【Article by EMI Resource Center】

The NCCU EMI Resource Center at National Chengchi University (NCCU) hosted a lecture titled “What Does EMI Mean for Taiwan?” on October 13. The event featured Mr. Jye Smallwood, a Ph.D. candidate and 2025–2026 English Language Fellow, who shared insights drawn from years of experience in teacher training and English education across multiple countries. Speaking to NCCU faculty members and teaching assistants, Smallwood discussed his reflections on English-Medium Instruction (EMI) and explored both the challenges and opportunities Taiwan faces in promoting bilingual education.

Smallwood began with an international perspective, outlining the core concepts and development of EMI. He emphasized that EMI is not merely “teaching English,” but rather a model of instruction that uses English to teach disciplinary content. Its goal lies in facilitating knowledge transfer and fostering critical thinking—not in direct language acquisition. Since the Bologna Declaration in 1999, the globalization of higher education and the rise in student mobility have made EMI a central vehicle for internationalization worldwide. Smallwood noted that Taiwan’s “Bilingual 2030” policy is part of this global trend, yet successful implementation requires attention to classroom realities and the actual needs of both teachers and students.

He then distinguished EMI from CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning). While CLIL emphasizes the dual development of content and language skills, EMI focuses primarily on subject matter, with language support serving a facilitative role. Smallwood cautioned that misunderstanding EMI as “English-only instruction” or “enhanced English courses” can lead to teacher anxiety and comprehension gaps for students. Instead, teachers should view language as a pedagogical tool, providing appropriate linguistic support to help students grasp content while gradually strengthening their English proficiency.

Drawing on language policy theory, Smallwood analyzed EMI implementation on three levels. At the macro level, governments often promote EMI for internationalization and economic competitiveness, but policies can be overly abstract and lack concrete evaluation or quality assurance mechanisms. At the meso level, universities actively expand EMI offerings in response to policy demands, yet disparities in teacher preparation and course quality remain. At the micro level, teachers frequently struggle with linguistic confidence, localizing materials, and developing effective teaching strategies. Smallwood argued that Taiwan’s EMI development has largely followed a top-down approach and suggested that incorporating bottom-up feedback from teachers and students could significantly enhance instructional quality and learning outcomes.

Regarding the current landscape of EMI in Taiwan, Smallwood observed ongoing inconsistencies in how teachers and administrators define and interpret EMI, resulting in varied classroom practices. While some departments have made progress in offering EMI courses, many instructors still seek stronger guidance in course design and language strategies. He praised Taiwanese educators for their professionalism and commitment, noting their desire for systematic training and institutional support to foster better classroom interaction and student engagement. As institutions continue to share best practices and refine their approaches, he expressed confidence that EMI in Taiwan will continue to mature in both quality and impact.

Finally, Smallwood highlighted that EMI represents not just a linguistic shift but a transformational change in educational culture and learning paradigms. Teachers must recognize the emotional and cognitive challenges students face when learning in a foreign language and create supportive, low-anxiety environments that build confidence in comprehension and expression. Taiwanese students, he observed, often underestimate their English abilities; with the right linguistic and psychological support, both their language proficiency and academic performance can thrive.

In conclusion, Smallwood emphasized that EMI brings significant opportunities for the internationalization of higher education in Taiwan while prompting educators to reexamine the essence of teaching and learning. Only through clear policy guidance, comprehensive language support, and robust professional development for teachers can EMI take root and flourish within Taiwan’s educational system. He encouraged educators to stay engaged with EMI research and localized practice, cultivating students’ understanding, confidence, and global competitiveness from the classroom outward.