Applying the ROAD-MAPPING Framework in Doctoral Research: A

Practical and Analytical Guide to Investigating English-Medium Education in

Multilingual University Settings
Part I: Conceptual Foundations of the ROAD-MAPPING Framework
1. Introduction: Navigating the Complexities of EMEMUS
The landscape of global higher education has been profoundly reshaped by the forces of
internationalisation, leading to a dramatic and accelerating increase in the use of English as a
medium for teaching academic subjects.1 This phenomenon, particularly prevalent in non-
Anglophone nations, has created complex multilingual university settings where English coexists
with national, regional, and other languages. In response to the limitations of the term 'English-
Medium Instruction' (EMI), which can narrowly imply a one-way transmission of knowledge,
Professors Emma Dafouz and Ute Smit have championed the more conceptually expansive term
'English-Medium Education in Multilingual University Settings' (EMEMUS). 2 This term is
intentionally broader, designed to encompass a wide array of "diverse research agendas,
pedagogical approaches and different types of education". 4 Crucially, by focusing on 'education'
rather than 'instruction', EMEMUS avoids prioritizing teaching over learning and explicitly
acknowledges the rich, multilingual reality of contemporary international universities. 2

The highly contextual and multifaceted nature of EMEMUS presents a significant challenge for
researchers. Implementations of English-medium education are shaped by a unique confluence of
global, national, and local forces, making each program highly dependent on its specific context. 2
This complexity makes it exceptionally "very difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about
what can be labelled 'good' or 'successful'" when comparing different programs or institutions. 4
This analytical challenge underscores the critical need for a theoretical framework that is
simultaneously holistic, systematic, and flexible enough to capture the intricate dynamics at
play.2 Without such a tool, research risks becoming fragmented, producing isolated case studies
that are difficult to synthesize or compare meaningfully.

To address this need, Emma Dafouz, a Professor of Applied Linguistics at Complutense

University of Madrid, and Ute Smit, a Professor of English Linguistics at the University of
Vienna, developed the ROAD-MAPPING framework. 1 First introduced in their seminal 2016
article and later expanded in their 2020 book, this framework has rapidly become a "profoundly
useful instrument" for scholars in the field. 1 It is designed to facilitate the comprehensive and
transparent investigation of EMEMUS, providing a conceptual map to understand, plan, and
evaluate programs in a variety of contexts.1 The purpose of this report is to serve as an
exhaustive and practical guide for doctoral researchers seeking to apply the ROAD-MAPPING
framework in their own work. It moves beyond a simple description of the framework to provide
an operational roadmap for its use in a PhD thesis, covering everything from the formulation of
research questions and data collection to in-depth analysis and the discussion of findings, thereby
equipping the next generation of scholars to navigate the complex terrain of EMEMUS research
with rigor and nuance.4
2. The Architecture of ROAD-MAPPING: Theoretical Underpinnings and Core Principles
The ROAD-MAPPING framework is not merely a descriptive model but a robust analytical tool
built upon a rich, interdisciplinary theoretical foundation. Its architecture is designed to capture
the dynamic and socially situated nature of language in education, enabling researchers to
conduct nuanced and holistic investigations.

Theoretical Anchoring
The framework is explicitly grounded in applied linguistics, a field dedicated to addressing "real
world problem[s] in which language is its central issue". 7 This grounding ensures that the
analysis remains focused on the linguistic and communicative realities of EMEMUS. Its
theoretical strength is drawn from several intersecting domains:
• Sociolinguistics and Ecolinguistics: The framework adopts an ecological perspective,
viewing the university not as a monolingual space but as a complex linguistic
ecosystem.14 Following Haugen's (1972) work, it examines the relationships between
languages and the society in which they exist, acknowledging the interdependence of
English with other local and national languages. 3 This approach moves beyond a
simplistic view of English as a neutral tool and instead analyzes its fluid, complex, and
multifunctional role within the institutional environment.15
• Language Policy Research: ROAD-MAPPING is heavily informed by contemporary
research in Language Policy and Planning (LPP), particularly the work of scholars like
Spolsky.14 It recognizes that language policy is comprised not only of explicit, top-down
policy documents (
de jure policy) but also of the implicit beliefs, attitudes, and everyday practices of
institutional actors (de facto policy). 19 This allows researchers to investigate the often-
significant "(mis)alignments between policymaking and implementation". 16
• Discourse Studies: At its core, the framework regards EMEMUS as a social phenomenon
that is constructed through language. It views discourse—in its broadest sense,
encompassing written texts, spoken interaction, and other semiotic means—as the
primary "access point" for understanding and analyzing the six dimensions of
EMEMUS.3 This discursive orientation encourages researchers to examine how realities
are shaped, negotiated, and contested through communication.

Core Principles of the Framework

The practical utility of the ROAD-MAPPING framework for PhD research stems from three core
principles that define its application:
• Comprehensive and Holistic: The framework's six dimensions encourage an inclusive
examination of the EMEMUS context, prompting researchers to consider all relevant
factors from policy to pedagogy and from individual agents to institutional structures.
This holistic approach is a direct response to the tendency for EME research to be
fragmented. It allows a researcher to focus intensely on one or two dimensions for their
specific project "without losing sight of the overall picture or object of analysis". 1 This
 ensures that findings, even when specific, are contextualized within the broader
institutional reality.7
• Dynamic and Intersecting: The framework is explicitly designed to be non-linear and
non-static. The six dimensions are understood to be inherently complex and to be
"intersecting dynamically with one another". 3 This means a change in one dimension,
such as a new institutional language policy (Management), will inevitably have ripple
effects on others, such as classroom pedagogy (Practices and Processes) and lecturer
attitudes (Agents).14 This dynamic quality reflects the fluid and ever-changing nature of
real-world educational settings and allows for a more realistic and nuanced analysis than
a simple checklist approach would permit.1
• Context-Sensitive and Flexible: Acknowledging the vast diversity of EMEMUS
programs worldwide, the framework is designed to be adaptable. It demands that "full
respect be paid to the situatedness of each of the EMEMUS cases under investigation". 1
This inherent flexibility is one of its most frequently praised strengths, as it allows
researchers to adapt the conceptualization of the dimensions to fit the unique
characteristics of their specific research context.1 It is a guide, not a rigid prescription.
The development of the ROAD-MAPPING framework itself illustrates its dynamic nature. It is
not a static, immutable model but rather a living conceptual tool that continues to be refined
through its application and evaluation by the scholarly community. Its initial introduction in the
2016 Applied Linguistics article laid the groundwork.4 This was followed by the 2020 book,

