challenges related to the shift away from the national language(s) to English as the language of instruction. University departments have raised concerns about increasing student dropout rates and the possible negative effects on exam results, factors that may have an impact on the universities’ income as well as their ratings in world university rankings. Moreover, students and staff increasingly have to deal with issues related to the need for complex second language (L2) skills, new educational approaches and classroom methodologies to accommodate a more heterogonous student population, increased workload, and shifting demands in relation to work preparation. Questions have been raised about the amount and quality of student-teacher interaction, and concerns have been expressed about possible domain loss for the national language in specialized technical fields as well as in relation to general academic language use. Discussions have also focused on the effect the use of English may have on lecturers’ professional identity and authority, and on the increased need for professional competence development both linguistically and pedagogically.

Empirical research into English medium instruction, to provide answers in relation to the many concerns voiced and questions posed, was already initiated in the 1990s and has been one of the growing areas of English for specific purposes studies in recent years, as shown by the number of anthologies and journal special issues published since then. Volumes compiling research on the use of English in higher education are distributed under a broad range of headings such as, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) (see e.g., Fortanet-Gomez, 2013; Nikula, Dafouz, Moore, & Smit, 2016; Smit & Dafouz, 2012), Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education (ICLHE see e.g., Valcke & Wilkinson, 2017; Wilkinson, 2004; Wilkinson & Walsh, 2015; Wilkinson & Zegers, 2008), foreign language use in globalized higher education (see e.g., Cancino, Dam, & Jæger, 2011; Gregersen, 2014; Haberland et al., 2008; Haberland, Lønsmann, & Preisler, 2013; Hultgren, Gregersen, & Thøgersen, 2014; Kuteeva, 2011; Preisler, 2008; Preisler, Klitgard, & Fabricius, 2011; Wächter, 2008; Wächter & Maiworm, 2014), and more specifically, English Medium Instruction (see e.g., Bradford & Brown, 2017; Dimova, Hultgren, & Jensen, 2015a; Doiz, Lasagabaster, & Sierra, 2012; Fenton-Smith, Humphreys, & Walkinshaw, 2017; Macaro, 2018; Zhao & Dixon, 2017).

The field of EMI related research describes and analyzes the process and impact of introducing EMI in relation to language policy issues and the challenges for lecturers and students. However, the focus has not only been on negative ramifications of EMI, but also the steps taken at an institutional and local level, for example in the form of language certification and competence development courses for staff and students. International research on EMI has also looked at the positive effects of the various changes in language use inside and across faculty boundaries. This research has documented and monitored the various approaches that universities, both at the top-level and at the local level of departments and teaching programs, have found fruitful. It has unearthed the often unconventional ways of dealing with these issues and challenges, e.g., in relation to involving staff in local decision-making and in establishing research and competence development centers that can develop tailor-made, in-service training programs directed towards individual language learning needs.

It is precisely the activities at one such center at the University of Copenhagen (UCPH) that spurred the inspiration for this book. The extensive research and competence development work that has been carried out for a number of years at the Centre of Internationalisation and Parallel Language Use (CIP) at the UCPH is the point of departure for exploring the themes of this volume. The university established CIP in 2008 to monitor and support the university´s parallel language strategy, including the process of implementing EMI across all university faculties. The experience from these initial years provides valuable points of reference for a more general understanding of the consequences of the increased use of English in tertiary educational institutions with a focus on the European context, how these changes are viewed by some of the major players, and even more importantly which strategies, both at institutional and at the personal level of the individual teacher, may be instrumental for a fruitful outcome of EMI educational policy decisions for all parties involved.

