research on english language

• Career Center
• Research in the Teaching of English

RTE is the flagship research journal of NCTE.

• Current Issue
• Write for Us
• Call for Manuscripts
• Alan C. Purves Award
• Advertise with Us
• Purchase Back Issues (Print)

Research in the Teaching of English ( RTE ) is a broad-based, multidisciplinary journal composed of original research articles and short scholarly essays on a wide range of topics significant to those concerned with the teaching and learning of languages and literacies around the world, both in and beyond schools and universities.

Subscribe Read It!

Editorial Staff

Editors and Editorial Assistants

Mollie Blackburn Ohio State University

David Bloome Ohio State University

Dorian Harrison Ohio State University

Michiko Hikida Ohio State University

Laurie Katz Ohio State University

Stephanie Power-Carter Ohio State University

Director of Publishing

Colin Murcray NCTE

Permissions

[email protected]

[email protected]

RTE Advisory Board for Volumes 58-62 (2023-2028)

Alfredo Artiles, Stanford University; Yona Asfaha, University of Asmara; April Baker-Bell, Michigan State University; Faythe Beauchemin, University of Arkansas; Pietro Boscolo, University of Padova; Maria Botelho, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Maureen Boyd, University at Buffalo; Ayanna Brown, Elmhurst College; David Bwire, College of New Jersey; Blanca Caldas Chumbes, University of Minnesota; Gerald Campano, University of Pennsylvania; Antonia Candela, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados; Angela Cannon, Bloomington, IN; Limarys Caraballo, Teachers College, Columbia University; Lucia Cardenas, Michigan State University; Thandeka Chapman, University of California, San Diego; Caroline Clark, The Ohio State University; Catherine Compton-Lilly, University of South Carolina; Jamal Cooks, San Francisco State University; Marcus Croom, Indiana University; Denise Dávila, University of Texas at Austin; Adrienne Dixson, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Leah Durán, University of Arizona; Elizabeth Dutro, University of Colorado, Boulder; Brian Edmiston, The Ohio State University; Patricia Enciso, The Ohio State University; Jeanne Fain, Lipscomb University; Tiffany Flowers, Georgia State University; Brittany Frieson Davis, University of North Texas; Danling Fu, University of Florida; Antero Godina Garcia, Stanford University; James Paul Gee, Arizona State University; Alexandra Georgakopolou, Kings College London; María Paula Ghiso, Teachers College, Columbia University; Susan Goldman, University of Illinois, Chicago; Millie Gort, University of Colorado, Boulder; Steven Graham, Vanderbilt University; Judith Green, University of California, Santa Barbara; David Green, Jr., Howard University; Lydia Haff, Hawaii; Troy Hicks, Central Michigan University; Jim Hoffman, University of North Texas; Huili Hong, Vanderbilt University ; Ana Christina Iddings Da Silva, Vanderbilt University; Vanessa Irvin, University of Hawaii; Hilary Janks, University of Witwatersrand; Korina Jocson, University of Massachusetts Amherst; Lamar Johnson, Michigan State; Latrise Johnson, University of Alabama; Miriam Jorge, University of Missouri-St. Louis; Judith Kalman, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados; Minjeong Kim, University of Massachusetts, Lowell; Lydiah Kiramba, University of Nebraska; Kafi Kumasi, Wayne State University; Wan Shun Eva Lam, Northwestern University; Kevin Leander, Vanderbilt University; Adam Leftstein, Ben Gurion University of the Negev; Constant Leung, Kings College London; Sarah Levine, Stanford University; Cynthia Lewis, University of California, Santa Cruz; Diana Liu, Columbia University; David Low, California State University, Fresno; Ruth Lowery, University of North Texas; Lian Madsen, University of Copenhagen; Joanne Marciano, Michigan State University; Danny Martinez, University of California, Davis; Ramón Martínez, Stanford University; Wayne Martino, Western University; Stephen May, The University of Auckland; Byeonggon Min, Seoul National University; Nicole Mirra, Rutgers University; Karla Möller, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Briana Morales, St. Louis, MO; Ernest Morrell, Notre Dame University; Luz Murillo, Texas State University; Vanesa Neves, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; George Newell, The Ohio State University; Sue Nichols, University of South Australia; Carmen Helena Guerrero-Nieto, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas ; Silvia Nogueron-Liu, University of Colorado, Boulder; Allison Wynhoff Olsen, Montana State University; Mariana Pacheco, University of Wisconsin; Kate Pahl, Sheffield University; Deborah Palmer, University of Colorado, Boulder; Uta Papen, Lancaster University; Jenell Igeleke Penn, The Ohio State University; Tonya Perry, University of Alabama, Birmingham; Grace Player, University of Connecticut; David Poveda, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; Detra Price-Dennis, Columbia University; Ben Rampton, Kings College London; Timothy Rasinski, Kent State University; Iliana Reyes, University of Arizona; Ryan Rish, State University of New York, Buffalo; Rebecca Rogers, University of Missouri St Louis; Deborah Rowe, Vanderbilt University; Jennifer Rowsell, University of Bristol; Lee Rutherford, Westerville, Ohio; Ryan Schey, University of Georgia; Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Columbia University; Audra Skukauskaite, University of Central Florida;  Peter Smagorinsky, University of Georgia; Mandy Smith, Columbus, Ohio; Julia Snell, University of Leeds; Tamara Spencer, St. Mary’s College; Massimiliano Spotti, Tilburg University; Laura Sterponi, University of California, Berkeley; Amy Stornaiuolo, University of Pennsylvania; Laura Taylor, Rhodes College; Ebony Elizabeth Thomas, University of Michigan; K.C. Nat Turner, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Cynthia Tyson, The Ohio State University; Lalitha Vasudevan, Teachers College, Columbia University; Saba Khan Vlach, University of Iowa; Jon Wargo, Boston College; Autumn West, Illinois State University; Melissa Wetzel,  University of Texas, Austin; Jill Williams, Columbus, Ohio; Arlette Willis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Darius Wimby, Atlanta, GA; Ursula Wingate, Kings College London; Maisha Winn, University of Wisconsin; Karen Wohlwend, Indiana University; Angie Zapata, University of Missouri, Columbia

Annual Annotated Bibliographies

For many years now, RTE has been publishing an Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English. Most recently, these bibliographies have been published annually in the February issue since 2018, and they have grown larger every year. Because of their length, the bibliographies are no longer published in their entirety in the print version of the journal; the complete version is to be found only online. They are open and available to all scholars, not just RTE subscribers.

2023 Bibliography

2022 Bibliography

2021 Bibliography

2020 Bibliography

2019 Bibliography

2018 Bibliography

2016 Bibliography

2015 Bibliography

2014 Bibliography

2013 Bibliography

2012 Bibliography

2011 Bibliography

2010 Bibliography

2009 Bibliography

2008 Bibliography

2007 Bibliography

2006 Bibliography

2005 Bibliography

2004 Bibliography

2003 Bibliography

Featured Journals

• Classroom Notes Plus
• College Composition and Communication
• College English
• English Education
• English Journal
• English Leadership Quarterly
• Language Arts
• School Talk
• Talking Points
• Teaching English in the Two-Year College
• Voices from the Middle

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Mol Biol Cell
• v.23(8); 2012 Apr 15

English as the universal language of science: opportunities and challenges

English is now used almost exclusively as the language of science. The adoption of a de facto universal language of science has had an extraordinary effect on scientific communication: by learning a single language, scientists around the world gain access to the vast scientific literature and can communicate with other scientists anywhere in the world. However, the use of English as the universal scientific language creates distinct challenges for those who are not native speakers of English. In this editorial, we discuss how researchers, manuscript reviewers, and journal editors can help minimize these challenges, thereby leveling the playing field and fostering international scientific communication.

