PLANNING ENGLISH COURSES FOR INTERNATIONALIZATION WITHIN LANGUAGES WITHOUT BORDERS AT UFS

PLANEJANDO CURSOS DE INGLÊS PARA INTERNACIONALIZAÇÃO NO IDIOMAS SEM FRONTEIRAS NA UFS

ABSTRACT

Languages without Borders (LwB) was created in 2014, replacing English without Borders (BRASIL, 2012), and amplified in 2016. From 2019, the program became Andifes LwB Network. The documents which alter IsF present changes with regard to internationalization orientations. In this context, it is worth reflecting on how practices take place in IsF nuclei within Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). In this sense, this paper aims to analyze the preparation of an English course for internationalization purposes within IsF in a HEI from the northeast of Brazil. This is a qualitative study characterized as action research (BURNS, 2015; LAVILLE; DIONNE, 1999; PAIVA, 2019), which involves the study of field notes, document collection, and teaching logs (FREEMAN, 1998). The results indicate the preparation of a course that works on language social practices in the academic environment. It also seeks for a transdisciplinary approach and a critical concept of internationalization, with emphasis on the reflection of global issues, the role of universities, students, and the language.

Keywords
Languages without Borders; English language; English learning course

RESUMO

O programa Idiomas sem Fronteiras (IsF) foi criado em 2014, substituindo o Inglês sem Fronteiras (BRASIL, 2012), e ampliado em 2016. A partir de 2019, o programa tornou-se a Rede Andifes IsF. Os documentos que alteram o IsF apresentam mudanças com relação a suas orientações para internacionalização. Cabe, nesse contexto, refletir sobre como a prática ocorre nos núcleos da rede em Instituições de Ensino Superior (IES). Nesse sentido, este artigo busca analisar a preparação de um curso de inglês para fins de internacionalização no âmbito do IsF em uma IES do Nordeste. Esta é uma pesquisa qualitativa, caracterizada como pesquisa-ação (BURNS, 2015; LAVILLE; DIONNE, 1999; PAIVA, 2019), que envolve o estudo de notas de campo, compilação de documentos e registro de ensino (FREEMAN, 1998). Os resultados indicam a preparação de um curso que parte de práticas sociais de uso da língua no ambiente acadêmico, além de buscar uma abordagem transdisciplinar e uma concepção crítica de internacionalização, com ênfase na reflexão sobre problemas globais, o papel das universidades e dos próprios alunos, assim como o da língua.

Palavras-chave
Idiomas sem Fronteiras; língua inglesa; curso para a aprendizagem de inglês

AS A WAY OF BEGINNING

In 2012, the program English without Borders (BRASIL, 2012) was created in response to the need to increase the low levels of English proficiency among university students, especially those aiming to be part of the academic mobility program Science without Borders. Two years later, the program was reshaped (BRASIL, 2014) and became Languages without Borders (LwB), including other languages, such as Spanish, French, and Portuguese as a Foreign Language, and new objectives. In 2016, it was amplified (BRASIL, 2016). In November 2019 (ANDIFES, 2019), considering that the Brazilian Ministry of Education (MEC) decided not to continue the program, a new version of LwB was announced, now as part of the National Association of Federal Higher Education Institution Leaders (Andifes): the Andifes National Network of Specialists in Foreign Language - Languages without Borders or Andifes LwB Network.

From its first decree, the program defends its commitment to contribute to the development of internationalization in Brazilian higher education institutions. This emphasis is one of the features which differentiates the courses offered within LwB. According to Sarmento et. al. (2016), the focus is to prepare the academic community to internationalization, including both situations which involve academic mobility and those which require students to use languages without leaving their universities (for instance, to read/write papers).

Considering the previous discussions, there is a need to study how the program’s goal is put into practice in courses. Therefore, this paper aims to analyze the preparation of a course for internationalization purposes within LwB at the Federal University of Sergipe (UFS). The 14-hour course was offered online in 2020 to students in the upper-intermediate level (CEFR: B2). This is a qualitative study (LAVILLE; DIONNE, 1999), characterized as action research (BURNS, 2015; PAIVA, 2019), which involves the study of field notes, document collection and teaching logs (FREEMAN, 1998), as well as the analysis of the decrees which created or reshaped LwB.

This text is organized in the following way: first, we discuss the concept of internationalization. In the following section, we present how internationalization has been approached in LwB decrees/resolutions, so as to highlight aspects worth considering for course planning. Next, the methodology employed and the research context are addressed. Then, data is analyzed and, finally, some considerations are drawn.

1. (RE)DEFINING INTERNATIONALIZATION

According to Kalantzis and Cope (2006), humanity has experienced three globalizations, that is, moments in history when the world went through intense processes of change - which affect actions, meaning making, and knowledge production and sharing. Schools and universities have been impacted by these social transformations and attempt to respond to them. However, technological development has enhanced these modifications and increased global interactions unequally, given that the so-called developed countries have concentrated resources.

