1. Introduction
English remains established as a modern global language and is viewed as an essential skill for the citizens of many countries around the world. The trend toward globalization has had a significant impact in the field of higher education, which has led to the rising use of English as a medium of instruction for academic purposes (Dearden, 2014; Nurshatayeva & Page, 2020). English as a medium of instruction (EMI) refers to the implementation of English to teach academic content in contexts where it is not the first language (Macaro, et al. 2018). While EMI exists globally, several countries, particularly in East and Southeast Asia have adopted the use of English in higher education to enhance access to new knowledge and improve competitiveness in innovation (Hu, 2007). The Republic of Korea, henceforth Korea, is no exception, as English language education has remained an integral part of Korea’s national education curriculum (Moon & Maeng, 2017) and EMI programs have become prominent in higher education (Kim, et al. 2017).
Korea’s implementation of EMI is not only to improve the global competitiveness of its domestic student population, but also to expand enrollment of international students. Korea is in the midst of a declining birthrate, which has already negatively impacted university enrollment (Jung, 2024). In addition, Korea has remained one of the highest sending countries with many students choosing to study abroad rather than domestically (Jon & Kim, 2011). As a result, the Korean government and universities have made efforts to increase global competitiveness (Jon & Kim, 2011) and improve the international rankings of its universities (Margić & Vodopija-Krstanović, 2017). The Korean government instituted the ‘Study Korea Project’ in 2004, with the primary goal of increasing international student enrollment to 50,000 (Byun & Kim, 2010). The program proved successful, and as of 2024, the number of foreign students attending institutions of higher education, such as community colleges and universities, in Korea stood at approximately 153,158, according to the Korean Council for University Education (2025). Plans for further increasing the international student population continue to ramp up as the Korean government’s initiative aims to become one of the top ten study abroad destinations by 2027. Foreign students seeking to study in Korea are required to have knowledge of either Korean or English to be able to attend classes. While many international students studying in Korea do so in Korean, universities continue to support and develop EMI courses as an effort to increase opportunities for students seeking to study in Korea (Ko, et al., 2025). Therefore, the steady increase of a rising international student population has precipitated the need for additional EMI programs and courses to adequately support academic growth and promote diverse learning environments.
EMI courses are essential to expand universities’ international student programs, but also to provide domestic students with greater opportunities to improve their English. For students to gain the most of EMI courses, English courses specific to language education are crucial to instill students with the skills necessary to participate successfully (Huang, 2015; Karakas, 2017; Kym & Kym, 2014; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019; Le & Nguyen, 2023). However, in such cases where English language education courses are limited, EMI courses can also serve to help students improve their English in unison with learning content specific to the course. Although the basis for EMI stipulates that language education is not the primary purpose, it is inevitable that English language learning will occur to some degree whether subconsciously or through a conscious effort made by students. Additionally, it has been reported that when enrollment in EMI courses is not mandated, students still choose to do so as it’s viewed to be an opportunity to improve their English (Kym & Kym, 2014). While the importance of English language education remains necessary for local students to develop adequate language knowledge, there is also a rising need for EMI courses that appeal to both domestic and international students alike, and such opportunities can also promote English skill development.
While debate about the efficacy of EMI courses in balancing the need for sufficient English language education and achieving the goal of learning the content of the course may persist, it is necessary to consider students’ views further and their satisfaction with EMI courses. EMI courses can provide domestic students with potential benefits, such as improving their English (Kym & Kym, 2014; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019) while simultaneously learning content knowledge, and, when enrolled in EMI courses with international students, an opportunity to meet and experience collaborative learning with students from various cultural backgrounds (Chu, et al., 2018; Huang, 2015). EMI courses are also necessary for international students to take part in study abroad programs, and with Korea’s continued endeavors to attract more international students, there is an opportunity to investigate a continually developing and unique context. EMI courses that contain a combination of Korean and international students provides another perspective that calls for further research which may prove valuable to the sustainability and improvement of EMI programs.
Therefore, the present research was guided by two primary questions:
1. How do Korean and international students perceive their experiences in an English as a medium of instruction (EMI) course, particularly in terms of their satisfaction with course activities and perceived English improvement?
2. In what ways, if any, do the experiences and perceptions of Korean and international students differ in an EMI course?
2. Literature Review
2.1. EMI in Higher Education
For much of the twenty-first century, English has cemented itself as the predominant language used globally. In turn, the use of English has extended to academia, where many institutions of higher education (HE) have made a concerted effort to implement English as the medium of instruction (EMI) for various programs (Nurshatayeva & Page, 2020). The relation between internationalization and the rise of EMI is closely tied and inseparable (Kirkpatrick, 2011), and the swift increase of EMI has been well-established (Dearden, 2014).