It is estimated that less than 15% of the world's population speaks English, with just 5% being native speakers ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language ). This extraordinary imbalance emphasizes the importance of recognizing and alleviating the difficulties faced by nonnative speakers of English if we are to have a truly global community of scientists. For scientists whose first language is not English, writing manuscripts and grants, preparing oral presentations, and communicating directly with other scientists in English is much more challenging than it is for native speakers of English. Communicating subtle nuances, which can be done easily in one's native tongue, becomes difficult or impossible. A common complaint of nonnative speakers of English is that manuscript reviewers often focus on criticizing their English, rather than looking beyond the language to evaluate the scientific results and logic of a manuscript. This makes it difficult for their manuscripts to get a fair review and, ultimately, to be accepted for publication.

We believe that the communications advantage realized by native speakers of English obligates them to acknowledge and to help alleviate the extra challenges faced by their fellow scientists from non-English-speaking countries. Native speakers of English should offer understanding, patience, and assistance when reviewing or editing manuscripts of nonnative speakers of English. At the same time, nonnative speakers of English must endeavor to produce manuscripts that are clearly written. We offer the following guidelines for writing and evaluating manuscripts in the context of the international community of scientists:

• Nonnative speakers of English can write effective manuscripts, despite errors of grammar, syntax, and usage, if the manuscripts are clear, simple, logical, and concise. (We note that native speakers of English sometimes write manuscripts exhibiting good grammar, yet filled with muddled and confusing logic.)
• When possible, reviewers and editors of manuscripts should look beyond errors in grammar, syntax, and usage, and evaluate the science.
• It is inappropriate to reject or harshly criticize manuscripts from nonnative speakers of English based on errors of grammar, syntax, or usage alone. If there are language errors, reviewers and editors should provide constructive criticism, pointing out examples of passages that are unclear and suggesting improvements. Reviewers and editors may also suggest that authors seek the assistance of expert English speakers or professional editing services in preparing revised versions of manuscripts. And finally, all involved should bear in mind that most journals employ copyeditors, whose job it is to correct any lingering errors in grammar, syntax, and usage before final publication of an article.
• Nonnative speakers of English must be aware that reviewers, editors, and journal staff do not have the time or resources to extensively edit manuscripts for language and that reviewers and editors must be able to understand what is being reported. Thus, it is essential that nonnative speakers of English recognize that their ability to participate in the international scientific enterprise is directly related to their ability to produce manuscripts in English that are clear, simple, logical, and concise.

The fact that English is the de facto global language of science is not likely to change anytime soon. Optimizing communication among members of the international community of scientists, and thus advancing scientific progress, depends on elimination of obstacles faced by nonnative speakers of the English language. This ideal can best be achieved when all members of the scientific community work together.

Acknowledgments

This editorial was inspired by correspondence with Victor Norris of the Université de Rouen, France. We thank Yi Zuo, Karsten Weis, and Laurent Blanchoin for comments on the manuscript and Mark Leader for his excellent edits.

DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E12-02-0108

Recommended pages

• Undergraduate open days
• Postgraduate open days
• Accommodation
• Information for teachers
• Maps and directions
• Sport and fitness

English Language Research Journal

• ISSN 2057-4215

Aims and scope

English Language Research  is a double-blind peer reviewed open access journal with an emphasis on original research into both theoretical and applied linguistic issues in context. The journal is based in the Department of English at the University of Birmingham, and has been the forum for many seminal works. It has been relaunched and expanded in 2013 as a journal committed to free online access, whilst maintaining the benchmarks of academic rigour and originality. The journal also actively welcomes submissions from postgraduate researchers and early career academics.

The next issue of the journal will be on a specific theme and a call for papers will be issued soon.

For enquiries about the suitability of studies for publication in English Language Research, prospective authors are welcome to contact the editors at: [email protected] .

• Issue 2: Special Issue on Metaphor

Editorial Board / Review Board

Editors, issue 2.

Sarah Turner, University of Birmingham

Editors, Issue 1

Phil Bennett, University of Birmingham Lee Oakley, University of Birmingham Sarah Turner, University of Birmingham

Advisory Board

Michael Barlow, University of Auckland Ylva Berglund-Prytz, University of Oxford Silvia Bernardini, University of Bologna Alice Deignan, University of Leeds Lynne Flowerdew, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Nicholas Groom, University of Birmingham Susan Hunston, University of Birmingham Chris Kennedy, University of Birmingham Jeannette Littlemore, University of Birmingham Sofia Malamatidou, University of Birmingham Ute Römer , Georgia State University Gabriela Saldanha, University of Birmingham Michael Stubbs, Universität Trier Caroline Tagg, University of Birmingham Paul Thompson, University of Birmingham Geoffrey Williams, Université de Bretagne Sud

English dominates scientific research – here’s how we can fix it, and why it matters

Científica del Instituto de Lengua, Literatura y Antropología (ILLA), del Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales (CCHS) del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales (CCHS - CSIC)

Disclosure statement

Elea Giménez Toledo does not receive a salary, nor does she own shares, nor does she receive funding from any company or organisation that might benefit from this article. She is a commissioner of the SEGIB, which implies only unpaid scientific advice to this institution, as part of the scientific activity carried out at the CSIC.

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation ES.

View all partners

It is often remarked that Spanish should be more widely spoken or understood in the scientific community given its number of speakers around the world, a figure the Instituto Cervantes places at almost 600 million .

However, millions of speakers do not necessarily grant a language strength in academia. This has to be cultivated on a scientific, political and cultural level, with sustained efforts from many institutions and specialists.

The scientific community should communicate in as many languages as possible

By some estimates, as much as 98% of the world’s scientific research is published in English , while only around 18% of the world’s population speaks it. This makes it essential to publish in other languages if we are to bring scientific research to society at large.

The value of multilingualism in science has been highlighted by numerous high profile organisations, with public declarations and statements on the matter from the European Charter for Researchers , the Helsinki Initiative on Multiligualism , the Unesco Recommendation on Open Science , the OPERAS Multiligualism White Paper , the Latin American Forum on Research Assessment , the COARA Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment , and the Declaration of the 5th Meeting of Minsters and Scientific Authorities of Ibero-American Countries . These organisations all agree on one thing: all languages have value in scientific communication .

As the last of these declarations points out, locally, regionally and nationally relevant research is constantly being published in languages other than English. This research has an economic, social and cultural impact on its surrounding environment, as when scientific knowledge is disseminated it filters through to non-academic professionals, thus creating a broader culture of knowledge sharing.

Greater diversity also enables fluid dialogue among academics who share the same language, or who speak and understand multiple languages. In Ibero-America, for example, Spanish and Portuguese can often be mutually understood by non-native speakers, allowing them to share the scientific stage. The same happens in Spain with the majority of its co-official languages .

Read more: Non-native English speaking scientists work much harder just to keep up, global research reveals

No hierarchies, no categories

Too often, scientific research in any language other than English is automatically seen as second tier, with little consideration for the quality of the work itself.

This harmful prejudice ignores the work of those involved, especially in the humanities and social sciences. It also profoundly undermines the global academic community’s ability to share knowledge with society.

By defending and preserving multilingualism, the scientific community brings research closer to those who need it. Failing to pursue this aim means that academia cannot develop or expand its audience. We have to work carefully, systematically and consistently in every language available to us.

Read more: Prestigious journals make it hard for scientists who don't speak English to get published. And we all lose out

The logistics of strengthening linguistic diversity in science

Making a language stronger in academia is a complex process. It does not happen spontaneously, and requires careful coordination and planning. Efforts have to come from public and private institutions, the media, and other cultural outlets, as well as from politicians, science diplomacy , and researchers themselves.

Many of these elements have to work in harmony, as demonstrated by the Spanish National Research Council’s work in ES CIENCIA , a project which seeks to unite scientific and and political efforts.

Academic publishing and AI models: a new challenge

The global academic environment is changing as a result the digital transition and new models of open access. Research into publishers of scientific content in other languages will be essential to understanding this shift. One thing is clear though: making scientific content produced in a particular language visible and searchable online is crucial to ensuring its strength.

