Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper investigates an emerging professional role transformation in Vietnamese universities, whereby English language teaching (ELT) lecturers transform themselves into English medium instruction (EMI) lecturers in a discipline new to them. Through interviews with five ELT/EMI lecturers working in separate universities and different disciplines, the study investigates reasons for their decision to engage in such professional mobility, their role transformation experience, and its implications for educational quality. We argue that participants’ move into EMI was shaped by the strategic imperative for higher education internationalisation, and the mistaken belief that EMI alone can achieve the English language development students require for academic success. It is also argued that the transformation option made available to the participants was not the best use of their skills, and that a profound change of perspective is needed at the institutional level to most effectively use the strengths of ELT lecturers to support educational quality.

Keywords

Transformation English medium instruction (EMI)English medium education (EME)professional mobility professional role transformation aspiration Vietnamese higher education English language teaching (ELT)

Introduction: Internationalisation and English medium instruction

Fundamental to many higher education institutions (HEIs) over the last few decades, ‘internationalisation’ remains a buzz word, yet the process itself is not consistently conceptualised and practised. While Hudzik (2015) argues for a comprehensive internationalisation integrating international and comparative perspectives throughout the teaching, research and service missions of higher education, this is still a work in progress across the world. Nevertheless, over time, internationalisation of HEIs has moved beyond its traditional dimensions, such as student and staff mobility, mutual cooperation and benefits, and capacity building, and has taken on new dimensions. These range from enhancing intercultural competence (Bennett 2014; Gundling et al., 2015; Yershova et al., 2000) and global engagement (Paige et al., 2009; Jon and Fry 2021) to more localised dimensions such as institutional competition, reputation building and global ranking (Hoang et al., 2018; Maruša 2019). Whereas initially the internationalisation process was ‘an aggregation of dispersed activities within higher education institutions’ (Gao 2015: 183), it has now shifted from this ‘marginal and minor component to a global, strategic, and mainstream factor’ (Knight and De Wit 2018: 2) and ‘from a reactive to a proactive strategic issue’ (De Wit et al., 2015: 4). There is no sign that the impetus of this internationalisation process will ease in the foreseeable future. On the contrary, there is often a sense of ‘strategic imperative’, with non-educational objectives such as income and reputation being prioritised over educational quality (Bowles and Murphy 2020; Pham and Doan 2020; Pham 2022).

In many countries where English is neither the official language nor necessarily even a secondary one, as in the case of Vietnam, the strategic imperative has been dominated by the use of English as the medium of instruction (EMI) (Dearden 2014), often without adequate preparation (Nguyen et al., 2017; Pham and Barnett 2022). Nevertheless, the growing global phenomenon of English medium instruction is considered ‘the single most significant current trend in internationalising higher education’ (Parr 2014) and some have even seen EMI ‘as a panacea’ for institutions to catch up with high-speed internationalisation (Chapple 2015: 1). In Vietnamese higher education, for example, EMI has grown so fast that it lies ‘at the heart of the internationalisation agenda’ and internationalisation has been ‘seen predominantly as the use of EMI’ (Tran and Nguyen, 2018: 94). In some parts of Asia, the term EMI can even be used interchangeably with internationalisation (Duong and Chua 2016).

This inappropriate foregrounding of English creates a discourse of ‘internationalisation-as-EMI’ which is pervading many HEIs in the region (Bradford 2019) and neglects important educational objectives, such as building international and intercultural understanding and skills of interaction, by sidelining the agenda of internationalising the curriculum itself (Leask 2008, 2015). Thus, it risks omission of ‘the purposeful integration of international and intercultural dimensions into the formal and informal curriculum’ (Beelen et al., 2015: 69), or alternatively integrating only Western English-dominant cultural dimensions at the expense of regional and world-wide ones, since ‘it is not just the language and the content that are imported, but also ways of thinking and understanding the world’ (Barnett and Pham 2022: 5). At the same time, internationalisation-as-EMI sidelines discourses of ‘learner-centred internationalisation’ (Coelen, 2016), which aim to provide an environment conducive to ‘learning outcomes associated with international awareness and intercultural competence’ (Coelen 2016: 40). EMI by itself does not ensure those broader educational outcomes.

In this context, there are numerous reports internationally of EMI challenges for both students and staff (e.g. Chou 2018; Phuong and Nguyen 2019; Rowland and Murray 2020) suggesting that educational quality may be reduced rather than enhanced by EMI (Bukhari 2021; Ismailov 2022; Tajik et al., 2022). According to British Council reviews of EMI, what is needed are ‘systems which provide ongoing support for students’, and which emphasise ‘the relationship between content and language’ (Veitch 2021: 11), as well as being ‘context specific, ideally, based on needs analyses’ (Curle et al., 2020: 44). This call has recently been addressed in several ways. One involves English language lecturers providing English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) courses, defined as: ‘An approach that targets discipline or subject specific needs of students by focusing on genres and skills that are relevant for their academic success in a specific course’ (Galloway 2021: 6). Being context specific in terms of disciplinary content, this approach is more closely related to student needs than generic English for Academic Purposes courses, and also requires the English language lecturer to build up some discipline familiarity. Another approach is through Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) where the discipline lecturer adopts a role as both content and language teacher. While this is a role that few discipline lecturers are ready to take on (Airey 2012; Moncada-Comas and Block 2021), some, importantly, have been willing to try out a ‘CLIL-ised approach’ (Moncada-Comas and Block 2021; Block and Moncada-Comas 2019; Thanh and Barnett 2022), progressively incorporating some CLIL pedagogies through professional development support.

In addition to these approaches, there is strong evidence that ‘joining forces in collaboration may well be the key to the successful implementation of EMI’ (Dearden 2018: 336), recognising that:

English Language teachers can play a vital role in ensuring the successful delivery of EMI at university level in terms of language knowledge, language awareness and interactive pedagogy skills. They possess the skills to support students with EAP and ESP, monitor and communicate students’ language levels to EMI academics, provide language support for EMI academics, share interactive pedagogy skills and raise linguistic awareness. (Dearden 2018: 331)

However, such institutional recognition is put at risk by a widespread ‘conceptual conflation of EMI and English learning’ (Bradford 2019: 707), a mistaken understanding which in a context of strategic imperative unfortunately acts on institutional decision makers as a powerfully persuasive discourse. The implication that EMI can replace English language teaching (ELT) in higher education is a highly contentious issue, and a number of studies have raised concerns (e.g. Chapple 2015; Yuan 2020; Galloway and Rose 2021). In fact, ‘there is no conclusive research evidence that EMI results in improved English proficiency without focus on language’ (Curle et al., 2020: 44). In other words, mere exposure to English through EMI is considered insufficient to ensure the English proficiency needed for academic success, and is likely to lead only to incidental English learning (Pecorari and Malmström 2018).

Nevertheless, the conflation of EMI and ELT reported by Bradford (2019) in Japan has been widely reported elsewhere in terms of an assumption by institutional decision makers that students following an EMI program would automatically develop the necessary English fluency without the need for targeted English language teaching (Vu and Burns 2014; Nguyen 2017; Rose and Galloway 2019). This not only disadvantages students but has direct implications for the status and prestige of ELT lecturers, and consequently for their employment prospects. For example, Dearden (2018) refers to a university in China that saw EMI as superseding English language teaching, and requested its English staff to re-train in another academic discipline. In Vietnam, ELT lecturers in higher education are concerned for their profession and some are transforming themselves into EMI lecturers in disciplines for which they have no prior expertise. Little is known about this, but across the five Vietnamese universities where authors of this study are employed, there have been over 60 such transfers in recent years. The concern is that if internationalisation-as-EMI is combined with a view of EMI-as-English-language-learning, then it is almost certainly to the detriment of both internationalisation and English language learning.

Given the historical experience in Vietnam where teachers of French, and subsequently teachers of Russian, found themselves having to re-train, we think it important to look into this trend in Vietnamese higher education, especially in light of recent research showing the importance of utilising the skills of English language lecturers in order to achieve successful EMI (Dearden 2018). To make a start, we conducted a small scale empirical study, reported here, involving five ELT/EMI lecturers working in separate Vietnamese universities and in different disciplines. The study investigates the drivers underpinning participants’ decision to engage in such professional mobility, their actual experiences of role transformation, and the kinds of transformation achieved.