English as a medium of instruction has been defined by Macaro, et al. (2018) as ”the use of the English language to teach academic subjects (other than English itself) in countries or jurisdictions where the first language (L1) of the majority of the population is not English” (p. 37). This definition remains widely accepted and has been further supported by Heath, et al. (2023). However, this definition has not been without controversy as it specifically precludes the inclusion of Anglophone contexts, or countries where English is considered the dominant language. Baker and Hüttner (2016, 2019) point out that excluding Anglophone environments can be problematic as it excludes the experiences of any multilingual and international students present who are learning through English as a second language. Heath, et al. argue that although some circumstances, such as those of students who study English as a second language in an Anglophone environment, present parallels to issues that apply to environments where the first language is not English, expanding the definition of EMI poses ramifications that can potentially minimize the results of EMI research by combining it with differing contexts. The present research believes it is important to consider the context of EMI carefully, and to also be aware that international students studying abroad face unique experiences worth acknowledging.
With investigation of EMI in HE restricted to non-Anglophone environments, it is clear there have been profound impacts, and it has not been without its challenges. The implementation of EMI demands that students must possess sufficient language proficiency to take a meaningful part of the class (Kym & Kym, 2014). While EMI courses typically do not focus primarily on English language education, it is intended that the majority of the class and supporting coursework be conducted in English (Dearden & Spain 2021). Therefore, the successful implementation of EMI requires that students be prepared and English as a foreign language education will likely remain a cornerstone for improving students’ English so they can understand, participate, and excel in their education. However, the shift to EMI for academic subjects does also afford students the opportunity to gain access to a greater range of knowledge while simultaneously holding the potential for improving their English. In addition, in the majority of EMI contexts, there exist teachers and students who often share a common L1 that can be leveraged to aid in learning when needed (Huang, 2015), particularly in the Korean EMI context (Cho, et al., 2023; Kym & Kym, 2014; Kim, et al. 2017).
In some contexts, the landscape of EMI courses has been extended to where multilingualism is becoming more prevalent in HE, particularly at international universities, universities with large international student populations, and countries and universities seeking to increase international student enrollment. EMI and growing international student populations are closely linked and rely on mutual development. For example, Japan has recognized a need to implement greater use of EMI at institutions of higher education to lessen the burden of international students having to learn Japanese, while allowing them the opportunity to study in the country (Chapple, 2015; Tsuneyoshi, 2005). The rising influx of international students and the trend to uphold English as the international language of academia has necessitated that EMI courses be offered at colleges that wish to remain competitive and maintain pace with these growing trends.
English-medium education in multilingual university settings (EMEMUS) has been put forth by Dafouz & Smit (2016), which acknowledges the presence of students who possess differing first languages within the same educational setting. In such an environment, English truly acts as a lingua franca and must be used for effective communication. Similar to an ESL context, the absence of a common L1 creates an impetus for using English. Jon and Kim (2011) discuss Korea’s own push toward internationalization in HE and the expansion of programs for students. In many ways, Korea is certainly a context that applies to the definition of EMI outlined by Macaro, et al. (2018). Korea is a country where the vast majority of the population’s first language is not English and a common L1, Korean, is shared. However, there also exists a rising international contingent with a multilingual background. The present research poses a unique context where EMI is instituted in a class setting where a population of students who share a common first language coexists with a population of international students of multilingual backgrounds. Through this combination of students from different backgrounds, an opportunity to investigate these students’ satisfaction with EMI courses and its impact on English improvement is necessary.
2.2. Students’ Experiences and Views of EMI Courses
In regard to EMI courses, students have expressed a range of views depending on varying contexts. In some instances, students have expressed satisfaction in EMI for its opportunity to improve content knowledge and English learning (Kym & Kym, 2014; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019). In contrast, dissatisfaction has also been expressed, in particular due to English proficiency being an issue (Kim, et al., 2017; Karakas, 2017). The requirement parameters of EMI programs are also a factor for students’ satisfaction. In cases where students are given autonomy in selecting EMI courses, they appear to show greater satisfaction (Kym & Kym, 2014). In contrast, when enrollment to EMI courses is required, satisfaction may drop (Le & Nguyen, 2023). EMI certainly poses both perceived advantages and disadvantages that affect students’ overall satisfaction.
Due to the role of English as a global language, many students perceive the potential benefits of EMI and thus view it favorably. Students have acknowledged EMI’s potential impact on their education and future career prospects to be beneficial (Le & Nguyen, 2023; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019). Students have also viewed EMI courses to be a means of improving their English, with many students choosing to enroll in EMI courses for this reason specifically (Kym & Kym, 2014). Because of the nature of EMI contexts, students may be limited in their opportunities to learn English, and therefore EMI is viewed as a chance to continue learning English.
EMI contexts that include international students provide an additional factor that affects students’ satisfaction. If afforded the opportunity, students view EMI courses that contain students from multilingual backgrounds favorably, making programs with a large percentage of students from diverse linguistic backgrounds desirable. As discussed by Tsui in Coleman, et al. (2018), ”When learners do not share an L1, EMI becomes a must in all educational settings and English therefore is a lingua franca among speakers of different languages” (p.715). Students recognize the circumstances of such environments and may seek them out to immerse themselves in a setting they believe will improve their English, as its use becomes a necessity. Research conducted by Huang (2015) found that university students participating in EMI courses, both local and foreign students, were most interested in and satisfied by the opportunity to meet and interact with students of different nationalities. Such programs offered greater exposure to foreign cultures and increased students’ ability to communicate in English (Chu, et al., 2018).
