Search

Abstract:The increasing use of English as a medium of education (EME) in higher education has attracted an impressive amount of applied linguistic research, reflecting the pivotal role language plays in teaching and learning processes. This, however, stands in sharp contrast to the equally prolific body of research into the internationalisation of higher education (IoHE) in which the complex linguistic reality of EME – and its potential role in the internationalised classroom – is given little attention. Reviewing the current research and policy agenda, the authors find that the current policy climate offers similar opportunities for conceptual expansion of IoHE and EME, which calls for greater integration of the two fields of study. The authors argue for an interdisciplinary approach, recognising, and more holistically exploiting, the potential of language at the intersection of dynamic and multilayered policies and practices in twenty-first century internationalised higher education.Abstract:Die zunehmende Verwendung des Englischen als Unterrichtssprache (English-medium education, EME) in der Hochschulbildung hat eine beeindruckende Menge an angewandtlinguistischer Forschung hervorgebracht, in der die Schlüsselrolle der Sprache in Lehr- und Lernprozessen zum Ausdruck kommt. Dies steht jedoch in scharfem Kontrast zur ebenso umfangreichen Forschung zur Internationalisierung der Hochschulbildung (IoHE), in welcher der komplexen sprachlichen Realität von EME und ihrer potenziellen Rolle im internationalisierten Unterricht nur sehr wenig Aufmerksamkeit zuteil wird. Wenn man die aktuelle Forschungsagenda und strategischen Bemühungen der Hochschulen genauer betrachtet, stellt man jedoch fest, dass das derzeitige politische Klima ähnliche Möglichkeiten für eine konzeptionelle Erweiterung von IoHE und EME bietet. Die Autoren dieses Kapitels sprechen sich für eine stärkere Integration der beiden Forschungsbereiche aus, indem sie für einen interdisziplinären Ansatz plädieren, der das Potenzial der Sprache an der Schnittstelle dynamischer und vielschichtiger Strategien und Praktiken in der internationalisierten Hochschulbildung des 21. Jahrhunderts erkennt und ganzheitlicher nutzt.

Abstract:Connected to the growing internationalisation of higher education in the world, the English language is increasingly being used as medium of teaching and learning, thereby contributing to the roles of English for transnational mobility, career development, access to new information and research, and the facilitation of global communication. While the label English-medium instruction (EMI) has been widely used in the last two decades to capture this phenomenon, we consider it an unfortunate choice in that it falls short in conceptualising the complexity of English in twenty-first-century higher education. First, EMI solely focuses on English, ignoring the increasing multilingual realities of higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide; secondly, EMI does not explicitly include reference to higher education, even though learning and teaching at the tertiary level is in crucial ways different to lower levels of education. Thirdly, EMI talks about "instruction" and thus views education as a non-relational process where teachers teach and learners learn. From this unilateral perspective, the co-construction of knowledge as a key feature of higher education remains unacknowledged.Against this backdrop, our paper sets out to argue for the conceptual need for an alternative label, known as English-medium education in multilingual university settings (or EMEMUS). This label, we argue, portrays more accurately and specifically the growing multilingual reality of current internationalised HEIs, the complex and highly situated roles that English plays in relation to other national and local languages, and the importance of interpreting education as a social-constructivist process. Moreover, EMEMUS will enable HEIs to re-examine comprehensively the range of activities that respond locally to global phenomena, from policy issues (e.g. regulations, implementation and management) to university practices (e.g. teaching, research, administration and teacher professional development) in an inclusive and multifaceted manner. Ultimately, this comprehensive conceptualisation aims to redefine English and internationalisation in a much more nuanced light.Resumen:Con la creciente internacionalización de la educación superior en el mundo, la lengua inglesa ha adquirido una mayor presencia como medio de enseñanza y aprendizaje, contribuyendo a una mayor movilidad transnacional, desarrollo profesional, acceso a la información e investigación y la comunicación global. A pesar de que, en las últimas dos décadas, el término en inglés 'English-medium instruction' (EMI) se ha utilizado ampliamente para describir este fenómeno, creemos que dicho término se queda corto a la hora de conceptualizar la complejidad del inglés en la educación superior del siglo XXI. Por una parte, EMI se centra únicamente en el inglés, ignorando la creciente realidad multilingüe de las instituciones de educación superior en todo el mundo; por otra, EMI no se refiere explícitamente a la educación superior, a pesar de que el aprendizaje y la enseñanza en el nivel terciario es muy diferente a los otros niveles educativos. Asimismo, EMI habla de "instrucción" y, por tanto, considera la educación como un proceso no interactivo en el que los profesores enseñan y los alumnos aprenden. Desde esta perspectiva unilateral, se ignora la co-construcción del conocimiento como característica clave de la educación superior.Con este telón de fondo, nuestro artículo presenta varios argumentos para el uso de una etiqueta alternativa – la educación en inglés en entornos universitarios multilingües (o EMEMUS en inglés). Esta etiqueta retrata de forma más precisa la creciente realidad multilingüe de una educación superior cada vez más internacionalizada, así como las complejas funciones que desempeña el inglés en relación con otras lenguas nacionales y locales, y la importancia de concebir la educación como un proceso socio-constructivista. Además, EMEMUS permitirá a las universidades reexaminar de manera exhaustiva e inclusiva las diversas actividades que responden localmente a los fenómenos globales, desde las cuestiones políticas (tales como, la aplicación y gestión de las normativas) hasta las prácticas universitarias (ya sea docencia, investigación, o el desarrollo profesional del profesorado). En definitiva, esta conceptualización integral persigue redefinir la relación entre la enseñanza en inglés y la internacionalización de la educación atendiendo a sus diferentes matices.