Literature review: EMI role transformations within higher education

While we have been unable to locate any research into the EMI role transformation of English language lecturers, insights can be gained from studies related to the EMI role transformation of discipline lecturers. These have chiefly focused on the challenges encountered (e.g. Nguyen et al., 2017; Pham, 2022; Pham et al., 2022), variations in classroom interaction (e.g. Lo and Macaro 2012; Hu and Duan 2019; Pun and Macaro 2019; Ismailov 2022) and the pedagogies needed (Dearden 2018; Macaro et al., 2020). It must be noted that such studies of EMI role transformation have emphasised the use of English and the types of thinking valued in Western curricula, with little attention paid to developing intercultural competence and internationalising the curriculum, thus reflecting the afore-mentioned flawed equation of internationalisation with EMI (Bradford 2019) and the lack of attention to internationalising the curriculum (Leask 2008, 2015; Beelen et al., 2015; Coelen 2016).

In regard to the professional skills needed for effective EMI, a recent British Council review affirms that:

Many of the pedagogical techniques and skills highlighted by research as important in lecturer support systems focus on language: the use of language-aware pedagogies, scaffolding and accommodation strategies, and basic language teaching skills. (Veitch 2021: 11)

Both learner-centred pedagogical approaches and frequent classroom interaction have consistently been highlighted as essential for successful EMI (e.g. Dearden 2014; Sahan et al., 2022), enabling students to express ideas and engage collaboratively in higher order thinking and critical reflection, all of which involve ways of thinking that are integral to EMI (Dafouz and Smit 2020). EMI lecturers are expected to scaffold learning and be creative and flexible in teaching (Nguyen et al., 2016; Nguyen 2017), and to ‘modify their input, check that students have understood and create an atmosphere where students are not afraid to speak both to check comprehension and to develop their own English language skills’ (Dearden 2018: 326). More recently the pedagogical value of appropriate translanguaging practices (Garcia and Wei 2014) has also been recognised within EMI, especially where the majority of students are domestic as in Vietnam.

Many of the academics called upon by their institutions to act as EMI lecturers have found themselves unable to meet such expectations, notably clarity in conveying disciplinary content, scaffolding learning, and being creative and flexible in teaching (Nguyen et al., 2016; Nguyen 2017). Others who were confident in their disciplinary English were not willing to adopt recommended EMI pedagogies, and persisted in teacher-centred pedagogies (Sahan et al., 2022). Even where academics have adopted basic EMI pedagogies such as providing translation and glossaries, they have still tended to firmly maintain their priority role as content lecturers (Airey 2012), refusing ‘to inhabit an English language teacher identity’ (Moncada-Comas and Block 2021: 1).

Based on the empirical research to date, we see such EMI role transformations as works in progress, some more progressed than others. They generally appear to represent what Mezirow (1995) referred to as a ‘straightforward transformation’ learned through existing meaning schemes, as distinct from a ‘profound transformation’ which ‘alters deeply held perspectives and world views and has long-term efficacy’ (Terblanche 2022: 269). A profound EMI role transformation would require firstly rejection of the notion that learning and teaching in a foreign language merely involves a change of code or ‘interface’ (Aguilar-Pérez and Arnó-Macià 2020; Arnó-Macià and Aguilar-Pérez 2020), secondly appreciation of the important relationship between content and language (Veitch 2021: 11), and thirdly pedagogical action responsive to those beliefs.

It is difficult to determine whether or not such a profound transformation is occurring among EMI lecturers in Vietnam, but a number of empirical studies certainly indicate professional role transformation heading in that direction. One example is the review of eight teachers’ practices as they first engage with EMI in a multidisciplinary university (Hoang and Tran 2022); other examples include CLIL-ised pedagogy in an electrical engineering class (Thanh and Barnett 2022); and two EMI teachers’ considered use of pedagogical translanguaging (Nguyen H-A et al., 2022). Primarily providing student perspectives, other examples include learning experiences derived from a teacher educator’s application of sociocultural learning theory in EMI (Vo 2022), and translanguaging practices from the perspective of student agency (Ngo 2021).

Drawing on such empirical data and on informal personal observations, we take the position that current EMI role transformation occurs as ‘a subjective and socially situated experience of change’ (Lipura 2021: 255) and a ‘constant becoming’ (Kang 2018: 807), ‘taking place and being generated and accumulated at multiple points and on numerous occasions where and when the personal, sociohistorical, the social and one’s reflections, experiences and relationship with others and with the world come together’ (Phan and Fry 2021: 202). This multidimensional understanding proposes professional role transformation as personal, ongoing and contextualised, in turn suggesting the need for a theoretical framework specific to English medium education in higher education contexts.

Theoretical premises: Dimensions of English medium education (EME)

We use the term English medium education (EME) to refer to the context in which academics transform their professional role. This is because the term ‘instruction’ in EMI excludes learners and their learning resources, and risks legitimising a teacher-centred approach. EME is also the term favoured by Dafouz and Smit (2016, 2020) in their ROAD-MAPPING framework, which distinguishes the dimensions of EME in higher education. The intersecting relationship of the six identified dimensions of EME is shown in Figure 1, with the acronym components given in capitals.

Figure 1.

The ROAD-MAPPING framework (Dafouz and Smit, 2016: 404).

As indicated in Figure 1, the dimensions in the ROAD-MAPPING framework are accessed through the central ‘discourses’ component. In this study, there are two key sources of such discourses: (a) EME scholarly research and theorisation, particularly as related to the Asian region, and (b) the interview data in which the research participants present their own constructions of their decision-making and experiences. Use of the ROAD-MAPPING framework is demonstrated in the next section through a brief description of the research context and subsequently as a tool for data analysis.

Because the focus of the study is on professional role transformation, the analysis is primarily grounded in the agent dimension of the framework and how the participating ELT/EMI lecturers connected with and were impacted by the other dimensions, and by the discourses that shaped those dimensions. From the perspective of agent, transformation of professional role is closely linked to studies of teacher identity and can therefore be expected to incorporate aspects such as a lecturer’s worldview, values, perceived efficacy, personal and social goals (Timperley and Alton-Lee 2008), as well as their emotions, satisfaction and openness to new teaching practices (Southerland et al., 2011), and their sense of self or conception of who they are (Capps et al., 2012). Taking these aspects into consideration sheds light on the forms that role transformation may take and how they may relate to educational quality.

Research design, context and methods

Phan and Fry (2021: 203) suggested ‘mobilities as a pivotal lens through which transformation is enabled and shows its diverse colours in ways that are often unexpected and easy to be overlooked’. While this lens has mostly been applied to student mobility internationally (e.g. Kang 2018; Lipura 2021), here it is applied to the staffing of internationalisation in Vietnamese higher education, thus highlighting the previously overlooked phenomenon of ELT/EMI professional role transformation. Contributing to a better understanding of such professional mobility is imperative for high quality EME to serve both the domestic demand and the emerging mobility of Asia-Pacific students.

The study aims to add to the body of empirical studies which provides close accounts of practices and processes in the current implementation of EME in Vietnamese universities and has a dual focus: the drivers underpinning ELT lecturers’ decision to undertake role transformation, and the ways in which ELT/EMI lecturers construct their experiences of role transformation. Given that the study is framed by the national context of EME in Vietnamese higher education, the following section outlines this context, using the ROAD-MAPPING dimensions, before introducing the participants and research methods.