ROAD-MAPPING English Medium Education in the Internationalised University, which

provided a more detailed and "updated account" of the framework, fleshed out with numerous
case studies.4 Subsequently, the 2023 edited volume,

Researching English-Medium Higher Education: Diverse Applications and Critical Evaluations

of the ROAD-MAPPING Framework, compiled studies from around the world that not only
applied the framework but also critically engaged with it, adapting and sometimes challenging its
components.1 A clear example of this evolution is the deliberate modification of the 'Roles of
English' dimension to include the parenthetical phrase '(in relation to other languages)', a change
made to more explicitly underscore the framework's commitment to a multilingual perspective. 12
This trajectory demonstrates that a doctoral researcher using the framework is not simply
applying a fixed theory but is entering into an ongoing academic conversation. A PhD thesis that
thoughtfully adapts a dimension to a new context or critically assesses its applicability
contributes directly to this collective process of refinement, elevating the potential impact of the
research beyond a simple case study.

Part II: Operationalizing the Framework for Doctoral Research

3. The Six Dimensions in Focus: From Concept to Data
For a doctoral researcher, the primary challenge lies in translating a conceptual framework into a
concrete research design. This chapter serves as a practical "how-to" guide, breaking down each
of the six ROAD-MAPPING dimensions into its core definition, potential research questions,
and corresponding data collection and analysis methods. 4 This operationalization is designed to
help researchers move from abstract theory to empirical investigation.

3.1 Roles of English (RO) (in relation to other languages)

• Definition: This dimension investigates the various communicative functions that English
fulfills within the university's linguistic ecosystem. Crucially, it examines English not in
isolation but in its "dynamic, complementary, and also conflictual" relationship with all
other languages present, including national, regional, local, and heritage languages. 1 The
framework recognizes that language can be viewed as both a static code (a product) and
as a fluid, dynamic resource used in multilingual communication practices like
translanguaging (a process).1 The explicit addition of the phrase "(in relation to other
languages)" in later versions of the framework was a deliberate move to emphasize this
multilingual reality and counter any assumptions of English monolingualism.12
• Potential Research Questions:
◦ What are the explicit (de jure) and implicit (de facto) roles assigned to English
versus the national/local language(s) in institutional policy documents and
everyday academic life?
◦ How do lecturers and students perceive the legitimacy and appropriateness of
using different languages for different functions (e.g., English for lectures, L1 for
clarifying concepts, other languages for social interaction)?
◦ What are the specific functions and patterns of translanguaging or code-switching
in EMEMUS classroom discourse, and how do they support or hinder learning?
◦ How do the roles of English differ across various university domains, such as
teaching, research, administration, and student services? 14
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ Document Analysis: University language policies, strategic plans, course syllabi,
and website content.
◦ Classroom Observation: Audio or video recordings of lectures, seminars, and
student group work to capture actual language use.
◦ Interviews & Focus Groups: Semi-structured interviews with students, lecturers,
and administrators to explore their language attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported
practices.
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Discourse Analysis: To analyze transcripts of classroom interaction, identifying
patterns of language choice, turn-taking, and communicative strategies.
◦ Thematic Analysis: To code interview and focus group data for recurring themes
related to language ideologies, attitudes, and perceived roles.
◦ Comparative Analysis: To compare the language policies articulated in official
documents with the actual language practices observed in the classroom.
3.2 Academic Disciplines (AD)
• Definition: This dimension moves beyond general language proficiency to focus on the
specific ways language is used within different fields of study. It comprises two
 interrelated concepts: academic literacies, which refers to the socially conventionalized
and discipline-specific products (e.g., lab reports, legal arguments, business case studies)
that students must learn to produce; and disciplinary culture, which encompasses the
unique conventions, norms, values, and ways of thinking that define an academic
community.1 A central concern within this dimension is the frequent and often erroneous
assumption that students' general proficiency in English automatically equates to mastery
of these highly specialized disciplinary literacies (DLs).25
• Potential Research Questions:
◦ How do the discursive and genre conventions of a 'hard' discipline (e.g.,
engineering) differ from those of a 'soft' discipline (e.g., sociology) when taught
through English in a multilingual setting?
◦ What specific linguistic and rhetorical challenges do students encounter when
attempting to acquire the academic literacies of their discipline in English as an
additional language?
◦ As investigated by Chang (2023), how does the implementation of an EME policy
impact the fundamental organization of knowledge and the pedagogical
transmission of disciplinary content? 1
◦ How do lecturers' and students' perceptions of what constitutes 'good' academic
writing or argumentation in their discipline align or diverge?
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ Textual Analysis: Collection of student-produced texts (essays, reports,
presentations, exam answers) for genre and discourse analysis.
◦ Interviews: In-depth interviews with subject-matter lecturers to understand their
discipline's communicative norms and pedagogical approaches to teaching them.
◦ Surveys: Questionnaires administered to students to gauge their perceived
difficulties and confidence levels with specific disciplinary tasks.
◦ Comparative Data: Collection of student grades or performance data to compare
academic outcomes between EME and L1-medium cohorts, as has been done in
several studies.16
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Genre Analysis: To identify the structural and linguistic features of specific
disciplinary texts.
◦ Corpus Linguistics: To analyze large collections of student texts to identify
patterns of language use, such as common errors or the development of
disciplinary vocabulary.
◦ Thematic Analysis: To analyze interview data from lecturers and students
regarding their understanding of disciplinary communication.

