A Typology of English-Medium Instruction

Abstract

The use of English to teach content subjects has been a growing trend in many parts of the world. It is labelled in a variety of ways, such as content-based learning, content and language integrated learning, immersion education, theme-based language teaching, and bilingual education, but it is referred to in this paper as English-medium instruction (EMI). The expansion of EMI worldwide has resulted in many different forms of EMI, as well as some confusion as to how they differ. In addition, a number of different forms of EMI may occur in the same school or institution, area, or country. The different forms of EMI can be usefully classified in the form of a typology. A typology provides a basis for objective and quantifiable accounts of the characteristics of EMI in different situations. The present typology describes 51 features across 10 curriculum categories, which were identified when comparing different forms and realizations of EMI. It highlights the many different dimensions of EMI that are involved in describing, planning, or evaluating EMI.

Investigating self-beliefs and success for English medium instruction learners studying finance

“…In the discipline of business education, some European studies have suggested that non-native English-speaking business students are not disadvantaged by learning through the medium of English (e.g., Dafouz, Camacho, & Urquia, 2014;Hernandez-Nanclares & Jimenez-Munoz, 2017). However, Richards and Pun (2021) note a difference in typology of EMI between established programs in Europe and "late-starting" EMI programs in Japan, in which students have to adjust quickly from learning English as a foreign language in high school to using it as a medium of education in university. Indeed, studies in Japan have suggested that business students of lower proficiency experience severe academic languagerelated challenges .…”

Inclusive Transnational Education Partnerships: A Case Study of a Master of Arts in TESOL Program

“…Hence, our evaluation must include relevant constructs. However, assessment of EMI programs remains problematic because there is little consensus about what to assess (content mastery only; content mastery and language proficiency; language proficiency only); who should design and conduct the assessment (content teacher only; content and language teacher; language teacher only); and, if language is assessed, what type of English to assess (academic vs general language proficiency; ‘native’ norms vs lingua franca English) (De Costa et al, 2020; Fenton-Smith et al, 2017; Macaro et al, 2018; Richards and Pun, 2021).…”

“…Importantly, since one of the claims of EMI is that it helps students to develop global literacy and intercultural communication skills (Richards and Pun, 2021), our evaluation must also consider the development of intercultural competence. Baker and Fang (2019) emphasize that intercultural citizenship education is particularly relevant in EMI programs which are by their very nature intercultural, hence posing a range of linguistic and cultural issues.…”

“…First, it sought to better understand the experience of English language teachers in TNHE and its impact on their professional lives and English language development. Since EMI programs claim an array of benefits for learners, including improved learning of English, increased ‘global literacy’ (2) and development of intercultural communication skills (Richards and Pun, 2021), then it is necessary to look specifically at how valid these claims are in the context of this program. Second, the study identified design features of the program that contribute to its effectiveness and that advance the ideals of an inclusive model of EMI and internationalization in TNHE.…”

Transnational Education in the Anglophone University: A Viewpoint Article

“…This coincides with two major trends globally: larger numbers of international students attending Anglophone universities; and widespread expansion of English Medium Instruction (EMI) in non-Anglophone HE settings not traditionally teaching subject matter in English. The proliferation of English medium university programmes affects such a diverse array of EMI practices that Richards and Pun (2021) classify the many guises of policy and practice in a typology of EMI, for which they identify a bewildering 51 features across 10 curriculum categories. In this viewpoint article, I discuss my take on the main articles in this Special Issue, with my commentary on each focussing on notions of internationalization and transnational higher education (TNHE) from the perspective of Anglophone universities.…”