Research context

In terms of internationalisation and glocalisation, the aim of EME across Vietnamese universities has been to ‘promote international exchange, increase revenue, raise the quality and prestige of educational programs, and provide a well-qualified, bilingual workforce for Vietnam’s rapidly-developing economy’ (Nguyen et al., 2017: 37). Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that the implementation of EME in a number of universities was initially as a remedy to financial pressures (Nguyen et al., 2016; Pham and Doan 2020), in other words as a strategic imperative. Central to the success of that imperative were the intended roles of English within the internationalisation initiatives, as a means both of attracting students from other countries and improving the English of domestic students. According to policy documents reviewed by Tri and Moskovsky (2019), it was assumed that students’ English language proficiency would automatically benefit, an assumption parallelled elsewhere internationally (Rose and Galloway 2019), but manifestly questionable (Curle et al., 2020: 44). Again as elsewhere, the emphasis on English and western-centric curriculum (Beck 2013; Majee and Ress 2020) has tended to sideline glocalisation. However, since the COVID-19 pandemic there are signs in Vietnamese universities of an emergent ‘place-based’ internationalisation (Phùng and Phan 2021: 252) which brings glocalisation more to the fore through ‘commitments related to local/community engagement, student wellbeing, and care’. Through policies, curriculum design guidelines and professional development, institutional management of language will need to play a large part in this transformation, replacing the inertia and neglect of recent years (Nguyen et al., 2017), where staff have been given incentives to engage in EME but not guided by clear policy nor provided with targeted professional development (Macaro et al., 2020; Pham and Doan 2020), and where students have often been insufficiently supported to develop their English proficiency for academic and specific disciplinary purposes (Arnbjörnsdóttir, 2017; Lin and Lei, 2021; Tran and Hoang, 2019). Across Vietnam, students as agents in EME bring with them diverse and often limited levels of both general and academic English proficiency, making it difficult for them to access the curriculum effectively and to learn through English (Phuong and Nguyen 2019a; Sahan et al., 2022).

As Aguilar-Pérez (2022: 171) points out, ‘the top-down implementation of EMI in Vietnamese higher education [is in] a context characterised by two key realities: students’ low proficiency and a teacher-centred pedagogical tradition’. Taking account of these realities, committed EMI practitioners tend to shift their practices and processes towards ‘a student-centred and interactive instructional pedagogy, which is conducive to the perception of EMI as an agent of modernising and democratising teaching and learning’ (Aguilar-Pérez 2022: 172). Nevertheless, practices and processes of EME implementation in Vietnam vary widely from one institution to another, often depending on their location and national ranking. In full EME programs, what is known in Vietnam as Advanced Programs (where overseas curricula are modified and delivered under an agreement between the local institution and foreign partner), students as agents of EME are usually supported through a preliminary intensive English course, either in General English or, more appropriately, in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and or English for Specific Purposes (ESP). However, this is not the case where individual EME courses are incorporated into largely Vietnamese medium of instruction (VMI) programs where students typically are only required to take one or two courses in General English. In full EME programs, and sometimes even in programs with only 30% EME courses, students may be offered credit-bearing courses in English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP), in what Macaro (2018) refers to as a ‘concurrent model’. Linking closely to students’ academic disciplines, ESAP has obvious educational and motivational strengths as compared with General English courses or non-specific EAP courses.

Practices and processes not only vary according to program, but also according to the academic discipline and its associated cultural features, employment pathways and professional literacies, as well as the extent to which it engages in ‘curriculum borrowing or foreign curriculum transfer’ (Tran and Marginson 2018: 7). In this regard, the current Vietnamese version of internationalisation ‘invokes an existing more or less neocolonial network of relations shaped by mobilising Western ideas and forms’ (Phùng and Phan 2021: 235). Individual faculty lecturers and leaders have a major role to play in the extent to which this happens, acting as key agents through the choices they make regarding curriculum, resources, pedagogy, language use and assessment practices. Nonetheless, it must be remembered that they do this in a low-cost, limited resource environment and must constantly take account of students’ varied and often inadequate academic English proficiency.

Research participants

The research participants in this study were five Vietnamese university lecturers who had shifted their main professional role from English language teaching (ELT) to English medium instruction (EMI). Maximum variation sampling of location (Creswell 2005) was used to select participants, resulting in five individuals at five different universities and in five different disciplines. All the universities were public institutions with a ranking in Vietnam as either high or medium. Four of the participants taught stand-alone EMI courses within Vietnamese medium instruction (VMI) programs, while one taught in an Advanced Program using a modified overseas curriculum. Participants made no mention of international students in their classes, suggesting that all were domestic Vietnamese students. Table 1 gives details of participants’ EMI employment.

Table 1.

Participants’ EMI employment.

Participants	Student year level	Program	University ranking in Vietnam
Electronics Lecturer	Year 3 (compulsory course)	Standard Program (VMI)	High ranking
Communication Lecturer	Year 3 (compulsory course)	Standard Program (VMI)	Medium ranking
Accountancy Lecturer	Year 2 (elective course)	Advanced Program (EMI)	High ranking
Geography Lecturer	Year 2–3 (elective course)	Standard Program (VMI)	High ranking
International Relations Lecturer	Year 1–2 (elective course)	Standard Program (VMI)	Medium ranking

The participants are named according to the discipline they worked in; however, the courses they taught varied in regard to the extent of specialised content and terminology required. For example, the Accountancy lecturer did not teach accountancy itself, but topics relevant to the use of accountancy in employment settings, whereas the Electronics Lecturer dealt with quite technical content. Four out of the five participants taught some topics related to culture, whether of English-speaking countries, or of organisations or businesses.

All five participants had volunteered to teach EMI courses, although they still also taught some English language courses at the time of the interviews (May–August 2022), and were still administered under their original English Language departments. Some background details about their qualifications and experience are provided in Table 2 with due care to maintain anonymity.

Table 2.

Participants’ qualifications and experience.

Participants	Highest ELT-related qualification	ELT experience	Highest EMI discipline qualification	EMI teaching experience
Electronics Lecturer	MA	08 years	Nil	04 years
Communication Lecturer	PhD	18 years	BA in Journalism	03 years
Accountancy Lecturer	MA	10 years	Nil	06 years
Geography Lecturer	BA	04 years	Nil	05 years
International Relations Lecturer	MA	08 years	Nil	03 years

Methods of data generation and analysis

Data for this study were derived from individual semi-structured interviews conducted online using the Zoom platform with visual connection, but recording only the audio component. The flexibly structured interview process allowed participants to expand on topics (Smith 1995), while use of Vietnamese allowed the interviewer and research participants to express their questions and responses comfortably and accurately. English was also used from time to time, especially when referring to terms or concepts that may not be translated into Vietnamese effectively, such as ‘scaffolding’ and ‘zone of proximal development’. The flexible use of both languages was a strength in the data generation as the participants said it made it easy for them to convey what they wanted to say. The audio recording was returned to each participant to check the clarity and accuracy of their responses, and all confirmed that they did not want to change any information.

When the interviews had been transcribed and all personal identifiable information removed, the text was entered into the Nvivo software tool. Thematic content analysis was then initiated in association with the research questions generating two broad themes: drivers of role transformation, and experiences of professional role transformation. After multiple readings, sub-themes were progressively identified, based on the number of mentions by three or more participants, and deriving the codes directly from the interview data. We also considered the interview data both as individual perspectives and holistically. The research team came together to discuss sub-themes which were then, in a theory-driven manner, categorised into analytical themes, defined as internally consistent units comprising semantically bounded components (Guest et al., 2012). This thematic process of data analysis is illustrated in Table 3. Subsequent analysis involved reviewing the interview discourse in light of the six dimensions of the ROAD-MAPPING framework (Dafouz and Smit 2016, 2020) as detailed earlier. The integrity of this process was ensured through maintaining correspondence between the coded extracts and the research participants’ perspectives and a careful record of each step in the data analysis.

Table 3.

Examples of thematic analysis from interview data.

Theme 1: Drivers of role transformation
Examples of data excerpts	Participants	Excerpts	Sub-theme	Analytical theme
Clear reduction in number of students in our department; less and less students enrol in English language studies and many would rather choose Chinese as an additional language.	All participants	15	Low number of students in ELT	Loss of disciplinary status
English is everywhere; everyone can speak English now, which gives little value to English language lecturers; technology will be everyone’s English teacher.	Communication, International Relations, Geography, and Accountancy lecturers	13	Increasing availability of English	–
English language graduates cannot do anything outside of their English proficiency; they are less competitive; English language is no longer a ‘fever’ in Vietnam.	All participants	20	Devaluing of English language studies	–
EMI will be a key foundation for students to get a good job after their graduation; EMI is an unstoppable phenomenon.	Communication, Geography, and Electronics lecturers	21	EMI as a trend	–

Findings: EMI role transformation

Initial data analysis identified particular themes relating to the two research questions: drivers of ELT/EMI role transformation and how participants constructed their actual experiences of that role transformation. The key themes are further analysed using the context-embedded ROAD-MAPPING dimensions of English medium education.

Drivers of role transformation

Drivers of participants’ EMI role transformations were both extrinsic and intrinsic, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4.

Drivers of ELT/EMI role transformation.