Another significant aspect relating to student satisfaction of EMI courses is possessing adequate English proficiency to engage meaningfully in the course. Students who perceive their English ability to be inadequate and who are required to take EMI courses may develop negative views. Research by Kim, et al. (2017) found that students enrolled in EMI courses, particularly in a context where international students are few and the majority of students share a common first language, considered the use of L1 to be highly beneficial. In such an environment, the use of English was not viewed to be as important as the content is. In many cases, due to the nature of EFL contexts, students become more proficient in their receptive skills, but productive skills may not be equally developed as communication can be conducted through a shared L1. As a result, EFL contexts can pose challenges for students in EMI courses. In such cases where students do not view their English ability to be sufficient, they may lose confidence when participating in EMI courses (Huang, 2015; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019), which can become problematic when engaging in EMI programs with international students. For example, Korean students have cited language barriers as a primary reason for avoiding interaction with international students (Lee & Bailey, 2020). Students appear to be in favor of opportunities to learn and use English, which EMI courses can provide, but their satisfaction hinges on whether they’ve reached their own perceived threshold of English proficiency to communicate confidently.
Based on research by Kym and Kym (2014), students did not perceive EMI classes to offer substantial improvement to their English skills despite many believing EMI courses would benefit their English. When compared to Korean used as the medium instruction, students’ overall comprehension of course material in English-mediated instruction was relatively lower. The researchers speculate that this is likely due to Korea’s English learning context, where the use of English is often limited to English language education and not field-specific knowledge, thus resulting in inadequacies in their language skill development. Additionally, students’ perceived ability to understand and follow along with EMI courses directly correlated with their proficiency level. Research conducted by Kym and Kym (2014) highlights the importance of students having sufficient language knowledge as a prerequisite to EMI course enrollment. This research is further supported by those who have emphasized the importance of greater English language instruction to prepare students for EMI enrollment (Huang, 2015; Karakas, 2017; Phuong & Nguyen, 2019; Le & Nguyen, 2023).
Teacher background has also been shown to play a role in student satisfaction of EMI courses where students viewed native or near-native English speakers more favorably (Karakas, 2017; Le & Nguyen, 2023; Kym & Kym, 2014). In particular, results from Kym and Kym (2014) revealed that a hierarchy exists in student’s views of EMI teachers. Students expressed greater satisfaction of teachers from native English-speaking countries or who had studied abroad and attained a near-native-like ability as opposed to English teachers who only studied and taught in Korea. The researchers acknowledge that due to the limited sample of teachers, it is difficult to determine whether nationality is a determining factor; however, they inferred that experience with foreign teaching environments and English fluency may have been important factors in students’ satisfaction. Research from Le & Nguyen (2023) further supports students’ preference for teachers with a native-speaking background.
Current research within the Korean context is limited. As Korea continues to raise its international student population, there is a need for additional investigation into the efficacy of EMI programs. Student views can offer valuable insights to enhance teaching practices and improve EMI programs designed to attract both domestic and international students. Therefore, this study aims to understand the views of students, both Korean and international, in an EMI setting, focusing on their overall satisfaction and experiences and identifying any discrepancies between these two groups.
3. Methods
3.1. Research Context
This research was conducted at a mid-sized university in Korea in the fall semester of 2024. Within the Liberal Arts Department, several EMI elective courses were offered and intended for both foreign international students and domestic Korean students to fulfil general education requirements. Such courses were not a requirement for any specific majors, nor were there any prerequisites. The course selected for this study was one such class offered. The course, titled Media and Society, was a three-credit introductory course that focused on instilling students with critical media literacy skills that would allow them to interpret and assess messages dispersed within the vast media landscape that surrounds them. The course consisted of 15 classes meeting once a week in person for three hours per class. As students did not share a common first language, the course was taught entirely in English, the sole language shared by all students and teacher. The instructor for this course was a native English-speaking teacher.
Throughout the semester, various approaches and activities were conducted to help achieve the overall goals of the course. Students engaged in six primary activities, including teacher lecture, teacher-led group discussions, student-led group discussions, independent homework readings, in-class group projects, and an extended group presentation project, which are outlined in Table 1.
<Table 1>
Overview of Course Activities
The primary method of which classes were conducted was through a combination of teacher-centered lecture and student-centered discussions. Teacher lecture was conducted in class accompanied by a PPT that was also made available to students to follow along and review. The majority of student discussions were held independently and led by the students in small groups of three to six students; however, the teacher made an effort to meet with each group to help guide the discussion, ask critical questions, and assist students with understanding the content presented in the lecture. Thus, students experienced a combination of small group discussions carried out on their own and with the teacher.
Independent homework readings consisted of chapters or articles about the main topic of the following class. Students were asked to read the required texts in advance and complete accompanying tasks, such as identifying and summarizing key points, answering and forming critical questions in response to the text, and listing questions on any points they encountered difficulty with in the reading. Classes would begin with the teacher’s lecture, and tasks from the readings or questions regarding areas students were unclear on would be discussed further through student and teacher-led discussions.