Connected to the growing internationalisation of higher education in the world, the English language is increasingly being used as medium of teaching and learning, thereby contributing to the roles of English for transnational mobility, career development, access to new information and research, and the facilitation of global communication. While the label English-medium instruction (EMI) has been widely used in the last two decades to capture this phenomenon, we consider it an unfortunate choice in that it falls short in conceptualising the complexity of English in twenty-first-century higher education. First, EMI solely focuses on English, ignoring the increasing multilingual realities of higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide; secondly, EMI does not explicitly include reference to higher education, even though learning and teaching at the tertiary level is in crucial ways different to lower levels of education. Thirdly, EMI talks about “instruction” and thus views education as a non-relational process where teachers teach and learners learn. From this unilateral perspective, the co-construction of knowledge as a key feature of higher education remains unacknowledged.Against this backdrop, our paper sets out to argue for the conceptual need for an alternative label, known as English-medium education in multilingual university settings (or EMEMUS). This label, we argue, portrays more accurately and specifically the growing multilingual reality of current internationalised HEIs, the complex and highly situated roles that English plays in relation to other national and local languages, and the importance of interpreting education as a social-constructivist process. Moreover, EMEMUS will enable HEIs to re-examine comprehensively the range of activities that respond locally to global phenomena, from policy issues (e.g. regulations, implementation and management) to university practices (e.g. teaching, research, administration and teacher professional development) in an inclusive and multifaceted manner. Ultimately, this comprehensive conceptualisation aims to redefine English and internationalisation in a much more nuanced light.

The increasing use of English as a medium of education (EME) in higher education has attracted an impressive amount of applied linguistic research, reflecting the pivotal role language plays in teaching and learning processes. This, however, stands in sharp contrast to the equally prolific body of research into the internationalisation of higher education (IoHE) in which the complex linguistic reality of EME – and its potential role in the internationalised classroom – is given little attention. Reviewing the current research and policy agenda, the authors find that the current policy climate offers similar opportunities for conceptual expansion of IoHE and EME, which calls for greater integration of the two fields of study. The authors argue for an interdisciplinary approach, recognising, and more holistically exploiting, the potential of language at the intersection of dynamic and multilayered policies and practices in twenty-first century internationalised higher education.

English as a foreign language is no longer the sole object of specialized language classes, but increasingly a medium of university‐level instruction in a range of content areas. This leads to a complex interaction between new academic content and the means of expressing this expertise through appropriate disciplinary language uses. Conceptually, this study focuses on oral disciplinary–reasoning episodes, in which knowledge structures are explicitly developed. These episodes exemplify diverse ways whereby disciplinary meaning making is co‐constructed in English‐medium instruction (EMI), with one specific type being language‐related episodes which clarify specific items of terminology. Drawing on INTE‐R‐LICA, an international and interdisciplinary project, the database under investigation covers 671 minutes (67,605 words) of classroom discourse from a Spanish business administration degree programme. Findings suggest a structural diversity within these episodes, which are jointly constructed, and involve a rich variety of discursive strategies to effectuate meaning making. Our results indicate that an understanding of the crucial role of language in this disciplinary meaning‐making process is essential for the TESOLprofession to remain relevant in the current English language teaching educational landscape. In addition to providing expert input into the potential of a language‐sensitive EMIpedagogy, TESOLteacher education will need to foster both language and content teachers’ awareness of the disciplinary nature of classroom discourse and its role in developing subject expertise among their students.