Extrinsic drivers	Intrinsic drivers
Loss of disciplinary status	Confidence in capacity to make the transformation
Potential advance in professional status	Aspiration for personal and professional growth
Financial incentive	—
Inclusion in the university’s internationalisation strategy	—

Extrinsic drivers

All five lecturers were deeply concerned that the roles of English in the Vietnamese academic world were diminishing and that English on its own was no longer considered a viable academic field. For example, the Geography Lecturer pointed out that:

There is a general belief that English language graduates cannot do anything outside of their English proficiency. They do not have other discipline knowledge and skills; and therefore, they are less competitive in the globalised labour market.

Participants provided clear evidence of this loss of disciplinary status, referring to reduction in student enrolments, the increasing acceptance of English in Vietnam, the development of technology undermining the importance of English language teachers, and the powerful push towards EMI. Such factors led participants to associate an EMI role with a potential for increased professional status. For example, the Geography Lecturer commented that ‘EMI lecturers are taken as more “senior” than English language lecturers … I guess EMI lecturers are valued better for they are assumed to be competent in both English and disciplinary knowledge’. This point of view led to hope for a potential advance in professional status following transfer.

Two additional drivers were related to the management of language dimension of EME. One was the financial incentive and encouragement offered by participants’ institutions. The other was the potential to become more involved in the institutional move to internationalisation, from which four of them appeared to feel marginalised. Their universities only wanted them to teach General English courses to students across the disciplines, while they themselves wanted to more actively contribute to the internationalisation process. The Communication Lecturer saw making such contribution as part of her professional duties, explaining that ‘lecturers have to innovate their pedagogies and throw themselves into new courses for the development of the institution-just part of our job-and I chose to teach EMI also for that reason’.

Intrinsic drivers

Participants’ confidence in their capacity to make the transformation was based initially on confidence in their English language competence. For instance, one participant stated: ‘I can deliver the lesson more smoothly with my English competence. That’s one of the main reasons why I am willing to challenge myself in a new field (Communication Lecturer). All interviewees also had confidence in their effective pedagogic practices. For example, the International Relations Lecturer commented:

Being a language teacher, I think I am good at a student-centred approach and making class activities interactive and fun. I can also support students with other skills such as reading articles, paraphrasing, and essay writing. Compared to other content colleagues, I think my English speaking skill may be easier for students to understand me in class.

The other participants similarly referred to both their English language skills and their skills in making the learning environment interesting and engaging, with plenty of interactive activities.

A further advantage of English proficiency in making the switch to EMI was confidence in being able to ‘access updated knowledge in the content field by reading research publications’ (International Relations Lecturer). As shown in Table 2, none but the Communication Lecturer had any discipline qualification related to their EMI courses, so capacity to gain knowledge through such reading in the content field was essential. For the Electronics Lecturer, knowing she had access to support networks (‘discipline lecturers, alumni students and friends working in this field’) for gaining content knowledge also gave her confidence in her capacity to transfer.

The second intrinsic driver for becoming EMI lecturers was the opportunity it offered for personal and professional growth within the move to internationalisation. Participants felt they were stagnating in ELT:

I was fed up with teaching General English courses. I could see I was not learning anything new from teaching English. I felt that both I and my English were deteriorating. I felt an urge to do something different. EMI was a great idea – it combines both of my wishes: doing something with English and learning new things. (International Relations Lecturer).

This aspiration towards personal growth was shared by the other four participants, as in ‘I can learn something new and therefore grow personally and professionally’ (Geography Lecturer). The next section indicates that this was indeed their experience, even though it was combined with difficulties.

Experiences of EMI role transformation

Within the ROAD-MAPPING framework of EME dimensions, four themes emerged as significant in terms of participants’ professional mobility and role transformation: shift in academic discipline content, shift in the roles of English, shift in sense of efficacy as agent, and lack of management support. The first three of these had a direct relationship to the fourth.

Shift in academic discipline content

As agents of EME the participants all considered content knowledge ‘the crucial’ or ‘decisive factor’ in the success of their new role, and the most challenging aspect. With the exception of the Accountancy Lecturer who appeared quite confident in the content knowledge for her topics, learning the disciplinary course content required for Years 1, 2 or 3 of an undergraduate program was a huge undertaking in the initial stages of the transition to EMI.

As I am teaching what I am not trained for, I must learn everything from scratch. In addition, no matter how much time I spend preparing for the lesson, it seems never enough. (Geography Lecturer)

Teaching a Year 3 compulsory course, the Electronics Lecturer had encountered several technical concepts she was unsure if she ‘understood accurately’ and thus found extremely difficult to explain to students. Similarly, the International Relations Lecturer, teaching a Year 1–2 elective, confessed that ‘there were things [content] that I was uncertain about but I still had to explain to my students. Needless to say how ineffective it was’. The Communication Lecturer, teaching a Year 3 compulsory course, was not only ‘not confident about the content’ that she was teaching, but, because of that, had difficulty finding relevant examples to illustrate the course topics. This of course impacted on her classroom practices and processes, as happened also for the Electronics Lecturer, who, when a group of students were presenting on a self-selected content topic, rapidly had to Google to look for information about it: ‘I was truly grateful to Google. After that I asked my students to hand in their presentation slides in advance’. In sum, there was ‘just too much to learn’ (International Relations Lecturer) and participants’ workload was consequently very high, just as it was for a native English speaker in a Japanese university teaching a course for which he did not have specialist content knowledge (Bradford 2016).

Not surprisingly, their lecturers’ lack of content knowledge did not go unremarked by students, the other key agents in the EME project. For example, the International Relations Lecturer suffered the humiliation of being asked by a student whether she understood the content topic, while the Accountancy Lecturer was told that lecturers should improve their content knowledge to avoid impeding students’ learning. This reflects a wider expectation among students that lecturers should be able to convey their disciplinary content effectively through English (Duong and Chua 2016; Phuong and Nguyen 2019). However, most of the time, these teachers were learning and teaching the subject content at the same time, keeping step with their students, or catching up with them when students used academic concepts they had never heard of before (Geography Lecturer). Because of this, they became somewhat reliant on students to support their own learning. For example, the International Relations Lecturer acknowledged herself as ‘a newbie… When it comes to content knowledge, I am no different from my students, we learn together’. In terms of classroom practices and processes, this created a space for co-learning, changing the traditional dynamics of Vietnamese higher education.

The objectives and content scope for each course provided the immediate frame for the disciplinary knowledge and skills that lecturers needed to acquire. As the Geography Lecturer explained,

Most of the time, I search for a syllabus of a similar course on the internet, from various universities across the world. I collect the reading list, and may make some adjustments to better suit the students’ ability.

Through this process, the lecturer realised that ‘the content in the EMI course was Westernised while the same version of the course in VMI (Vietnamese medium instruction) was still “traditional”’. This is in line with research indicating that internationalisation tends to foster Western-centric curriculum (Beck 2013; Majee and Ress 2020), requiring EMI lecturers to navigate their own and students’ intercultural learning.

All participants found the internet to be a key resource to self-learn the subject content, finding collegial networks, particularly content colleagues, similarly valuable: ‘new knowledge, new contacts, motivation to work’ (Accountancy Lecturer). These were clear gains from their ELT/EMI transfer, as well as broader ‘opportunities to learn and know about the world, therefore, to open up my thinking and world view’ (Geography Lecturer), which suggests both professional and personal growth.

Roles of English in the EMI experience

While initially all participants had confidence in their English language competence, the actual experience of EME soon made most of them doubt that confidence, realising that their English was not suited to effective content teaching. They tended to use conversational English in EMI lectures when they should have used specific discipline terminology and the language of abstract thinking.

I used to think that my English was good, at least good enough to express what I wanted to communicate. However, I now realize that I am truly not yet fully prepared for EMI. I usually find the lengthy explanations in each lesson too overwhelming. I am lost in communication sometimes. (International Relations Lecturer)

I was trained in ELT, but I still feel linguistically unprepared for EMI, especially when I have to explain terminology, and give examples (case studies) which require lots of technical vocabulary. (Geography Lecturer)

These participants reasoned that their ‘linguistic unpreparedness’ mainly stemmed from lack of disciplinary content knowledge. This is borne out by the fact that the Accountancy Lecturer, who was confident with her content knowledge, was the only one who appeared to be confident with her discipline English, only needing ‘to double check the pronunciation, meaning and use of difficult disciplinary terms’. In contrast, the other four participants found that almost all specialist disciplinary terminology constituted a challenge, one that was increased by needing to explain such terminology in a way comprehensible to students. As Bradford (2016) points out, many EMI lecturers have difficulty with the English required for classroom activity such as leading students to understanding of new concepts. However, for those trained in the discipline the issue is restricted to English language proficiency, whereas for these ELT/EMI lecturers it includes their lack of content competence.