Researchers from around the world have focused on a range of the varied and complex issues and challenges related to EMI for all stakeholders (i.e., students, teaching staff, and administration), e.g., language proficiency, confidence in foreign language skills, lack of interest and/or motivation, increased workloads, quality of teaching and learning, willingness to study/teach in English, possible threat to cultural identity and L1, program organization and infrastructure, increased costs, availability of teaching materials, and equitable assessment of all students (Coleman, 2006). In this volume we focus specifically on matters related directly to university teachers/lecturers who are non-native speakers of English (NNES). We look at international research carried out within this area, but with a primary focus on the Nordic countries, zooming in on the experiences documented in the Danish educational context and the findings from the research carried out at CIP. The book focuses on tenured university staff and how they respond to the day-to-day challenges as teachers in a constantly fluctuating multilingual and multicultural teaching and learning context.

While non-native English speaking university lecturers and professors often have extensive experience with using English for their own academic readings and for publication and in interaction with international colleagues, they may not necessarily feel confident in the use of English as the predominant medium of instruction, especially in oral face-to-face interactions with students in lectures, class discussions, and consultations. It is this tension that EMI research of teachers has identified. Under the auspices of internationalization, university management teams and program administrators have enthusiastically pushed for a sudden change in the medium of instruction. EMI has become equated with internationalization – a quantifiable objective – the number of English taught courses can be used for, e.g., accreditation, recruitment, etc. Very often, experienced lecturers find themselves needing to revamp their courses and teach them in a foreign language (FL) with little notice. From one semester to the next (and sometimes with only a week’s notice), courses are announced with a change in language of instruction, leaving teachers with little choice but to fend for themselves. For those with strong oral English proficiency, or previous experience of teaching in English, this poses no challenge. But what about those who would rather opt out? Or who find themselves developing compensatory strategies to accommodate for the change in medium of instruction?

Maria, a highly experienced associate professor at the University of Copenhagen, expresses this concern clearly when being interviewed in a small case study:

We do it, but that doesn’t mean we’re good at it. We do it because we have to, but we are not necessarily doing it in a qualified way.

(Maria, in Westbrook & Henriksen, 2011, p. 189)

Another equally experienced researcher from a more recent study also conducted at the University of Copenhagen outlines the differences between teaching in English (L2) and Danish (L1) in this way:

Yes, I’m embarrassed in English. When I stand in front of the entire class and have to give a lecture in English. Then it is embarrassing for me. And it never, never happens in Danish. So, all the issues are connected to my language skills – all the feelings of embarrassment, and lack of confidence, and my anxiety, and so on. It is connected to my English. I am never nervous in Danish.

(Jan, in Eilert, 2017, p. 46)

When describing the different teaching approaches used when operating in English and Danish, the same teacher explains his experiences of having to re-organize his teaching quite dramatically:

When I conduct classes in English I do the front teaching using my Power Point slides. I explain something that is the most difficult. I do it at a very high speed and I do everything to end it as fast as possible, and then I divide students into groups, and then they have to discuss different issues about the theory. And then I consult with the groups, have a dialog and correct them in the groups. It is completely opposite when I teach in Danish. In Danish, I use a very long time to explain in detail the theory, there is a discussion and I show a lot of examples and then at the end of the class, perhaps the last 20 minutes I make the groups. In English, I start, and after 5–10 minutes I give out assignments the groups have to work on.

(Jan, in Eilert, 2017, p. 42)

It is interesting to note that both these lecturers are highly experienced university teachers, but both have little experience with EMI teaching. In this book, we describe, analyze, and discuss university lecturers’ experiences of, reflections on, and reactions to the increasing use of English. And we look into the lecturers’ responses to the pressure, whether self-imposed or from top-down decision makers, to use English more extensively, and the effect this may have on their didactic practices and on their professional identity and authority. The lecturers’ voices expressed in studies on English medium instruction are given prominence throughout the book in order to convey clearly how strongly the lecturers react to and are emotionally affected by the shift to English, but also to see how the challenges are met, and how the role of experience with EMI and the offer of competence development may affect the lecturers’ attitudes to EMI and their own feeling of self-confidence.

