PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Language Teaching· 2017Q1· Review

A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education

Ernesto Macaro, Samantha Curle, Jack Pun, Jiangshan An et al.

Short summary

A review of 83 studies indicates that while English Medium Instruction (EMI) is growing in higher education, there's insufficient evidence to confirm benefits for language learning or detriments to content learning.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • 83 studies were reviewed on English Medium Instruction (EMI) in higher education.
  • EMI is growing globally, but evidence for its impact on language or content learning is inconclusive.
  • Stakeholders have concerns about EMI implementation despite its perceived inevitability.
  • Research methodology issues at micro and macro levels contribute to the insufficiency of current evidence.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

After outlining why a systematic review of research in English medium instruction (EMI) in higher education (HE) is urgently required, we briefly situate the rapidly growing EMI phenomenon in the broader field of research in which content and language have been considered and compare HE research outputs with those from other phases of education. An in-depth review of 83 studies in HE documents the growth of EMI in different geographical areas. We describe studies which have investigated university teachers’ beliefs and those of students before attempting to synthesise the evidence on whether teaching academic subjects through the medium of English as a second language (L2) is of benefit to developing English proficiency without a detrimental effect on content learning. We conclude that key stakeholders have serious concerns regarding the introduction and implementation of EMI despite sometimes recognising its inevitability. We also conclude that the research evidence to date is insufficient to assert that EMI benefits language learning nor that it is clearly detrimental to content learning. There are also insufficient studies demonstrating, through the classroom discourse, the kind of practice which may lead to beneficial outcomes. This insufficiency, we argue, is partly due to research methodology problems both at the micro and macro level.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Language Teaching, 2017 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Literature and Literary Theory

Literature and Literary TheoryArts and Humanities