Internationalization refers to means employed to respond to globalization (ALTBACH; KNIGHT, 2007; KNIGHT, 1999). Both processes are related in such a way that one changes the other. As per Knight (2003, p. 3), globalization refers to “the flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values, and ideas… across borders. [It] is positioned as a multifaceted phenomenon and an important environmental factor that has multiple effects on education.” Globalization is permeated by inequality and power relations, with the Global North in a privileged position. Internationalization, in this context, often reinforces this situation, as universities in the Global North are considered models to be followed.

Defining the word internationalization has involved controversy over the years, as Knight (2003) explains. The author states that the term became popular in the area of Education in the 1980’s, and many others have been used to address the topic. Knight (2003) argues, when pondering on how internationalization should be defined, that it involves the national and institutional level but should not be too specific, so the particularities of each context can be considered. The author herself has redefined internationalization. In a publication from 1993, Knight (cited in KNIGHT, 1994, p. 3) submits that “[it] is the process of integrating the international dimension into the teaching, research and service functions of an institution of higher education.” In 2003, she rethinks the former definition, so as to complement it, and proposes that “internationalization at the national, sector, and institutional levels is defined as the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary education” (KNIGHT, 2003, p. 2).

De Wit et al. (2015) updates Knight’s (2003) definition in order to highlight that internationalization is not an end but a way to improve the quality of education and research, in addition to being a planned process that requires effort to be put into practice.

The intentional process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions and delivery of post-secondary education, in order to enhance the quality of education and research for all students and staff, and to make a meaningful contribution to society (DE WIT et al., 2015, p. 29).

There was a need to emphasize that contributing to society is the aim. According to de Wit (2019), internationalization has shifted towards a more competitive and economy-oriented perspective from the 1990’s. Stein and Silva (2020), however, explain that, albeit not dominated by economical aims, the former practices, which were aid-based, were rooted in a colonial logic. They worked on the reasoning that the West, as the developed part, should help non-Western countries, and they sought to, given the context of the Cold War, “socialize international students as good capitalist subjects who would go on to become political and economic leaders in their home countries and would be sympathetic to the geopolitical and economic interests of their former host country” (STEIN; SILVA, 2020, p. 553). The economy-oriented or trade-based approach is much more focused on quantity, position in rankings, and on the generation of more income, which has led some authors to call for a redefinition of internationalization. In 2011, Brandenburg and de Wit (2011) published a paper entitled “The End of Internationalization”, in which they incite critically oriented reflections on internalization. De Wit continues to defend this point in later works (DE WIT, 2013b; 2020, as well as DE WIT; LEAL; UNANGST, 2020).

Regarding the discussion on the definition of internationalization, there are two interconnected components which can be observed in higher education internationalization: at home and abroad. The former refers to the promotion of intercultural and international thinking; in this sense, it is more related to the actions planned and developed within an institution. The latter, on the other hand, is more closely linked to exchanges ‘across borders’, including, for instance, academic mobility (DE WIT, 2013a; KNIGHT, 2008). LwB courses aim to contribute to both components, working to cover their elements in the course options.

To offer courses, local coordinators have access to pre-stablished options¹ within a catalogue. There are different possibilities, from those which prepare students linguistically to academic mobility to those that focus on reading strategies to comprehend scientific publications. There are also options that address cultural issues and linguistic varieties.

In the following topic, we discuss LwB decrees, in order to analyze: a) the goals of the program; b) the aspects which should be considered for course planning within LwB; c) internationalization orientations.

2. LWB DECREES

Wiley and García (2016) explain that language policy and planning, under conventional views, have two aspects, corpus planning and status planning. The first refers to language in its structural level, including, for instance, standardization. The latter, in turn, deals with choices and attitudes towards languages (and its varieties), which can be considered (less/more) prestigious. Although both aspects are focused on language itself, they are connected to and have impact on speakers. Wiley and García (2016, p. 50) defend the existence of a third dimension: acquisition planning, which “typically involves the formulation of policies that guide practice on a large scale, including the determination of which languages will be used as media for instruction.” Therefore, this aspect has more direct impact on language education.

When discussing language policy appropriation, Johnson and Johnson (2015, p. 223) state that these policies “are created, interpreted, and appropriated within and across multiple levels and institutional contexts.” In this sense, those involved in the process read and make decisions based on their interpretations and, sometimes, resignify the policy in different ways. This is the case for LwB, which more closely relates to acquisition planning. Albeit there are decrees that create, reshape, and define how the program works, local coordinators from each university choose how to run LwB in their institutions, considering their own readings of the decrees, as well as their understandings of language teaching, internationalization, and teacher formation, to name but a few.

With that in mind, we will discuss LwB decrees, considering their goals and important features, so we can we address how LwB goals were appropriated in the course under analysis, which, we should highlight, was developed in the context of UFS.

