Advertisement

Topic Oriented Mixed-Method System (TOMMS)

A Holistic System to Integrate English Language Classes into English-Medium Instruction Courses in European Higher Education
  • Mathew Docherty
  • Kurt Gaubinger
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 715)

Abstract

This paper addresses the issue of English-Medium Instruction (EMI) in European higher education, which has been referred to as ‘the language of higher education in Europe’ [1]. It outlines the goals of this new phenomenon, analyses the current situation and evaluates potential limitations. It investigates how, using team-teaching, inverted classrooms and active classroom techniques, potential hurdles may be reduced. How, through careful planning and coordination, students and teachers alike, can be prepared for the new challenge of teaching and learning content through English. It goes on to outline a systematic approach, coined by the authors as the Topic Oriented Mixed-Method System (TOMMS), where each topic is initially addressed in a contact lesson with a Language Teaching Expert (LTE), to prepare students, it then introduces them to the theory in self-study sessions, before applying the theory, under guidance of the Content Expert (CE), in tasks and projects. This paper provides a holistic mixed-methods pedagogical approach to address the issue of knowledge transfer in EMI programmes using state of the art methodologies to allow the LTE to support the CE in planning and teaching of content. It offers higher education institutes (HEIs), who may be averse to teaching content courses in English, an effective system to implement EMI and, for those that already have, it offers ways to improve the efficiency of them.

Keywords

English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) Inverted classroom Blended learning Active classroom Web-based learning Project-based learning Team-teaching 

References

  1. 1.
    Coleman, J.A.: English-medium teaching in European Higher Education. Lang. Teach. 39, 1–14 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dearden, J.: English as a medium of instruction – a growing global phenomenon, pp. 1–8. Going Glob 2014, Interim Report, Oxford Dep. Educ. Univ., Oxford (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wächter, B., Maiworm, F.: English-Taught Programmes in European Higher Education: The State of Play in 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hüppauf, B.: Globalization: Threats and Opportunities, Globalization and the Future of German (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., Sierra, J.M.: English-Medium Instruction at Universities: Global Challenges. Multilingual matters, Bristol (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dafouz, E., Camacho-Miñano, M.M.: Exploring the impact of English-medium instruction on university student academic achievement: the case of accounting. Engl. Specif. Purp. 44, 57–67 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sert, N.: The language of instruction dilemma in the Turkish context. System 36, 156–171 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Byun, K., Chu, H., Kim, M., et al.: English-medium teaching in Korean higher education: policy debates and reality. High. Educ. 62, 431–449 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9397-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maiworm, F., Wächter, B.: English-language-taught degree programmes in European higher education: Trends and success factors. ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education. Lemmens, Bonn, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tatzl, D.: English-medium masters? programmes at an Austrian university of applied sciences: Attitudes, experiences and challenges. J. Engl. Acad. Purp. 10, 252–270 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wachter, B., Maiworm, F.: English-Taught Programmes in European Higher Education: The Picture in 2007 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sowden, C.: Elf on a mushroom: the overnight growth in English as a Lingua Franca. ELT J. 66, 89–96 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spolsky, B.: Language Policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shepard, J.: An e-recipe for success. EL Gaz. 312, 5 December (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rotellar, C., Cain, J.: Research, perspectives, and recommendations on implementing the flipped classroom. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 80, 1–9 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe80234 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    King, A.: From sage on the stage to guide on the side. Source Coll. Teach. 41, 1–7 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J., Treglia, M.: Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. J. Econ. Educ. 31, 30–43 (2000).  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596759 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harmer, J.: How to Teach English (Second Edition). ELT J. 62, 313–316 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lim, D.H., Morris, M.L., Kupritz, V.W.: Online vs. blended learning: differences in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction. J. Asynchronous Learn. Netw. 11, 27–42 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thompson, I.:Job impact study: the next generation of corporate learning. JobImpact. pdf (2002). 07 Octubre 2003Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., et al.: Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Dep Educ, vol. 94 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.10.002
  22. 22.
    Bloom, B.S., Englehard, M.D., Furst, E.J., et al.: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I Cognitive Domain, vol. 16, p. 207, New York (1956)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bonwell, C.C., Eison, J.A.: Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. ERIC (1991)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laur, D.: Authentic Learning Experiences: A Real-World Approach to Project-Based Learning. Routledge, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chickering, A.W., Gamson, Z.F.: Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bull. 3, 7 (1987).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0307-4412(89)90094-0 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Willis, D., Willis, J.: Doing task-based teaching. Tesl-Ej 12, 173–176 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm083 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nunan, D.: Task-Based Language Teaching, pp. 1–15 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667336
  28. 28.
    Prabhu, N.S.: Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Willis, J.: A flexible framework for task-based learning. In: Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, pp. 52–62 (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krashen, S., Terrell, T.D.: The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Pergamon, Oxford (1983)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Krashen, S.D.: Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Mod. Lang. J. (1982).  https://doi.org/10.2307/328293 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Long, M.: The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In: Handbook Language Acquisition, pp 413–468 (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EngineeringUniversity of Applied Sciences Upper AustriaWelsAustria

Personalised recommendations