English-Medium Instruction from an English as a Lingua Franca Perspective

Exploring the Higher Education Context

Kumiko Murata, Kumiko Murata

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351184311
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Langues et linguistique
• Subtopic: Enseignement des arts du langage

English is increasingly used as a lingua franca (ELF) in communicative situations the world over with the acceleration of globalisation. This is in line with the increased introduction of English-medium instruction (EMI) to higher education institutions in many parts of the world to further promote both students' and faculty's mobility to make them competitive and employable in the globalised world, and to make their institutions more attractive and reputable. EMI and ELF, however, are rarely explicitly investigated together despite the fact that the spread of EMI cannot be separated from that of ELF. This volume tackles the issue head on by focusing on EMI in higher education from an ELF perspective. The volume includes contributions by Asian, European, Middle Eastern, South American and Anglo-American scholars. It discusses language policies, attitudes and identities, analyses of classroom EMI practices, case studies and finally, pedagogical implications from an ELF perspective, incorporating also theoretical and empirical issues in conducting EMI courses/programmes. The volume will be of great interest and use, not only to those who are conducting research on ELF, EMI, CLIL, language policy and related fields, but also to classroom teachers and policy makers who are conducting and/or planning to start EMI courses/programmes in their institutions or countries all over the world.

1 Exploring EMI in higher education from an ELF perspective

Introduction

Kumiko Murata

Research on ELF in EMI settings in higher education (HE): language policies

English used as a lingua franca (ELF) in academic contexts (cf. ELFA, Mauranen 2012) is one of the major areas of investigation for ELF researchers as increasingly more universities the world over are introducing English-medium instruction (EMI) to attract students from all over the world. EMI has quickly spread now with the acceleration of globalisation. European countries, where the mobility of both students and faculty is very high (Björkman 2016; Jenkins 2014, this volume; Kuteeva, this volume; Mauranen 2012, 2016; Murata 2016a; Murata and Iino 2018; Smit, this volume), in particular, are in the forefront of this trend. EMI is also an issue dealt with by Jenkins (2014) and Mauranen (2012); the former focusing more on language policies and attitudinal aspects in EMI settings in HE, while the latter investigates the characteristics of English as a lingua franca in academic contexts (ELFA) from grammatical, lexical and discoursal perspectives on the basis of its actual use in EMI settings based on the ELFA corpus Mauranen and her colleagues compiled (Mauranen 2012, 2016).

Since ELF is a relatively new research field, most of the existing or ongoing research on ELF so far has concentrated either on the detailed description of ELF features observed during interactions in various contexts (see Ehrenreich 2009, 2011, 2012; Firth 1996; House 20092016; Jenkins 2000; Kaur 2009, 2011a, 2011b, Mauranen 2006, 2012, 2016; Seidlhofer 2011; Seidlhofer and Widdowson 2009 among many others) or analyses of attitudes and identities behind the use of ELF (Jenkins 2007, 2014, this volume, see also works by her colleagues and research students) as well as its conceptualisation (Jenkins 2015; Mauranen 2012; Seidlhofer 2001, 2004, 2011, 2016; Widdowson 2016).

Under these circumstances, this volume aims to explore the development of ELF research, paying special attention to EMI contexts, which is relevant to further deepen our understanding of the meaning of ELF research, its role, possibility and implications in real-world contexts; that is, language pedagogy in EMI contexts in higher education (HE). This is all the more important as ELF is still relatively unknown territory despite the fact that ELF research is now thriving not only in the European context, where the first ELF research projects were initiated (see, for example, Jenkins 2000; Mauranen 2012; Seidlhofer 2011 among many others), but also in the Asian context, where a major project like Asian Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca (ACE) as well as various other projects are currently being (or having already been) undertaken (Kirkpatrick 2010, 2012, 2017) nearly 15 years after Seidlhofer (2001) voiced her opinion about the need for ELF descriptive research.