Like many colleagues in diverse EMI settings, all participants found it necessary to use L1 in consideration of students’ limited English proficiency, and saw that practice as ‘normal and acceptable’, although it was thought that compared to discipline lecturers ELT/EMI lecturers ‘do communicate more in English during class (90%)’ (Accountancy Lecturer). In addition, translanguaging was not always easy for these lecturers who had read the content in English and now found it challenging to explain in Vietnamese:

I sometimes find myself lost in words. I just can’t find the vocab for what I need to explain. However, my Vietnamese is not any better when it comes to explaining terminology. I guess because I often read material in English, so the knowledge that I take in is in English. Consequently, I don’t know how to translate or talk about that knowledge in Vietnamese. (Geography Lecturer)

In fact, this difficulty reflects an important issue in terms of appropriate internationalisation and glocalisation of curriculum, since graduates will need to be able to effectively use the disciplinary discourses of both languages in their professional lives.

Sense of efficacy as agent of EMI

Due to their inadequate content knowledge and command of disciplinary language, four out of five of these ELT/EMI lecturers were uncertain of their efficacy in terms of ability to teach EMI courses. One saw herself as sometimes functioning merely as a translator in class (Electronics Lecturer) while another saw herself operating as ‘instructor, not lecturer’ (Accountancy Lecturer). More directly self-critical, the Geography Lecturer sometimes considered herself a ‘loser’, elaborating that:

Frankly, I can just learn something new the previous night, and the next morning I talk about it as if I have learned it long ago. So, I sometimes feel like such a hypocrite.

The reality of the classroom experience made these ELT/EMI lecturers question their ability and undermined their sense of efficacy. From having been highly experienced seniors in the field of ELT, they were floundering in their EMI teaching, making them question their own professional credibility.

Early in their transition to EMI lecturers, several participants found their previous ELT discipline was dominating their classroom practice, to the detriment of the discipline content. The Electronics Lecturer recalled that:

At some of my very first EMI classes, I thought I explained the grammar and vocab of English language too much so I thought that was an English lesson rather than an EMI lesson. After that, I changed my approach to guide my students to learn more about English grammar and vocab by themselves before the class. (Electronics Lecturer)

Along similar lines, the International Relations Lecturer recalled that in her initial year of EMI teaching she had ‘accidentally taught academic English writing’ rather than teaching students ‘about their content topic’. Nevertheless, these lecturers quickly adapted, noting that it was important to become ‘aware of differences between EFL and EMI, be willing to confront challenges’ (Communication Lecturer), to recognise that English is ‘only small part of what you will have to do’ (International Relations Lecturer), and that EMI involves not only language but ‘pedagogies, professional development, materials, and even policies’ (International Relations Lecturer). These perspectives support Susser’s (2017) emphasis on the need for a fundamental shift of mindset, ‘what a teacher believes that he/she is doing in a course’ (p. 201), in other words moving away from language teaching to content teaching and treating students as language users rather than as language learners. This shift in mindset occurred for all participants and was central in transforming their practices and processes.

Participants emphasised the importance of interactive activities and using pedagogical techniques ‘flexibly to keep the students interested in the content and provoke their critical insight’ (Communication Lecturer). At the same time, they habitually used their English language expertise to build students’ academic English proficiency within the coursework. Specific mentions of pedagogy included ‘raising students’ awareness of language aspects in terms of pronunciation, grammar, vocab, language in use’ (Electronics Lecturer), ‘knowing how to simplify terminology without having to use the mother tongue’ (Communication Lecturer), and ‘assisting students to build up or rephrase their answers or arguments to make them more comprehensible’ (Accountancy Lecturer). Such pedagogies all align with existing research into successful EMI pedagogies (Dearden 2014, 2018; Nguyen et al., 2016; Nguyen 2017; Sahan et al., 2022), which suggests that participants’ initial pedagogical confidence was well justified. Indeed, several indicated that their pedagogical skills were openly validated by content lecturers: ‘When my colleagues asked me for advice and experience in EMI teaching, I felt valued and thought I really had chosen the right path to continue my teaching profession’ (Electronics Lecturer). Some also found that their professional status had increased, with the Electronics Lecturer having the ‘feeling of being better valued by students and other colleagues’ as an EMI content lecturer.

Nevertheless, while the EMI experience appears to have become less stressful over time, none of these research participants have ever yet considered themselves fully EMI practitioners – in other words, the role transformation is not complete in their eyes. This is not because of the fact that they all still teach in the ELT field as well as EMI, but because of their belief that they have not been ‘good enough’ even after several years. For them, an effective EMI practitioner is one who is highly competent in both English language and content knowledge as well as effective in teaching method, and this ideal prototype of an EMI lecturer is what they aim to become. Whilst sometimes feeling overwhelmed by the task, none of them regret having made the transfer: ‘All in all, it’s worth it’ (Geography Lecturer); ‘It’s time consuming, tiring but also rewarding. You get opportunities to learn and grow yourself’ (International Relations Lecturer); ‘I see a new me’ (Communication Lecturer).

Lack of management support for role transformation

In terms of institutional support for participants’ role transformation, it is noteworthy that none of the employing universities had developed a specific EME-related policy to guide pedagogy. This reflects a more general lack of appropriate policy and explicit guidelines for EMI implementation in Vietnamese higher education (Tri and Moskovsky 2019; Pham and Doan 2020). Providing direct evidence of the institutional conflation of EMI and ELT reported in the literature (Dearden 2018; Bradford 2019), the Geography Lecturer commented: ‘To be honest, I don’t think our university is aware of the differences between EMI and ELT’.

Related to this, the absence of a formal EME community in their institutions provoked feelings of isolation and anxiety in three of the lecturers, with the Communication Lecturer suggesting that institutions should formalise networks for EMI professional development rather than relying on staff independently developing personal relationships to connect with other EMI colleagues. On a similar note, the International Relations Lecturer suggested a need to ‘start raising voices to the managers so they can understand how challenging EMI teaching is’, in other words challenging for all lecturers involved.

We want to have more EMI professional support. EMI lecturers are struggling to find their own paths without having sufficient support from our institution and professional associations. (Communication Lecturer)

The only professional development offerings made available were ad hoc and one-off workshops or seminars often provided by a third party such as the British Council or the United States Embassy, which, according to the International Relations Lecturer, were either insufficient or decontextualised, if not ‘westernised’. This reflects a wider situation of insufficient and unsuitable professional development internationally (Lauridsen 2017; Macaro et al., 2018). However, Burns (2022) insists that if students ‘are to truly thrive in the EMI classroom, a major priority must be for Vietnamese universities to offer substantial and targeted professional development to their teachers’.

Discussion: What kind of role transformation?

This study first investigated the decision by five English language lecturers to attempt a new career path as EMI content lecturers, each in a different university and a different discipline. The extrinsic drivers of these lecturers’ decision to transition into EMI were fourfold: loss of disciplinary status, potential advance in professional status, financial incentive, and inclusion in the university’s internationalisation strategy. All four drivers are shaped by three overarching factors: the strategic imperative to internationalisation, the flawed equation of English medium education with internationalisation, and the misconception that students’ English language will automatically be improved through EMI without additional provisions to support students’ required academic English development. These contextual factors also indirectly shaped participants’ aspiration for personal and professional growth, and perhaps contributed to the other intrinsic driver they identified, namely, confidence in their capacity to make the intended role transformation.

The lived realities of participants’ professional ELT/EMI role transformation, shaped both by the broad national context of Vietnamese higher education and the more immediate institutional context of the new discipline, involved more discrepancies than parallels between participants’ intrinsic drivers or expectations and their actual experience of role transformation. However, it is important to view the discrepancies in the light of participants’ overriding commitment to continuing in the EMI role and the benefits they affirmed in terms of heightened prestige and status, interesting and exciting professional growth, and life-long learning.