In-class group projects consisted of single-class projects where students worked together in groups of four to five students to apply specific skills in analyzing various media content while considering the media’s production, content, and potential effects. For example, students were asked to investigate bias, discourse, visual or other forms of analysis on a particular media text. Students were given the opportunity to discuss among themselves and select media content (e.g. news article, advertisement, podcast, YouTube video) based on their personal interests. Students were given class time to work together and analyze the media content, then a short informal presentation was shared with the class allowing each group to report their findings. Such projects would include an additional homework assignment where students, as a group, would be required to write out a report of their project for submission.
In the second half of the semester, students participated in an extended group presentation project. Students were randomly assigned a group and given a list of general topics relating to media studies, of which they were asked to select a topic of interest and develop it into a more focused area. For example, one of the general topics offered was ”violence portrayed in the media,” which one group chose to narrow to ”the effects of violence portrayed in the media on young children.” Students were scheduled to meet or corresponded with the teacher at scheduled intervals to review the progress on their presentation project. For example, individual group meetings were scheduled to discuss topic development, and guidance was provided on how to best approach the project and possible sources to use. Additionally, students were required to provide an outline and visual aids to be reviewed, and detailed feedback was provided a week before their scheduled presentation. Students were required to present their topic in a manner that would engage with the audience by including discussion questions or activities that would facilitate learning for the students viewing the presentation.
3.2. Participants
Twenty-eight students were enrolled in the course and were informed that their participation was voluntary. Twenty-three students completed the survey voluntarily and one student was removed because they reported English as their first language. In total, twenty-two students participated in this research. An overview of the participant demographics can be viewed in Table 2.
<Table 2>
Participant Demographics
Of the participants, there were ten Korean students (45.45%) and twelve international students (54.55%). All Korean students claimed to be from Korea and reported Korean as their first language. International students hailed from various countries with four (33.33%) from Indonesia, three (25%) from The Netherlands, and one (8.33%) student each from Brazil, Italy, Mexico, Mongolia, and Vietnam. The first language of international students was also varied with four (33.33%) reporting Indonesian, two (16.67%) Dutch, and one (8.33%) each reporting Frisian, Portuguese, Italian, Spanish, Mongolian, and Vietnamese. For the purpose of this research, due to the relatively low number of participants and broad range of countries and linguistic backgrounds represented, international students have been analyzed as a single group.
Participants were spaced across different years of their college career, with six students (27.27%) being in their first year, six students (27.27%) in their second year, six students (27.27%) in their third year, and four students (18.18%) in their fourth year of college. Eighteen students (81.82%) identified as female and four students (18.18%) as male. A broad range of majors were represented including Business Administration (22.73%), Social Sciences (13.64%), Economics (13.64%), Engineering (13.64%), Advertising and Communication Design (9.09%), Media Studies (9.09%), History (9.09%), Humanities (4.55%), and Fashion Design (4.55%).
Participants from this study showed a broad range in their English proficiency levels. No English level test was required for enrollment; however, students were asked to self-report their own perceived English ability in the survey designed for this study. Students’ self-reported English ability was based on the scale developed for the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). The international students reported a slightly higher overall English ability with four students (33.33%) selecting C2, two (16.67%) C1, four (33.33%) B2, and two (16.67%) B1, and no students selecting lower proficiency levels. Among the Korean students, none selected the advanced level (C2), two students (20%) selected C1, three (30%) B2, four (40%) B1, and one (10%) A2. In total, both groups represented a range of English proficiency levels with international students being higher on average.
3.3. Data Collection
The data for the study were collected through a survey questionnaire at the end of the 2024 fall semester and follow up interviews conducted via email with willing participants in the early months of 2025. The survey consisted of two parts with a total of 20 items. The survey consisted of a combination of Likert-scale questions, multiple-choice questions, and open-ended questions. The first section included a combination of ten questions seeking demographic information (i.g., age, gender, school year, and field of study) and the students’ linguistic background and self-reported English proficiency. The second section of the survey consisted of ten questions seeking to answer the primary questions driving this research and help better understand students’ experiences and views of the EMI course they were enrolled in. The full list of questions from this section is provided in Appendix A. The survey was created online using Google Forms; students were informed about the survey at the end of class and a link was shared on the university’s online learning management system. Students were informed that they were not obligated to complete the survey and all participants answered voluntarily. Survey data was anonymized and remained confidential. Data was saved to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for later analysis.
To develop a more comprehensive understanding of students’ views, post-survey follow-up interviews were conducted with willing participants via email. In total, four students, two Korean (Student 5 and Student 9) and two international (Student 19 and Student 23), voluntarily completed the post-survey follow-up question process. The background information of the focal students is presented in Table 3.
<Table 3>
Focal Students’ Background Information
All focal students provided their informed consent after being briefed on the goal of the research and how the interview process would be conducted by email in early January, 2025. A series of six to nine interview questions, designed based on a preliminary analysis of the survey data, were emailed to the participants in mid-January, 2025. All focal students were asked common questions and individualized questions based on their survey responses (see Appendix B). Their responses were received individually in early to mid February.