The role and impact of English in Scandinavia in the higher education context

In all five Nordic countries, English is the first foreign language in school. English is an obligatory subject for all pupils and has extremely high prestige value both in schools and in society in general. An abundance of English-language input is found everywhere outside the classroom, and many young Northern Europeans use English extensively for gaming, for socializing with other young people on the web or when traveling the world. As we have seen, English is also used more and more as the medium of instruction in tertiary education, and many businesses use English as the corporate language, so the need for advanced language skills is high, both in relation to general work encounters, but also for social encounters with students, colleagues, customers, and clients.

In Denmark, domestically recruited Danish speaking lecturers still make up a majority of tenured staff at Danish universities, but the proportion of internationally recruited lecturers has gradually grown within the last 20 years. According to the latest statistics available (Ståhle, 2011), internationally recruited faculty members made up 18% of the newly appointed in 2009 across disciplines, but with a higher share within science and biotechnology. At UCPH, for example, over a third of all university researchers are international (University of Copenhagen, 2017a). Some of these have English as their L1, but many come from other language backgrounds. Since Danish is a less-spoken language in the world, with only roughly 5.6 million speakers, academics and students coming to Denmark for work or study are often not in the beginning of their stay expected to be able to use the language for teaching and learning. For academic staff planning to stay more permanently, Danish skills become obligatory, not only in relation to being able to fulfill all functions in the workplace but also in relation to public outreach and application for permanent residency. This translates into parallel language use of both Danish and English in most university units for communication in the workplace and on webpages, with a focus on English as lingua franca for both teaching and administration (Chopin, 2016; Kling Soren, 2013; Larsen, 2013).

However, in the more diversely staffed faculties this has not only meant an increase in the use of English, but the creation of a more multilingual and multicultural community altogether. In her study on international staff at the University of Copenhagen, Merike Jürna (2014) found that 35 different languages were used by her 150 informants, and that only 26 of these reported to have English as their first language. All 150 used English in their daily work life and 48 also Danish. No such study has been carried out among international students at the University of Copenhagen, but we do have access to some numerical data from 2016,² which show that international students made up 14.06% of the university´s total student population of 38,615 students. The numbers include exchange students (primarily at undergraduate level, 1752 students) as well as full degree students (mostly at graduate level 3676 students), but not PhD students. A Nordic agreement that gives full access to universities in the region means there is a substantial share of students with a background in one of the other Nordic countries, including Greenland and the Faroe Islands at Danish universities.

Language policy issues

Nordic universities see themselves both as national institutions and as part of what Preece (2011) has termed a “Global Higher Education Stage,” based on increased mobility among staff and students and competition and cooperation between programs and institutions. They are all publicly funded, provide free tuition, and are regulated by general rules set out by their governments, but are also implementing the Bologna Treaty from 1999.³ In order to function at both a national and a transnational level, they aim at parallel language use in one version or another in their language policy. The term “parallel language use” or “parallellingualism” was introduced in Nordic language policy debates around 2000 and included in the Nordic Language Declaration in 2006. Here it refers to the concurrent use of two or more languages in a situation where none of the languages abolish or replace each other. In principle, it applies to contact between the many languages relevant in the Nordic region, but its main focus is on the balance between the national language and English. Within higher education, parallel language use may take many forms, from full bilingual to partial use of the languages involved, depending on context, target group, and legal status of the different documents or communicative practices.

In the language policies of the Nordic universities, parallel language use is often referred to as one of the guiding principles. However, the documents tend to be very general descriptive frameworks, but without prescriptions or concrete priorities of actions to be taken. They only rarely identify the agents responsible for the implementation of the parallel language strategy. In a comparison between language policy documents and their impact from all eight Danish universities, Hultgren (2013) concludes that they are strategic papers with no real influence on the actual language use at the universities. Furthermore, there is no Danish language legislation affecting higher education and very little guidance con...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Acknowledgements
• 1 English medium instruction in higher education in non-Anglophone contexts
• 2 Language policy in Northern European EMI contexts
• 3 Lecturers’ attitudes to EMI
• 4 EMI lecturers’ language and literacy knowledge and skills
• 5 EMI teaching practices
• 6 The impact of EMI teaching on teacher identity
• 7 The issues and challenges revisited
• References
• Index