Critical stances towards English Medium Instruction (EMI), and to a lesser extent the similar use of French, Portuguese and Spanish Medium Instruction in former colonies of European states, have been growing since ‘independence’ in the 1960s. This discussion contextualises ‘Southern’ critiques of EMI within early decolonial debates, ‘southern multilingualisms’ and ‘transknowledging’ (reciprocal translation and exchange of knowledge), which are often invisibilised in EMI. This is illustrated through critiques in two former British territories: the first, with critiques that circulated in Southern Africa from the 1960s; the second, with critiques that surfaced four decades later in Australia. Whereas EMI is readily recognised in South Africa (with 8 per cent L1 English speakers), Australia (with 250 Aboriginal linguistic communities at colonisation and 250 years of in-migration from all continents) is an EMI context for 23–30 per cent of citizens. Aggressive marketing of Australia as an educational destination for students from the Asia-Pacific amplifies its multilingual and EMI reality in higher education. The critique of EMI includes a history of cognitive capture, debt-trap diplomacy and educational failure. Included are key agents that advance EMI, invisibilise multilingualisms and perpetuate coloniality despite the claims of social justice and access that accompany EMI rationales.

This study examines English Medium Instruction (EMI) teacher identities in two Colombian universities within the context of the country's linguistic diversity and sociopolitical shifts. It highlights the educational preference for English over indigenous languages and the contentious introduction of EMI and Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). The research focuses on the identity (re)configurations of EMI educators within this evolving landscape, influenced by both personal and broader sociopolitical factors. Utilizing a qualitative approach, the study examines seven professors across disciplines to capture their experiences with EMI. The findings underscore the complexity of EMI teacher identity (EMITI), which intersects language, discipline, context, and pedagogy. The ROAD-MAPPING framework facilitates an exploration of these identities, highlighting the critical role of teacher agency in EMI settings. The research illuminates how EMI teachers navigate their roles amid global and local pressures, disciplinary demands, and the linguistic aspects of EMI. This study enriches the understanding of language policy, teacher identity, and educational practices in multilingual higher education contexts.

English Medium Instruction (EMI) is a burgeoning field of interest for researchers and practitioners; however, to date its sociocultural and political implications have not been widely considered. This book addresses that concern by situating EMI within wider sociopolitical contexts of knowledge and language. It foregrounds the notion of “Critical EMI,” bringing together applied linguists to revisit EMI in higher education from critical sociocultural perspectives. The notion of criticality is conceptualized as an attempt at addressing issues of ideology, policy, identity, social justice, and the politics of English. The chapters explore Critical EMI concerns in diverse settings across five continents, and present insights for the theory, research, policy, and practice of EMI. The book also problematizes the neocolonial spread and dominance of English through EMI. Calling for an explicit and inclusive EMI praxis, it is essential reading for researchers of applied linguistics and English language education, as well as teacher practitioners.

This chapter examines the ideologies of language use in the context of an EMI university in multilingual Hong Kong from the perspectives of a group of international students. Based on the findings of the study, the chapter shows that international students’ ideologies of language use in the EMI university classroom are much more complex and nuanced than what is written in the institution’s official language policy documents. The majority of international students are found to hold ideologies of English as the default language for university education and English monolingualism as the norm in the EMI classroom. However, there is also evidence of varying degrees of acceptability of multilingual language practices in the classroom. The chapter draws attention to the complex ways in which international students’ language ideologies intersect with their concerns about social exclusion, linguistic disadvantage and educational inequality in the EMI classroom. It also demonstrates how their language ideologies contribute to sustaining and reproducing linguistic hegemony and social injustice in EMI higher education.

Inequality in higher education English Medium Instruction (EMI) is mainly discussed in Global South contexts, where socioeconomic status and rural–urban contrasts are often identified as the main drivers. In this chapter we present the situation of EMI inequalities in three very different national contexts – Ethiopia, Poland, and Japan – with provision of empirical evidence in support of arguments made. The authors have been involved in researching EMI in these contexts and issues of inequalities arose in our data as important concerns that should be discussed. In this chapter we promote the argument that, contrary to education ministries’ insistence, EMI may present limited opportunities or, where socioeconomic issues can be overcome, it may present new opportunities for marginalised populations in certain disciplines. We argue that EMI should not be heralded as a solution to any range of problems, emphasising that even across a range of socioeconomies EMI brings opportunities only for certain sectors of the population. We conclude with suggestions for how EMI might be used more effectively to achieve the goals it is often intended for.