3.4. Data Analysis
Different analysis methods were used depending on the types of data. For quantitative data collected from multiple-choice survey questions, frequency counts were conducted, and both raw numbers and their corresponding percentages were reported. For other quantitative data derived from five-point Likert scale questions, means and standard deviations were calculated.
For the analysis of qualitative data such as students’ responses to the open-ended survey questions and interview questions, thematic analysis was employed. Initially, the entire dataset was read multiple times by both researchers to gain a comprehensive understanding of its content and context. Approximately 10% of the data were selected and double-coded by the two independent researchers. With the initial codes developed by both researchers, Krippendorff’s alpha, a statistical measure suitable for nominal and multi-label data, was calculated to assess the inter-coder reliability. The resulting alpha was 0.9143, indicating a strong level of agreement between the two coders. Based on this result, the remaining data were coded by one researcher, but all codes were shared, reviewed, and discussed collaboratively until consensus was reached.
Students’ responses with similar codes were grouped together to identify recurring themes. Once the themes were identified, they were cross-checked with data again to ensure their accuracy and representativeness. Throughout this process, multiple tables were created to compare not only themes but also students’ responses within each theme. All student responses to open-ended survey questions and interviews were used verbatim in this study.
4. Results
4.1. Students’ Satisfaction with the EMI Course: Class Activities
Students were asked about their overall satisfaction with the course in Survey Question 1. Korean students (M = 4.8, SD = 0.42) reported slightly higher satisfaction than international students (M = 4.5, SD = 0.9); however, both groups expressed high overall satisfaction with their EMI course experience (see Table 4).
<Table 4>
Students’ Satisfaction Rate for their EMI Course
| Item | KS | IS | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
||||
| M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | |
| 1. Please rate your overall satisfaction with the course. | 4.8 | 0.42 | 4.5 | 0.90 | 4.64 | 0.73 |
To understand students’ experiences with the course, they were asked about the aspects they were satisfied or dissatisfied with, particularly in terms of class activities. Among six primary activities conducted both in and outside the classroom throughout the semester, Table 5 shows that four activities (i.e., small teacher-led group discussions, teacher lectures, group presentations, and student-led group discussions) were generally well received. However, in-class group projects received less favorable evaluations, and independent homework such as reading assignments rated the least satisfactory.
<Table 5>
Students’ Responses of Each of the Class Activities in Terms of Their Benefits
Students, in general, perceived teacher-led small group discussions as beneficial primarily because the teacher’s presence facilitated more in-depth and focused discussions while also encouraging greater participation and engagement (see Table 6). Although students also acknowledged that discussions without a teacher offered advantages, such as increased opportunities to express their ideas in English, exposure to diverse perspectives from foreign classmates, and encouragement of participation, teacher involvement appeared to foster deeper and more structured discussions and in turn enhance engagement. The second activity highly valued by both Korean and international students was teacher lectures as they provided comprehensive and clear explanations of course content. According to Student 21, for example, these teacher lectures appeared to enhance her understanding by incorporating not only verbal instruction but also visual aids, such as PowerPoint slides. Ranked third were group presentations. Students reported that the group presentations allowed them to choose a topic that they enjoyed and to study it in greater depth, which, in turn, led to a more enjoyable attitude toward studying and a higher level of understanding.
<Table 6>
Reasons for Choosing Particular Activities as Helpful
Overall, both Korean and international students demonstrated similar perceptions, particularly in their preference for teacher involvement in class activities (i.e., small teacher-led group discussions and teacher lectures). However, some differences were also observed. Regarding the most beneficial activities, Korean students ranked group presentations (80%) as the most beneficial, followed by teacher lectures (70%) and teacher-led group discussions (60%). On the other hand, international students most frequently selected teacher-led discussions (75%), followed by teacher lectures (58.33%) and small group discussions (50%). It was notable that group presentations were perceived as highly beneficial by a significant majority of Korean students (80%), whereas a relatively low percentage of international students (41.67%) shared this view. In addition, small group discussions were favorably received by at least half of the international students (50%), but less than half of Korean students (40%) expressed a similar view.
Regarding international students’ relatively lower satisfaction with group presentations compared to Korean students, the four focal students were asked about the reasons through email interviews. One focal participant generally cited communication and inequality issues within the group, stating, ”The reason students found the presentation less helpful was the teamwork. Personally, I love my group, but I heard people complaining about their group mates due to a lack of communication and unequal contribution” (Student 22, interview, February 12, 2025). Particularly, Student 19 observed that these unequal dynamics between group mates occurred when Korean students were reluctant to take the lead in the group project:
I can only speak for my group specifically which consisted of two Korean students and two international students. The two international students already had a lot of experience with group projects, and we were both from countries where taking the lead is appreciated, so we took the lead quite easily. As a result, we led the entire project, and at times, it felt like we were not learning much. We were more focused on guiding the two Korean students. This was sometimes frustrating as they were simply doing their part and learning from that, while we were trying to manage everything, making sure all the work was of high quality, in addition to doing our own parts. This made the whole project a lot of work, for which we gain minimal knowledge in return (Student 19, interview, February 5, 2025).