In the case of academic books, the transition to open access has barely begun , especially in the commercial publishing sector, which releases around 80% of scientific books in Spain. As with online publishing, a clear understanding will make it possible to design policies and models that account for the different ways of disseminating scientific research, including those that communicate locally and in other languages. Greater linguistic diversity in book publishing can also allow us to properly recognise the work done by publishers in sharing research among non-English speakers.

Read more: Removing author fees can help open access journals make research available to everyone

Making publications, datasets, and other non-linguistic research results easy to find is another vital element, which requires both scientific and technical support. The same applies to expanding the corpus of scientific literature in Spanish and other languages, especially since this feeds into generative artificial intelligence models.

If linguistically diverse scientific content is not incorporated into AI systems, they will spread information that is incomplete, biased or misleading: a recent Spanish government report on the state of Spanish and co-official languages points out that 90% of the text currently fed into AI is written in English.

Deep study of terminology is essential

Research into terminology is of the utmost importance in preventing the use of improvised, imprecise language or unintelligible jargon. It can also bring huge benefits for the quality of both human and machine translations, specialised language teaching, and the indexing and organisation of large volumes of documents.

Terminology work in Spanish is being carried out today thanks to the processing of large language corpuses by AI and researchers in the TeresIA project, a joint effort coordinated by the Spanish National Research Council. However, 15 years of ups and downs were needed to to get such a project off the ground in Spanish.

The Basque Country, Catalonia and Galicia, on the other hand, have worked intensively and systematically on their respective languages. They have not only tackled terminology as a public language policy issue, but have also been committed to established terminology projects for a long time.

Multiligualism is a global issue

This need for broader diversity also applies to Ibero-America as a whole, where efforts are being coordinated to promote Spanish and Portuguese in academia, notably by the Ibero-American General Secretariat and the Mexican National Council of Humanities, Sciences and Technologies .

While this is sorely needed, we cannot promote the region’s two most widely spoken languages and also ignore its diversity of indigenous and co-official languages. These are also involved in the production of knowledge, and are a vehicle for the transfer of scientific information, as demonstrated by efforts in Spain.

Each country has its own unique role to play in promoting greater linguistic diversity in scientific communication. If this can be achieved, the strength of Iberian languages – and all languages, for that matter – in academia will not be at the mercy of well intentioned but sporadic efforts. It will, instead, be the result of the scientific community’s commitment to a culture of knowledge sharing.

This article was originally published in Spanish

• Scientific publishing
• Multilingualism
• The Conversation Europe

Compliance Lead

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

• Open access
• Published: 10 May 2024

Challenges and opportunities of English as the medium of instruction in diploma midwifery programs in Bangladesh: a mixed-methods study

• Anna Williams 1 ,
• Jennifer R. Stevens 2 ,
• Rondi Anderson 3 &
• Malin Bogren 4  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  523 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

171 Accesses

Metrics details

English is generally recognized as the international language of science and most research on evidence-based medicine is produced in English. While Bangla is the dominant language in Bangladesh, public midwifery degree programs use English as the medium of instruction (EMI). This enables faculty and student access to the latest evidence-based midwifery content, which is essential for provision of quality care later. Yet, it also poses a barrier, as limited English mastery among students and faculty limits both teaching and learning.

This mixed-methods study investigates the challenges and opportunities associated with the implementation of EMI in the context of diploma midwifery education in Bangladesh. Surveys were sent to principals at 38 public midwifery education institutions, and 14 English instructors at those schools. Additionally, ten key informant interviews were held with select knowledgeable stakeholders with key themes identified.

Surveys found that English instructors are primarily guest lecturers, trained in general or business English, without a standardized curriculum or functional English language laboratories. Three themes were identified in the key informant interviews. First, in addition to students’ challenges with English, faculty mastery of English presented challenges as well. Second, language labs were poorly maintained, often non-functional, and lacked faculty. Third, an alternative education model, such as the English for Specific Purposes (ESP) curriculum,  has potential to strengthen English competencies within midwifery schools.

Conclusions

ESP, which teaches English for application in a specific discipline, is one option available in Bangladesh for midwifery education. Native language instruction and the middle ground of multilingualism are also useful options. Although a major undertaking, investing in an ESP model and translation of technical midwifery content into relevant mother tongues may provide faster and more complete learning. In addition, a tiered system of requirements for English competencies tied to higher levels of midwifery education could build bridges to students to help them access global evidence-based care resources. Higher levels might emphasize English more heavily, while the diploma level would follow a multilingualism approach, teach using an ESP curriculum, and have complementary emphasis on the mother tongue.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

As the international language of science, English holds an important position in the education of healthcare professionals. Globally, most scientific papers are published in English. In many non-native English-speaking countries, English is used as the language of instruction in higher education [ 1 ]. The dominant status held by the English language in the sciences is largely considered to increase global access to scientific information by unifying the scientific community under a single lingua franca [ 2 ].

In Bangladesh, where the mother tongue is Bangla and midwifery diploma programs are taught in English, knowledge of English facilitates student and instructor access to global, continuously updated evidence-based practice guidance. This includes basic and scientific texts, media-based instructional materials (including on life-saving skills), professional journals, and proceedings of medical conferences. Many of these resources are available for free online, which can be particularly useful in healthcare settings that have not integrated evidence-based practice.

In addition to opportunity though, English instruction also creates several challenges. Weak student and faculty English competency may impede midwifery education quality in Bangladesh. Globally, literature has linked limited instructor competency in the language of instruction with reduced depth, nuance, and accuracy in conveying subject matter content [ 3 ]. This can lead to the perpetuation of patterns of care in misalignment with global evidence. In addition, students’ native language proficiency in their topic of study can decline when instruction is in English, limiting native language communication between colleagues on the job later on [ 4 , 5 ].

In this paper, we examine the current status of English language instruction within public diploma midwifery programs in Bangladesh. Midwifery students are not required to demonstrate a certain skill level in English to enter the program. However, they are provided with English classes in the program. Midwifery course materials are in English, while—for ease and practicality—teaching aids and verbal classroom instruction are provided in Bangla. Following graduation, midwifery students must pass a national licensing exam given in English to practice. Upon passing, some new midwives are deployed as public employees and are posted to sub-district health facilities where English is not used by either providers or clients. Others will seek employment as part of non-governmental organization (NGO) projects where English competency can be of value for interacting with global communities, and for participating in NGO-specific on-the-job learning opportunities. The mix of both challenge and opportunity in this context is complex.

Our analysis examines the reasons for the identified English competency gaps within midwifery programs, and potential solutions. We synthesize the findings and discuss solutions in the context of the global literature. Finally, we present a set of viable options for strengthening English competencies among midwifery faculty and students to enable better quality teaching and greater learning comprehension among students.

Study design

We employed a mixed-methods study design [ 6 ] in order to assess the quality of English instruction within education programs, and options for its improvement. Data collection consisted of two surveys of education institutes, a web-search of available English programs in Bangladesh, and key informant interviews. Both surveys followed a structured questionnaire with a combination of open- and closed-ended questions and were designed by the authors. One survey targeted the 38 institute principals and the other targeted 14 of the institutes’ 38 English instructors (those for whom contact information was shared). The web-search focused on generating a list of available English programs in Bangladesh that had viable models that could be tapped into to strengthen English competencies among midwifery faculty and students. Key informant interviews were unstructured and intended to substantiate and deepen understanding of the survey and web-search findings.

No minimum requirements exist for students’ English competencies upon entry into midwifery diploma programs. Students enter directly from higher secondary school (12th standard) and complete the midwifery program over a period of three years. Most students come from modest economic backgrounds having completed their primary and secondary education in Bangla. While English instruction is part of students’ secondary education, skill attainment is low, and assessment standards are not in place to ensure student mastery. To join the program, midwifery students are required to pass a multi-subject entrance exam that includes a component on English competency. However, as no minimum English standard must be met, the exam does not screen out potential midwifery students. Scoring, for instance, is not broken down by subject. This makes it possible to answer zero questions correctly in up to three of the subjects, including English, and pass the exam.

