User:TheGuyWithGlasses/sandbox

This is a draft paragraph on English-medium education wikipedia article regarding Criticisms in English-medium instruction.

Criticisms in English-medium instruction
Criticisms in English-medium instruction (EMI) refers to the exacerbation of global and local inequalities through the detrimental effects on linguistic and cultural diversity provoked by English language teaching and in particular English-medium instruction.

The internationalisation of education provision, achieved in the European territory thanks to the Bologna Process and boosted by the increased importance of international rankings for universities, has produced a change in the core concept of education. British scholar Jacquelin Widin suggests that education as a public good is no longer a current value in itself but rather an item traded by the defenders of centralised wealth. Moreover, the indicators used in international rankings reward the percentage of international students enrolled in universities. In this situation, English has a hegemonic position in the higher education field. This is one of the reasons why in the last decade there has been a huge increase in the number of bachelor's and master's programmes where teaching is conducted entirely in English (English-taught programs, ETPs). In Europe, it increased from 725 to 8089 in the period between 2001 and 2017.

Another reason is the willing of universities to increase their income, especially in places where domestic enrolment is decreasing. Furthermore, some institutions charge domestic students higher fees to enrol in EMI programmes. Enhancing the employability of domestic students, providing them with international competencies is another key motivating factor. Moreover, courses taught entirely in English are seen as indispensable for promoting mobility, cultural diversity, and intercultural understanding. In this situation, English native speakers have an unfair market advantage. On the other hand, non-native speakers have to reach an adequate level of English in order to fulfil the admission requirements in EMI courses.

The first issue is about equal access to English learning. Living in an urban or rural area as well as the socio-economic condition of the student have an impact on his chance to learn the English language. Especially in rural areas, there is a shortage of qualified teachers, a lack of appropriate instructional materials and, above all, the absence of a sociolinguistic environment in which English is meaningful. Socio-economic conditions influence both the range of possibilities of learning English (i.e. paying for a private English course, moving to an English-speaking country for a period to improve the level of English) and the effective access to an EMI course, considering that some universities charge higher fees for courses taught in English. Westernization is another issue. Robert Phillipson, who has written extensively on the topic of linguistic imperialism, is very critical of EMI, as he sees it as another form of linguistic imperialism perpetuating the stereotype that having a Western-style education is superior and something that is necessary for a successful future

The use of English as a medium of instruction in non-speaking English countries may lead local languages to be inadequate in the future as a medium of higher education. One risk is they will not develop the necessary registers to express specific academic knowledge.

Another controversial issue is whether introducing EMI courses could in a certain way downgrade the courses taught in the local language. EMI courses might be considered elitist and may lead to discrimination even among students of the same university. Coming to the teaching side, lecturers may not be able to perform as well as if they were performing in their native language. Not sufficient proficiency in English of lecturers leads to a simplification of contents and materials and, in general, to a reduced quality of instruction.

Criticisms in English-medium instruction in Japan
In Japan, the spread of English has been obtained thanks to various organisations of English language teaching and accompanying textbooks and teaching materials. Scholars such as Ryuko Kubota have explored the possible impact of the construction of the subject of English in the Japanese education system and of the learners in the teaching resources. Major criticisms addressed the way textbooks for English language teaching are designed. These tend to depict English-speaking societies (mostly associated with the USA and the UK) as problem free, and this leads to notions of idealised societies where Japanese students may think there are no injustices, discrimination or social disharmony. According to Jacquelin Wildin these texts also assume that the West has ownership of critical thinking and that non-western countries are underdeveloped in their logic, critical and analytical skills. As underlined by the studies of Takehiko Nakata, this reinforces Japanese views of inferiority of non-westerners.

Other critics have argued that the dominance of English influences the Japanese language and people’s views of language, culture, race, ethnicity and identity which are affected by the worldview of native English speakers and that teaching English creates cultural and linguistic stereotypes not only of English but also of Japanese people. Recent discourses linked with the concepts of nihonjinron and kokusaika provide a broader context for understanding such ideologies. These discourses represent both resistance and accommodation to the hegemony of the West with a promotion of nationalistic values and learning a Western mode of communication; i.e., English. Among several proposals offered by critics, raising critical awareness of English domination parallels the philosophy of critical pedagogy.

Criticisms in English-medium instruction in China
In China, English language teaching has become increasingly important in the national scholastic system since university admission regulations changed in 2001. The value of the English-language component of the Gaokao became more important for the final evaluation than it was before. Moreover, English became an entry requirement for the most exclusive and desirable programs, such as business, law, sciences, technology. These decisions have had detrimental effects and have created many issues in the Chinese school system, due to the lack of English-language professors and appropriate funds. The starkest consequences are in the poorest parts of the country, as rural and minority languages areas. Nowadays, this educational disadvantage of minority students and students who come from the peripheral parts of China is widely discussed in China, as it is considered to diminish the possibility of social mobility instead of offering any development benefits.