The concept of localisation has been with us since learning systems were first developed. The need for such systems to reflect the requirements of the context in which they were created has always been obvious. Examples of this range from the village schools in ancient China set in place to prepare candidates for the Imperial Examinations, to the 19th century education systems delivering education for the masses in Europe and the USA. Assessment in these systems was designed and delivered locally by classroom teachers. However, the huge expansion in education in the late 19th and early 20th century saw the growth of the education industries – particularly in textbook and test publishing. With this change came a lessening of the focus on local to a consideration of broader national or even international ‘standards’.

Over then past decade or more, the pendulum has begun to move back towards the local, with an increased emphasis on building systems that are appropriately contextualised. In terms of language education, this has seen an increased emphasis on the local suitability of the content and focus of learning and assessments.
In this talk, I will briefly look back over the recent growth of interest in localisation in learning systems, specifically focusing on assessment. I will set out a theoretical basis in support of such an approach as well as pointing to examples of different levels of local/localised assessments. In addition, I will consider the potential of artificial intelligence to influence future innovations in localisation.

Barry O’Sullivan is Head of Assessment Research & Development of the British Council. He has been involved in language testing for thirty years and during this time has written extensively on the subject and well as presenting his work at conferences around the world on hundreds of occasions. His work includes the development and validation of the British Council’s Aptis test (2012) and more recently the conceptualization of the socio-cognitive model of test development and validation. He is the founding president of the UK Association of Language Testing and Assessment.

English-medium instruction (EMI) is a rather unusual pedagogical phenomenon. Generally speaking, educational interventions are structured around explicitly articulated intended learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities designed to advance learners toward those outcomes, and assessment mechanisms to reveal the extent to which the outcomes were achieved. In EMI settings, most stakeholders expect that the use of English as the instructional language will strengthen students’ proficiency in English; however, language development is not accorded the same sustained attention as content-related outcomes. In most EMI settings, language takes a back seat to content. In many, language related learning objectives, explicit language instruction in the content classroom, and assessment of students’ developing language skills are entirely lacking.

One of the reasons for the downplaying of language in the EMI classroom is the way that teachers of the academic subjects orient toward language skills. Many feel that language teaching is not their area of competence, and that they lack the skills needed to provide input or feedback on students’ language use. Some believe that attention to language is not necessary: that exposure to English will lead to incidental language acquisition, without any particular effort. As a result, many EMI teachers choose to focus on what they know how to do well and with confidence–teaching their academic subjects–and leave the development of students’ language skills to chance.

Leaving intended pedagogical outcomes to chance is, manifestly, not ideal, and in the EMI literature it is easy to find calls for this situation to be remedied by team-teaching initiatives: subject specialists and language teaching specialists working together to design and deliver instruction which gives equal priority to the development of language skills and subject knowledge. In this respect, the EMI literature is echoing similar calls from the early days of research into English for specific purposes (ESP) and English for academic purposes (EAP). Going back to the 1980s, ESP and EAP researchers proposed team-teaching models, implemented them, and assessed their effectiveness.

In this talk, I will follow up on that body of research. How did these collaborations play out in practice? Are they still a common feature of the ESP/EAP landscape? What did they deliver successfully, and what worked less well? Above all, this talk will ask what lessons can be learned from these ESP/EAP initiatives to make the EMI environment a rich space for learning.

Diane Pecorari is Professor of TESOL at the University of Leeds. Her research, situated in the broad area of educational linguistics, investigates the widespread and growing phenomenon of English as the medium of instruction, along with aspects of English for academic purposes and second-language writing, including source use and plagiarism. Her publications include Introducing English for academic purposes (Routledge, with Maggie Charles). She is Editor in Chief (with Hans Malmström) of the Journal of English-Medium Instruction, and serves on the editorial boards of journals including English for Specific Purposes and System.