The two Korean focal students also agreed that Korean students tended to be less forthcoming in sharing their thoughts during group discussions and often refrained from taking on leadership roles when preparing group presentations. According to them, this tendency contributed to Korean students’ lower satisfaction with small-group discussions without an instructor compared to international students. In the interview, Students 5 and 9, both Korean students themselves, cited their lack of familiarity and discomfort as reasons why group discussions were not as helpful to Korean students as their international peers perceived them to be:
In my case, the main reason was that I had fewer opportunities to speak. This was because I lacked the level of understanding and familiarity in speaking English that foreign students had. In fact, discussion-based classes are rare in Korean universities, especially in the major courses I have taken. (Student 5, interview, February 11, 2025)
In the lives of Korean students, discussion activities are rarely conducted in school. As a result, I think many students feel uncomfortable with the idea of sharing their individual thoughts. Additionally, even in classes taught in English, students generally prefer individual tasks over group discussions or group projects. (Student 9, interview, February 12, 2025)
Regardless of students’ general tendency to favor class activities, two activities were perceived as unsatisfactory. One of them was an in-class group project, in which students were expected to work closely to analyze media content during class time. As shown in Table 7, which presents the reasons why this activity did not achieve its intended outcomes, time constraints were an issue as the class time was insufficient for students to complete the project effectively. Additionally, the lack of rapport among group members appeared to lead to discomfort, causing students to divide the task among themselves and work on their respective portions individually rather than collaboratively working together, engaging in continuous interaction and discussion. The other activity, which was regarded as the least helpful by both Korean and international students, was reading homework. Many reported that they did not complete assigned readings at home due to a lack of motivation. Furthermore, some students found it challenging to comprehend the reading materials independently, particularly in the absence of guidance or the opportunity to see clarification from others.
<Table 7>
Reasons for Choosing Particular Activities as Less Helpful
4.2. Students’ Perceived English Improvement
The next set of survey questions focused on students’ English improvement during the class. When students were asked whether participating in the course helped them improve their English, their responses were generally positive. As shown in Table 8, they perceived the course as beneficial for enhancing not only their overall English proficiency (M = 3.95, SD = 0.72) but also specific English skills, including reading comprehension (M = 4.09, SD = 0.81), listening comprehension (M = 4.18, SD = 0.80), writing ability (M = 4.00, SD = 0.82), and speaking ability (M = 4.14, SD = 0.83). While the ratings were similar across skills, Korean students felt they benefited the most in listening and speaking, whereas international students reported they benefited the most in listening and reading. However, despite their overall positive experience, Korean students reported a stronger belief in their improvement compared to international students across all areas of English.
<Table 8>
Students’ Perceived English Improvement
Questions about Korean students’ higher perceived gains from their EMI course than international students were asked to the four focal students. The two focal Korean students attributed this gap to differences in their previous English learning and usage environment. Students 5 and 9 stated,
In the case of Korean students, I think it is because we have never experienced English discussions and presentations at this level during their college life… However, in this class, we write and discuss at a deeper level and the students are also composed of foreign students who are already proficient in English and Korean students who are willing to take classes in which the entire curriculum is conducted in English. (Student 5, interview, February 11, 2025)
This is because most Korean students have never taken classes conducted entirely in English before entering university. In Korea, English education is mainly focused on preparing for the Korean SAT rather than developing practical communication skills. This class, however, offered various opportunities for language development, such as weekly readings for reading comprehension, discussions for speaking practice, lectures for listening enhancement, and group projects and researching for writing development. In contrast, I think most international students come from countries where English is naturally spoken and used in their daily life. (Student 9, interview, February 12, 2025)
As Students 5 and 9 indicated, the EMI course was perceived as providing a sufficient environment for using English and, ultimately, for improving English proficiency. Additionally, the students in the class were either fluent English users or highly motivated to use English. Korean students found this environment new and rare in their college life, whereas international students did not as they had prior experience ”naturally” using English in daily contexts, from everyday conversations to academic settings. This contrasted with Korean students’ previous learning experiences, which was primarily focused on test preparation. As a result, the Korean focal students reported that Korean students perceived significant gains in English proficiency, whereas international students did not view the course as contributing as much to their English improvement.
In the same vein, the two international focal participants shared a similar view to that of the Korean interviewees as follows:
I think this has to do with the fact that many [international] students come from countries that are not as homogenous as Korea. Additionally, all international students, obviously, have an interest in travelling and living abroad. For that they might have already invested a lot of time in learning English. The more fluent you already are, the less improvement there will be. (Student 19, interview, February 5, 2025)
We have more opportunities to use English on a daily basis, which makes us more comfortable using it, so there is less space for improvement…. Maybe there were some improvements for international students as well, but it seemed too little for us to notice. The written exams and weekly discussions helped us gather our thoughts and express them more clearly, but perhaps it was not noticeable. (Student 22, interview, February 12, 2025)
Due to their more frequent exposure to diverse environments where people of various nationalities interacted and English was essential for communication, international students tended to be more proficient in English. As a result, they had less room for English improvement through their current EMI course; in other words, they still benefited from the course, but their progress was less dramatic and, therefore, less noticeable than that of Korean students. However, regarding Korean students’ struggles with English use, Student 19 noted that these struggles were more linked to a lack of confidence in their communication skills than to their actual English proficiency. She stated, ”During the first few weeks, some of the Korean students were quite insecure about their English speaking, even if it was pretty good. So maybe these students felt more improvement just because they gained confidence.” This suggests the possibility that while Korean students had sufficient baseline proficiency to take their EMI class, their perceived improvement was strongly influenced by the boost in confidence they gained from the course.