According to the interviews, participants’ initial confidence in their capacity to transform did not match the reality of their experience. First, none of them had anticipated the extent of the content learning required in order to teach their EMI courses. Second, they had been overconfident regarding their readiness in terms of English language proficiency, since all but one struggled with the disciplinary language of their new courses, and with the task of explaining academic concepts. This led to a third issue – uncertainty as to their efficacy as EMI lecturers in terms of providing educational quality for students. Related to that, they had not anticipated the amount of help they would need to manage the role transformation, and the absence of professional development support from their universities.

These gaps between expectations and realities suggest transformations ‘that come from struggles, adaptations and “discomforts” experienced’ (Leve 2021: 321). As we have seen, participants struggled with lack of content knowledge, linguistic unpreparedness, lack of self-efficacy, and lack of management support. Mobilising themselves out of their professional comfort zone (Boler and Zembylas 2003) of ELT into the new arena of EMI, they experienced frequent ‘discomforts’ in trying to explain content, as well as embarrassment when students were critical of their performance. In response to their struggles and discomforts, the key adaptation all of them made was to invest a great amount of time and effort into building capacity in regard to disciplinary knowledge. They worked many hours in preparation for classroom teaching, choosing learning materials that were not too challenging for students or for themselves, and constructing an interactive classroom culture of co-learning with their students. Collaborative relationships with colleagues and ready access to the internet assisted them in these transformative efforts, as did their fluency in conversational English and their ELT pedagogical skills. Unlike many content lecturers, who do not accept the role of language teachers within their disciplinary teaching (Airey 2012; Vu and Burns, 2014; Pham and Doan 2020) and are unwilling to comment on language features (Horie 2018), these ELT/EMI lecturers showed themselves well able to do so, and received acknowledgement from colleagues in confirmation. This provides endorsement for the position put forward by Susser (2017) that ELT expertise does offer some compensation for lack of disciplinary expertise.

Nevertheless, while the participants received satisfying responses from disciplinary colleagues in regard to their EMI skills, they frequently experienced feelings of incompetence, self-doubt and lack of professionalism. Navigating through such feelings made their role transformation emotionally intense, as they felt they were not providing adequate educational quality for their students. This unwelcome realisation they internalised as a personal matter, whereas we argue that it should be seen as an effect of the combination of strategic imperative and financial inadequacies that have led universities to incorrectly believe that EMI can itself achieve the English language development necessary for students’ academic success. With support to develop course content knowledge prior to the time of transition, and with ongoing EMI professional development, this flawed transformation process could be considerably improved.

Conclusion

This small empirical study makes a start on providing a research-informed position on professional ELT/EMI role transformation as an emerging phenomenon of internationalisation in Vietnamese higher education. While the sample is limited to five, these ELT/EMI lecturers were working in different high and medium ranking universities in Vietnamese metropolitan centres, and also in different disciplines. Four participants taught EMI courses within standard Vietnamese medium programs, while one taught in a predominantly EMI program. This is quite representative of current EMI offerings across Vietnamese higher education, although it would be valuable to look more closely into whether or not more ELT/EMI transfers occur in standard VMI programs than in predominantly EMI programs, and what differences are experienced, if any.

The case study approach and the multidimensional ROAD-MAPPING analysis used in this study have offered some initial insights into the contextual factors involved, bridging the disconnect between the global move to internationalisation and its local manifestations (Knight and De Wit 2018), offering a new perspective on mobilities in higher education in the context of internationalisation, and laying some groundwork for further research into ELT/EMI role transformations.

Together the five participants provided valuable and rich insights that contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex process of professional ELT/EMI role transformation in the current context of internationalisation in Vietnamese higher education. First is that by engaging in professional mobility and taking themselves out of their ELT comfort zone into the new arena of EMI, lecturers are likely to find themselves in considerable discomfort, struggling to cope with their insufficient content knowledge and linguistic unpreparedness for disciplinary teaching, experiencing associated feelings of professional uncertainty and self-doubt, and working extremely hard to adapt to the situation and build professional capacity in the new role. Over time, it is likely this would lead to considerable professional growth, and quite possibly to educational quality for students.

Nevertheless, we argue that, rather than encouraging ELT lecturers to transform themselves into EMI lecturers, institutions wishing to excel in the internationalisation process would do better to capitalise on the already existing strengths of ELT lecturers (Dearden 2018). Universities can make excellent use of ELT expertise by establishing staffing positions and accredited curriculum pathways that develop the English language needed for students’ academic purposes. This would directly address insufficiencies in student support related to the flawed assumption that EMI leads automatically to English language improvement. We advocate a concurrent support model with credit-bearing English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) courses as an integral part of the overall curriculum. Such ESAP courses would be taught by English language lecturers who have either co-taught in the discipline or studied it sufficiently to be able to integrate content within their language teaching, with the aim of developing English for academic success. ‘Recognising the need for extensive EAP training and providing it’ to students has been identified (Linn et al., 2021) as one of the key conditions for English medium education to succeed. This would be supported by such an ELT/ESAP role transformation properly resourced with appropriate training, access to an EME community; and dedicated time for collaboration between content lecturers and ESAP lecturers.

An innovation of this kind would require on the part of Vietnamese universities a profound perspective transformation (Mezirow 1981), rejecting any suggestion that EMI might be sufficient on its own to develop students’ academic English proficiency to the degree required for effective content learning, and recognising the multiple ways in which English language lecturers can serve the successful implementation of English medium education and internationalisation more broadly. We argue that such a perspective transformation at the level of university management is essential if educational quality is to be achieved within the internationalisation project.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Min Pham

Viet-Nga Nguyen

Hoa Hoang

Thi-Thien-Huong Nguyen

Duc-Hanh Le

Jenny Barnett

Author biographies

Min Pham is a lecturer in language education at the University of South Australia (UniSA) and UniSA Centre for Research in Educational and Social Inclusion. He has completed graduate studies in English language teaching, Education, and holds a PhD in International Relations. Min Pham has extensive experience in teaching English as an additional language/dialect and English medium instruction in various higher education institutions. His main research interests concern English as medium of instruction, content and language integrated learning, and enabling pedagogies. He is also experienced in collaborating with international colleagues on research projects relating to EMI and the use of human technology in English language teaching. Email: Min.pham@unisa.edu.au; ORCID: 0000-0001-9210-9334.

Viet-Nga Nguyen is the Dean at Faculty of Foreign Languages, Academy of Journalism and Communication, Vietnam. She has been working as a university lecturer since 2004 and started her career path as an EMI lecturer in 2018. She holds one excellent B.A. degree of English Teaching and another B.A. degree of Journalism. She graduated from the University of Languages and International Studies with a master degree and a doctoral degree in English Linguistics. Her research interests include Teaching English as a Foreign Language, English for Specific Purpose, English as a Medium of Instruction, Computer-assisted Language Learning. She has authored 12 publications including peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings. Email: nguyenthivietnga@ajc.edu.vn; ORCID: 0000-0003-0096-0493.

Hoa Hoang is a lecturer at the University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. Together with EFL programs, she has been delivering several EMI courses at her university. At the same time, she actively participates in professional development programs to English teachers at all levels throughout Vietnam. Her research interests are English language teacher education, teacher identity, and social justice in education. Email: thanhhoahoang@ulis.vnu.edu.vn. ORCID: 0000-0002-1626–927X.

Thi-Thien-Huong Nguyen is a lecturer at Hanoi National Economics University in Vietnam. She has been working in the EFL setting for 10 years and in the EMI setting for 6 years. She conducts research on teaching English as a foreign language, technology-enhanced learning, blended learning and English as a medium of instruction. Currently, the focus of her research is the implementation of EMI in higher education with a special interest in EMI teacher competencies and professional development. Email: Thienhuong@neu.edu.vn; ORCID: 0000-0002-7028-0082.

Duc-Hanh Le has been working as an English language lecturer at the School of Languages and Tourism, Hanoi University of Industry, Vietnam since 2007. She currently works as a team leader of designing EAP blended materials. She also takes responsibilities of designing, teaching EOP blended program for technical students. Her research interests include EMI, ICTs in education and professional development. Email: leduchanh_knn@haui.edu.vn; ORCID; 0000-0003-2139-5729.

