Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study reports on an investigation into the perspectives of different stakeholders (e.g. administrators, teachers, students, and parents) towards motivations for introducing English as a medium of instruction (EMI) policy in low-resourced public schools, serving minoritized students, and language ideologies that form its practices. Framed within the notions of neoliberalism and elite bi/multilingualism, this study provides a nuanced understanding of ideological and implementational discourses of the EMI policy in the K-1211 In Nepal, the school education system refers to education from Kindergarten to grade 12. The system includes ‘Early Childhood Education’, ‘Basic Education’ (grades 1 to 8), and ‘Secondary Education’ (grades 9 to 12). Secondary schools often run classes from Kindergarten to grade12 in Nepal. context, which contributes to the emerging field of EMI. As the analysis of interviews and focus groups with the above stakeholders from five different schools in Mt. Everest region and the Kathmandu Valley of Nepal reveals, the key motivations for EMI were to help students gain social and material (economic) capital as EMI was perceived as a means to achieve English skills and quality education. However, such desires, guided by neoliberal logics, have put the minoritized students under delusion because the insufficiency of English proficiency among both teachers and students and the lack of rudiments to effectively implement EMI have created a ‘comprehension crisis’ and ‘epistemic inequalities’ for minoritized students. The findings also illustrate how neoliberal ideologies have led to the practice of elite bilingualism in EMI classrooms, also influencing the local language ecology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sah et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: