• Dadajon Dadabayev Rustamovich

  Author

The rapid globalization of higher education has led to the use of English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) in state institutions worldwide. Although the national policies tend to impose a rigid English-only pedagogy structure to make the country more competitive in the global market and institutionally prestigious, there is a big de jure/de facto disparity between these top-down requirements and the real-life classroom activities. The current paper explores the tension between the official policy and the reality in the area of public higher education, and specifically the institutions in the region with language diverse student bodies. The study employs the Spolsky Language Policy Framework and a qualitative case study method to outline key obstacles to alignment, such as different degrees of linguistic proficiency among the faculty, under-preparedness of students, and the unavailability of special pedagogical tools. The results demonstrate that translanguaging, or the intentional use of local languages to explain complex ideas, is a survival strategy that is needed, but not commonly recognized, by teachers and students. This hidden bilingualism implies that hard monolingual policies can unintentionally result in surface learning and overworking of the mind. This paper concludes that to close the divide between theory and practice, it is necessary to change the ideologies of English only towards more adaptable, multilingual models. Suggestions are formalization of translanguaging into policy documents, faculty-level special training on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and creation of bilingual or bridge materials. Institutions can safeguard the academic rigor by matching policy expectations and the sociolinguistic realities of public universities, and attain the aims of internationalization.

• PDF