EMI has been promoted in Europe under the ERASMUS project (Björkman 2016; Bolton and Kuteeva 2012; Coleman 2006, Cots, Llurda and Garrett 2014; Dafouz and Smit 2016; Doiz, Lasagabaster and Sierra 2013; Jenkins 2014, this volume; Kuteeva, this volume; Kuteeva and Airey 2014; Smit 2010, this volume, inter alia). This tendency is also widely observed in East Asian countries such as China and Korea (see Cheng 2012, Cho 2012, Hu 2005, 2009, Hu and McKay 2012, Park, J-K 2009, this volume, Park, K-J 2009, Wang, this volume). In Japan as well, EMI is now officially promoted by the government’s various policies, and the number of university courses which offer EMI is also on the increase (MEXT 2011, 2014, see also Iino 2012, this volume, Murata 2016 a, 2016b, Murata and Iino 2018). The Japanese government, in line with other Asian and European countries, is now also very eager to encourage EMI in order to promote students’ exchanges, both by inviting more overseas students to Japan and sending more Japanese students abroad (Iino 2012, this volume, Murata 2016a, 2016b, Murata and Iino 2018). The government, suggesting that more courses be conducted in the medium of English to realise this, has taken the initiative in providing selected universities with special funding for this purpose, starting, in 2009, with ‘the Project for Establishing University Network for Internationalisation’ (Global 30), in which 13 universities were provided with funding for five years to promote students’ exchanges and to encourage the universities to offer EMI courses (JSPS 2009, 2011, see also D’Angelo, this volume, Hino, this volume, Iino 2012, this volume, Iino and Murata 2016, Jenkins 2014, this volume, Murata 2016 a, 2016b, Murata and Iino 2018 and Oda, this volume). Along with this project, in 2012, it initiated another project entitled ‘The Project for Promotion of Global Human Resource Development’, in which 42 universities in total were chosen to promote the ‘internationalisation’ of university education and educate students to be active in the globalised world (MEXT 2012). These two projects were followed in 2014 by another big project entitled ‘Top Global University Project’, in which 13 Top Type universities and 24 Global Traction Type universities were given special funding to enhance their ‘international competitiveness’ in the globalised world (MEXT 2014). It is also worth noting here that these moves were initiated under the strong influence of Japanese industries to have more ‘competitive human resources’ to compete with their counterparts in the globalised world, as also reported in Murata (2016 a, 2016b) and Murata and Iino (2018). Even outside this programme, more universities have started offering EMI courses to keep up with the urge for internationalisation of universities by the Government, industries and society in general (see also Iino 2012, this volume).

Under these circumstances, EMI research from an ELF perspective in the Japanese context has also made great progress. Additionally, the number of researchers who are interested in ELF research has steadily increased, particularly young scholars, but also some established scholars in the field of World Englishes (WE) are paying more attention to incorporating an ELF perspective into their WE paradigm (see D’Angelo, Hino, this volume, for example), in particular, in the EMI context, which is the focus of the current volume. This volume therefore specifically focuses on ELF communication in EMI academic contexts. It explores, both theoretically and pedagogically, what is going on globally in the use of ELF in the EMI context, although more case studies are introduced from East Asian contexts. For this purpose, the volume is divided into three parts. Part I, entitled ELF in higher education – from the perspective of language policies at institutional and governmental levels, mainly explores language policies regarding EMI at both institutional and governmental levels, while Part II, ELF in EMI settings – attitudes, identities and classroom practices, investigates both students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards ‘English’ used mainly in EMI classroom settings and their identity formation in its use. The final part, Part III, ELF in EMI – policy, practice and pedagogy: focus on case studies, mostly introduces case studies, dealing with institutional EMI policies and practices as well as ELF pedagogy. In what follows, I shall briefly introduce these three parts in relation to the existing research in the field.

Contributions in the volume

Part I of this volume, entitled ELF in higher education – from the perspective of language policies at institutional and governmental levels, includes five chapters by Jenkins, Jordão, Kuteeva, Park and Iino (Chapters 2–6). It focuses on English language policies from the perspective of the use of ELF in EMI in higher education (HE) settings. The first contributor of Part I, Jenkins, scrutinises ‘international’ universities’ degree of ‘internationalisation’ in terms of their language policies, in particular, those of English or rather ELF, as English used in these universities is naturally expected to be ELF used by international students and staff from diverse lingua-cultural backgrounds. Jenkins investigates this, utilising three research methods: 1) university websites search of 60 universities from all over the world for their language policies, 2) questionnaires administered to academic staff from wide-ranging countries and 3) interviews or rather in-depth ‘conversation’ with international postgraduate students at a university in the UK (see also Jenkins 2014).

