An Examination of the Degree of Complexity of Teacher Questions in English-Medium University Courses

David Lasagabaster; Aintzane Doiz

doi:10.5294/laclil.2022.15.2.6

Authors

David Lasagabaster Author University of the Basque Country https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7750-2314
Aintzane Doiz Author University of the Basque Country https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4818-6495

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2022.15.2.6

Keywords:

English-medium instruction, EMI, questions, interaction, complexity, disciplines

Abstract

Research has demonstrated that questions are essential when teachers endeavor to foster students’ comprehension and learning of the subject taught. However, there is a scarcity of studies on questioning practices in English-medium instruction (EMI) settings. In this study, we aim to fill this gap by focusing on the linguistic complexity of the questions put forward by EMI lecturers by paying particular heed to whether the disciplinary culture exerts any influence on the complexity of lecturers’ questioning practices. The study was conducted at four public Spanish universities in which the classes delivered by nine EMI lecturers from three different disciplines (history, economics, and engineering) were recorded and analyzed. The statistical analyses performed found no significant differences in the lexical and syntactic complexity of the questions posed in the three disciplines, while language at the C level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) was conspicuous by its absence. These results lead us to conclude that if students are not widely exposed to language at the C level of the CEFR, oral language development and improvement may not be promoted in EMI courses. Therefore, EMI teacher training should be given more attention.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aguilar, M., & Muñoz, C. (2014). The effect of proficiency on CLIL benefits in Engineering students in Spain. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12006

Airey, J. (2015). From stimulated recall to disciplinary literacy: Summarizing ten years of research into teaching and learning in English. In S. Dimova, A. Hultgren, & C. Jensen (Eds.), English-medium instruction in European higher education. Volume 3 (pp. 157-176). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614515272-009

An, J., Macaro, E., & Childs, A. (2021). Classroom interaction in EMI high schools: Do teachers who are native speakers of English make a difference? System, 98, 102482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102482

An, J., & Thomas, N. (2021). Students’ beliefs about the role of interaction for science learning and language learning in EMI science classes: Evidence from high schools in China. Linguistics and Education, 65, 100972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2021.100972

British Council (2021). The changing landscape of English-taught programmes. British Council.

Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency (pp. 21-46). John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.02bul

Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005

Carter, R. & McCarthy, M. (2013). Cambridge grammar of English. 7th printing. Cambridge University Press.

Chang, Y. Y. (2012). The use of questions by professors in lectures given in English: Influences of disciplinary cultures. English for Specific Purposes, 31(2), 103-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.08.002

Council of Europe. (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment companion volume with new descriptors. https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989

Doiz, A., & Lasagabaster, D. (2023). An analysis of the type of questions posed by teachers in English-medium instruction at university level. Education Sciences, 13, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010082

Guarda, M., & Helm, F. (2017). A survey of lecturers’ needs and feedback on EMI training. In K. Ackerley, M. Guarda, & F. Helm (Eds.), Sharing perspectives on English-medium instruction (pp. 167-194). Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0343-2538-7

Hu, G., & Li, X. (2017). Asking and answering questions in English-medium classrooms: What is the cognitive and syntactic complexity level? In J. Zhao & L. Q. Dixon (Eds.), English-medium instruction in Chinese universities: Perspectives, discourse and evaluation (pp. 184-203). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315618623-10

Jarvis, S. (2013a). Capturing the diversity in lexical diversity. Language Learning, 63(s1), 87-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00739.x

Jarvis, S. (2013b). Defining and measuring lexical diversity. In S. Jarvis, & M. Daller (Eds.), Vocabulary knowledge: Human ratings and automated measures (pp. 13-44). John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.47.03ch1

Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary differences in the use of English in higher education: Reflections on recent language policy developments. Higher Education, 67, 533-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9660-6

Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 757-786. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.194

Lahmann, C., Steinkrauss, R., & Schmid, M. (2019). Measuring linguistic complexity in long-term L2 speakers of English and L1 attriters of German. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29(2), 173-191. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12259

Larson, L. R., & Lovelace, M. D. (2013). Evaluating the efficacy of questioning strategies in lecture-based classroom environments: Are we asking the right questions? Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 24(2), 105-122.

Lasagabaster, D. (2022). English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press.

Lasagabaster, D. (2023). The spread of multilingualism in higher education and its repercussions for language for specific purposes. Ibérica, 45, 7-29. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.45.23

Lasagabaster, D., & Doiz, A. (2023). Classroom interaction in English-medium instruction: Are there differences between disciplines? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 36(3), 310-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2022.2151615

Llinares, A., & Pascual Peña, I. (2015). A genre approach to the effect of academic questions on CLIL students’ language production. Language and Education, 29, 15-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.924964

Lo, Y.Y. (2014). L2 Learning opportunities in different academic subjects in content-based instruction – Evidence in favour of ‘conventional wisdom’. Language and Education, 28(2), 141-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2013.786086

Macaro, E. (2018). English medium instruction: Content and language in policy and practice. Oxford University Press.

Mercer, N., Wegerif, R. & Major, L. (Eds.) (2019). The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677

Morell, T. (2020). EMI teacher training with a multimodal and interactive approach: A new horizon for LSP specialists. Language Value, 12(1), 56-87. https://doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2020.12.4

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555-578. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044

Ortega, L. (2012). Interlanguage complexity: A construct in search of theoretical renewal. In B. Kortmann, & B. Szmrecsanyi (Eds.), Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisition, indigenization, contact (pp. 127-155). Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110229226.127

Pallotti, G. (2015). A simple view of linguistic complexity. Second Language Research, 31(1), 117-134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314536435

Rescher, N. (1998). Complexity: A philosophical overview. Transaction Publishers.

Sánchez-García, D. (2020). Mapping lecture questions and their pedagogical goals in Spanish- and English-medium instruction. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 8(1), 28-52. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.18016.san

Sancho-Guinda, C. (2023). The multifaceted nature of interaction in higher education: Reflections from a genre-based approach. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 4(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1558/jmtp.23600

Tan, Z. (2007). Questioning in Chinese university EL classrooms: What lies beyond it? RELC Journal, 38(1), 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206076161

Teo, P. (2016). Exploring the dialogic space in teaching: A study of teacher talk in the pre-university classroom in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.019

Vygostky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Walsh, S. & Li, L. (2013). Conversations as space for learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12005

Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Major, L. (2019). Introduction to the Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 1-8). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677-1

Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605895