Processes/data collection

Prior to the first survey, principals were contacted by UNFPA with information about the survey and all provided verbal consent to participate. The survey of principals collected general information about the resources available for English instruction at the institutes. It was a nine-item questionnaire with a mix of Yes/No, multiple choice and write-in questions. Specific measures of interest were whether and how many English instructors the institutes had, instructors’ hiring criteria, whether institutes had language labs and if they were in use, and principals’ views on the need for English courses and their ideal mode of delivery (e.g., in-person, online, or a combination). This survey also gathered contact information of institute English instructors. These measures were chosen as they were intended to provide a high-level picture of institutes’ English resources such as faculty availability and qualifications, and use of language labs. To ensure questions were appropriately framed, a pilot test was conducted with two institute principals and small adjustments were subsequently made. Responses were shared via an electronic form sent by email and were used to inform the second survey as well as the key informant interviews. Of the 38 principals, 36 completed the survey.

The second survey, targeting English instructors, gathered information on instructors’ type of employment (e.g., institute faculty or adjunct lecturers); length of employment; student academic focus (e.g., midwifery or nursing); hours of English instruction provided as part of the midwifery diploma program; whether a standard English curriculum was used and if it was tailored toward the healthcare profession; use of digital content in teaching; education and experience in English teaching; and their views on student barriers to learning English. These measures were chosen to provide a basic criterion for assessing quality of English instruction, materials and resources available to students. For instance, instructors’ status as faculty would indicate a stronger degree of integration and belonging to the institute midwifery program than a guest lecturer status which allows for part time instruction with little job security. In addition, use of a standard, professionally developed English curriculum and integration of digital content into classroom learning would be indicative of higher quality than learning materials developed informally by instructors themselves without use of listening content by native speakers in classrooms. The survey was piloted with two English instructors. Based on their feedback, minor adjustments were made to one question, and it was determined that responses were best gathered by phone due to instructors’ limited internet access. Of the 14 instructors contacted, 11 were reached and provided survey responses by phone.

The web-search gathered information on available English language instruction programs for adults in Bangladesh, and the viability of tapping into any of them to improve English competency among midwifery students and faculty. Keywords Bangladesh  +  English courses , English training , English classes , study English and learn English were typed into Google’s search platform. Eleven English language instruction programs were identified. Following this, each program was contacted either by phone or email and further detail about the program’s offerings was collected.

Unstructured key informant interviews were carried out with select knowledgeable individuals to substantiate and enhance the credibility of the survey and web-search findings. Three in-country expert English language instructors and four managers of English language teaching programs were interviewed. In addition, interviews were held with three national-level stakeholders knowledgeable about work to make functional technologically advanced English language laboratories that had been installed at many of the training institutes. Question prompts included queries such as, ‘In your experience, what are the major barriers to Bangla-medium educated students studying in English at the university level?’, ‘What effective methods or curricula are you aware of for improving student English to an appropriate competency level for successful learning in English?’, and, ‘What options do you see for the language lab/s being used, either in their originally intended capacity or otherwise?’

Data analysis

All data were analyzed by the lead researcher. Survey data were entered into a master Excel file and grouped descriptively to highlight trends and outliers, and ultimately enable a clear description of the structure and basic quality attributes (e.g., instructors’ education, hours of English instruction, and curriculum development resources used). Web-search findings were compiled in a second Excel file with columns distinguishing whether they taught general English (often aimed at preparing students for international standard exams), Business English, or English for Specific Purposes (ESP). This enabled separation of standalone English courses taught by individual instructors as part of vocational or academic programs of study in other fields, and programs with an exclusive focus on English language acquisition. Key informant interviews were summarized in a standard notes format using Word. An inductive process of content analysis was carried out, in which content categories were identified and structured to create coherent meaning [ 7 ]. From this, the key overall findings and larger themes that grew from the initial survey and web-search results were drawn out.

The surveys (Tables  1 and 2 ) found that English instructors are primarily long-term male guest lecturers employed at each institute for more than two years. All principal respondents indicated that there is a need for English instruction—18 of the 19 reported that this is best done through a combination of in-person and computer-based instruction. Ten institutes reported that they have an English language lab, but none were used as such. The other institutes did not have language labs. The reported reasons for the labs not being in use were a lack of trained staff to operate them and some components of the technology not being installed or working properly. The findings from the instructors’ survey indicated that English instructors typically develop their own learning materials and teach general English without tailoring content to healthcare contexts. Only two mentioned using a standard textbook to guide their instruction and one described consulting a range of English textbooks to develop learning content. None reported using online or other digital tools for language instruction in their classrooms. Most instructors had an advanced degree (i.e., master’s degree) in English, and seven had received training in teaching English. Interviews with instructors also revealed that they themselves did not have mastery of English, as communication barriers in speaking over the phone appeared consistently across 10 of the 11 instructor respondents.

The web-search and related follow up interviews found that most English instruction programs (10 out of the 11) were designed for teaching general English and/or business English. The majority were offered through private entities aiming to reach individuals intending to study abroad, access employment that required English, or improve their ability to navigate business endeavors in English. One program, developed by the British Council, had flexibility to tailor its structure and some of its content to the needs of midwifery students. However, this was limited in that a significant portion of the content that would be used was developed for global audiences and thus not tailored to a Bangladeshi audience or to any specific discipline. One of the university English programs offered a promising ESP model tailored to midwifery students. It was designed by BRAC University’s Institute of Language for the university’s private midwifery training program.

Three themes emerged from the other key informant interviews (Table  3 ). The first was that, in addition to students’ challenges with English, faculty mastery of English presented challenges as well. Of the 34 faculty members intending to participate in the 2019–2020 cohort for the Dalarna master’s degree, half did not pass the prerequisite English exam. Ultimately, simultaneous English-Bangla translation was necessary for close to half of the faculty to enable their participation in the master’s program. English language limitations also precluded one faculty member from participating in an international PhD program in midwifery.

The second theme highlighted the language labs’ lack of usability. The language labs consisted of computers, an interactive whiteboard, audio-visual equipment, and associated software to allow for individualized direct interactions between teacher and student. However, due to the lack of appropriately trained staff to manage, care for and use the language lab equipment, the investment required to make the labs functional appeared to outweigh the learning advantages doing so would provide. Interviews revealed that work was being done, supported by a donor agency, on just one language lab, to explore whether it could be made functional. The work was described as costly and challenging, and required purchasing a software license from abroad, thus likely being impractical to apply to the other labs and sustain over multiple years.

The third theme was around the ESP curriculum model. The program developers had employed evidence-informed thinking to develop the ESP learning content and consulted student midwives on their learning preferences. Due to the student input, at least 80% of the content was designed to directly relate to the practice of midwifery in Bangladesh, while the remaining 10–20% references globally relevant content. This balance was struck based on students’ expressed interest in having some exposure to English usage outside of Bangladesh for their personal interest. For conversation practice, the modules integrated realistic scenarios of midwives interacting with doctors, nurses and patients. Also built into written activities were exercises where students were prompted to describe relevant health topics they are concurrently studying in their health, science or clinical classes. Given the midwifery students’ educational backgrounds and intended placements in rural parts of Bangladesh, an ESP curriculum model appeared to be the most beneficial existing program to pursue tapping into to strengthen English competencies within midwifery programs. This was because the content would likely be more accessible to students than a general English course by having vocabulary, activities and examples directly relevant to the midwifery profession.

The study findings demonstrate key weaknesses in the current model of English instruction taught in public midwifery programs. Notably, the quantitative findings revealed that some English instructors do not have training in teaching English, and none used standard curricula or online resources to structure and enhance their classroom content. In addition, weak mastery of English among midwifery faculty was identified in the qualitative data, which calls into question faculty’s ability to fully understand and accurately convey content from English learning materials. Global literature indicates that this is not a unique situation. Many healthcare faculty and students in low-resource settings, in fact, are faced with delivering and acquiring knowledge in a language they have not sufficiently mastered [ 8 ]. As a significant barrier to knowledge and skill acquisition for evidence-based care, this requires more attention from global midwifery educators [ 9 ].