Jenny Barnett worked for 25 years in the School of Education, University of South Australia, Adelaide. She taught undergraduate and postgraduate courses in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), and supervised doctoral students addressing issues in multilingual learning environments. Until recently, her research and consultancy work focused on the learning and teaching of students in Australia for whom English is an additional language or dialect (EALD), with an emphasis on their learning across the curriculum. This focus has subsequently shifted to English medium education in the Asia-Pacific region more broadly, and particularly in higher education. Email: Jenny.barnett@unisa.edu.au; ORCID: 0009-0001-5019-9914.

References

Aguilar-Pérez

(2022) Commentary: EMI in Vietnamese universities-the need for a glocal educational approach. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 171–176.

Airey

(2012) I don’t teach language”: the linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review 25(1): 64–79.

Arnbjörnsdóttir

(2017) Preparing EFL 1 students for university EMI 2 programs: the hidden challenge 3. Oslo Studies in Language 9(3): 77–91.

Arnó-Macià

Aguilar-Pérez

(2020) Language issues in EMI: when lecturers and students can choose the language of instruction. In: Block

Khan

(eds). The Secret Life Of Englishmedium Instruction in Higher Education: Examining Microphenomena in Context. New York: Routledge, 19–43.

Barnett

Pham

(2022) Perspectives on English medium instruction practices in Vietnamese universities: introduction. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 1–14.

Beck

(2013) Making sense of internationalization: a critical analysis. In: Hébert

Abdi

(eds). Critical Perspectives on International Education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 43–59.

Beelen

Jones

Curaj

, et al. (2015) Redefining internationalization at home. In: Curaj

Matei

Pricopie

, et al. (eds) The European Higher Education Area: Between critical reflections and future policies. Cham: Springer, 59–72.

Bennett

(2014) Intercultural competence: vital perspectives for diversity and inclusion. In: Ferdman

Deane

(eds). Diversity at Work: The Practice Of Inclusion. San Francisco: Wiley/Jossey-Bass, 155–176.

Block

Moncada-Comas

(2019) English-medium instruction in higher education and the ELT gaze: STEM lecturers’ self-positioning as NOT English language teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 25(2): 401–417. DOI: 10.1080/13670050.2019.1689917

10.

Boler

Zembylas

(2003) Pedagogies of difference rethinking education for social change. In: Trifonas

(ed), Discomforting Truths: The Emotional Terrain of Understanding Difference. Falmer: Routledge, pp. 110–136.

11.

Bowles

Murphy

(2020) EMI and the Internationalization of Universities: An Overview. In: Bowles H and Murphy (eds). English-Medium Instruction and the Internationalization of Universities: International and Development Education. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–26.

12.

Bradford

(2016) Toward a typology of implementation challenges facing English-medium instruction in higher education: evidence from Japan. Journal of Studies in International Education 20(4): 339–356. DOI: 10.1177/1028315316647165

13.

Bradford

(2019) It’s not all about English! The problem of language foregrounding in English-medium programmes in Japan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 40(8): 707–720.

14.

Bukhari

(2021) Challenges of the sudden switch from mother tongue instruction to English as a medium of instruction. International Journal of English Linguistics 12(1): 76–85.

15.

Burns

(2022) Commentary: EMI in Vietnamese universities-the value of a socio-ecological perspective. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 227–232.

16.

Capps

Crawford

Constas

(2012) A review of empirical literature on inquiry professional development: alignment with best practices and a critique of the findings. Journal of Science Teacher Education 23(3): 291–318.

17.

Chapple

(2015) Teaching in English is not necessarily the teaching of English. International Education Studies 8(3): 1–13.

18.

Chou

(2018) Speaking anxiety and strategy use for learning English as a foreign language in full and partial English-medium instruction contexts. TESOL Quarterly 52(3): 611–633.

19.

Coelen

(2016) A Learner-Centred Internationalisation of Higher Education. In: Jones

Elspeth

, et al. (ed) Global and Local Internationalization. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 35–42.

20.

Creswell

(2005) Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Research. 2nd edition. Boston: Merrill/Pearson Education.

21.

Curle

Ratkaine Jablonkai

Mittelmeier

, et al. (2020) English in higher education-English medium. Part 1: literature review. In: Galloway

(ed). English in Higher Education-English Medium. London: British Council, 10–73.

22.

Dafouz

Smit

(2016) Towards a dynamic conceptual framework for English-medium education in multilingual university settings. Applied Linguistics 37(3): 397–415.

23.

Dafouz

Smit

(2020) ROAD-MAPPING English Medium Education in the Internationalised University. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

24.

Dearden

(2014) English as Medium of Instruction: A Growing Global Phenomenon. London: British Council.

25.

Dearden

(2018) The changing roles of EMI academics and English language specialists. In: Kırkgöz

Dikilitaş

(eds), Key issues in English for Specific Purposes in Higher Education. Springer International Publishing, pp. 323–338.

26.

de Wit

Hunter

Howard

, et al. (2015) Internationalisation of higher education. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/540370/IPOL_STU(2015)540370_EN.pdf (accessed 10 August 2022).

27.

Duong

Chua

CSK

(2016) English as a symbol of internationalization in higher education: a case study of Vietnam. Higher Education Research and Development 35(4): 669–683.

28.

Galloway

Rose

(2021) English medium instruction and the English language practitioner. ELT Journal 75(1): 33–41.

29.

Gao

(2015) Toward a set of internationally applicable indicators for measuring university internationalization performance. Journal of Studies in International Education 19(2): 182–200.

30.

García

Wei

(2014) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

31.

Guest

MacQueen

Namey

(2012) Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

32.

Gundling

Caldwell

Cvitkovich

(2015) Leading Across New Borders: How to Succeed as the Center Shifts. New Jersey: Wiley.

33.

Fry

(2021) Editorial: International educational mobilities and new developments in Asia’s higher education: putting transformations at the centre of inquiries. Research in Comparative and International Education 16(3): 199–208.

34.

Hauptman Komotar

(2019) Global university rankings and their impact on the internationalisation of higher education. European Journal of Education 54(2): 299–310. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12332

35.

Hoang

Tran

Pham

(2018) Vietnamese government policies and practices in internationalisation of higher education. In: Tran

Marginson

(eds). Internationalisation in Vietnamese Higher Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 19–42. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78492-2_2

36.

Hoang

Tran

(2022) English-medium classroom practices in action: facilitating student learning and engagement in a Vietnamese university. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 89–106.

37.

Horie

(2018) Faculty training for non-native speakers of English at Japanese universities: effective English-medium teaching for a culturally diversified student population. In: Bradford

Brown

(eds). English-Medium Instruction in Japanese Higher Education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 207–221.

38.

Duan

(2019) Questioning and responding in the classroom: a cross-disciplinary study of the effects of instructional mediums in academic subjects at a Chinese university. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22: 303–321. DOI: 10.1080/13670050.2018.1493084

39.

Hudzik

(2015) Comprehensive Internationalization: Institutional Pathways to Success. New York: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315771885

40.

Ismailov

(2022) Content lecturer and quality interaction in EMI university classrooms: a longitudinal case study. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 1–22. doi: 10.1080/01434632.2022.2092120.

41.

Jon

Fry

(2021) Study abroad and engagement at the local and global levels: the stories behind the numbers. Journal of Studies in International Education 25(4): 407–424. DOI: 10.1177/10283153211016276

42.

Kang

(2018) A pathway to ‘constant becoming’: time, temporalities and the construction of self among South Korean educational migrants in Singapore. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 39(5): 798–813.

43.

Knight

de Wit

(2018) Internationalization of higher education: past and future. International Higher Education (95): 2–4. doi: 10.6017/ihe.2018.95.10715.

44.

Lauridsen

(2017) Professional development of international classroom lecturers. In: Valcke

Wilkinson

(eds). Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education: Perspectives on Professional Practice. Berlin: Peter Lang GmbH. Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, 25–37.

45.

Leask

(2008) Internationalisation, globalisation and curriculum innovation. In: Hellstén

Reid

(eds). Researching International Pedagogies. The Netherland: Springer, 9–26.

46.

Leask

(2015) Internationalising the Curriculum. New York: Routledge.

47.

Leve

(2021) Contemplative reflections on international education: transformative possibilities. Research in Comparative and International Education 16(3): 318–324.

48.

Lin

Lei

(2021) English-medium instruction and content learning in higher education: effects of medium of instruction, English proficiency, and academic ability. SAGE Open 11(4): 215824402110615.