The Decree nº 1.466, from December 18, 2012 (BRASIL, 2012), creates English without Borders (EwB). Given that the program was conceived in response to Science without Borders (SwB), its goals, at first, were linked to this academic mobility and study abroad program. EwB aimed to prepare undergraduate students linguistically to sit the proficiency exams “required to the admission in Anglophone universities” (BRASIL, 2012, p. 1). It also sought, by promoting English learning, to help students have access to educational and professional experiences focused on “quality, entrepreneurship, competitivity and innovation in priority and strategic areas to Brazil” (BRASIL, 2012, p. 1). Contributing to internationalization of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and to the development of language centers is also mentioned in the objectives. Therefore, the key elements are academic mobility, the development of English proficiency and language centers, as well as the focus on market competitivity. In this sense, EwB was linked to a monolingual perspective and highlighted one aspect of internationalization, academic mobility. These two matters are addressed as misconceptions when it comes to defining internationalization, which cannot be reduced to teaching (in) English or to studying abroad (DE WIT, 2011). We emphasize, once again, that the goals established for EwB were aligned with SwB, given that the first program was complementary to the second; hence, the focus on mobility. The emphasis on English is related to a broader sociohistorical, political and ideological process, in addition to being connected to the aim of sending Brazilian students to Anglophone universities, associated with good quality due to their positions on international rankings (SILVA; SILVA, 2019). With regard to the emphasis on market competitivity, we ought to remind that globalization and internationalization are deeply related and cannot be isolated. As Szyszlo (2016) asserts, knowledge has gained a central place in economy. HEIs, ergo, occupy a central spot in a society in which

a nation’s competitiveness is heavily influenced by its ability to innovate. Innovation, therefore, is the outcome of how knowledge is mobilized and applied. The essential elements for the knowledge society are innovation and collective intelligence, as well as the ability to harness the outcomes of intellectual work (SZYSZLO, 2016, p. 2-3).

However, as Altbach and Knight (2007) contend, globalization is engendered in inequalities that favor groups of people who have been favored historically. This requires HEIs to question what kind of internationalization they seek to promote and its consequences.

The aim to foster students’ involvement in experiences directed to “quality, entrepreneurship, competitivity and innovation” (BRASIL, 2014, p. 1) is kept in the following decree, now with no mention to priority areas. The Decree n. 973, from November 14, 2014 (BRASIL, 2014), creates LwB. Albeit still linked to SwB, the program presents a different overall objective: linguistically prepare HEIs students and staff, public-school teachers, and foreigners (Portuguese as a foreign language). The goals from EwB appear in LwB, with the inclusion of the commitment to strengthen language teaching in Brazil, as well as Portuguese and the Brazilian culture abroad. This decree also establishes that any agreements made must contribute to language teacher education in HEIs which are part of LwB. The main changes in this decree include: addressing more languages, as opposed to only English - even though it is still privileged, given its recurrent representation as ‘the language of science;’ working with Portuguese teaching both in the country and for foreigners/abroad, as well as the Brazilian culture; and contributing to teacher education. Silva and Silva (2019) explain that, although teacher education was not discussed in the decrees, local coordinators felt the need to prepare EwB/LwB teachers to develop courses which have such specific features, and the good results achieved led to the inclusion of teacher education in the program’s decrees.

The Decree n. 30, from January 26, 2016 (BRASIL, 2016), amplifies LwB and emphasizes teacher formation even more. This decree provides more details about the responsibilities of each one involved in the program (teachers, coordinators, HEIs, Higher Education Secretary). Moreover, it seeks to “contribute to the development of a language policy for the country” (BRASIL, 2016, p. 1).

Given the lack of interest in continuing LwB from MEC, the Andifes LwB Network was created through the Resolution n. 01/2019. Its aim is to “strengthen internationalization efforts and foreign teacher formation in universities” (ASSOCIAÇÃO…, 2019, p. 1). The document explicitly names the languages which are part of the network but makes it clear that others can be included: German, Spanish, French, English, Italian, Japanese, and Portuguese for foreigners. The goals from Decree n. 30 (BRASIL, 2016) are kept, with the addition of two items: the focus on research on language teaching for internationalization and the partnership with (inter) national specialists. Unlike the other documents, which privileged English, this one does not approach languages differently, given the independence of LwB from MEC. Nonetheless, there are differences in the functioning of the network, given the power position English occupies; for instance, there are more English specialists linked to LwB then those from other languages, as there are more universities offering English language teaching degrees (and hiring more professors, as well as accepting more students). Consequently, more English courses are offered within LwB.

Table 2 presents a summary of the discussions, highlighting the items on which we focused our analysis, namely a) the goals of the program; b) the aspects which should be considered for course planning within LwB; c) internationalization orientations.