Also holding back students’ English development is the finding from both the quantitative and qualitative data that none of the high-tech language labs were being used as intended. This indicates a misalignment with the investment against the reality of the resources at the institutes to use them. While setting up the costly language labs appears to have been a large investment with little to no return, it does demonstrate that strengthening English language instruction in post-secondary public education settings is a priority that the Bangladesh government is willing to invest in. However, scaling up access to an ESP curriculum model tailored to future midwifery practitioners in Bangladesh may be a more worthwhile investment than language labs [ 10 ]. 

The ESP approach teaches English for application in a specific discipline. It does this by using vocabulary, examples, demonstrations, scenarios and practice activities that are directly related to the context and professions those studying English live and work (or are preparing to work) in. One way ESP has been described, attributed to Hutchinson and Waters (1987), is, “ESP should properly be seen not as any particular language product but as an approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to content and method are based on the learner’s reason for learning” [ 11 ]. It is proposed by linguistic education researchers as a viable model for strengthening language mastery and subject matter comprehension in EMI university contexts [ 12 ].

Though it did not arise as a finding, reviewing the literature highlighted that Bangla language instruction may be an additional, potentially viable option. Linguistic research has long shown that students learn more thoroughly and efficiently in their mother tongue [ 12 ]. Another perhaps more desirable option may be multilingualism, which entails recognizing native languages as complementary in EMI classrooms, and using them through verbal instruction and supplemental course materials. Kirkpatrick, a leading scholar of EMI in Asia, suggests that multilingualism be formally integrated into EMI university settings [ 13 ]. This approach is supported by evidence showing that the amount of native language support students need for optimal learning is inversely proportional to their degree of English proficiency [ 14 ].

Ultimately, despite the language related learning limitations identified in this study, and the opportunities presented by native language and multilingualism approaches, there remains a fundamental need for members of the midwifery profession in Bangladesh to use up-to-date guidance on evidence-based midwifery care [ 11 ]. Doing that currently requires English language competence. Perhaps a tiered system of requirements for English competencies that are tied to diploma, Bachelor’s, Master’s and PhD midwifery programs could build bridges for more advanced students to access global resources. Higher academic levels might emphasize English more heavily, while the diploma level could follow a multilingualism approach—teaching using an ESP curriculum and integrating Bangla strategically to support optimal knowledge acquisition for future practice in rural facilities. Ideally, scores on a standard English competency exam would be used to assess students’ language competencies prior to entrance in English-based programs and that this would require more stringent English skill development prior to entering a midwifery program.

Methodological considerations

One of the limitations of this study is that it relied on self-reports and observation, rather than tested language and subject matter competencies. Its strengths though are in the relatively large number of education institutes that participated in the study, and the breadth of knowledge about faculty and student subject matter expertise among study co-authors. It was recognized that the lead researcher might be biased toward pre-determined perceptions of English competencies being a barrier to teaching and learning held by the lead institution (UNFPA). It was also recognized that due to the inherent power imbalance between researcher and participants, the manner of gathering data and engaging with stakeholders may contribute to confirmation bias, with respondents primarily sharing what they anticipated the researcher wished to hear (e.g., that English needed strengthening and the lead agency should take action to support the strengthening). The researcher thus engaged with participants independently of UNFPA and employed reflexivity by designing and carrying out the surveys to remotely collect standard data from institutes, as well as casting a wide net across institutes to increase broad representation. In addition, while institutes were informed that the surveys were gathering information about the English instruction within the institutes, no information was shared about potential new support to institutes. Finally, the researcher validated and gathered further details on the relevant information identified in the surveys through key informant interviews, which were held with stakeholders independent of UNFPA.

Adapting and scaling up the existing ESP modules found in this study, and integrating Bangla where it can enhance subject-matter learning, may be a useful way to help midwifery students and faculty improve their knowledge, skills, and critical thinking related to the field of midwifery. Given the educational backgrounds and likely work locations of most midwives in Bangladesh and many other LMICs, practitioners may want to consider investing in more opportunities for local midwives to teach and learn in their mother tongue. This type of investment would ideally be paired with a tiered system in which more advanced English competencies are required at higher-levels of education to ensure integration of global, evidence-based approaches into local standards of care.

Declarations.

Data availability

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Bangladesh Rehabilitation Assistance Committee

English medium instruction

English for Specific Purposes

Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

United Nations Population Fund

Macaro E. English medium instruction: global views and countries in focus. Lang Teach. 2019;52(2):231–48.

Article   Google Scholar  

Montgomery S. Does science need a global language? English and the future of research. University of Chicago Press; 2013.

Doiz A, Lasagabaster D, Pavón V. The integration of language and content in English-medium instruction courses: lecturers’ beliefs and practices. Ibérica. 2019;38:151–76.

Google Scholar  

Gallo F, Bermudez-Margareto B, et al. First language attrition: what it is, what it isn’t, and what it can be. National Research University Higher School of Economics; 2019.

Yilmaz G, Schmidt M. First language attrition and bilingualism, adult speakers. Bilingual cognition and language, the state of the science across its sub-fields (Ch. 11). John Benjamin’s Publishing Company.

Polit DF, Beck CT. (2021). Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Eleventh edition. Philadelphia, Wolters Kluwer.

Scheufele, B. (2008). Content Analysis, Qualitative. The international encyclopedia of communication John Wiley & Sons.

Pelicioni PHS, Michell A, Rocha dos Santos PC, Schulz JS. Facilitating Access to Current, evidence-based Health Information for Non-english speakers. Healthcare. 2023;11(13):1932.

Pakenham-Walsh N. Improving the availability of health research in languages other than English. Lancet. 2018;8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S2214-109X(18)30384-X.

Islam M. The differences and similarities between English for Specific purposes(ESP) and English for General purposes(EGP) teachers. Journal of Research in Humanities; 2015.

Lamri C, Dr et al. (2016-2017). English for Specific Purposes (1st Semester) Third Year ‘License’ Level. Department of English Language, Faculty of Arts and Language, University of Tlemcen

Jiang L, Zhang LJ, May S. (2016). Implementing English-medium instruction (EMI) in China: teachers’ practices and perceptions, and students’ learning motivation and needs. Int J Bilingual Educ Bilinguaism 22(2).

Kirkpatrick A. The rise of EMI: challenges for Asia. In, English medium instruction: global views and countries in focus. Lang Teach. 2015;52(2):231–48.

Kavaliauskiene G. Role of the mother tongue in learning English for specific purposes. ESP World. 2009;1(22):8.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Farida Begum, Rabeya Basri, and Pronita Raha for their contributions to data collection for this assessment.

This project under which this study was carried out was funded by funded by the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office.

Open access funding provided by University of Gothenburg.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Data, Design + Writing, Portland, OR, USA

Anna Williams

Goodbirth Network, North Adams, USA, MA

Jennifer R. Stevens

Project HOPE, Washington DC, USA

Rondi Anderson

University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Malin Bogren

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Authors contributions in the development of this paper were as follows: AW- Concept, acquisition, drafting, revision, analysis, interpretation. JRS- Concept, revision. RA- Concept, analysis MB- Revision, analysis, interpretationAll authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

This study was part of a larger project in Bangladesh approved by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW) with project ID UZJ31. The MOHFW project approval allows data collection of this type, that is carried out as part of routine program monitoring and improvement, including informed verbal consent for surveys and key informant interviews.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors of this study have no competing interests and no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Williams, A., Stevens, J., Anderson, R. et al. Challenges and opportunities of English as the medium of instruction in diploma midwifery programs in Bangladesh: a mixed-methods study. BMC Med Educ 24 , 523 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05499-8

Download citation

Received : 31 July 2023

Accepted : 02 May 2024

Published : 10 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05499-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• “English for special purposes”
• “English medium instruction”

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

A systematic review of empirical studies incorporating english movies as pedagogic aids in english language classroom provisionally accepted.