3.3 (Language) Management (M)

• Definition: This dimension is concerned with the top-down, explicit, and "direct efforts to
influence and manipulate the language situation" through formal policy mechanisms. 1 It
involves the analysis of language policy statements, strategic documents, regulations, and
guidelines at various levels—from the institutional (e.g., a single university's language
plan) to the national (e.g., a ministry of education decree) and even the continental (e.g.,
 European Union initiatives).1 A key focus is on examining the potential gaps and tensions
between official policy and on-the-ground implementation.16
• Potential Research Questions:
◦ What are the stated rationales, goals, and ideological underpinnings for the
implementation of EME as articulated in national and institutional policy
documents?
◦ How do university-level language policies address practical issues such as
language proficiency requirements for students and staff, provision of language
support, and guidelines for pedagogical training?
◦ What discrepancies exist between the de jure policies written in official
documents and the de facto practices and beliefs of those tasked with
implementing them?
◦ How are language-related issues managed in quality assurance procedures and
program accreditation?
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ Document Collection: Systematic gathering of official documents, including
university strategic plans, internationalisation strategies, language policy
frameworks, program handbooks, course syllabi, and public-facing websites.
◦ Interviews: Semi-structured interviews with key policy-makers and managers,
such as university rectors, deans, heads of international offices, and language
center directors.
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA): To analyze policy texts not just for their
content but also for their underlying ideologies, power relations, and discursive
constructions of EME.
◦ Thematic Content Analysis: To systematically identify and code key themes and
provisions within a corpus of policy documents.
◦ Comparative Policy Analysis: To compare and contrast the language management
strategies of different institutions or the evolution of policy within a single
institution over time, as demonstrated in the work of Rose & Sahan.1

3.4 Agents (A)

• Definition: This dimension brings the human element to the forefront, encompassing all
the "different social players" involved in and affected by EMEMUS. 1 These agents can be
conceptualized as individuals (a specific student, a lecturer) or as collective groups
(international students, tenured faculty, administrative staff). The framework considers
their diverse beliefs, attitudes, motivations, professional concerns, and evolving
identities.1 Importantly, agents are not viewed as passive recipients of policy but as active
participants who possess agency to interpret, negotiate, appropriate, or even resist top-
down directives, thereby co-constructing the reality of EMEMUS from the bottom up.18
• Potential Research Questions:
 ◦ What are the beliefs and ideologies of subject-matter lecturers regarding the
integration of language and content in their teaching? Do they see themselves as
language teachers?
◦ How do domestic and international students navigate their academic and social
identities within the multilingual and multicultural space of an EME program?
◦ What are the perceived professional development needs of lecturers transitioning
to teaching in English?
◦ How does the English language proficiency of different agents (e.g., students,
lecturers, administrative staff) influence their engagement with and experience of
EMEMUS?
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ In-depth Interviews: Semi-structured or narrative interviews to elicit rich, detailed
accounts of individuals' experiences, beliefs, and perspectives.
◦ Focus Groups: To facilitate discussion among peer groups (e.g., students from the
same program, lecturers from the same department) and explore shared or
contested views.
◦ Surveys and Questionnaires: To collect data on attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions
from a larger sample of agents, allowing for quantitative analysis.
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Thematic Analysis: To identify patterns and themes in interview and focus group
data related to agent beliefs, attitudes, and experiences.
◦ Narrative Analysis: To analyze the stories and personal accounts of agents to
understand how they construct their identities and make sense of their
experiences.
◦ Statistical Analysis: To analyze survey data using techniques like factor analysis
to identify underlying attitudinal constructs or regression analysis to explore
relationships between beliefs and demographic variables.

3.5 Practices and Processes (PP)

• Definition: This dimension focuses on the observable "doing" of EMEMUS—the

concrete administrative, research, and educational activities that constitute its daily
reality. It is concerned with social practices, understood as "cultural conception[s] of
particular ways of thinking about and doing" things. 1 The process-oriented perspective
allows for dynamic analysis at multiple levels: the
micro-level of classroom discourse, the meso-level of curriculum design and teacher
professional development, and the macro-level of institutional internationalisation
strategies.1 This dimension looks both inside the classroom (e.g., pedagogical strategies)
and outside of it (e.g., quality assurance work, marketing promises made to students).12
• Potential Research Questions:
◦ What specific pedagogical strategies (e.g., defining, paraphrasing, use of L1
equivalents) do lecturers employ in the classroom to scaffold content and
language for students? 3
 ◦ As in Komori-Glatz's (2023) study, how do students in multicultural teams
interact to negotiate business content and develop a community of practice? 21
◦ What are the institutional processes for developing, implementing, and evaluating
EME teacher professional development programs? 1
◦ What are the quality assurance processes in EME programs, and how do they
account for the dual challenges of content and language? 12
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ Classroom Observation: Direct, systematic observation of teaching and learning
practices, often supported by video or audio recordings.
◦ Analysis of Materials: Examination of teaching materials, lesson plans, student
assignments, and assessment tools.
◦ Interviews and "Stimulated Recall": Interviewing lecturers and students about
their practices, sometimes using video clips of their own classes to stimulate
reflection.
◦ Document Analysis: Reviewing institutional documents related to curriculum
development, teacher training modules, and quality assurance reports.
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Interactional Analysis / Conversation Analysis: Micro-level analysis of
transcribed classroom data to understand the sequential organization of talk and
interaction.
◦ Content Analysis: Systematic analysis of the content and design of teaching
materials.
◦ Process Tracing: Mapping the stages and decision points in administrative or
pedagogical processes, such as curriculum design or quality review.

3.6 Internationalisation and Glocalisation (ING)

• Definition: This final dimension situates EMEMUS within the broader strategic context
of the university, capturing the inherent "tensions but also the synergies" between global
ambitions and local identities.1
Internationalisation refers to the purposeful integration of international, intercultural, or
global dimensions into the university's core functions. 7
Glocalisation, a complementary concept, describes the process whereby a university
positions itself as a global player while simultaneously maintaining and leveraging its
unique local identity, culture, and community connections. 14 This dimension explores
how EME serves as a vehicle for these strategic goals.
• Potential Research Questions:
◦ How are the concepts of 'internationalisation' and 'glocalisation' discursively
constructed and promoted in the university's mission statements, strategic plans,
and marketing materials?
◦ In what ways does the university's EME strategy engage with or neglect local
languages, cultures, and knowledge systems?
 ◦ As explored by Bradford (2023), what specific promises regarding global careers,
international experiences, and local relevance are made to prospective students on
EME program websites? 1
◦ How do lecturers' personal and professional backgrounds influence their
engagement with and understanding of the university's internationalisation
agenda?
• Data Collection Methods:
◦ Discourse Analysis of Institutional Texts: Critical analysis of university websites,
promotional brochures, strategic plans, and mission statements.
◦ Interviews and Focus Groups: Discussions with university leadership,
international office staff, and lecturers to explore their perspectives on the
institution's global and local positioning.
◦ Corpus Analysis: As demonstrated by Pérez-Paredes & Curry (2023), building
and analyzing a corpus of interview and focus group data to identify key linguistic
patterns in how agents talk about internationalisation.12
• Analytical Approaches:
◦ Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA): To deconstruct the ideologies and narratives
embedded in institutional texts about internationalisation.
◦ Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS): To combine quantitative corpus
methods (e.g., keyword analysis, collocation analysis) with qualitative discourse
analysis to reveal patterns in large textual datasets.
◦ Thematic Analysis: To identify key themes in interview data related to
stakeholders' perceptions of the university's global and local roles.
To provide a clear, at-a-glance reference for the doctoral researcher, the information in this
chapter is synthesized in the following table.