Despite their already high listening proficiency, international students notably identified listening skills as the greatest benefit of the course among the four English skills (see Table 8). When asked about the reason for this choice, the two international interviewees commonly cited their exposure to diverse English accents in class, along with the instructor’s lectures in English:
For listening, I think improvement was partially due to just simply listening to the lecture and comprehending what was being said. However, for me personally it was also because of the variety of accents in the room. I was used to Dutch, American, German, and British accents, but in class there were many more. This helped a bit in improving listening skills as it challenged me to listen more actively. (Student 19, interview, February 5, 2025)
It was the fact that the class was diverse, and with the diversity came different accents, speech patterns and different views, which improved our listening skill. (Student 22, interview, February 12, 2025)
Their remarks highlight that the course provided unique listening practice by exposing students to diverse accents and suggest the potential for enhancing listening skills even among those with high proficiency.
Following listening, students generally acknowledged their gains in speaking, and all four focal students attributed these improvements to the course’s English-using environment. However, not all students were able to use and practice English to their fullest potential due to the mixed proficiency levels within the class. This diverse environment may explain partially why international students, who typically had higher English proficiency, reported lower perceived gains in speaking (M = 3.83, SD = 0.83) compared to their Korean classmates (M = 4.5, SD = 0.71). However, Students 19 and 22 noted that this dynamic still benefited them by allowing them to learn and practice adapting their communication strategies. For example, when they noticed their group members struggling to participate in discussions due to language difficulties, they adjusted by simplifying or elaborating on their words:
When some students were not yet comfortable enough speaking in English, I spoke a bit slower and simplified my words. I don’t think this hindered my opportunities to improve my English. I actually believe overcoming this and learning to adapt my communication was much more educational than simply focusing on improving my English. (Student 19, interview, February 5, 2025)
I was more likely to elaborate on my ideas so people could understand better, and I don’t think this hinders my opportunity to improve my English. Learning a language is about being able to communicate, so knowing how to share my ideas in a way that more people can understand is a goal I strive for. When talking with various students in the class, I paid attention to everyone in the group and explained my ideas in different ways to ensure they understood. (Student 22, interview, February 12, 2025)
These reflections highlight that they did not perceive these adjustments as obstacles to their English development; rather, they viewed them as valuable opportunities to refine their ability to communicate in diverse settings while fostering inclusivity.
Korean students who appeared to have slightly lower English proficiency than international students also had opportunities to enhance their communication skills in diverse settings. For instance, when Student 9 participated in group discussions with both Korean and international peers, she felt ”awkward” not using Korean with her Korean classmates. She could have switched between Korean when speaking with her Korean group members and English when addressing international peers, but she chose to consistently use English instead. She explained,
I recognized that using Korean would exclude the exchange students, so I made a conscious effort to speak English throughout the discussion. This experience not only improved my language skills but also strengthened my ability to communicate effectively in a diverse setting” (Interview, February 12, 2025).
Student 9’s decision to refrain from using Korean despite her initial discomfort demonstrates her effort to navigate multilingual environments. This experience highlights that diverse linguistic contexts, such as those in the current EMI class, have the potential to enhance students’ cross-cultural communication skills and adaptability.
5. Conclusion and Implications
This study explores students’ overall experiences and perceptions of an elective EMI class in terms of their satisfaction, class activities, and English improvement. This study focuses on a mixed class of Korean and international students at a Korean university, particularly examining differences between these two groups. Overall, students reported highly positive attitudes toward the class, though Korean students showed slightly higher satisfaction than international students. Among the six main class activities, teacher-led group discussions were perceived as the most helpful, followed by teacher lectures, group presentations, and student-led group discussions. In contrast, in-class group projects and independent assignments, such as homework readings, were considered less helpful.
These findings suggest that many students still benefited from student-led activities (i.e., group presentations and small group discussions), particularly valuing opportunities to use English, stay focused and engaged through their own topic selection, and listen to diverse perspectives. However, activities involving a teacher (i.e., teacher-led group discussions and teacher lectures) were rated more favorably. This preference was attributed to the teacher’s role of helping students stay focused, engaged, and participatory, as well as in providing clearer and more comprehensive explanations of the subject matter. In-class projects, categorized as student-led activities, had the potential to be as beneficial as other student-led activities, but they were not. Findings show that such activities were often completed as individual tasks, with students dividing the work so that each member completed their portion independently, resulting in minimal interaction among group members. Lastly, independent homework assignments were considered the least helpful due to a lack of guidance for completing reading tasks and a general lack of student motivation.
