Variations of English-medium instruction: comparing policy and practice in Turkish higher education

In response to the growing use of English as an international language and a lingua franca in academic settings, the number of English-medium programs in higher education has increased. English-medium instruction (EMI) policies are typically determined through top-down decision making processes. However, decisions to implement EMI programs are often made with little consideration for the educational issues surrounding language policy changes. Disparities between the central policies regulating EMI and the classroom practices shaping EMI inhibit its equal or expected implementation. This DPhil dissertation examines the policies, practices, and perceptions of EMI in engineering departments at state universities in Turkey to investigate the variation with which EMI is implemented.
The research design for this study includes three phases. In the first phase, national and institutional policies regulating EMI are analyzed to understand the aims and expectations of EMI programs. In the second phase, this study explores the classroom language practices of teachers and students at EMI engineering departments in Turkey. The third phase examines EMI lecturers’ and students’ perceptions of EMI for teaching and learning in order to triangulate the findings and incorporate stakeholders’ perspectives on EMI implementation.
To analyze EMI policy, data were collected from national and institutional policy documents (n=145) and, when available, classroom syllabi were collected from participating lecturers during fieldwork. Data concerning policy were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, and the ROAD-MAPPING framework developed by Dafouz and Smit (2016) was applied to situate the analysis of EMI policy. In the second phase of the study, data were collected through classroom observations of 21 EMI lecturers from engineering departments at seven state universities in Turkey. For each lecturer, a minimum of two EMI lessons were observed, resulting in 85 classroom observations. Finally, to analyze perceptions of EMI for teaching and learning, semi-structured interviews were conducted with lecturers and focus group discussions were held with students. Interviews were conducted following each classroom observation for a total of 42 interviews with teachers. Focus group discussions (n=25) were conducted with 4-9 students from each class to triangulate the data and incorporate a student perspective.
Observations and interviews were voice-recorded and transcribed for analysis using NVivo 11. Data from classroom observations were analyzed according to a structured coding scheme, and qualitative content analysis was used to identify recurring themes in interviews with teachers and students. The analysis revealed a variety of classroom practices, with EMI implementation varying in terms of language choice and proportion of teacher-student interaction across classrooms. Lower proportions of Turkish use and teacher-student interaction were found at elite universities compared to small and large universities, where L1 Turkish was more commonly incorporated into the lecture and higher levels of student participation were observed.
The variations in practice were supported by data collected through interviews with teachers and students. Moreover, the analysis of interview and focus group data revealed a tension between teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the benefits of EMI for students’ career opportunities and the challenges of content and language learning through EMI. By revealing the variation with which EMI is implemented at Turkish universities, this study illustrates how teachers serve as EMI micro-level policymakers. Despite national policies which envision a ‘one-language-at-a-time’ model of EMI education, the findings from this study suggest that EMI is neither English-only nor English-always in practice, particularly at non-elite universities. Implications are discussed for EMI theory, policy planning, and program development.

Keywords: Higher education
Classroom discourse
Turkey
Language policy
English medium instruction
Advisor: Rose, H
Macaro, E