• 1 Department of English, School of Social Sciences and Languages, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, India., India
• 2 Research Scholar, Department of English, School of Social Sciences and Languages, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India., India
• 3 Department of English, School of Social Sciences and Languages, VIT University, India

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

The use of movie as an audio-visual multimodal tool has been extensively researched, and the studies prove that they play a vital role in enhancing communicative competence. Incorporating authentic materials like movies, television series, podcasts, social media, etc. into language learning serves as a valuable resource for the learners, for it exposes them to both official and vernacular language. The current study aims to systematically analyse the preceding studies that conjoined English movies into the curriculum to teach English. It also examines and evaluates the empirical research that various researchers conducted from 2000 to 2023. The articles were primarily sourced from prominent academic databases such as ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied in screening the 921 sources, of which 23 empirical studies were eligible for the review as a result of a three-stage data extraction process as shown in the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses" (PRISMA) chart. The extraction of data from the review encompasses an overview of the empirical studies, methodologies, participants, and interventions. The extracts were systematically analysed using the software's End Note and Covidence. The analysis of the existing literature and experimental data substantiates that teaching and learning English as a second or foreign language using movies as teaching aids exhibit promising prospects for enhancing English language proficiency. The findings of the study reveal different genres of movies that aid the facilitator in producing effective instruction materials with clearly defined objectives and guided activities. It is also observed that the learners have a positive experience with long-term learning benefits.

Keywords: EndNote, Covidence, Audio-visual multimodal aids, Communicative competence, Systematic review, Teaching Supplements

Received: 13 Feb 2024; Accepted: 16 May 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 K and S.N.S. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Dr. Gandhimathi S.N.S, Department of English, School of Social Sciences and Languages, VIT University, Vellore, India

People also looked at

• Schools & departments

Informatics: ILCC: Language Processing, Speech Technology, Information Retrieval, Cognition PhD, MPhil, MScR

Awards: PhD, MPhil, MScR

Study modes: Full-time, Part-time

Funding opportunities

Programme website: Informatics: ILCC: Language Processing, Speech Technology, Information Retrieval, Cognition

Upcoming Introduction to Postgraduate Study and Research events

Join us online on the 19th June or 26th June to learn more about studying and researching at Edinburgh.

Choose your event and register

Research profile

Strongly interdisciplinary in nature, the Institute for Language, Cognition and Communication ( ILCC ) is dedicated to both basic and applied research in the computational study of language, communication, and cognition, in both humans and machines.

As technology focuses increasingly on language-based communication tools, research into the automation of language processing has become vital. ILCC offers you the broadest research scope in the UK, and a strong computational focus.

Our primary areas of research are:

• natural language processing and computational linguistics
• spoken language processing
• dialogue and multimodal interaction
• information extraction, retrieval, and presentation
• computational theories of human cognition
• educational and assistive technology
• visualisation

Much of our research is applied to software development, in areas as diverse as social media, assisted living, gaming and education.

• ILCC Website

You may find yourself working closely with other departments of the University, particularly the School of Philosophy, Psychology & Language Sciences.

Many of our researchers are involved in cross-disciplinary research centres, for instance:

Centre for Speech Technology Research ( CSTR )

The Centre for Speech Technology Research ( CSTR ) is an interdisciplinary research centre linking Informatics and Linguistics. Founded in 1984, it is now one of the world's largest concentrations of researchers working in the field of language and speech processing.

CSTR is concerned with research in all areas of speech technology including:

• speech recognition
• signal processing
• acoustic phonetics
• information access
• multi-modal interaction
• dialogue systems

The Centre is home to state-of-the-art research facilities including:

• specialised speech and language-orientated computer labs
• a digital recording studio
• perception labs
• a meeting room instrumented with multiple synchronised video cameras and microphones

There is also access to high-performance computer clusters, the University storage area network, a specialist library, and many speech and language databases.

• Centre for Speech Technology Research

Centre for Design Informatics

Data-driven innovation is transforming society and the economy. In the Centre for Design Informatics, we design systems for better human data interaction, in diverse settings such as health, culture, mobility and finance.

We explore design from, with, and by data: the central concern is the design of data flow which sustains and enhances human values. Relevant technologies range from:

• the Internet of things
• blockchains
• data visualisation
• interaction design
• social computing

Programme structure

Find out more about compulsory and optional courses.

We link to the latest information available. Please note that this may be for a previous academic year and should be considered indicative.

Training and support

You will carry out your research within a research group under the guidance of a supervisor. You will be expected to attend seminars and meetings of relevant research groups and may also attend lectures that are relevant to your research topic. Periodic reviews of your progress will be conducted to assist with research planning.

A programme of transferable skills courses facilitates broader professional development in a wide range of topics, from writing and presentation skills to entrepreneurship and career strategies.

The School of Informatics is committed to advancing the representation of women in science, mathematics, engineering and technology. The School is deploying a range of strategies to help female staff and students of all stages in their careers and we seek regular feedback from our research community on our performance.

The award-winning Informatics Forum is an international research facility for computing and related areas. It houses more than 400 research staff and students, providing office, meeting and social spaces.

Amongst other research facilities, it also contains:

• several robotics labs
• an instrumented multimedia room
• eye-tracking and motion capture systems
• a full recording studio

Its spectacular atrium plays host to many events, from industry showcases and student hackathons to major research conferences.

Nearby teaching facilities include:

• computer and teaching labs with more than 250 machines
• 24-hour access to IT facilities for students
• comprehensive support provided by dedicated computing staff

Among our entrepreneurial initiatives is Informatics Ventures - set up to support globally ambitious software companies in Scotland, and nurture a technology cluster to rival Boston, Pittsburgh, Kyoto and Silicon Valley.

Career opportunities

While many of our graduates pursue an academic career, others find their skills are highly sought after in the technology industry. A number of our students serve internships with large UK and international software developers, while others take up positions with major social media companies.

Entry requirements

These entry requirements are for the 2024/25 academic year and requirements for future academic years may differ. Entry requirements for the 2025/26 academic year will be published on 1 Oct 2024.

A UK 2:1 honours degree, or its international equivalent, typically in an area of informatics, such as artificial intelligence, cognitive science or computer science. You should have experience in computer programming.

We may also consider a UK 2:1 honours degree, or its international equivalent, in engineering, linguistics, mathematics, philosophy, physics or psychology.

International qualifications

Check whether your international qualifications meet our general entry requirements:

• Entry requirements by country
• English language requirements

Regardless of your nationality or country of residence, you must demonstrate a level of English language competency at a level that will enable you to succeed in your studies.

English language tests

We accept the following English language qualifications at the grades specified:

• IELTS Academic: total 6.5 with at least 6.0 in each component. We do not accept IELTS One Skill Retake to meet our English language requirements.
• TOEFL-iBT (including Home Edition): total 92 with at least 20 in each component. We do not accept TOEFL MyBest Score to meet our English language requirements.
• C1 Advanced ( CAE ) / C2 Proficiency ( CPE ): total 176 with at least 169 in each component.
• Trinity ISE : ISE II with distinctions in all four components.
• PTE Academic: total 62 with at least 59 in each component.

Your English language qualification must be no more than three and a half years old from the start date of the programme you are applying to study, unless you are using IELTS , TOEFL, Trinity ISE or PTE , in which case it must be no more than two years old.

Degrees taught and assessed in English

We also accept an undergraduate or postgraduate degree that has been taught and assessed in English in a majority English speaking country, as defined by UK Visas and Immigration:

• UKVI list of majority English speaking countries

We also accept a degree that has been taught and assessed in English from a university on our list of approved universities in non-majority English speaking countries (non-MESC).

• Approved universities in non-MESC

If you are not a national of a majority English speaking country, then your degree must be no more than five years old* at the beginning of your programme of study. (*Revised 05 March 2024 to extend degree validity to five years.)

Find out more about our language requirements:

• Academic Technology Approval Scheme

If you are not an EU , EEA or Swiss national, you may need an Academic Technology Approval Scheme clearance certificate in order to study this programme.

Fees and costs

Scholarships and funding, featured funding.

• School of Informatics scholarships for research students
• Research scholarships for international students
• Edinburgh Doctoral College Scholarship

UK government postgraduate loans

If you live in the UK, you may be able to apply for a postgraduate loan from one of the UK's governments.

