English proficiency is increasingly recognized as a pivotal requirement for lecturers, particularly within English Medium Instruction (EMI) contexts. Wang (2021) demonstrates that a lecturer’s level of English proficiency significantly shapes their classroom leadership and directly affects students’ perceptions of teaching efficacy. This suggests that language ability is not merely a supplemental skill, but a core component of effective instructional practice.
Supporting this assertion, Macaro et al. (2017) highlight that educators across disciplines consistently emphasize the necessity of strong language skills to ensure clear and meaningful classroom communication, even though the specific linguistic demands may vary across subject areas. Likewise, Rachmawati and Purwati (2021) argue that adequate English proficiency is fundamental to teaching competence, recommending that universities provide sustained professional development to strengthen lecturers’ linguistic and pedagogical capacities.
Further reinforcing these insights, Jensen et al. (2024) report that students tend to express negative attitudes toward lecturers whose English proficiency is perceived as inadequate, indicating a direct impact on both the learning environment and overall student engagement.
Collectively, these studies highlight that a high level of English proficiency is not only advantageous but essential for lecturers striving to create effective, inclusive, and meaningful educational experiences within EMI settings.
1. Defining English Proficiency in EMI Contexts
English proficiency for EMI lecturers goes beyond grammar and vocabulary accuracy. It involves the ability to communicate disciplinary knowledge clearly, manage classroom discourse, and respond to students’ questions in a linguistically and culturally inclusive manner. The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) is often used as a benchmark, with many Asian universities requiring at least B2 or C1 levels for teaching in English-medium programs.
Key idea: Linguistic proficiency in EMI is not static; it must evolve with pedagogical and intercultural competencies to ensure both clarity and engagement in teaching.
2. Regional Benchmarks and Policy Frameworks
Different countries have adopted various standards to assess and support EMI lecturers. In Vietnam, the Ministry of Education and Training has set guidelines requiring lecturers in EMI programs to achieve a minimum of B2 on the CEFR scale, though institutional practices vary. Malaysia and Thailand have implemented similar benchmarks, often incorporating internal training and assessment systems. In Japan and Korea, universities frequently set their own standards, sometimes aligned with international proficiency tests such as IELTS (6.5 or higher) or TOEFL iBT (90+).
3. Challenges in Achieving Required Proficiency
Despite policy clarity, many lecturers experience difficulties in meeting English language standards. Challenges include:
- Limited access to professional development or language immersion opportunities.
- Balancing language learning with heavy teaching and administrative workloads.
- Differences between conversational English and academic or discipline-specific English.
- Anxiety and reduced confidence when interacting with international students or colleagues.
In countries like Vietnam or Indonesia, lecturers often express concerns about maintaining content depth while speaking in English, which may slow lesson delivery or reduce spontaneity in discussions.
4. Institutional Support and Capacity Building
Progressive universities across Asia have recognized that language proficiency development should be a continuous institutional investment. Effective initiatives include:
- In-house language enhancement programs tailored to disciplinary needs.
- Collaborative teaching models pairing English specialists with subject lecturers.
- Peer observation and mentoring focused on EMI classroom communication.
- Scholarships and overseas training for faculty language immersion.
For example, Hong Kong universities integrate EMI training modules into faculty development systems, while Singapore institutions offer customized English for Academic Purposes workshops linked to teaching evaluations.
Good practice: Combine linguistic assessment with reflective teaching portfolios to evaluate how lecturers use English to achieve learning outcomes, not just test scores.
5. Moving Toward Sustainable Professional Development
Beyond meeting test requirements, long-term EMI success depends on ongoing language support and pedagogical innovation. Universities can establish communities of practice where lecturers share EMI experiences, materials, and microteaching videos for feedback. Moreover, institutions should recognize language proficiency as a developmental goal, integrating it into promotion pathways and workload considerations.
Ultimately, EMI implementation will thrive when language and pedagogy are viewed as interdependent dimensions of professional excellence, ensuring that lecturers not only meet English proficiency standards but also leverage language as a tool for global academic engagement.