Some discrepancies were also found between Korean and international students in their perceptions of the helpfulness of specific activities. First, the vast majority of Korean students perceived group presentations as beneficial, whereas fewer than half of the international students shared this view. One possible reason for this difference was the unequal division of work; international students often took on leadership roles while Korean students tended to refrain from leading, which increased the burden and workload on international students. Secondly, fewer than half of Korean students found small group discussions helpful, whereas at least half of international students considered them beneficial. Korean students’ reluctance to take initiative and their hesitancy in sharing thoughts were identified as possible reasons for their negative experience with small group discussions. This, in part, may also be due to Korea’s strong cultural connection to Confucian ideals that focus on teacher-centered education and de-emphasis on student independence (Yang & Tan, 2019).
Most students acknowledged the EMI class’s role in enhancing their English skill, but Korean students, in fact, perceived greater improvement across all skills compared to international students. These findings contrast with those of Kym and Kym (2014), in which Korean students did not perceive significant improvement to their English. A primary difference between these contexts is the presence of international students enrolled in the same EMI course, which may be a motivating factor in Korean students’ English development. In addition, Korean students’ prior English learning environments were substantially different. For Korean students, whose previous English learning primarily focused on test preparation (Byun, et al., 2012), the EMI course offered a rare opportunity to use English in an immersive environment. As Tsui in Coleman, et al. (2018) points out, such an environment necessitates the use of English as a lingua franca as there is no other option for effective communication between students. At first Korean students felt uncomfortable using English, but as they gained more experience, their confidence grew, which may have contributed to their perceived improvement in English skills. In contrast, international students were already accustomed to using English naturally in daily and academic contexts, so they may not have experienced the same level of novelty or dramatic shift in language exposure as Korean students. Because they had already developed a high level of English proficiency through exposure to English-rich environments, their perceived improvement may have been less noticeable.
Examining individual English skills, it was notable that listening was one of the top areas where both Korean and international students benefited from the class. With continuous exposure to spoken English in class as the most commonly cited reason for this perceived improvement, exposure to diverse accents from students of various backgrounds was also mentioned. The class’s diversity also appeared to benefit speaking skills. For international students, it was provided an opportunity to improve their communication skills by simplifying and elaborating their language for group members. For Korean students, having classmates of both the same and different nationalities created opportunities to develop cross-cultural communication skills.
The findings suggest several educational implications for schools and instructors to consider in practice. First, offering EMI courses at the university level that accommodate a diverse range of students to enroll is recommended. In this study, the EMI course was an elective general education class, open not only to domestic Korean students but also to international students from various countries. While the inclusion of students from different backgrounds introduced challenges that would not typically arise in a homogeneous learning environment, it also provided valuable learning opportunities that students would have been otherwise hard to encounter, such as the development of cross-cultural communication skills. These skills are particularly relevant and applicable in real-world settings, in contrast to isolated EMI courses where all students share the same native language. Therefore, the presence of a diverse student body in EMI classes can create favorable learning opportunities not only for domestic students but also international students.
The potential benefits of diverse EMI classes may remain unrealized without strategic teacher involvement. As the study’s findings have shown that teacher-led activities were favored across all students, teacher involvement effectively could help students maintain their focus and engagement in class. In addition, it could mitigate issues arising from students’ differences in experiences and cultural backgrounds within groups. However, direct teacher intervention in every learning activity is not feasible in practice, making structured scaffolding a crucial approach. For instance, rather than having students prepare for presentations or discussions entirely on their own, guided instruction—such as providing a clear outline for assigning specific roles in advance or rotating leadership roles—can be particularly effective for those who struggle with communication, leadership, or collaboration. This approach can reduce the burden on both Korean and international students while fostering equitable participation and a healthier learning environment for all of them.
Last, fostering rapport among students through cultural understanding is recommended as a prerequisite to academic activities. Since students’ perceptions of in-class projects were negatively impacted when they focused solely on completing their individual tasks without sufficient interactions with their peers, cultivating a collaborative and inclusive mindset within groups appears to be essential for more constructive learning experiences. In particular, when diversity arises from variations in students’ language proficiency levels, cultural backgrounds, or prior educational experiences, its benefits in EMI courses may not be fully realized without empathetic connection and an inclusive attitude.
While the results of this study offer greater insight into the views of students from a multicultural background studying in an EMI setting, it is not without its limitations. One limitation is that this case study focuses on a single EMI course. Additional research may help to reveal a greater number of perspectives through various types of EMI courses that span different subjects and employ other types of class activities. Furthermore, this research focused on a course taught by a native English-speaking teacher, which may influence the views of students regarding their satisfaction with EMI courses. As previous research has found, students enrolled in EMI courses tend to show preference toward teachers who possess a native-speaking ability (Kym & Kym, 2014; Le & Nguyen, 2023). A closer comparison of teachers from various backgrounds may help to provide greater understanding behind these views and whether they persist as EMI and globalization continues to challenge the hierarchy of English-speaking teachers.
PDF Links
PubReader
ePub Link
Full text via DOI
Download Citation