Table 2
analysis of LwB decrees

	Purpose	Aspects for consideration (from the objectives)	Internationalization orientations
Decree nº 1.466, from December 18, 2012	To prepare students to take English proficiency exams.	academic mobility; development of English proficiency and language centers; focus on market competitivity in strategic areas.	Internationalization for the development of the country’s economy, with focus on academic mobility and English for proficiency exams.
Decree n. 973, from November 14, 2014	To linguistically prepare HEIs students and staff, public-school teachers, and foreigners (Portuguese as a foreign language).	academic mobility; development of language proficiency and language centers; focus on market competitivity; strengthening language teaching in Brazil, as well as Portuguese and the Brazilian culture abroad.	Internationalization for the development of the country’s economy and for social contribution (including schools), with focus on language learning and teacher education.
Decree n. 30, from January 26, 2016	To linguistically prepare HEIs students and staff, public-school teachers, and foreigners (Portuguese as a foreign language); contributing to the development of a language policy.	academic mobility; development of language proficiency and language centers; focus on market competitivity; strengthening language teaching in Brazil, as well as Portuguese and the Brazilian culture abroad.	Internationalization for the development of the country’s economy and for social contribution (including schools), with focus on language learning, teacher education, and language policy.
Resolution n. 01/2019	To “strengthen internationalization efforts and foreign teacher formation in universities”	academic mobility; development of language proficiency and language centers; focus on market competitivity; strengthening language teaching in Brazil, as well as Portuguese and the Brazilian culture abroad; the focus on research on language teaching for internationalization; and the partnership with (inter)national specialists.	Internationalization for social contribution, with mention to the development of the country’s economy and focus on language learning, teacher education, language policy, and research on internationalization.

Source: authors’ elaboration

Table 2 shows how LwB changed, as it became more independent, first from SwB, than from MEC. In the first decrees there is a strong focus on the country’s economy, but it gradually moves towards a social contribution, given that other elements, such as teacher education for LwB contributors and the offer of free language courses, aiming to increase the levels of proficiency - in a country where language learning has been mostly possible for upper social classes². The orientations towards internationalization also change, becoming broader. The initial focus on academic mobility and English is broaden and ends up including research on the area and scholars’ collaboration. We, once again, highlight the complexities, tensions, and negotiations which permeate(d) the choices and changes in the documents, considering that many interests were at stake.

The documents which create or change LwB do not go further in specifying how each nucleus should develop its activities, giving room for local agency. Local coordinators were responsible for, among other things, deciding which courses to offer, considering their IES needs, how to educate teachers, and how the courses should be developed. General guidance was provided in the semiannual meetings for coordinators, in which local practices were shared. Based on these guidelines, the annual calendar for classes and the course catalog, coordinators could conduct their LwB language centers and the activities which would be offered to the academic community.

The course catalog includes 110 options that vary in duration (16h, 32h, 48h or 64h), from which nuclei should pick the courses they will offer. This list is constantly under development, given that local coordinators can propose new options, based on the needs they observe in their communities. New proposals go through an evaluation before they are included in the catalog and, therefore, made available nationally. This process is discussed in Braga, Souza, and Dellagnelo (2021). After choosing which courses to offer, a nucleus is free to develop them however local coordinators and teachers consider more appropriate, as long as they fit the scope of LwB.

In the following topic, we address the methodology, to later discuss the process of preparing a LwB course at UFS and analyze one specific course, Oral productions: academic interactions, which is presented below along with its context.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND CONTEXT

This research is considered as qualitative, given that it does not intend to measure or quantify a phenomenon; rather than studying a large sample and drawing representative conclusions to be generalized or to represent a group, this work focuses on a specific context so as to understand it (FERREIRA; CALVOSO; GONZALES, 2002; LAVILLE; DIONNE, 1999).

Considering that this research is conducted by teachers/professors, it is also characterized as teacherresearch (FREEMAN, 1998). The author defends the inseparability of both teaching and researching and the deconstruction of the understanding that those who teach are the ones who practice, not the ones who develop studies. His proposition is to redesign these two actions so as to see (and practice) them as one. The idea is, therefore, to investigate - i.e., to be aware of and try to understand what happens in the classroom - and share findings with other teacher-researchers to provoke reflections. There is no unique way to do teacher-research; rather, there are many possibilities from which the most appropriate choices (considering objectives and the context, among other factors) can be made. One of the options - the one we adopt here - is action research, which, according to Burns (2015, p. 188),

involves a self-reflective, systematic and critical approach to enquiry by participants who are at the same time members of the research community. The aim is to identify problematic situations or issues considered by the participants to be worthy of investigation in order to bring about critically informed changes in practice.

We, as researchers and being directly involved with the offer and development of the course, seek to investigate our practice, specifically course preparation, to reflect on how it can be improved. In this sense, the goal is to generate knowledge that can be useful for those who are part of the context (PAIVA, 2019), that is, not only teachers and coordinators at LwB-UFS but the ones who are directly linked to other higher education institutions in the scope of LwB or another similar program.

Data for this research was collected through field notes (annotations based on observations), document collection (in this case, course overview, lesson plans, presentation slides, and handouts), and teaching logs (annotations of procedures adopted, the sequence of actions planned, goals and predicted results) (FREEMAN, 1998). We also briefly analyze the decrees which created or reshaped LwB.

