Exclusive use of the second language in classroom interaction in English Medium Instruction science classrooms: the beliefs of students and their monolingual teachers

Abstract

Previous research on English Medium Instruction classrooms has almost exclusively documented the interaction between a teacher and students where the teacher is able to understand and use the first language (L1) of the students. We present data obtained from science classrooms in English-medium-instruction (EMI) high-school programs in China where the teacher had almost no L1 proficiency and therefore spoke only English in class. The beliefs of both teachers and students were elicited with regard to L2-only English use in classroom interaction through questionnaire and post-lesson interviews with references to lesson observations. Two hundred and thirty-one questionnaires were collected, together with 60 interviews with students and teachers following 30 lesson observations. Our findings suggest that teachers divided into three categories of beliefs: virtual position, maximal position, and optimal position (already identified in previous literature), but that students tended to prefer a classroom environment in which some L1 was permitted, or even encouraged, in order to facilitate their understanding of complex science constructs. With increasing teacher mobility and a growing demand of EMI education worldwide, pedagogical suggestions are made to EMI programs with monolingual teachers.

Keywords

classroom interaction English medium instruction L1 use student beliefs teacher beliefs

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Thomas

(2021). Students’ beliefs about the role of interaction for science learning and language learning in EMI science classes: Evidence from high schools in China. Linguistics and Education, 65, 100972.

Macaro

Childs

(2021). Classroom interaction in EMI high schools: Do teachers who are native speakers of English make a difference ? System, 98, 102482.

Barnard

McLellan

(2013). Codeswitching in university English medium classes: Asian perspectives. Multilingual Matters.

Borg

(2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81–109.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.

Creswell

J.W.

Plano Clark

V.L.

(2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd edition. Sage.

Cummins

(1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49, 222–251.

Dörnyei

(2003). Questionnaires in second language research. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ernest

(1998). Social constructivism as a philosophy of mathematics. State University of New York Press.

10.

Evnitskaya

Morton

(2011). Knowledge construction, meaning-making and interaction in CLIL science classroom communities of practice. Language and Education, 25, 109–127.

11.

Galloway

Kriukow

Numajiri

(2017). Internationalisation, higher education and the growing demand for English: An investigation into the English medium of instruction (EMI) movement in China and Japan. The British Council.

12.

García

(2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Pivot.

13.

Gass

(1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Lawrence Erlbaum.

14.

Gierlinger

(2015). ‘You can speak German, sir’: on the complexity of teachers’ L1 use in CLIL. Language and Education, 29, 347–368.

15.

Gredler

M.E.

(2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice. 4th edition. Merrill Prentice Hall.

16.

Haroon

H.A.

(2005). Teacher code-switching and its functions in mathematics and science lessons. Asia Pacific Journal of Language in Education, 7, 1–25.

17.

Hellekjaer

G.O.

(2017). Lecture comprehension in English-medium higher education. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 23, 11–34.

18.

Huang

(2014). College students’ perspectives of English medium instruction. Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology.

19.

Jin

Mercer

Talbot

(2021). EMI teacher identity, language use and reported behaviours in Austrian higher education. In Talbot

Gruber

M.-T.

Nishida

(Eds.), The psychological experience of integrating content and language. Multilingual Matters.

20.

Kirkpatrick

(2011). Internationalization or Englishization: Medium of instruction in today’s universities. Hong Kong: Centre for Governance and Citizenship, The Hong Kong Institute of Education.

21.

Krashen

(1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Prentice Hall.

22.

Lasagabaster

(2013). The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: The teachers ‘ perspective. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 6, 1–21.

23.

Lee

G.J.

(2014). Why students don’t participate in English medium instruction classes in a Korean university: A case Study. English Teaching, 69, 91–117.

24.

Lemke

J.L.

(1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Ablex.

25.

Lin

A.M.Y.

Y.Y.

(2017). Trans/languaging and the triadic dialogue in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Language and Education, 31, 26–45.

26.

Littleton

Mercer

(2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Routledge.

27.

Liu

(2019). Exploring bilingual learners’ desires in English-medium studies: Evidence from a Thai private bilingual school. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25, 80–99.

28.

Llurda

(2005). Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession. Springer.

29.

Y.Y.

(2015). How much L1 is too much? Teachers’ language use in response to students’ abilities and classroom interaction in content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18, 270–288.

30.

Y.Y.

Lin

A.M.Y.

(2019). Curriculum genres and task structure as frameworks to analyse teachers’ use of L1 in CBI classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22, 78–90.

31.

Long

(1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie

W.C.

Bhatia

T.K.

(Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.

32.

Lourenço

Pinto

(2019). Expatriate and home teachers’ beliefs about English-medium instruction at a Portuguese university. European Journal of Higher Education, 9, 252–267.

33.

Macaro

(2001). Analysing student teachers’ codeswitching in foreign language classrooms: Theories and decision making. The Modern Language Journal, 85, 531–548.

34.

Macaro

(2009). Teacher use of codeswitching in the second language classroom: Exploring ‘optimal’ use. In Turnbull

Dailey-O’Cain

(Eds.), First language use in second and foreign language learning (pp. 35–49). Multilingual Matters.

35.

Macaro

Graham

Woore

(2016). Improving foreign language teaching: Towards a research-based curriculum and pedagogy. Routledge.

36.

Macaro

Tian

Chu

(2020). First and second language use in English medium instruction contexts. Language Teaching Research, 24, 382–402.

37.

Macaro

Nakatani

Hayashi

Khabbazbashi

(2014). Exploring the value of bilingual language assistants with Japanese English as a foreign language learners. The Language Learning Journal, 42, 41–54.

38.

Macaro

Curle

Pun

Dearden

(2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51, 36–76.

39.

Méndez García

del

Pavón Vázquez

. (2012). Investigating the coexistence of the mother tongue and the foreign language through teacher collaboration in CLIL contexts: Perceptions and practice of the teachers involved in the plurilingual programme in Andalusia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15, 573–592.

40.

Mortimer

E.F.

Scott

(2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press.

41.

Paltridge

Phakiti

(2015). Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource. Bloomsbury.

42.

Paulsrud

B.Y.

(2016). English-medium instruction in Sweden: Perspectives and practices in two upper secondary schools. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 4, 108–128.

43.

Pavón Vázquez

& Ramos Ordóñez, M. del C. (2019). Describing the use of the L1 in CLIL: An analysis of L1 communication strategies in classroom interaction. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22, 35–48.

44.

Poza

L.E.

(2018). The language of ciencia: translanguaging and learning in a bilingual science classroom. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21, 1–19.

45.

Pun

Macaro

(2019). The effect of first and second language use on question types in English medium instruction science classrooms in Hong Kong. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22, 64–77.

46.

Roothooft

(2019). Spanish lecturers’ beliefs about English medium instruction: STEM versus Humanities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Epub ahead of print 14 February 2019. DOI: 10.1080/13670050.2019.1707768.

47.

Seah

L.H.

Silver

R.E.

(2020). Attending to science language demands in multilingual classrooms: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 42, 2453–2471.

48.

Swain

(1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and output in its development. In Gass

Madden

(Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.

49.

Sweller

(1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.

50.

Vygotsky

L.S.

(1986). The collected work of L.S. Vygotsky: Volume 1: Thinking and speaking. Plenum.

51.

Wächter

Maiworm

(2014). English-taught programmes in European higher education: The state of play in 2014. Lemmens Medien GmbH Bonn.

52.

Zhou

Mann

(2021). Translanguaging in a Chinese university CLIL classroom: Teacher strategies and student attitudes. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11, 265–289.