The type and amount of financial support you are eligible for will depend on:

• your programme
• the duration of your studies
• your residency status.

Programmes studied on a part-time intermittent basis are not eligible.

• UK government and other external funding

Other funding opportunities

Search for scholarships and funding opportunities:

• Search for funding

Further information

• IGS Admissions Administrator
• Phone: +44 (0)131 650 3091
• Contact: [email protected]
• School of Informatics Graduate School
• Office 3.42, Informatics Forum
• Central Campus
• Programme: Informatics: ILCC: Language Processing, Speech Technology, Information Retrieval, Cognition
• School: Informatics
• College: Science & Engineering

Select your programme and preferred start date to begin your application.

PhD Informatics: ILCC: Language Processing, Speech Technology, Information Retrieval, Cognition - 3 Years (Full-time)

Phd informatics: ilcc: language processing, speech technology, information retrieval, cognition - 6 years (part-time), mphil informatics: ilcc: language processing, speech technology, information retrieval, cognition - 2 years (full-time), mphil informatics: ilcc: language processing, speech technology, information retrieval, cognition - 4 years (part-time), msc by research informatics: ilcc: language processing, speech technology, information retrieval, cognition - 1 year (full-time), msc by research informatics: ilcc: language processing, speech technology, information retrieval, cognition - 2 years (part-time), application deadlines.

Applications for 2024/25 entry are now open and can be submitted all year round.

Please submit your completed application at least three months prior to desired entry date.

If you want to be considered for School funded PhD scholarships you must apply by one of two rounds:

Please note that some University and School scholarships require separate applications via the Scholarships portal.

(Revised 25 October 2023 to update application deadlines)

(Revised 15 February 2024 to extend the round 2 application deadline)

• How to apply

You must submit two references with your application.

You must submit an application via the EUCLID application portal and provide the required information and documentation. This will include submission of:

• a Curriculum Vitae (CV)
• a research proposal (2-5 pages long)
• degree certificates and official transcripts of all completed and in-progress degrees (plus certified translations if academic documents are not issued in English).
• two academic references

Only complete applications will progress forward to the academic selection stage.

Read through detailed guidance on how to apply for a PGR programme in the School of Informatics:

• School of Informatics PGR Application Guidance

Find out more about the general application process for postgraduate programmes:

How Much Research Is Being Written by Large Language Models?

New studies show a marked spike in LLM usage in academia, especially in computer science. What does this mean for researchers and reviewers?

In March of this year, a  tweet about an academic paper went viral for all the wrong reasons. The introduction section of the paper, published in  Elsevier’s  Surfaces and Interfaces , began with this line:  Certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic. 

Look familiar? 

It should, if you are a user of ChatGPT and have applied its talents for the purpose of content generation. LLMs are being increasingly used to assist with writing tasks, but examples like this in academia are largely anecdotal and had not been quantified before now. 

“While this is an egregious example,” says  James Zou , associate professor of biomedical data science and, by courtesy, of computer science and of electrical engineering at Stanford, “in many cases, it’s less obvious, and that’s why we need to develop more granular and robust statistical methods to estimate the frequency and magnitude of LLM usage. At this particular moment, people want to know what content around us is written by AI. This is especially important in the context of research, for the papers we author and read and the reviews we get on our papers. That’s why we wanted to study how much of those have been written with the help of AI.”

In two papers looking at LLM use in scientific publishings, Zou and his team* found that 17.5% of computer science papers and 16.9% of peer review text had at least some content drafted by AI. The paper on LLM usage in peer reviews will be presented at the International Conference on Machine Learning.

Read  Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers and  Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews  

Here Zou discusses the findings and implications of this work, which was supported through a Stanford HAI Hoffman Yee Research Grant . 

How did you determine whether AI wrote sections of a paper or a review?

We first saw that there are these specific worlds – like commendable, innovative, meticulous, pivotal, intricate, realm, and showcasing – whose frequency in reviews sharply spiked, coinciding with the release of ChatGPT. Additionally, we know that these words are much more likely to be used by LLMs than by humans. The reason we know this is that we actually did an experiment where we took many papers, used LLMs to write reviews of them, and compared those reviews to reviews written by human reviewers on the same papers. Then we quantified which words are more likely to be used by LLMs vs. humans, and those are exactly the words listed. The fact that they are more likely to be used by an LLM and that they have also seen a sharp spike coinciding with the release of LLMs is strong evidence.

Some journals permit the use of LLMs in academic writing, as long as it’s noted, while others, including  Science and the ICML conference, prohibit it. How are the ethics perceived in academia?

This is an important and timely topic because the policies of various journals are changing very quickly. For example,  Science said in the beginning that they would not allow authors to use language models in their submissions, but they later changed their policy and said that people could use language models, but authors have to explicitly note where the language model is being used. All the journals are struggling with how to define this and what’s the right way going forward.

You observed an increase in usage of LLMs in academic writing, particularly in computer science papers (up to 17.5%). Math and  Nature family papers, meanwhile, used AI text about 6.3% of the time. What do you think accounts for the discrepancy between these disciplines? 

Artificial intelligence and computer science disciplines have seen an explosion in the number of papers submitted to conferences like ICLR and NeurIPS. And I think that’s really caused a strong burden, in many ways, to reviewers and to authors. So now it’s increasingly difficult to find qualified reviewers who have time to review all these papers. And some authors may feel more competition that they need to keep up and keep writing more and faster. 

You analyzed close to a million papers on arXiv, bioRxiv, and  Nature from January 2020 to February 2024. Do any of these journals include humanities papers or anything in the social sciences?  

We mostly wanted to focus more on CS and engineering and biomedical areas and interdisciplinary areas, like  Nature family journals, which also publish some social science papers. Availability mattered in this case. So, it’s relatively easy for us to get data from arXiv, bioRxiv, and  Nature . A lot of AI conferences also make reviews publicly available. That’s not the case for humanities journals.

Did any results surprise you?

A few months after ChatGPT’s launch, we started to see a rapid, linear increase in the usage pattern in academic writing. This tells us how quickly these LLM technologies diffuse into the community and become adopted by researchers. The most surprising finding is the magnitude and speed of the increase in language model usage. Nearly a fifth of papers and peer review text use LLM modification. We also found that peer reviews submitted closer to the deadline and those less likely to engage with author rebuttal were more likely to use LLMs. 

This suggests a couple of things. Perhaps some of these reviewers are not as engaged with reviewing these papers, and that’s why they are offloading some of the work to AI to help. This could be problematic if reviewers are not fully involved. As one of the pillars of the scientific process, it is still necessary to have human experts providing objective and rigorous evaluations. If this is being diluted, that’s not great for the scientific community.

What do your findings mean for the broader research community?

LLMs are transforming how we do research. It’s clear from our work that many papers we read are written with the help of LLMs. There needs to be more transparency, and people should state explicitly how LLMs are used and if they are used substantially. I don’t think it’s always a bad thing for people to use LLMs. In many areas, this can be very useful. For someone who is not a native English speaker, having the model polish their writing can be helpful. There are constructive ways for people to use LLMs in the research process; for example, in earlier stages of their draft. You could get useful feedback from a LLM in real time instead of waiting weeks or months to get external feedback. 

But I think it’s still very important for the human researchers to be accountable for everything that is submitted and presented. They should be able to say, “Yes, I will stand behind the statements that are written in this paper.”

*Collaborators include:  Weixin Liang ,  Yaohui Zhang ,  Zhengxuan Wu ,  Haley Lepp ,  Wenlong Ji ,  Xuandong Zhao ,  Hancheng Cao ,  Sheng Liu ,  Siyu He ,  Zhi Huang ,  Diyi Yang ,  Christopher Potts ,  Christopher D. Manning ,  Zachary Izzo ,  Yaohui Zhang ,  Lingjiao Chen ,  Haotian Ye , and Daniel A. McFarland .