Dimen
Example
sion
Core Definition Focus of Inquiry Research
(Acron
Questions
ym)

The communicative Language ideologies,

How do students
functions of English multilingual practices
and lecturers use
Roles and its dynamic (e.g., translanguaging),
their full linguistic
of relationship with and the functional
repertoires to
Englis other languages distribution of
facilitate learning
h (RO) (national, regional, languages across
in the EME
etc.) in the university different academic and
classroom?
setting. social domains.

Acade The specific The construction of What are the key

mic academic literacies disciplinary knowledge differences in the
Discip (genres, discourses) through language, and linguistic and
lines and cultural norms of the challenges of rhetorical
 demands of an
acculturating students
EME engineering
different fields of into specific academic
(AD) course versus an
study. communities of
EME history
practice via English.
course?

To what extent
The explicit, top-
The content and does the
down efforts to
(Lang ideology of de jure university's
influence the
uage) language policies and official language
language situation
Manag the (mis)alignment policy support the
through formal
ement between policy goals pedagogical and
policies, regulations,
(M) and on-the-ground linguistic needs of
and strategic
implementation. its EME
planning.
lecturers?

What are the

The beliefs, attitudes, beliefs of science
The social actors
identities, and agency lecturers
(students, lecturers,
of different stakeholder regarding their
Agent administrators,
groups and how they responsibility for
s (A) policymakers)
interpret, negotiate, students'
involved in
and co-construct the language
EMEMUS.
EMEMUS reality. development in
EME?

What
pedagogical
The concrete Micro-level classroom
Practi strategies do
administrative, interactions, meso-
ces & experienced EME
research, and level curriculum design
Proce lecturers use to
educational activities and teacher training,
sses ensure content
that constitute the and macro-level quality
(PP) comprehension
"doing" of EMEMUS. assurance processes.
for linguistically
diverse students?

The tension and

How do university
synergy between the How EME is used as a
Int'lisa websites
university's global strategic tool for
tion & discursively
ambitions internationalisation,
Glocal construct the
(internationalisation) and the ways in which
isatio value of an EME
and its connection to global and local forces
n degree in both
local identity and are balanced in policy
(ING) global and local
community and practice.
job markets?
(glocalisation).
Part III: The ROAD-MAPPING Framework in Practice: An Analysis of Case Studies

This section transitions from theoretical operationalization to an in-depth analysis of how the
ROAD-MAPPING framework has been applied in actual doctoral-level and scholarly research.
By examining a range of case studies, this part provides the concrete examples of "data, and the
analysis in practice" necessary for a PhD student to envision and design their own project. The
studies showcased here illustrate the framework's versatility across different research designs,
from broad comparative analyses to deep institutional dives and focused explorations of single
dimensions.

4. Multi-Sited and Comparative Analysis: Insights from Cross-Case Studies

One of the most significant challenges in international education research is conducting

meaningful comparisons across contexts that differ widely in their cultural, linguistic, and policy
environments. The ROAD-MAPPING framework provides a powerful methodological scaffold
for addressing this challenge.

A prime example is the 2023 study by Lijie Shao and Lorna Carson, which conducted a cross-
case analysis of undergraduate business schools in three distinct EMEMUS contexts: China,
Japan, and the Netherlands.1 Their research demonstrates how the framework can be used as a
systematic tool to structure a complex, multi-sited investigation.
• Methodology in Practice: The researchers explicitly state that their rationale for selecting
the framework was that it "represents a robust means of distinguishing features within
and across different university settings, particularly useful for a comparative study". 32
They used it as both a methodological guide for structuring their inquiry and as an
analytical framework for interpreting their data.
◦ Data Collection: A mixed-methods approach was employed to gather rich data
from each site. This included large-scale surveys completed by 663 students and
in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 27 students and 19 faculty members. 31
This combination allowed for both broad statistical patterns and deep qualitative
insights.
◦ Data Analysis: The six dimensions of the ROAD-MAPPING framework were
used as the primary coding structure for a thematic analysis of the interview
data.31 This ensured that the analysis was systematic and consistent across all
three national contexts, allowing the researchers to "transform research findings
from separate and specific cases into a synthesised cross-case analysis".32
 • Key Findings and Analysis: The application of the framework revealed "marked
contrasts" between the sites that might have been obscured by a less structured
approach.31 For example, significant differences were found in student language
proficiency, the linguistic competence of teachers, and the degree to which content and
language support were integrated at both the institutional (Management) and classroom
(Practices and Processes) levels. The study was able to draw nuanced comparisons,
noting, for instance, that while the Chinese and Japanese universities contrasted sharply
with the Dutch university, there were also some similarities between the Japanese and
Dutch cases in specific aspects.31
This study powerfully illustrates how the framework facilitates robust comparative research. The
fundamental difficulty in comparing EME programs across diverse nations lies in establishing a
valid basis for comparison, or what researchers term "functional equivalence." A direct
comparison of, for example, "student satisfaction" in the Netherlands and China could be
misleading because the underlying systems and contexts are vastly different. The ROAD-
MAPPING framework provides a solution to this problem. By applying the same six-
dimensional lens to each case, Shao and Carson were able to create a systematic profile of each
university's entire EMEMUS ecosystem. They were not merely comparing isolated outcomes but
the interplay of factors within each system—how the Management dimension (e.g., national
policies) in the Netherlands shaped the Agents (e.g., highly proficient students and staff), which
in turn influenced Practices and Processes (e.g., classroom pedagogy). This structured approach
provides the theoretical architecture necessary to make justifiable and meaningful comparisons
across heterogeneous settings, a critical component of high-quality international research.