On the other hand, the second contributor of Part I, Jordão, critically explores the notion of internationalisation from a Brazilian, or ‘Global South’ perspective. Although Jordão does not explicitly subscribe to the term ‘ELF’ in explaining her practice of running ‘the English for Internationalization course’ for professors, conducting EMI at her university, what she advocates by using the expression, such as ‘construct[ing] more equalitarian practices around English’, actually shares its spirit with that of ELF research. It is an invaluable contribution to the volume as we do not have many chances to hear voices from South America in this field.

Next, in Chapter 4, we move from the Global South to the North. The third contributor in Part I, Kuteeva, introduces language policy and practices in the Swedish context, where EMI has been firmly established as a way to opening university courses to international students as well as encouraging domestic students and faculty to be internationally mobile. Sweden is one of the countries which is very successful in introducing EMI, attracting a great number of international students from both inside and outside Europe (Bolton and Kuteeva 2012, Kuteeva, this volume, Kuteeva and Airey 2013). The chapter thus is of great relevance to the researchers, policymakers and practitioners of ELF the world over who are planning to introduce or have just introduced EMI-related courses and programmes.

We then move from the North to Far East. The fourth contributor in Part I, Park, explores EMI situations in Korean HE. In so doing, she discusses the Korean government-initiated EMI policy implementation and its consequences, and details the problems both students and faculty have to face in order to cope with this drastic transition. Finally, Park lists issues to be dealt with in this situation, which could be informative and applicable to similar situations worldwide.

We then move further east. The final contributor in Part I, Iino, discusses the changes made by the Japanese government in recent years regarding the use of English as a medium of instruction (EMI) to teach content courses at university. This, Iino asserts, is to attract international students as well as to make their domestic students more globally minded, promoting both students and faculty’s mobility on international markets in line with globalisation. Iino critically analyses this tendency from a political economic perspective, critiquing the trend, which is influenced by the recent surge of neo-liberalism. He further critiques the ways in which these recent changes are also affecting English education at secondary level, discussing the issues at both institutional and governmental policy levels.

The five contributions in Part I thus all explore EMI policies at institutional and governmental levels in HE contexts. They, at the same time, persuasively reveal the extent to which English native speaker (NS) norms are prevalent and deep-seated in students’, academic staff members’ and policymakers’ minds, and critique the practices particularly from an ELF perspective, revealing these stakeholders’ lack of awareness of the reality of ELF use.

Part II (Chapters 7–11), ELF in EMI settings – attitudes, identities and classroom practices, explores students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards ‘English’ and their identity formation in EMI settings, as well as actual classroom practices and accompanying attitudes and identities in these classroom settings. Attitudes towards English from an ELF perspective in general are explored by many scholars, most notably by Jenkins (2007, 2009, 2014), followed also by her colleagues and students, e.g. Galloway (2011), Karakaş (2015), Takino (2015), Wang (2015), in both academic and business settings. The same issue is also addressed by Iino and Murata (2016). While students’ attitudes towards English or ELF have generally attracted more attention in academic settings, Part II also contains Ng’s contribution (Chapter 8), which has investigated teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards a ‘non-native’ teacher (Ng himself) from an Outer Circle country in an Expanding Circle setting, which is unique and intriguing.

The first contributor in Part II, Smit, on the basis of her longitudinal EMI investigation from an ELF perspective at a specialist (tourism) college in Austria, elaborates on students’ and teachers’ interactions in which translanguaging and code-switching practices are often observed. This is a global phenomenon often reported in recent research results of ELF interactions in both academic (Iino and Murata 2016) and business settings (see, for example, Cogo 2012, 2016a, 2016b, Ehrenreich 2009, 2011). Smit classifies these practices into different types in analysing her findings, utilising a discourse analytic approach supported also by quantification.

On the other hand, the second contributor in Part II, Ng, as touched on earlier, focuses on teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards ‘non-native’ teachers and their English as well as non-native-speaking teachers’ identity formation in this context. Through the method of autoethnography, Ng details the journey of one teacher from the Kachuruvian Outer Circle, conducing EMI in the Expanding Circle, namely, in Japan.

The third contributors in Part II, Kriukow and Galloway, with Galloway’...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of contributors
• 1 Exploring EMI in higher education from an ELF perspective: introduction
• Part I ELF in higher education – from the perspective of language policies at institutional and governmental levels
• Part II ELF in EMI settings – attitudes, identities and classroom practices
• Part III ELF in EMI settings – policy, practice and pedagogy: focus on case studies
• Index