Regarding the context of the research, the course we analyze here was offered between October and November, 2020 for UFS students and staff in the upper intermediate level. Considering that LwB was no longer proctoring English language proficiency tests shortly before the offer, and the online course My English Online (MEO)³ was discontinued on December, 2019, students were responsible for deciding in which levels they were, in a self-evaluative effort. In addition to sharing options of online free placement tests, the LwB-UFS team was available to talk to students, mainly through social media, to help them in the process of self-evaluation. Given that some online open classes were offered, some students attended options which focused on different levels to evaluate the ones which were challenging for them (neither too difficult nor too easy); this way, some of them could find the levels they felt more comfortable with to choose for which courses they would sign up.

The course, entitled Oral productions: academic interactions, was 14-hour long and offered completely online, given that social distance was in place due to Covid-19. The format adopted was that of remote teaching education (ARRUDA, 2020), with synchronous classes and some asynchronous activities. The total number of students enrolled was 31 out of 30 spots available, considering that an additional student was included in the course because, even though he was unable to enroll before all places were over, he had participated in all remote courses previously developed and was very interested in joining this one. However, as many people end up dropping classes for several reasons, such as time scarcity and personal issues, there is a difference between the number of enrolments and that of completions. In this case, 11 students completed the course, that is, they participated in three out of four classes and completed the final task, about which we will discuss later on in this paper. The number of students per class can be seen at Table 1.

Table 1
Students’ attendance

	Number of students
First class	12
Second class	14
Third class	11
Fourth class	10
Completed the final task	11

Source: authors’ elaboration

As Table 1 shows, among attendees, three students did not complete the course. Overall, 11 of the 31 people enrolled had 75% or more of attendance. We highlight, nonetheless, that 17 pupils never participated in a class, and the reasons for that may vary from connection or equipment problems, other tasks related to the university routine, illnesses, difficulties to access the platform, and lack of interest.

The platform adopted by LwB-UFS was Microsoft Teams⁴, given that, in addition to being LwB’s recommendation (once teachers and coordinators have access to a free Office 365 account), it was also an option for UFS students, who also had access to a personal Office 365 account sponsored by the university. This platform was also the chosen one among LwB-UFS teachers and coordinators, who discussed its features and limits. For the course under analysis, a team was created, and students joined it (either using a link or a code). One day a week, a 2-hour class would take place; in this case, a video call would happen. For asynchronous activities, students had to send them through email or share them with the class (in a file within the course archives).

4. PLANNING A COURSE AT LWB-UFS

First, the course was chosen from the options available in the national catalog, considering: a) the level, which had to be upper-intermediate (B2), due to the division of levels and classes proposed by the coordination, based on the demands from the academic community; b) courses previously offered to this level in the same year, so as to make sure that different needs were addressed (reading, writing, preparation for oral presentations etc.); c) students’ preferences collected via survey on Instagram. Based on that, the chosen option was Oral productions: academic interactions. As its name suggests it, the focus is on interactions that require the oral use of English within HEIs.

In order to start writing the course plan, a brainstorming of communication contexts took place, some of them were: presenting results of a study, talking to students (who speak English) from other countries, buying food, engaging in debates, organizing studies and sharing schedules to find compatibilities to meet, understanding and explaining thoughts on a topic or theories. After selecting four options, one for each class, the linguistic structures required for each situation were considered, as well as themes - which should cover different areas of study, considering that the public included people from different levels, fields, and (under)graduate courses. The course plan on Table 3 demonstrates the result.

Table 3
Course plan

Short description: the course focuses on academic situations in which HEI students might need to use English, especially those in academic mobility programs. Therefore, each class highlights one communicative context and provides participants with the linguistic preparation to face it. Besides, given the diversity of areas students are engaged in at UFS, the themes of classes aim to embrace this variety, working on topics from different fields of study. Finally, even though all four abilities will be addressed (reading, writing, speaking, and listening), speaking will be emphasized due to the focus of this course in oral interactions
	CLASS	COMMENTS
1	Climate change (Geography)	First, as this is the first class, there will be a moment to talk about LwB activities and to get to know each other, considering that students need to introduce themselves and meet people, as well as address professors. Besides, when going to a different university some matters are considered important; for instance, commitment with research and/or environmental issues. The second part of this class focuses on climate change and the role of universities and students, as well as of language.
2	Engaging in debates: Copyright (Law)	In this class, students will have the opportunity to debate copyright, after learning helpful expressions and strategies to respond to arguments (presented by colleagues or by lecturers/authors). This class focuses on debate because they are common in the academic environment, especially in scientific events and classes.
3	Explaining and understanding explanations (tense vs modality): statistics and politics (Statistics)	In addition to learning useful vocabulary, students will be able to work on the difference between using tense or modality in academic communications, especially with regard to explanations (of concepts, of research findings etc.).
4	Organizing studies (using forms of the future “tense”): routines and human health (Health Sciences)	In this class, students will learn how to use the future (considering its possible forms) to organize their studies, that is, to develop routines considering life in a university. This is especially important in some situations, such as creating and discussing a schedule for courses in (under)graduation semesters and other academic activities.