Stanford HAI’s mission is to advance AI research, education, policy and practice to improve the human condition.  Learn more . 

More News Topics

• Ethics & Leadership
• Fact-Checking
• Media Literacy
• The Craig Newmark Center
• Reporting & Editing
• Ethics & Trust
• Tech & Tools
• Business & Work
• Educators & Students
• Training Catalog
• Custom Teaching
• For ACES Members
• All Categories
• Broadcast & Visual Journalism
• Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
• In-newsroom
• Memphis, Tenn.
• Minneapolis, Minn.
• St. Petersburg, Fla.
• Washington, D.C.
• Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
• Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
• Ethics & Trust Articles
• Get Ethics Advice
• Fact-Checking Articles
• International Fact-Checking Day
• Teen Fact-Checking Network
• International
• Media Literacy Training
• MediaWise Resources
• Ambassadors
• MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

Study shows lack of trust among Hispanics in local English-language news organizations

The study focused on the Raleigh-Durham community and specifically sought to discover what barriers non-English speakers face in accessing news.

Since you’re visiting Poynter’s website, I’ll assume you’ve heard this before: America’s local news ecosystem is in crisis. 

Across the country, local newspapers are closing down . This trend has prompted researchers to identify a growing number of news deserts, or communities that have little access to essential local information. A declining local press harms democracy: According to the American Journalism Project , it increases polarization, reduces voter turnout and decreases accountability for local leaders. 

Yet, lost in these conversations is an analysis of whom the remaining local papers actually serve. With reporting often published in English, many of those papers are inaccessible to recent immigrants and communities that speak English as a second language. These people live in what Emma Murphy, editorial intern at the progressive magazine American Prospect, calls “ linguistic news deserts ,” or places where the existence of a local paper does not guarantee in-language coverage of local events. 

Where do these communities turn for news instead? 

While working last fall as a Poynter-Google News Initiative misinformation student fellow for WRAL-TV in North Carolina, I sought to answer this question for the largest language minority group in the state: Hispanic communities.

Our questions

Specifically, we wanted to understand: 

• where Hispanic residents in Raleigh-Durham got their local news, 
• how much they trust those sources, 
• what barriers they face accessing local news, 
• and what solutions they might have for improving the accessibility of local coverage. 

The need for accessible in-language news was exemplified by an anecdote shared by one of the community leaders I interviewed for this project:

“When COVID happened, (North Carolina) was pushing for these COVID vaccine drives. … They had Spanish speakers, and they had them ready and available … and no one showed up. And they were like, ‘Well, we’re putting this out in the (News & Observer) and WRAL.’ Well, they’re not watching that. So as soon as (the) Spanish news station ran it, they were flooded, because they went to where they are.”

Without a newspaper in their first or preferred language, many minority communities struggle to access essential local news from traditional media outlets, including information about vaccine clinics, or extreme weather warnings . WRAL-TV sought to understand how they could improve the reach of their coverage for these communities. 

We created two surveys — one in English and one in Spanish — consisting of questions that would help us study these topics. After standing in front of grocery stores, hanging up flyers in restaurants with my friends, and networking through community organizations, we received 26 responses over about a month and a half. We supplemented our findings with interviews with two community leaders whose experience working in local journalism and with community members strengthened our analysis. 

Our findings

Consistent with national research on the news consumption habits of Latino communities , our survey revealed that local Hispanic residents rely predominantly on social media for news, followed by television and websites. Sparse translation, coupled with inadequate representation, creates barriers to news access and may drive distrust in English-language news organizations for Hispanics.

Discussing translation, respondents lamented that there are few attempts at translation of local news into Spanish. When it is translated, the translations are often sensationalist and inaccurate. As one respondent summarized:

“ The American media does little to address the realities that affect Hispanic families. There is not enough translation and, sadly, many attempts lack quality because they translate very poorly and I end up uninformed.”

This lack of quality translation, coupled with a lack of holistic representation, pushes community members away from traditional media outlets for news. Community members also felt as if most English-language coverage of their community was negative, focusing on crime rather than community activities and businesses. Again, these limitations may undermine community trust in English news outlets in North Carolina. 

Spanish speakers are more trusting of Spanish-language news, and some research finds that community members who receive their news from ethnic media outlets — outlets covering underrepresented communities like the Hispanic community — are more likely to trust Spanish-language journalists. 

In comparison, researchers found no increase in trust for English-language reporters when community members watched mainstream outlets for news. As such, a lack of representation and translation may reduce trust in local news. 

However, we found that Hispanic residents in the Raleigh-Durham area still trust traditional news sources like websites, newspapers and television more than social media for news. This suggests that barriers to accessibility — namely, inadequate translation — may drive community members to use social media for news, despite feeling as though social media news is untrustworthy. Further, community members cited fact-checks as the least trusted news source, and many community members do not know what they are. 

Implications

Given that Hispanic communities are more likely to be exposed to false political information , these findings have important implications for news and fact-checking organizations seeking to promote their content to these communities.

First, the survey results suggest that English local news content and fact-checking by North Carolina outlets are failing to reach portions of the local community. Given that mis- and disinformation proliferate on social media often used by Hispanics for news, it is especially important that these organizations work to make their content visible and accessible to these communities. 

Toward that end, community members provided a myriad of suggestions. First, translation must be improved, overseen by at least one bilingual reporter. The advent of artificial intelligence can assist in translation, but absent human supervision, mistakes can be made. At Gizmodo en Español, the Spanish-language version of Gizmodo, a technology news site , an AI error left part of an article entirely in English, for example. 

However, it is important to remember that the Hispanic community is a large diaspora, with regional differences in language use and cultural norms. As such, one bilingual reporter will not adequately represent all groups, despite improving the reach of local coverage. 

Next, coverage of minority communities should be holistic, rather than focused on issues the outlet feels may be relevant to that group. Community members in Raleigh-Durham said that local English-language coverage often overemphasizes immigration and crime in their coverage of Hispanic communities, rather than covering community achievements and businesses, for example. Based on an Oxford study that found that misrepresentation of minority communities in media undermines trust in those outlets, I suspect that well-rounded coverage could improve community trust in local news outlets. 

Finally, news outlets that cannot afford to substantially increase their coverage and/or translation should partner with existing ethnic media organizations and amplify their coverage. In North Carolina, QuéPasa Media Network Raleigh , La Noticia , Enlace NC , and La Conexión all provide essential local coverage for Hispanic community members. Yet, these outlets face many of the same revenue-raising challenges as other local papers. As such, English local papers should strive to supplement and support these ethnic media outlets. 

Further research needed

While these findings are important, they’re limited in their applicability: Our sample was not representative of the local Hispanic population. Further research is also needed to understand the news consumption patterns of the various ethnic groups that form the Hispanic diaspora. 

Nevertheless, this study provides important insights into the ways in which existing local news organizations in North Carolina and beyond can provide respite to linguistic news deserts. Given the vast linguistic and cultural diversity of the United States, it is essential that local newspapers provide accessible content for as many of its potential readers as it can. Future research should continue to examine ways that local papers can better serve the diverse American electorate. 

Chloe Nguyen, an alumnus of Duke University, was a Poynter-Google News Initiative misinformation fellow with WRAL News in North Carolina in the fall of 2023. At Duke she was an Alice M. Baldwin Scholar and a Nakayama Public Service Scholar, and currently is a George J. Mitchell Scholar.

Nobel Prize winner Maria Ressa, experts on democracy and AI to lead GlobalFact as keynote speakers

Other speakers at the fact-checking summit include Steve Levitsky, Nikita Roy and Craig Silverman

Opinion | Q&A: Fox News foreign correspondent Trey Yingst on the perils of covering war

Yingst, 30, has spent the past several years in some of the most dangerous places in the world.

Opinion | Planning a town hall with candidates? Try a reverse town hall instead.

They spend so much time talking. It’s their turn to listen.

The meaning, history and political rhetoric surrounding the term abortion ‘ban’

Experts say ‘ban’ has emerged as shorthand for nearly all abortion prohibitions. The blunt term often leaves room for political spin.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.