49.

Linn

Shrestha

Bezborodova

, et al. (2021) Current Practice in English-medium Education in Higher Education: Case Studies from Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Bangladesh and Nepal. London: British Council.

50.

Lipura

SJD

(2021) Deconstructing the periphery: Korean degree-seeking students’ everyday transformations in and through India. Research in Comparative and International Education 16(3): 252–275.

51.

Macaro

(2012) The medium of instruction and classroom interaction: evidence from Hong Kong secondary schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 15(1): 29–52.

52.

Macaro

Akincioglu

Han

(2020) English medium instruction in higher education: teacher perspectives on professional development and certification. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 30(1): 144–157.

53.

Macaro

Curle

Pun

, et al. (2018) A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching 51(1): 36–76.

54.

Majee

Ress

(2020) Colonial legacies in internationalisation of higher education: racial justice and geopolitical redress in South Africa and Brazil. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 50(4): 463–481.

55.

Mezirow

(1981) A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education 32(3): 3–24.

56.

Mezirow

(1995) Transformation theory of adult learning. In: Welton

(ed). In Defense of the Lifeworld. New York: State University of New York Press, 39–70.

57.

Moncada-Comas

Block

(2021) CLIL-ised EMI in practice: issues arising. The Language Learning Journal 49(6): 686–698. doi: 10.1080/09571736.2019.1660704

58.

Ngo

PLH

(2021) Translanguaging practices in EMI settings from the perspective of student agency: an example from Vietnamese higher education. In: Tsou

Baker

(eds). English-Medium Instruction Translanguaging Practices in Asia: Theories, Frameworks and Implementation in Higher Education. Singapore: Springer, 121–141.

59.

Nguyen

H-A

Chik

Woodcock

(2022) Translanguaging in English-medium instruction: teacher practices at a Vietnamese university. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds), English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, pp. 137–152.

60.

Nguyen

Hamid

Moni

(2016) English-medium instruction and self-governance in higher education: the journey of a Vietnamese university through the institutional autonomy regime. Higher Education 72(5): 669–683.

61.

Nguyen

Walkinshaw

Hiep

(2017) EMI Programs in a Vietnamese University: Language, Pedagogy and Policy Issues. In: Fenton-Smith

Humphreys

Walkinshaw

(eds). English Medium Instruction in Higher Education in Asia-Pacific: From Policy to Pedagogy. Cham: Springer, 37–52.

62.

Paige

Fry

Stallman

, et al. (2009) Study abroad for global engagement: the long-term impact of mobility experiences. Intercultural Education 20(4): S29–S44.

63.

Parr

(2014) English Language Use ‘Most Significant Internationalisation Trend for HE’. The Times Higher Education (30 April 2014). Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/english-language-use-most-significant-internationalisation-trend-for-he/2013009.article

64.

Pecorari

Malmström

(2018) At the crossroads of TESOL and English medium instruction. TESOL Quarterly 52(3): 497–515.

65.

Pham

(2022) Road-mapping English-medium instruction in Vietnamese universities: the divergence of agency. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 15–39.

66.

Pham

Barnett

(2022) From English medium instruction to English medium education: a forward direction for Vietnamese universities. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 233–248.

67.

Pham

Doan

(2020) English as a medium of instruction (EMI) in Vietnamese universities: policies of encouragement and pedagogies of assumption. In: Phan

Doan

(eds). Higher Education in Market-Oriented Socialist Vietnam: New Players, Discourses, And Practices. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 261–282.

68.

Pham

TTL

Nguyen

Hoang

(2022) Mediating job satisfaction among English medium instruction teachers in Vietnamese universities. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds), English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, pp. 61–80.

69.

Phùng

Phan

(2021) Higher education in Vietnam and a new vision for internationalization at home post COVID-19. In: Gillen

Kelley

Phan

(eds). Vietnam at the Vanguard: New Perspectives Across Time, Space, and Community. Singapore: Springer Nature, 235–256.

70.

Phuong

Nguyen

(2019) Students’ perceptions towards the benefits and drawbacks of EMI classes. English Language Teaching 12(5): 88–100.

71.

Rose

Galloway

(2019) Global Englishes and English medium instruction. In: Rose

Galloway

(eds). Global Englishes for Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 193–222.

72.

Rowland

Murray

(2020) Finding their feet: lecturers’ and students’ perceptions of English as a medium of instruction in a recently-implemented Master's programme at an Italian university. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 41(3): 232–245.

73.

Sahan

Galloway

McKinley

(2022) ‘English-only’ English medium instruction: mixed views in Thai and Vietnamese higher education. Language Teaching Research 00(0): 1–20. doi: 10.1177/13621688211072632. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211072632.

74.

Smith

(1995) Semi structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In: Smith

Harre

Van Langenhove

(eds). Rethinking Methods in Psychology. London: Sage Publications, 9–26.

75.

Southerland

Sowell

Enderle

(2011) Science teachers' pedagogical discontentment: its sources and potential for change. Journal of Science Teacher Education 22(5): 437–457.

76.

Susser

(2017) Rating English-medium instruction degree programs at Japanese universities. In: Clements P

Krause

Brown

(eds). Transformation in Language Education. Nagoya: JALT.

77.

Tajik

Abdul Manan

Arvatu

A-C

, et al. (2022) Growing pains: graduate students grappling with English medium instruction in Kazakhstan. Asian Englishes 1–19. DOI: 10.1080/13488678.2022.2119970

78.

Terblanche

NHD

(2022) Transformative transition coaching: a framework to facilitate transformative learning during career transitions. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 33(2): 269–296.

79.

Thanh

Barnett

(2022) Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) perspectives in a Vietnamese undergraduate electrical engineering course. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd, 171–176.

80.

Timperley

Alton-Lee

(2008) Reframing teacher professional learning: an alternative policy approach to strengthening valued outcomes for diverse learners. Review of Research in Education 32(1): 328–369.

81.

Tran

QTT

Hoang

(2019) An investigation into English preparatory programs for EMI learning in higher education institutes in Vietnam. Can Tho University Journal of Science 11(2): 51–60.

82.

Tran

Marginson

(2018) Internationalisation of Vietnamese higher education: an overview. In: Tran

Marginson

(eds). Internationalisation in Vietnamese Higher Education. Cham: Springer, 1–16.

83.

Tran

Nguyen

(2018) Internationalisation of Higher Education in Vietnam Through English Medium Instruction (EMI): Practices, Tensions and Implications for Local Language Policies. In: Liyanage

Indika

(ed). Multilingual Education Yearbook 2018: Internationalization, Stakeholders & Multilingual Education Contexts. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, 91–106.

84.

Tri

Moskovsky

(2019) English-medium instruction in Vietnamese higher education: a road-mapping perspective. Issues in Educational Research 29(4): 1319–1336.

85.

Veitch

(2021) English in Higher Education-English Medium: Part 2: A British Council Perspective. London: British Council.

86.

TKL

(2022) English as medium of instruction in Vietnamese teacher education: students’ learning experiences. In: Pham

Barnett

(eds). English Medium Instruction Practices in Vietnamese Universities: Institutional, Practitioner and Student Perspectives. Singapore: Springer Nature, 195–210.

87.

Burns

(2014) English as a medium of instruction: challenges for Vietnamese tertiary lecturers. Journal of Asia TEFL 11: 1–33.

88.

Yershova

DeJaeghere

Mestenhauser

(2000) Thinking not a usual: adding the intercultural perspective. Journal of Studies in International Education 4(1): 39–78. doi: 10.1177/102831530000400105.

89.

Yuan

(2020) Promoting EMI teacher development in EFL higher education contexts: a teacher educator’s reflections. RELC Journal 51(2): 309–317.

Internationalisation and English medium education in Vietnamese universities: Professional role transformation among English language lecturers

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction: Internationalisation and English medium instruction

Literature review: EMI role transformations within higher education

Theoretical premises: Dimensions of English medium education (EME)

Research design, context and methods

Research context

Research participants

Methods of data generation and analysis

Findings: EMI role transformation

Drivers of role transformation

Extrinsic drivers

Intrinsic drivers

Experiences of EMI role transformation

Shift in academic discipline content

Roles of English in the EMI experience

Sense of efficacy as agent of EMI

Lack of management support for role transformation

Discussion: What kind of role transformation?

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Author biographies

References