Source: LwB-UFS archives

In addition to including different areas of study, the themes were also global problems and their relation to knowledge produced within universities. For instance, the first class regards the role of universities in relation to climate change (a global issue), so some of the discussions proposed reflections, for instance, on the importance of university commitment with the environment, and some questions guided the class. What is the role of researchers in this matter? What is the role of language? For the second class, in turn, students worked on debating strategies to discuss the relation of copyrights and knowledge distribution, as well as access, specially in a global scale, considering the similarities and differences among legislations for each country. Therefore, each class addresses one global issue from a questioning perspective of people’s/universities’ role, in an attempt to have students seeing themselves as subjects, global citizens, and reflecting on the role of HEIs as centers of teaching, researching, and contributing to their communities (university outreach projects). In this process, students work on reading, writing, listening, and, specially, speaking, the focus of the course. Grammar is also approached in contextualized and critical way, given that activities were developed for them to reflect on the implications of each linguistic choice they make in the academic context. Take the third class, for instance. It works on the difference between using modality or tense⁵ and relating this use to statistics, considering how they can be employed to serve certain interests.

LwB, particularly in the Resolution n. 01/2019, the one in effect when this course was developed, shows internationalization orientations that “are driven by a combination of economic and social imperatives” (VAVRUS; PEKOL, 2015, p. 5), as it aims to contribute socially (for instance, improving the proficiency of public-school teachers through the offer of free courses) and economically (to the Brazilian knowledge society, preparing students to experiences focused on entrepreneurship, competitivity, and innovation). In this course, the orientation to internationalization moves towards a more critical perspective, by focusing on global problems - as per de Wit’s (2019) remarks - and students’ role, as well as that of universities in dealing with them.

In addition to participating in the classes, students had to complete a final task, which was not graded, but they received individual feedback, based on the guidelines stablished and shared with them. Participants should record, individually, a video in which they spoke, given the focus on oral production, considering:

Situation: a university requested from its students a video in which they address it, focusing on their perspectives/experiences, so the videos can be shared with prospective students.

You should record a video focusing on one university. First, you should say which university you chose (it can be UFS or any other where you would like to study/work). Then, you should choose one policy or action undertaken (for instance, the requirement of a certain level of proficiency). Next, you have to pick a comment about this specific topic (left on a website, a video, text or that you have heard before) and respond to the argument, considering the use of tense or modality. Finally, you should briefly explain an organization of studies using the future (in a potential/intended situation, if you chose to talk about a university where you plan to study, or your real experience at UFS). Source: LwB-UFS archives

This task required them to use the linguistic topics covered during the course (debating, tense/modality, future forms for organizing studies) within a situation: a video for prospect students. After considering options of products students could create that could be part of academic interactions, this one was chosen because the topics addressed in classes could be used in it. To keep promoting reflections, students were invited to discuss one action or policy from the university. In this sense, they had to look for something rather than position in rankings that was worth addressing in relation to their chosen university and respond to someone else’s stand towards this action/policy.

In line with calls to rethink internationalization (BRANDENBURG; DE WIT, 2011; DE WIT, 2019; 2020; VAVRUS; PEKOL, 2015), the course was planned to promote critical thinking in relation to global issues, English language use and knowledge construction and sharing, moving towards a questioning stand that regards the complexities of internationalization. Therefore, rather than ignoring or a-critically including the aspects of LwB documents, the course addresses some of them (due to the length of the course and the numerous possibilities of issues to consider) from a critical perspective. We are not claiming, however, that students developed critical thinking because of the course, as the focus is on the course planning, rather than on actual results. Additionally, we believe that critical thinking does not magically happen or can/should be measured, as it refers to an ongoing uncomfortable process that requires unlearning and relearning.

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

In this paper, we discussed LwB decrees and resolution, considering that the courses planned within the former program (now a network) should be aligned with its principles. Considering that EwB was created in response to SwB linguistic demands, the initial main objective was to prepare students to proficiency exams in English. This goal is later amplified: first, it expands the work with language and the preparation for the aforementioned exams become one of the possibilities, as other course options with different foci become available; it includes more languages, although they are only specified in the 2019 resolution, with the exception of Portuguese - which is explicitly mentioned; public-school teachers’ linguistic development is added to the objective; later (BRASIL, 2016), contributing to the development of a language policy is integrated to the goal; and finally, the purpose changes its focus, emphasizing teacher formation and internationalization. Therefore, as LwB is changed, new elements are introduced as goals. They show a broadening in the concept of internationalization, as it moves from a focus on English and academic mobility to address more aspects which are important in the process of internationalization. Moreover, even though the aims to contribute to the country’s competitivity was kept in all of the documents analyzed, social contribution and a collaborative perspective were increasingly emphasized, which indicates the tensions between economic and social imperatives. As Knight (2004) explains when discussing internationalization rationales, the categorization of motivations gets increasingly blurry, given that one is related the other.

Albeit LwB decrees/resolution present orientations towards internationalization, specifying elements which should be considered for actions undertaken in its scope, local nuclei appropriate these documents and make decisions, based on their own interpretations, on local needs, and on their conceptions related to language, teaching-learning, teacher formation, and internationalization. For instance, culture only appears in the goals related to sharing the Brazilian culture (in all documents, except for the one that creates EwB, where it is not mentioned at all); however, there are courses in the national catalog which regard intercultural awareness, because coordinators considered them important for the process of internationalization.