Teen die agtergrond van Smitherman (2000:314) se mening dat daar aantoonbare ooreenkomste in die sosio-politieke aard van die taaldebat in Amerika en Suid-Afrika bestaan, is die doel met hierdie artikel om spesifiek na te gaan tot watter mate die uitspraak waar is ten opsigte van die manier waarop die etnolinguistiese varieteite van Engels ontwikkel. Spesifieke aandag word gegee aan die manier waarop die Ann Arbor verhoor in 1979 en die sogenaamde Ebonics-debate van 1996 die etnolinguistiese vitaliteit van Swart Amerikaanse Engels kon beïnvloed het, sodat bepaal kan word watter moontlike “lesse” daar in hierdie verband te leer is betreffend die funksie en status van Engels soos dit hoofsaaklik deur swart sprekers in Suid-Afrika gebruik word. Dit word uiteindelik duidelik dat, hoewel geen enkelvoudige vergelykings tussen dié twee variëteite van Engels getrek kan word nie, die manier waarop met Engels in die Suid-Afrikaanse onderwysstelsel omgegaan word—soos in die VSA—'n wesentlike invloed uitoefen op die ontwikkelingsmoontlikhede van die taal en die gesindhede daarteenoor.

Na dekades van (sosio)linguistiese marginalisering het Swart Suid-Afrikaanse Engels (SSAE) uiteindelik die nodige aandag begin kry. Tersaaklike navorsing het begin om die tot dusver lee gapings te vul, maar daar moet nog meer gebeur. In die lig van diefeit dat 'n belangrike deel van 'n variëteit se beskrywing bestaan uit hoe dit waargeneem en geëvalueer word in verskillende omgewings, behoort toekomstige navorsing oor SSAE navorsing oor wat taalhoudings genoem kan word, in te sluit. Dit is die doel van hierdie artikel om die teoretiese en metodologiese basis wat nodig vir is sosio- en etnolinguistiese studies van SSAE te voorsien. Dit word gedoen deur diefaktore wat taalhoudingsnavorsing voor te hou en te bespreek hoe hulle in ag geneem behoort te word in individuele studies.

In the context of pronunciation teaching, the relevance of a standard native accent as teaching model and norm needs to be reconsidered in view of the learners’ attainment as well as their wishes and expectations. In order to test attitudes to native and non‐native varieties of English in Austria, a language attitude study was undertaken with 132 university students of English. In response to the modified matched‐guise test, the subjects evaluated three native accents RP (Received Pronunciation), near‐RP and GA (General American) and two Austrian non‐native accents of English. The results confirm the low status the non‐native accents have amongst their users and the overall preference for the three native accents. Generally, the respondents rate the accent best with which they have become familiar at school and/or during stays in English‐speaking countries. Reflecting historical and geopolitical circumstances, the majority of the subjects support RP as their favourite model of pronunciation. Furthermore, the study sheds light on the importance of personal exposure to English in its native environments. While the evaluations of the students with EFL experience reflect rather rigid stereotypes, those students who have spent some time in English‐speaking countries reveal more individualized, situation‐linked attitudes.

In die meeste taalhoudingstudies, waar die klassieke ‘matched-guise’-tegniek gebruik word, word daar nie van die proefpersone verwag dat hulle die variëteite wat hulle moet evalueer, ook nog moet identifiseer nie. Omdat hierdie aanname gebaseer is op tradisionele navorsingsbegrippe, moet toekomstige navorsers die implementering daarvan heroorweeg wanneer studies in meer gestratifiseerde en verdeelde gemeenskappe, soos dié in Suid-Afrika, deurgevoer word. Deur die daarstelling van die tersaaklike resultate uit 'n taalhoudingstudie, wat gedurende 1993 in Grahamstad onderneem is, wil hierdie artikel aandui dat aksentherkenning die sprekerevaluering kan beïnvloed, en dus as integrate deel van toekomstige taalhoudingstudies gesien moet word.