EMI (English medium instruction) as a catalyst for change: Issues of equity and quality in Kazakhstani higher education

• In Event: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion: Educational experiences of post-Soviet students within and outside Eurasia

Proposal

Universities around the globe are seeking to internationalize in order to benefit from the numerous opportunities that internationalization offers (Kirkpatrick, 2011). This drive for internalization has given a boost to English language instruction (EMI) in universities in many countries, including Kazakhstan, which arguably is the first amongst post-soviet countries to adopt a trilingual education policy and encourage EMI in its universities. Kazakhstan was also the first post-Soviet country to join the Bologna Declaration in March 2010. Both the trilingual education policy and the adoption of the European education system through the Bologna Process have led to a sharp rise in the number of EMI programs at Kazakhstani universities. Research shows that the number of Master’s programs taught entirely in English increased from 560, in 2002, to 3,701 in 2011; in 2015, there were 42 university departments that had undergraduate and graduate programs in English. Many new master's and PhD programs in English have come into existence since then.

Research conducted elsewhere reveals that on the one hand, EMI enjoys growing popularity in the non-anglophone countries, and it is seen as a catalyst for change in higher education institutions, but on the other hand, poorly conceived policies and haphazard expansion of EMI have led to inequalities and declining quality of education. Despite meeting the English language admission requirements of universities, graduate students for whom English is a second, third or additional language still struggle with academic reading and writing in English. Although these students speak good English, they struggle when it comes to analyzing and synthesizing literature and writing an academic paper in a coherent and succinct manner. They often report difficulties with grammar, lexis, and syntax. Similarly, challenges with academic reading can cause conceptual confusion and create difficulties in analyzing essay prompts, for example. Students from rural areas and disadvantaged communities usually lack English language proficiency and therefore struggle more with academic reading g and writing in English. Thus, the growing emphasis on EMI seems to raise questions about equity, inclusion, and quality in higher education. However, there had not been any research in Kazakhstan to look exclusively at this issue.

The purpose of the current study was to explore how EMI is conceptualized and practiced, the ways in which EMI has changed the landscape of higher education, and the challenges and issues of equity and quality faced by the graduate students and instructors Kazakhstani universities.

This study is located within the broader theoretical field of literacies, social practice, and social justice. From the academic literacies perspective, reading and writing are seen as social practices that vary with context, culture, and genre. This perspective also treats literacies not confined to subjects and disciplines but associated with broader institutional discourses, genres, and communities. Similarly, the social justice perspective looks at access, equity, and inclusion embedded in pedagogical practices and support system available at the universities. Thus, the current study takes academic reading and writing as social practices embedded within the context, culture, education, and social justice system in Kazakhstan.

A mixed-methods study, involving a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews, was employed to carry out this study with graduate students, faculty, and program directors from 10 purposefully selected universities across Kazakhstan. The quantitative data was collected through an anonymous online survey in 10 Kazakhstani universities between March-June 2021. The ten participating universities in this research project offer a variety of graduate programs in English and represent both the public and private education sectors in Kazakhstan. Their participation was voluntary and informed.

The participants in the online survey were Masters and PhD students in EMI programs at the selected universities. As many as 320 students responded to the survey, representing different disciplines, degree programs, age groups, regions, and linguistic backgrounds. Over 25 interviews, both individual and focus-group, were conducted with graduate students, faculty, English language instructors, and program directors from the selected universities.

The study’s findings revealed that the EMI is seen both as a catalyst for change and improvement in higher education quality and a factor for creating inequality and hurdles to students and instructors. The implementation of EMI is replete with numerous challenges in the context of Kazakhstan. Academic English appears to pose noticeable challenges and equity issues to a large number of students from the selected universities. The policy as envisioned at the macro-level by the policymakers at the top seems to suffer from fuller implementation on the ground, a typical example of the gap between policy aspirations and enactment, which many other countries like Kazakhstan are confronted with. More precisely, the data indicated a significant number of students’ dissatisfaction with their level of general and academic English, their reported low confidence levels and anxiety during English presentations, their relatively lower level of enjoyment in the use of English vis-à-vis Russian and Kazakh languages, and an overall assessment of their reading and writing skills.

The data also revealed ecological tensions including lack of adequately proficient students, lack of properly trained teachers, and overall resources and pedagogical environment that hold the development of academic English back at these universities. In light of the emerging results, these tensions apparently become more pronounced, and which conspicuously mark the competing policy aspirations and real enactment on the ground. The data also revealed issues related to access, equity and inclusion in EMI universities as students from rural and disadvantaged communities seem to struggle more in getting admissions and coping with the challenges of academic reading and writing in EMI universities. We understand that the concerns and circumstances of the participants cannot be seen in isolation from the macro-level policymaking, and the complex and competing implementation issues occurring on the ground. For a more in-depth and fuller understanding of the emerging results of this study, it was crucial to contextualize the processes, outcomes, concerns, and possible challenges that surrounded the current EMI programs in Kazakhstan. Such contextualized insights helped understand the macro-level goals of the policy, practices on the ground, and the complexity of challenges in policy implementation, and in achieving the desired outcomes.

Authors

• Mir Afzal, Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education

• Duishon Ali Shamatov, Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education

• Maganat Shegebayev, KIMEP University