Here we addressed the process of planning an English course within LwB, specifically at UFS. We highlight, however, that the process for this specific course is not a ‘recipe’ used by every teacher. Supervised by the local coordinators, teachers are autonomous to plan the courses under their responsibility, so their cognition - that is, what they know, their beliefs, perspectives, attitudes, emotions, and conceptions (BORG, 2003) - is part of the process.

The course analyzed here - chosen from the catalog considering local needs - was developed based primarily on social practices that require the oral use of the language, in this case, English. The orientation towards internationalization is more critical, provoking students’ reflections on the roles of language, people, and universities in dealing with global issues and disseminating knowledges (the plural form was deliberately used).

Each class in the course also approaches a theme that is related to an area of studies, so the diverse group of students could be contemplated and be able to discuss topics closer to their course. In addition to that, this diversity stimulates a transdisciplinary dialogue, in which students from different disciplines bring what they know to the discussions on issues that are related to everyone (for instance, climate change or copyright).

The perspective which permeates the course is that of contributing to the formation of critical global citizens who question their own roles both in dealing with global issues and as researchers, and who think of the place of language in the process.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the conclusions of this study are available in the archives of Languages without Borders at the Federal University of Sergipe, which can be requested via the authors’ e-mail or through the email [e-mail].

• 1
  The courses available in the national catalogue were proposed by local coordinators. If one of them has an idea for a new course, considering local/global needs, he or she can suggest the course to be added in the catalogue, so other coordinators can offer it in their universities. Therefore, rather than imposed in a top-down process, the catalogue is a collaborative product always under development, which comes from local coordinators - in a bottom-up process.
• 2
  As per Paiva (2003), educational policies in Brazil, historically, have not provided solid grounds for high-quality English teaching in schools, which lead socioeconomically privileged classes to assure the learning of the language by taking classes from the private sector. Given the social inequality of the country, many students could not do the same, depending mostly on public schools to learn English.
• 3
  In order to enroll in a LwB English course, students were required to present the results of proficiency tests attesting one of the levels emphasized within the available options (at UFS, most courses were developed for A2, B1, and B2 learners), according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR). Students could either take the Test of English as a Foreign Language - Institutional Testing Program (TOEFL ITP), which was proctored free of charges by LwB language nuclei, or the placement test available at MEO, a course they could take for free as well. Both placement options became unavailable once LwB was disconnected from the Ministry of Education (MEC).
• 4
  There are an app and a web version of the platform, which is available through the link: https://www.microsoft.com/pt-br/microsoftteams/log-in.
• 5
  Janks’ (2014) work was considered for the process of planning this class. She explains that “Modality […] works with degrees of certainty and authority and it is different from tense. Tense is a claim to truth.” This reflection was taken to the academic level. Students had to consider whether they would use tense based on the quality of evidence and on the question of what can be considered true, after analyzing the use of tense (and statistics) in the political context to convince people.