5. Institutional Deep Dives: Single-Case Study Applications

While the framework excels in comparative research, it is equally powerful when applied to a
single case, enabling a rich, in-depth, and holistic understanding of a specific institutional
context. Several studies demonstrate its utility for this kind of deep dive.
• Focus Study 1: An Austrian Business University: A study by Miya Komori-Glatz (2023)
at an English-medium master's program in Vienna is described as the "first major study to
use ROAD-MAPPING as an integral part of the analytical approach" from start to
finish.21
◦ Application: The framework provided the overarching structure for the entire
research project. While considering all six dimensions to understand the macro
(institutional) and meso (programmatic) context, the study strategically "zoomed
in" on the Practices and Processes (PP) dimension at the micro-level. 21 The
specific focus was on how multicultural student teams negotiated business content
and developed a community of practice during collaborative tasks.
◦ Data and Analysis: The methodology combined an etic approach (interactional
analysis of student teamwork recordings) with an emic one (reflective interviews
with the students), providing a multi-layered view of the processes. 21 The study
 confirmed the framework's robustness in illuminating the "multi-layered and
multifaceted nature of the international university setting". 21 It also highlighted
the framework's flexibility, noting that it was necessary to adapt the
conceptualization of some dimensions to better fit the specific context.21
• Focus Study 2: An Internationally-Oriented Chinese University: Another case study used
the framework to investigate the complex interplay between EME and
internationalisation strategies within a single Chinese university.16
◦ Application: The framework was used to analyze how the institution navigated
both top-down policies and bottom-up language norms. This holistic view
allowed the researchers to identify and characterize five distinct types of EME
being practiced within the same university, a level of granularity that a less
comprehensive model might have missed.
◦ Data and Analysis: The study was based on triangulated data from two key
sources: official institutional documents (Management dimension) and in-depth
interviews with faculty and staff (Agents dimension).16
• Focus Study 3: Universities in Colombia and Brazil: A qualitative PhD thesis examining
EME in two Latin American universities provides an excellent example of using a single
dimension as an analytical entry point.16
◦ Application: While acknowledging the importance of the entire framework, this
study used the Roles of English (RoE) dimension as the primary "starting point
for data analysis".16 The research aimed to understand how the introduction of
EME was affecting the specific functions that English performs in these settings
relative to Spanish and Portuguese.
◦ Data and Analysis: The research drew on in-depth interviews with EME
professors and an analysis of institutional documents, demonstrating how a
focused application of one dimension can yield deep insights while remaining
conceptually grounded in the holistic model.16
These cases collectively show that the framework is not an all-or-nothing proposition. A doctoral
researcher can use it to structure an entire thesis, as Komori-Glatz did, or they can strategically
deploy a single dimension, like RoE, as a primary analytical lens to make their project's scope
manageable, while still using the other five dimensions to provide essential context for their
findings.

6. From Policy to Practice: Analyzing National and Institutional Strategy

The ROAD-MAPPING framework is particularly adept at bridging the gap between policy and
practice, making it a valuable tool for research at the meso- (institutional) and macro-
(national/continental) levels. It allows researchers to move beyond simply describing policies to
analyzing how they are constructed, interpreted, and enacted.
• National Level Analysis: Several studies have applied the framework to analyze national-
level EME policies. Research examining EME in Vietnam, for instance, drew on the
 framework's six dimensions to deductively code and analyze top-down government
policy documents.17 This provided a systematic and holistic understanding of how
Vietnamese policymakers conceptualized EME-based education and its intended
implementation.17 A particularly insightful study by Heath Rose and Kari Sahan (2023)
explicitly compared the ROAD-MAPPING framework to traditional macro-meso-micro
frameworks for policy analysis.26 By contrasting a study of Chinese EME policy using
the traditional model with a study of Turkish policy using ROAD-MAPPING, they
concluded that while the multilayered framework allowed for a holistic but "far less
focused" investigation, the ROAD-MAPPING framework was "more adept at explicating
the discourses between policy arbitration".26 They argue that ROAD-MAPPING offers
"greater utility, specificity, and nuance" for EME policy research, in large part because it
is theoretically grounded in sociolinguistics and is thus more sensitive to language-related
issues.26
• Institutional Level Analysis: The framework has also been used to inform policy and
management at the institutional level. Dafouz and Smit present a case study of its
application at the Complutense University of Madrid, demonstrating how the six
dimensions can be used as an analytical guide to examine and inform managerial
decisions regarding internationalisation and language planning. 4 By systematically
considering all dimensions, university leaders can identify potential challenges and
opportunities, leading to more coherent and context-sensitive strategies.
• Continental Level Analysis: The framework's utility extends to transnational contexts. It
was applied in the EQUiiP project, which involved six European countries. 4 In this
context, ROAD-MAPPING provided a common conceptual language and analytical
structure for partners from different national systems to collaborate on developing
resources and strategies for EME teacher education and professional development,
demonstrating its value for large-scale, cross-border initiatives.

7. Zooming In: Research Focused on Specific Dimensions

A key challenge for any doctoral candidate is defining a research project that is both significant
and manageable within the constraints of a PhD. The ROAD-MAPPING framework supports
this by allowing researchers to place a "lens on a particular aspect" while still keeping the
holistic context in view.1 The following studies exemplify how deep, methodologically
sophisticated research can be conducted by focusing primarily on one or two dimensions.
• Focus Study 1: The ING Dimension: A 2023 study by Pascual Pérez-Paredes and Niall
Curry offers a compelling example of an in-depth investigation into the
Internationalisation and Glocalisation (ING) dimension. 1 Their research sought to
understand how EME lecturers at a Spanish university discursively construct the concepts
of internationalisation and glocalisation.
◦ Innovative Methodology: This study stands out for its methodological innovation.
The authors proposed a novel mixed-methods approach that combined the
ROAD-MAPPING framework with corpus linguistics and elements of critical
 grounded theory.12 They compiled a corpus of text from five semi-structured
interviews and two focus groups with multidisciplinary lecturers.28
◦ Analysis in Practice: The ROAD-MAPPING framework was used to
"theoretically position and interrogate the data," providing the overarching
conceptual structure.28 Corpus linguistic tools were then used to analyze the
interview corpus for key patterns of language use, while critical grounded theory
guided the interpretation of these patterns. This sophisticated approach allowed
them to move beyond simple thematic coding to offer a nuanced interpretation of
the lecturers' discourse, identifying not only established themes of
internationalisation but also significant "gaps in their engagement with ING".28
• Focus Study 2: The AD Dimension: Research led by Emma Dafouz as part of the
international SHIFT project demonstrates a focused application on the Academic
Disciplines (AD) dimension, specifically investigating the role of Disciplinary Literacies
(DLs).9
◦ Application: The study used the ROAD-MAPPING framework as a conceptual
and analytical tool to provide a "situated account of how DLs are conceptualised,
practised, and socialised" in an English-taught business studies program. 25 The
research addressed the critical gap between students' general English proficiency
and their mastery of the specific communicative practices of their discipline.
◦ Data and Analysis: The analysis was based on data from focus group interviews
with both students and lecturers, allowing for a multi-perspective view of the
challenges and practices related to developing disciplinary literacy in an EME
context.25
These studies show that focusing on a single dimension does not mean ignoring the others.
Rather, the other dimensions provide the essential context that makes the focused analysis
meaningful. For example, Pérez-Paredes and Curry's findings on the ING dimension are enriched
by an understanding of the specific Agents (lecturers with certain backgrounds), the institutional
Management (university policies), and the Academic Disciplines involved. The following table
provides a comparative overview of how different studies have operationalized the framework,
offering concrete models for a PhD researcher.

