Enhancing Interactional Competence in EMI: Teacher Reflective Practices

Enhancing Interactional Competence in EMI: Teacher Reflective Practices

Ana Llinares (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain) and Amaya Mendikoetxea (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-2318-6.ch005


This chapter shows the role of in-service EMI teacher reflective practices by showcasing the use of self- and peer-reflection on classroom interaction by two EMI lecturers at UAM. Based on previous models for the analysis of classroom interactional competence at tertiary level and in CLIL contexts, the authors apply the video technology of VEO, which helps teachers to gather and interpret their own teaching evidence and that of others. This interpretation is based on a tagging system that allows EMI teachers to identify types of interactional patterns, their frequency, and their effect in their observation of their own video-recorded lessons. These reflections are then followed by their trainers' own reflections on these practices, which can be added as comments in the VEO tool. In addition, students' perceptions on these practices are analysed through their answers to a questionnaire administered right after each lesson.
Chapter Preview

Terminological Considerations

‘English Medium Instruction’ (EMI) is often the label adopted for the delivery of content in English in Higher Education (HE) (among others, Coleman, 2006; Dafouz, Camacho & Urquía,, 2014; Hellhekjaer, 2010; Sercu, 2004). Others prefer the more generic term ‘Content and Language Integrated Learning ‘(CLIL), a dual-focused educational approach in which focus on language and focus on content are interwoven (Aguilar & Rodriguez, 2012; Fortanet, 2010; Lasagabaster, 2008), widely used across all levels of education.1 An intermediate position between the dual approach adopted in CLIL programmes, applied mainly in pre-university education, and the primary focus on content of EMI programmes is the use of the label ICLHE ‘Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education’. This is the term used for HE programmes which acknowledge the importance of integrating both language and content in HE settings (see Smit & Dafouz, 2012).2

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book: