Over the past two decades, shifts in the production and circulation of scientific knowledge have transformed universities from sites of knowledge transmission internationally. The growing dominance of English in academic publishing and increased student and researcher mobility have encouraged higher education institutions not only to teach English as a foreign language but also to adopt it as a medium of instruction for content courses (Wächter & Maiworm, 2014). For many countries, English is viewed as a key resource for international collaboration and scientific visibility. At the same time, the expanding role of English in academia has raised critical debates from cultural, linguistic, and pedagogical perspectives (Airey, 2020).

The expansion of English-Medium Instruction (EMI) in Europe accelerated following the Bologna Process, as universities began to adopt English strategically to enhance student mobility and align programs with international standards (Breetvelt, 2018). Since the late 1990s, the number of English-taught programs has increased substantially, with similar trends reported beyond Europe (Kirkpatrick, 2017). While EMI has strengthened universities’ international profiles and widened access to global academic resources, it has also introduced significant pedagogical challenges for both students and instructors.

The benefits and challenges of EMI are well documented. While students may gain access to international academic resources, develop academic English skills, and enhance future employability (Ahmed, 2025; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019), EMI has also been associated with comprehension difficulties, reduced classroom participation, and lower academic performance (Lasagabaster, 2025). From the instructor perspective, challenges include limited linguistic resources, difficulty explaining complex concepts, reduced interaction, and uncertainty in assessment practices (Airey, 2020; Helm & Guarda, 2015). To address these challenges, lecturers may engage in pedagogical strategies such as code-switching to the first language (Sánchez García, 2018), which can support comprehension (Pun, 2023) but may be constrained by institutional English-only policies. Overall, research suggests that effective EMI depends not solely on language choice but on pedagogical competence and institutional support.

In response, most institutions have introduced professional development (PD) initiatives for EMI lecturers. However, existing PD programmes largely reflect institutional or teacher-centred perspectives and tend to focus on language proficiency and general teaching techniques, which may not fully prepare lecturers for the pedagogical demands of EMI (Dafouz & Smit, 2020). While such initiatives are essential, they often overlook how students experience EMI teaching and how instructional practices shape students’ access to learning.

Research on student voice and inclusive pedagogy highlights students’ unique position in providing insights into teaching quality, learning conditions, and inclusion. Student voice scholarship conceptualises learners not merely as evaluators of teaching but as legitimate contributors to knowledge about educational processes, particularly in relation to participation, recognition, and equity (Cook-Sather, 2006; Bovill & Woolmer, 2019). From an inclusive education perspective, teaching quality is closely linked to students’ access to learning opportunities, their ability to participate meaningfully, and the extent to which classroom practices respect linguistic and cultural diversity.

This study reframes EMI lecturer professional development through student experiences, using inclusive pedagogy as an analytical lens. with the following research questions: (1) How do students describe their learning experiences in EMI courses with regard to language use, pedagogy, interaction, and classroom climate? (2) Which EMI teaching practices do students identify as enabling or constraining their access to learning and participation? (3) How can student-identified experiences be translated into design-relevant implications for inclusive professional development for EMI lecturers? The primary aim is to explore how student perspectives can contribute to a more inclusive and pedagogically grounded understanding of EMI lecturer PD.

A qualitative research design is used to gather rich data about students’ perspectives on English as medium of instruction to inform professional development for inclusive faculty. The research is conducted at a large research university in The Netherlands in which English is the predominant language of instruction at both undergraduate and graduate levels. Participants in this study included undergraduate and master’s students who are enrolled in courses taught in EMI from various disciplinary fields. Purposeful sampling was used to capture diversity in the following key areas: language backgrounds, field of study, and level of education. This is consistent with earlier EMI research that highlights the need to capture multiple student perspectives because students are engaged in learning using multiple languages (Macaro, 2018). Data were collected through semi-structured interviews designed to elicit students’ perspectives on their classrooms and learning experiences with EMI. The interview protocol contained questions related to the delivery of lectures, interactional strategies, assessments, language use, and classroom climate. The protocol specifically probed students for influences (both positive and negative) on learning and classroom participation based on the students’ perceptions of their classroom experiences. The interviews were conducted in English with participant consent, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. In addition to interview data, document analysis was used as a supplementary data source to contextualise students’ accounts of EMI teaching and professional development. Relevant institutional documents, including course syllabi, assessment guidelines, and publicly available EMI-related professional development materials, were examined to identify stated expectations regarding language use, teaching practices, assessment, and inclusivity. Document analysis supported the interpretation of interview data by situating students’ perspectives within the broader institutional context. Data were analysed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In the first phase, transcripts were coded inductively to identify recurring patterns in students’ responses. In the second phase, codes were organised into broader themes reflecting key dimensions of EMI teaching, including pedagogical clarity, intelligibility, interaction, assessment practices, and inclusivity. Themes were interpreted through the lenses of inclusive pedagogy and student voice to inform the design of EMI lecturer professional development. Throughout the study, ethical issues were recognised and approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Arts, University of Groningen (CETO; ID 103572513). Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and anonymity was ensured through the use of pseudonyms. The data were gathered as part of ongoing postdoctoral research into English-medium instruction and professional development in higher education.