Data
Key
Study & Primary Collection Data Analysis
Dimensions
Context Research Focus Instrument Approach
Investigated
s

Shao & To compare and All six Surveys Thematic

Carson contrast the dimensions, (N=663) analysis of
(2023) profiling and used as a Semi- interview data
Compar enactment of comparative structured using the six
ative EMEMUS across lens. interviews ROAD-
study of three distinct with MAPPING
Busines national and students dimensions as
s institutional (N=27) a deductive
schools
in
China, coding
and faculty
Japan, contexts. 31
(N=19). framework.
& the
Netherla
nds 32

Komori-
Primary
Glatz Interaction Synthesis of
focus on
(2023) To examine al analysis etic
Practices &
Single- multicultural of student (interactional
Processes
case student teamwork analysis) and
(PP), with
study at teamwork and (recording emic (thematic
other
an the negotiation s). analysis of
dimensions
Austrian of business Reflective interviews)
providing
Busines content at a interviews approaches.
macro and
s micro-level. with 21
meso
Universit students.
context.
y 21

Pérez- Semi- Novel mixed

Paredes To explore how structured method
Primary
& Curry lecturers' interviews combining
focus on
(2023) attitudes and (N=5) ROAD-
Internationa
Single- discourse Focus MAPPING
lisation &
case construct the groups with corpus
Glocalisatio
study at concepts of (N=2) with linguistics and
n (ING),
a internationalisati lecturers critical
related to
Spanish on and from grounded
Agents (A).
Universit glocalisation. various 12
y 30 disciplines. theory.

To analyze
Rose & national and Primary Discourse
Policy analysis of
Sahan institutional EME focus on
documents policy texts,
(2023) policy (Language)
(N=145) structured by
Policy documents and Managemen
University the six
analysis compare the t (M), but
fieldwork dimensions of
in utility of ROAD- connected to
data the
Turkey MAPPING vs. all other
(N=7). 26
34 traditional dimensions. framework.
frameworks.
Part IV: Critical Evaluation and Future Directions

8. Reflections, Recommendations, and Avenues for Future Research

For a doctoral candidate, adopting a theoretical framework requires not only understanding its
application but also developing a critical perspective on its strengths and weaknesses. This final
chapter provides a balanced evaluation of the ROAD-MAPPING framework, offers actionable
recommendations for its use in a PhD thesis, and outlines potential avenues for future research
where an emerging scholar can make an original contribution.

Critical Evaluation of the Framework

The widespread adoption of the ROAD-MAPPING framework is a testament to its considerable

strengths, but like any conceptual tool, it also presents challenges and has limitations.
• Strengths:
◦ Interdisciplinary Potential: A frequently cited strength is its ability to encourage
discussion and analysis across disciplinary boundaries. While grounded in applied
linguistics, it provides a common language for educators, managers, policy
analysts, and sociologists to engage with the multifaceted phenomenon of EME.4
◦ Structure and Flexibility: The framework achieves a difficult balance. It provides
a clear, explicit, and comprehensive structure that prevents research from
becoming fragmented, yet it remains flexible enough to be adapted to diverse
local needs and contexts.12
◦ Connects Micro and Macro: It is a powerful tool for linking micro-level practices
(e.g., classroom discourse) with meso-level management (e.g., curriculum design)
and macro-level policy (e.g., national internationalisation strategies), enabling a
truly holistic analysis.21
◦ Heuristic Power: It functions as an effective analytical tool that can "bring to light
contextual factors that might otherwise be overlooked". 4 Applying the framework
a posteriori to existing data can generate new interpretations and deeper
understanding.
• Limitations and Challenges:
◦ Complexity: The framework's holistic nature is also its main challenge. For a
single researcher, keeping all six intersecting dimensions in focus simultaneously
 can be difficult and risks a lack of depth in any one area. As some users have
noted, it can be "a challenge to keep all six dimensions in focus and unbiased"
when analyzing a complex dataset.12
◦ Overlapping Dimensions: The "fluid nature" of the framework means that the
boundaries between dimensions can be blurry in practice. For instance, the
distinction between Agents and their Practices and Processes can overlap
significantly, which can create analytical repetition. 12 One study noted the need to
combine these two dimensions to better study quality assurance work.12
◦ Lack of Explicit Prescription: The framework is intentionally non-prescriptive; it
"emphasises complexity and does not include instructions on how to use it". 12
While this allows for flexibility, for novice researchers it "may appear to be more
of a challenge than a guide".12
◦ Contextual Specificity: The framework was designed specifically for multilingual
university settings. Researchers have found it "a bit tricky" to apply its sub-
dimensions directly to other educational contexts, such as secondary education,
without significant adaptation.12

Actionable Recommendations for PhD Researchers

Based on this critical evaluation, a doctoral candidate can employ several strategies to use the
framework effectively and manage its challenges:
1. Strategically Scope the Project: It is neither feasible nor desirable for most PhD projects
to investigate all six dimensions with equal depth. A more effective approach is to select
one or two dimensions as the primary focus of the investigation while using the
remaining dimensions as the essential contextual backdrop for the analysis. For example,
a study might focus intensely on Practices and Processes within the classroom but use the
Management and Agents dimensions to explain why those practices are occurring.
2. Treat Intersections as Findings: Rather than viewing the overlap between dimensions as a
methodological problem, treat it as an analytical finding. The intersection between, for
instance, a lecturer's beliefs (Agents) and their pedagogical choices (Practices and
Processes) is a rich site for inquiry. Explicitly analyzing these points of intersection can
lead to more nuanced and integrated conclusions.
3. Pair the Framework with Specific Analytical Methods: The ROAD-MAPPING
framework is a conceptual guide, not an analytical method in itself. To avoid purely
descriptive research, it is crucial to pair it with robust and specific methods of analysis.
As the case studies show, its power is amplified when combined with techniques like
critical discourse analysis, corpus linguistics, interactional analysis, or grounded theory. 12
4. Acknowledge and Justify Adaptations: If the research context requires an adaptation of
the framework (e.g., combining dimensions or modifying a definition), this should be
done transparently. The thesis should clearly articulate the rationale for the adaptation,
thereby contributing to the ongoing scholarly conversation about the framework's
application and refinement.
Future Research Directions

The work of Dafouz, Smit, and the community of scholars using their framework points to
several under-investigated areas where a doctoral researcher could make a significant
contribution. The existing literature, while growing, has so far only covered a limited number of
geopolitical contexts.12 There is a pressing need for more research that applies the ROAD-
MAPPING framework in diverse settings, particularly in the Global South, to broaden the field's
empirical base.

