English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI)

Definition & Historical Overview of EMI

Postgraduate TESOL • Moodle Reading Page • ~10–12 minutes

English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) refers to the use of English to teach academic subjects in settings where the majority language is not English. In EMI classes, English functions primarily as the language of content delivery rather than the content itself. Lecturers focus on disciplinary knowledge—engineering, business, medicine—while also supporting students’ access to that knowledge through comprehensible English.

Content-first Academic interaction Internationalization Higher education focus

What EMI is — and what it is not

EMI is often compared with related approaches. Understanding these distinctions clarifies goals and assessment:

EMI

Teaches discipline content using English.
Language objectives are supportive (e.g., terminology, discourse moves).
Assessment targets content mastery (with language-sensitive design).

CLIL / CBI

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and Content-Based Instruction (CBI) explicitly pursue dual aims: content learning and systematic language development. EMI overlaps with CLIL/CBI but typically places a stronger emphasis on disciplinary outcomes within tertiary education.

Key takeaway: EMI prioritizes access to knowledge through English. Language support is essential, but it serves the disciplinary goals of the course rather than replacing them.

A Brief History of EMI

The story of EMI intertwines with the broader history of language-of-instruction choices in universities. For centuries, institutions have selected languages to meet scholarly, political, or economic needs. According to Sheng (2023), while English dominates today, earlier eras favored Latin, French, German, or national languages. The current prominence of English reflects globalization, academic mobility, and the circulation of research.

Medieval–Early Modern
European universities relied heavily on Latin as a transnational scholarly medium. As nation-states strengthened, universities gradually shifted toward vernacular languages to expand access and align with national agendas.
19th–Early 20th Century
Scientific leadership rotated among languages—German in many sciences, French in diplomacy and philosophy, English gaining ground in commerce and technology. Language-of-instruction often mirrored centers of research prestige.
Post–World War II
English expanded rapidly in global publishing, science funding, and professional networks. International students increasingly viewed English as a gateway to research collaboration and mobility, seeding early EMI practices in non-English speaking contexts.
1990s–2000s
The push for internationalization of higher education, the Bologna process in Europe, and student exchange schemes accelerated the creation of full degree programs delivered in English outside Anglophone countries. Scandinavian and Dutch universities became prominent early adopters, followed by continental Europe and parts of the Middle East.
2010s–Present
EMI spread across Asia, Latin America, and Africa as institutions aimed to attract international students, publish in English, and plug into global knowledge networks. Countries such as China, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Thailand expanded English-medium programs—especially in STEM, business, and health sciences—while developing local frameworks for quality assurance and language support.

Trend: Growth in EMI aligns with universities’ aims to raise research visibility, increase graduate employability, and foster international partnerships. The shift is not uniform: disciplines, regions, and institutions adopt EMI at different speeds.

Why EMI Expanded — and Why It’s Debated

Drivers of EMI

Global research ecosystems: English dominates major journals and conferences.
Student mobility & recruitment: English-medium degrees attract international cohorts.
Employability: Graduates gain disciplinary knowledge and global communication skills.
Institutional branding: EMI signals international outlook and partnerships.

Ongoing Debates

Equity & access: English proficiency gaps can disadvantage some students.
Quality of learning: Cognitive load may increase when processing complex content in L2.
Language ecology: EMI may sideline local academic registers and knowledge traditions.
Assessment fairness: How to judge content knowledge without penalizing language variation?

Evidence-based consensus: EMI works best when paired with deliberate language support (e.g., glossaries, model texts, discourse scaffolds), clear communication strategies (signposting, visuals), and language-aware assessment.

Core Characteristics of EMI Courses

Most successful EMI courses share design patterns that reduce cognitive load and increase participation:

Transparent learning outcomes and discipline-specific language targets.
Scaffolding: visuals, guided notes, staged tasks, pre-teaching key terms.
Interactive discourse: checks for understanding, sequenced questions, think-pair-share.
Multimodal resources: slides, diagrams, concept maps, short screencasts.
Language-sensitive assessment with explicit rubrics and exemplars.

Quick Toolkit

• Signpost lecture structure (First, Next, Therefore)
• Provide a glossary of key terms and phrase frames
• Use dual-coding: short text + schematic visuals
• Invite recaps: “In your own words…”
• Offer sentence starters for seminar discussion

Impact on Stakeholders

Lecturers

Lecturers adjust teacher talk, adopt clear slides and visuals, and plan explicit discourse moves—signposting, strategic repetition, and comprehension checks. Professional development often targets intelligibility, interaction design, and feedback language.

Students

Students acquire content knowledge while developing the genres of academic English needed for their disciplines. Effective EMI provides supports that help learners move from surface understanding to deeper conceptual mastery.

Summary

EMI is the use of English to teach academic subjects in contexts where English is not the dominant language. Its modern rise is tied to research globalization, student mobility, and institutional strategies. While EMI offers opportunities for internationalization and graduate competitiveness, it raises crucial questions about equity, learning quality, and linguistic diversity. The most robust EMI models foreground comprehensibility, disciplinary accuracy, and language-aware pedagogy—ensuring all students can access and demonstrate high-level knowledge.

References

Sheng, Y. (2023). English medium instruction practices in higher education: International perspectives (J. McKinley & N. Galloway, Eds., 2022). Bloomsbury Publishing. Porta Linguarum: Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras, 39, 369–370. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi39.25486