According to the findings, from a pedagogic perspective, there are direct implications for lecturer professional development from students’ views of EMI teaching. Research on English as a Lingua Franca in academia finds that students value intelligibility and clarity above native-like pronunciation (Jenkins, 2014). Students also stress the importance of structured explanations; clear cues; and appropriate speed of presentation as the conditions necessary to access the content. Students emphasise interactive teaching methods that create opportunities for dialogue, asking questions and engagement that will be helpful in developing students’ use of their content knowledge. This supports prior research that has established links between inclusive teaching and student engagement in higher education (Bovill & Woolmer, 2019). In addition, student participants discuss socio-emotional and inclusive aspects of EMI. They describe types of classrooms where making errors with language is normalised as part of learning; and where students are encouraged to fully participate. However, code-switching to a local language during EMI is viewed by international students as excluding them, consistent with concerns previously raised in respect to EMI (Airey, 2012). Students also provide examples of how they expect transparency in assessments and feedback to support their understanding and inclusion. In a complementary manner, each of these student perspectives provides a source of inspiration for the creation of inclusive EMI lecturer professional development. Student informed insight will drive how we conceptualize professional development for lecturers; instead of framing professional development around perceived lecturer deficits, this view will highlight pedagogical, linguistic and interactional abilities that support equitable access to learning. These findings were interpreted in relation to institutional documents on EMI teaching and professional development, allowing student perspectives to be situated within the broader pedagogical and organisational context.

Ahmed, M. K. (2025). Navigating English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) in Tertiary Education: Challenges, Opportunities, and Pedagogical Strategies for EFL Learners. Ampersand, 100231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2025.100231 Airey, J. (2012). I don’t teach language. The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(1), 64-79. Airey, J. (2020). The content lecturer and English-medium instruction (EMI): epilogue to the special issue on EMI in higher education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(3), 340–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1732290 Bovill, C., Woolmer, C. How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum. High Educ 78, 407–422 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0349-8 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 24, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597 Breetvelt, I. (2018). English-medium instruction in Dutch higher education: A policy reconstruction and impact study. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 18(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2018.18.03.10 Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, Presence, and Power: “Student Voice” in Educational Research and Reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2006.00363.x Helm, F. & Guarda, M. (2015). “Improvisation is not allowed in a second language”: A survey of Italian lecturers’ concerns about teaching their subjects through English . Language Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 353-373. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2015-0017 Jenkins, J. (2013). English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics of academic English language policy. Routledge. Kirkpatrick, A. (2017). The languages of higher education in East and Southeast Asia: Will EMI lead to Englishisation?. In English medium instruction in higher education in Asia-Pacific: From policy to pedagogy (pp. 21-36). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Lasagabaster, D. (2025). “Because guess what? I don’t even want to speak English”: English as an obstacle for the development of multilingualism at a South African institution. Lang Policy 24, 209–243). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-024-09707-5 Macaro, E. (2018). English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Phuong, Y. H., & Nguyen, T. T. (2019). Students' Perceptions towards the Benefits and Drawbacks of EMI Classes. English Language Teaching, 12(5), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n5p88 Pun, J. (2023). Commentary for “The Emotional Landscape of English Medium Instruction (EMI) in Higher Education. Linguistics and Education 75:101180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2023.101180 Sánchez García, M. D. (2018). Codeswitching practices in the discourse of two lecturers in English-medium instruction at university. http://dx.doi.org/10.12795/elia.2018.i18.05 Wächter, B., and F. Maiworm, eds. 2014. English-taught Programmes in European Higher Education. The State of Play in 2014. ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education. Bonn: Lemmens.