Furthermore, scholars have called for further testing and development of the framework itself,
with the potential to create a "research kit and resource package for each dimension". 12 A PhD
project could contribute to this by, for example, developing and validating a survey instrument
specifically designed to measure one of the dimensions (e.g., Agents' beliefs) or by creating a
detailed coding scheme for analyzing policy documents through the lens of the Management
dimension. By undertaking such methodologically focused work, a doctoral researcher's project
can move beyond a single case study to provide tools and insights that advance the entire field of
EMEMUS research. In doing so, they participate in the ongoing journey of mapping this
complex and vital area of international higher education.

References

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. Towards a dynamic conceptual framework for English-medium

education in multilingual university settings. Applied Linguistics, v. 37, n. 3, p. 397-415, jun.
2016.

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. ROAD-MAPPING English medium education in the internationalised

university. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. (ed.). Researching English-Medium Higher Education: Diverse

Applications and Critical Evaluations of the ROAD-MAPPING Framework. London: Routledge,
2023.

Propostas de Adaptação para o Projeto de Doutorado

A ideia central é usar as seis dimensões do ROAD-MAPPING como uma lente para organizar e
aprofundar a análise dos dados que você já planeja coletar.

1. Na Fundamentação Teórica
Você pode introduzir o framework ROAD-MAPPING como seu principal modelo analítico,
explicando que ele oferece uma abordagem holística para investigar a Educação em Meio de
Inglês em Ambientes Universitários Multilíngues (EMEMUS), um termo que você pode adotar
para dialogar com a literatura mais recente.

• Como integrar seus conceitos-chave ao framework:

◦ Translinguagem e Inglês como Língua Franca (ELF): Esses conceitos se
encaixam perfeitamente na dimensão Roles of English (RO) (in relation to other
languages). O framework legitima a análise do inglês não de forma isolada, mas
em sua relação dinâmica com o português e outras línguas, e valida o estudo de
práticas como a translinguagem como um processo comunicativo e pedagógico, e
não como "falta" ou "erro".
◦ Agência Discente: Este é o cerne da dimensão Agents (A). O framework vê os
estudantes não como receptores passivos de políticas, mas como "atores sociais"
que interpretam, negociam e até resistem às diretrizes, construindo a realidade do
EMI de baixo para cima. Sua pesquisa, ao focar na agência, aprofunda exatamente
essa dimensão.
◦ Decolonialidade: Sua lente decolonial pode ser aplicada de forma transversal a
todas as dimensões, mas dialoga especialmente com (Language) Management (M)
e Internationalisation and Glocalisation (ING). Você pode usar o framework para
analisar como as políticas linguísticas (de jure) da universidade (Management)
podem carregar ideologias coloniais, e como as práticas decoloniais dos alunos
(Agents e Practices and Processes) desafiam essas ideologias. A dimensão ING
permite analisar criticamente a tensão entre a "internacionalização" (muitas vezes
alinhada a modelos do norte global) e a "glocalização" (a valorização de saberes e
identidades locais), que está no cerne do seu argumento decolonial.

2. Nos Objetivos

Seus objetivos já estão bem alinhados com o framework. A adaptação aqui seria torná-los mais
explícitos, usando a terminologia do modelo para mostrar o alcance da sua análise.

Sugestão de reescrita dos Objetivos Específicos:

1. Descrever e analisar as Práticas e Processos (PP) pedagógicos em salas de aula de EMI,

com foco nas estratégias de translinguagem e no uso do Inglês como Língua Franca
(ELF).
2. Investigar as percepções, crenças e identidades dos Agentes (A) discentes sobre o uso do
ELF, a aprendizagem de conteúdo e seu papel no processo de internacionalização
acadêmica.
3. Analisar como a agência discente se manifesta na negociação e resistência às normas
linguísticas, examinando a relação entre as práticas de sala de aula (PP) e as políticas de
Gestão (M) linguística da instituição.
 4. Examinar, a partir da perspectiva dos Agentes (A), como as estratégias de
Internacionalização e Glocalização (ING) da universidade são percebidas, negociadas ou
ressignificadas por meio de práticas linguísticas decoloniais.

3. Na Metodologia

Sua escolha pela abordagem etnográfica é ideal para a aplicação do ROAD-MAPPING. A

principal adaptação seria usar as seis dimensões como um framework de codificação dedutiva
para a análise dos seus dados (gravações, entrevistas, notas de campo).

• Na prática da análise: Ao transcrever uma entrevista com um aluno, por exemplo, você
pode codificar os trechos usando as dimensões.
◦ Um aluno diz: "O professor explicou em inglês, eu não entendi, aí perguntei em
português e meu colega me ajudou."
▪ Isso pode ser codificado em Practices and Processes (PP) (a prática
concreta de pedir ajuda) e em Roles of English (RO) (o uso funcional do
português para garantir a compreensão).
◦ Um aluno comenta: "A universidade quer que a gente fale só inglês, mas na hora
do aperto, a gente usa o português. É o nosso jeito."
▪ Isso pode ser codificado em (Language) Management (M) (a percepção da
política de jure), Agents (A) (a manifestação da agência e identidade) e
Roles of English (RO) (a prática de facto que desafia a política).

Essa abordagem não muda seus métodos de coleta, mas confere uma camada extra de rigor e
sistematicidade à análise, permitindo que você conecte claramente os eventos da sala de aula às
estruturas mais amplas da universidade.

4. Na Tese a ser Defendida

Você pode refinar sua tese para incorporar explicitamente o framework, fortalecendo seu
argumento.