REFERENCES

• ALTBACH, P. G.; KNIGHT, J. (2007). The Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations and Realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, [S.l], v. 11, n. 3-4, p. 290-305.
• ARRUDA, E. P. (2020). Educação remota emergencial: elementos para políticas públicas na educação brasileira em tempos de Covid-19. EmRede, [S.l.], v. 7, n. 1, p. 257-275.
• ASSOCIAÇÃO NACIONAL DOS DIRIGENTES DAS INSTITUIÇÕES FEDERAIS DE ENSINO SUPERIOR. (2019). Resolução do Conselho Pleno da Andifes nº1/2019, de 12 de novembro de 2019. Cria na estrutura da associação nacional dos dirigentes das instituições federais de ensino superior (ANDIFES), a da rede ANDIFES nacional de especialistas em língua estrangeira - Idiomas sem Fronteiras, denominada Rede ANDIFES IsF. Brasília, DF.
• BORG, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, [S.l], v. 36, n. 2, p. 81-109.
• BRAGA, J. de C. de F.; SOUZA, V. V. S.; DELLAGNELO, A. de C. K. (2021). Catálogo de cursos do IsF: unidade nacional. In: ABREU-E-LIMA, D. et al (org.). Sistemas de gestão e Ações do Núcleo Gestor: a experiência do Programa Idiomas sem Fronteiras. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG.
• BRANDENBURG, U.; DE WIT, H. (2011). The End of Internationalization. International higher education, [S.l], n. 62, p. 15-17.
• BRASIL. (2012). Portaria No 1.466, de 18 de dezembro de 2012. Institui o Programa Inglês sem Fronteiras.
• BRASIL. (2014). Ministério da Educação. Secretaria da Educação Superior. Portaria nº 973, de 14 de novembro 2014. Institui o Programa Idiomas sem Fronteiras e dá outras Providências.
• BRASIL. (2016). Ministério da Educação. Secretaria da Educação Superior. Portaria n° 30, de 26 de janeiro de 2016. Amplia o Programa Idiomas sem Fronteiras.
• BURNS, A. (2015). Action Research. In: PALTRIDGE, B.; PHAKITI, A. Research methods in applied linguistics: a practical resource. London: Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, p. 187-204.
• DE WIT, H. (2011). Trends, issues and challenges in internationalisation of Higher Education Amsterdam: Centre for Applied Research on Economics & Management.
• DE WIT, H. (2013a). Internationalisation of higher education, an introduction on the why, how and what. In: DE WIT, H. (Ed.). An Introduction to Higher Education Internationalisation Milão: Vita&Pensiero, p. 13-46.
• DE WIT, H. (2013b). Reconsidering the Concept of Internationalization. International Higher Education, n. 70, p. 6-7.
• DE WIT, H. et al. (Ed). (2015). Internationalisation of Higher Education Brussels: European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies.
• DE WIT, H. (2019). Internationalization in Higher Education, a Critical Review. SFU Educational Review, [S.l.], v. 12, n. 3, p. 9-17.
• DE WIT, H. (2020). Internationalization of Higher Education: The Need for a More Ethical and Qualitative Approach. Journal of International Students, [S.l], v. 10, n. 1, pp. i-iv.
• DE WIT, H.; LEAL, F.; UNANGST, L. (2020). Internationalization aimed at global social justice: Brazilian university initiatives to integrate refugees and displaced populations. ETD - Educação Temática Digital, Campinas, v. 22, n. 3, p. 567-590.
• FERREIRA, R. F.; CALVOSO, G. G.; GONZALES, C. B. L. (2002). Caminhos da pesquisa e a contemporaneidade. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, v. 15, n. 2, p. 243-250.
• FREEMAN, D. (1998). Doing Teacher Research: from inquiry to understanding. Boston: Heinle Cencage Learning.
• JANKS, H. (2014). Grammar as a resource for critical literacy. In: JANKS, H. et al. Doing critical literacy: texts and activities for students and teachers. New York: Routledge. p. 75-89.
• JOHNSON, D. C.; JOHNSON, E. J. (2015). Power and agency in language policy appropriation. Language Policy, v. 14, p. 221-243.
• KALANTZIS, M.; COPE B. (2006). On Globalisation and Diversity. Computers and Composition, v. 23, n. 4, p. 402-411.
• KNIGHT, J. (1994). Internationalization: elements and checkpoints. Ottawa: Canadian Bureau for International Education.
• KNIGHT, J. (1999). A time of turbulence and transformation for internationalization Ottawa: Canadian Bureau for International Education.
• KNIGHT, J. (2003). Updating the definition of internationalization. International Higher Education, p. 2-3.
• KNIGHT, J. (2004). Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and Rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, [S.l], v. 8, n. 1, p. 5-31.
• KNIGHT, J. (2008). Higher education in turmoil The changing world of internationalization. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
• LAVILLE, C.; DIONNE, J. (1999). A construção do saber: manual de metodologia da pesquisa em ciências humanas. Porto Alegre: Artmed.
• PAIVA, V. L. M. O. (2003). A LDB e a legislação vigente sobre o ensino e a formação de professor de língua inglesa. In: STEVENS, C. M. T.; CUNHA, M. J. Caminhos e Colheitas: ensino e pesquisa na área de inglês no Brasil. Brasília: UnB. p. 53-84.
• PAIVA, V. L. M. O. (2019). Pesquisa-ação. In: PAIVA, V. L. M. O. Manual de Pesquisa em Estudos Linguísticos São Paulo: Parábola. p. 72-78.
• SARMENTO, S. et. al (2016). IsF e internacionalização: da teoria à prática. In: SARMENTO, S; ABREU-E-LIMA, D. M.; MORAES FILHO, W. B. (org.). Do Inglês sem Fronteiras ao Idiomas sem Fronteiras: a construção de uma política linguística para a internacionalização. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG. p. 77-100.
• SILVA, T. G. de; SILVA, T. T. (2019). O lugar político-social do Inglês sem Fronteiras diante da internacionalização da educação superior brasileira. Olhares & Trilhas, [S.l], v. 21, n. 2, p. 170-185.
• STEIN, S.; SILVA, J. E. da. (2020). Challenges and complexities of decolonizing internationalization in a time of global crises. ETD - Educação Temática Digital, Campinas, v. 22, n. 3, p. 546-566.
• SZYSZLO, P. (2016). Internationalization Strategies for the Global Knowledge Society. CBIE PhD Research Series, Ottawa, p. 1-7.
• VAVRUS, F.; PEKOL, A. (2015). Critical Internationalization: Moving from Theory to Practice. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, v. 2, n. 2, p. 5-21.
• WILEY, T. G., GARCÍA, O. (2016). Language policy and planning in language education: legacies, consequences, and possibilities. The Modern Language Journal, [S.l], v. 100, s. 1, p. 48-63

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  10 Nov 2023
• Date of issue
  May-Aug 2023

History

• Received
  20 July 2021
• Accepted
  11 Mar 2023
• Published
  16 May 2023