Sugestão de refinamento da Tese:

"A tese principal a ser defendida é que as práticas de EMI no ensino superior brasileiro,
analisadas sob a ótica holística do framework ROAD-MAPPING, configuram-se não como uma
mera transposição de um modelo monolíngue, mas como um ecossistema complexo. Nesse
ecossistema, os estudantes, como Agentes (A) centrais, exercem sua agência por meio de
Práticas e Processos (PP) decoloniais de translinguagem. Tais práticas redefinem os Papéis do
Inglês (RO) como uma Língua Franca (ELF) e desafiam as políticas de Gestão (M) e as
narrativas de Internacionalização (ING), construindo um modelo de educação superior mais
inclusivo e epistemicamente diverso, adaptado à realidade local."

Ao fazer essas adaptações, seu projeto ganha um diálogo mais profundo com a literatura
internacional sobre EMI, aumenta seu potencial de comparabilidade com outros contextos e
fortalece a conexão entre a teoria e a análise etnográfica.

Objetivos

Objetivo Geral:

Analisar, a partir de uma lente decolonial e com base no framework

holístico ROAD-MAPPING (DAFOUZ; SMIT, 2016, 2020), as dinâmicas
da Educação em Meio de Inglês em Ambientes Universitários
Multilíngues (EMEMUS) no ensino superior brasileiro. A pesquisa
investigará como os discentes, enquanto Agentes (A), exercem sua
agência por meio de Práticas e Processos (PP) de translinguagem e
do uso do Inglês como Língua Franca (ELF), redefinindo os Papéis do
Inglês (RO) e negociando as estratégias de Internacionalização e
Glocalização (ING) da instituição.

Objetivos Específicos:

1. Descrever e analisar as Práticas e Processos (PP) pedagógicos

e as estratégias comunicativas em salas de aula de EMEMUS,
com foco em como os Agentes (A) (discentes e docentes) utilizam
a translinguagem e o ELF para redefinir os Papéis do Inglês (RO)
em relação ao português e outras línguas.
2. Examinar as percepções, crenças e identidades dos Agentes (A)
discentes sobre o uso do ELF para o aprendizado do conteúdo
disciplinar e seu papel no processo de Internacionalização e
Glocalização (ING) da universidade.
 3. Investigar como a agência discente se manifesta na negociação
de normas linguísticas, analisando a relação entre as práticas de
sala de aula (de facto) e as políticas de Gestão (M) linguística (de
jure) da instituição como forma de resistência à colonialidade.

Descrição e fundamentação da metodologia a ser

usada

A presente investigação se fundamentará em uma abordagem

etnográfica de natureza qualitativa e interpretativista, buscando uma
compreensão aprofundada das dinâmicas linguísticas e sociais em
contextos de Educação em Meio de Inglês em Ambientes Universitários
Multilíngues (EMEMUS) no ensino superior brasileiro. A escolha por
1

essa metodologia se justifica por sua capacidade de permitir uma

imersão prolongada e sistemática no cenário de pesquisa, com o
objetivo de capturar a complexidade de fenômenos como a
translinguagem e a agência, que não podem ser isolados de seu
contexto social e cultural. Conforme propõe André (2003), o
1

pesquisador atuará como um "estrangeiro familiar", participando das

atividades diárias para obter uma visão interna, enquanto mantém um
olhar externo e analítico para desvendar os significados por trás das
interações e práticas observadas.1

O cenário de pesquisa será a Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM),

instituição onde o pesquisador já possui uma trajetória de engajamento
com as políticas de internacionalização. O estudo focará em iniciativas
1

de EMEMUS oferecidas até o momento que, conforme destacado por

Züge, Calvo e Lima (2025), têm posicionado a UEM como referência em
boas práticas de internacionalização. A análise de documentos, como a
1

política linguística do estado, servirá para contextualizar a pesquisa no

âmbito das políticas públicas. Os participantes, professores e
1

estudantes, serão convidados a participar após a aprovação do projeto

pelo Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa e a assinatura do Termo de
Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido. 1

Para a coleta de dados, a pesquisa adotará uma variedade de

instrumentos etnográficos. A observação participante será o método
central, com o pesquisador acompanhando as aulas para registrar as
interações linguísticas, as estratégias de negociação de sentido e as
manifestações de agência. Complementarmente, serão realizadas
1

gravações em áudio e vídeo das aulas e das interações em grupo,

constituindo o principal corpus de análise para um exame microanalítico
das práticas de translinguagem e Inglês como Língua Franca (ELF). 1

Além disso, notas de campo detalhadas documentarão as impressões e

reflexões do pesquisador, enquanto entrevistas semiestruturadas
aprofundarão as percepções dos participantes sobre suas escolhas
linguísticas e identidades.
1

A análise dos dados, embora de natureza interpretativista, será

sistematicamente estruturada pelo framework ROAD-MAPPING
(DAFOUZ; SMIT, 2016, 2020). As seis dimensões do framework (Roles
of English, Academic Disciplines, Management, Agents, Practices and
Processes, Internationalisation and Glocalisation) serão utilizadas como
um sistema de codificação dedutivo para organizar os dados
etnográficos (transcrições de aulas e entrevistas, notas de campo). Este
3

processo permitirá conectar as microinterações da sala de aula (nível

micro) às políticas institucionais (nível meso) e às forças da globalização
(nível macro). Por exemplo, um trecho de entrevista em que um aluno
5

descreve o uso do português para esclarecer um conceito será

codificado nas dimensões

Agentes (A) (sua percepção e agência), Práticas e Processos (PP) (a

estratégia comunicativa em si) e Papéis do Inglês (RO) (a função
complementar entre inglês e português).

Após essa codificação estruturada, e alinhando-se à perspectiva de

letramento crítico de Street (2014) e aos estudos decoloniais de
Gimenez (2024), a análise ascenderá a um nível crítico-ideológico. As
1

práticas de translinguagem e ELF, já mapeadas dentro do ecossistema

EMEMUS, serão então examinadas como micropolíticas de resistência
à colonialidade. O objetivo final é entender como o uso da língua,
1

sistematicamente analisado pelo ROAD-MAPPING, reflete, desafia e

subverte as estruturas de poder e as ideologias sobre a
internacionalização na universidade. 1
Referências Adicionais

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. Towards a dynamic conceptual framework for

English-medium education in multilingual university settings. Applied
Linguistics, v. 37, n. 3, p. 397-415, jun. 2016.

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. ROAD-MAPPING English medium education

in the internationalised university. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.

DAFOUZ, E.; SMIT, U. (ed.). Researching English-Medium Higher

Education: Diverse Applications and Critical Evaluations of the ROAD-
MAPPING Framework. London: Routledge, 2023.