Teaching by Inquiry: Integrating Socratic, Maieutic, and Indirect Communication in EMI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31154/isc12.v12i3.23.463-474Keywords:
Indirect communication, maieutic, Socratic, higher education, questioningAbstract
The rise of English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) presents complex challenges for educators tasked with teaching subject content in English to linguistically diverse students. While EMI often prioritizes content delivery, it frequently neglects the cognitive and communicative demands of learning in a second language. This paper explores how three inquiry-based pedagogical approaches—Indirect Communication, the Maieutic Method, and the Socratic Method—can support deeper engagement in EMI contexts. Rooted in purposeful questioning and dialogic interaction, these traditions foster interpretive thinking, learner agency, and reflective language use. Each method is examined for its philosophical grounding and practical application, with attention to how they can enhance both content understanding and English proficiency. By shifting the teacher’s role from content expert to facilitator of inquiry, this framework offers a more inclusive, student-centered model for EMI. The paper concludes with a practical sequence for implementation that integrates language, thinking, and disciplinary learning through layered questioning strategies.
References
Airey, J. (2020). The content lecturer and English-medium instruction (EKI): epilogue to the special issue on EMI in higher education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(3), 340-346. doi:10.1080/13670050.2020.1732290
Brown, H., & Bradford, A. (2017). EMI, CLIL, & CBI: Differing approaches and goals. In P. Clements, A. Krause, H. Brown, & A. K. P. Clemens (Ed.), Transformation in language education. Tokyo: JALT 0 Japan Association for Language Teaching.
Churchill, R., Ferguson, P.., Godhino, S., Johnson, N., Keddie, A., Letts, W., . . . Shaw, K. (2016). Teaching: Making a difference (3rd ed.). Australia: Wiley.
Cornu, B. (2011). Digital natives: How do they learn? How to teach them? UNESCO - Institute for Information Technologies in Education, Policy Brief, 1-12. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000216681
Costa, F., & Mariotti, C. (2023). the use of questions as a form of interaction in the Italian EMI setting: Face-to-face and online lectures. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 4(1), 32-52. doi:10.1558/jmtp.23493
Dearden, J. (2015). English as a medium of instruction: A growing phenomenon. London, UK: British Council.
Dowie, A. (2023). Ethical sense, medical ethics education, and maieutics. Medical Teacher, 45(8), 838-844. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2023.2178885
Dundon, J. T. (2019). Cross-examining English-medium legal education. Studies in Applied Linguistics & TESOL, 19(2), 44-60. Retrieved from https://tesolal.columbia.edu/
El Yazidi, R. (2023). Strategies for promoting critical thinking in the classroom. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 8(2), 26-40. doi:10.22161/ijels.82.5
Fraser, B. P. (2020). Hide and Seek: The sacred art of indirect communication. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.
Herrmann, A. F. (2008). Kierkegaard and dialogue: The communication of capability. Communication of Capability, 18, 71-92.
Ho, Y., Chen, B., & Li, C. (2023). Thinking more wisely: using the Socratic method to develop critical thinking skills amongst healthcare students. BMC Medical Education, 23(173), 1-16. doi:10.1186/s12909-023-04134-2
Hu, G., & Duan, Y. (2019). Questioning and responding in the classroom: a cross-disciplinary study of the effects of instructional mediums in academic subjects at a Chinese university. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(3), 303-321. doi:10.1080/13670050.2018.1493084
Johansson, V. (2019). Pedagogy and polyphonic narrativity in Soren Kierkegaard. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 53(4), 111-122.
Kierkegaard, S. (2000). The essential Kierkegaard. (H. H. Kong, & Hong, E., Trans.) Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N. J., USA: Prentice Hall. Retrieved from http://www.learningfromexperience.com/images/uploads/process-of-experiential-learning.pdf
Li, X., & Ke, P. (2024). Becoming feedback literate: A case study of a Chinese university EFL teacher. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 33, 471-479. doi:10.1007/s40299-023-00743-z
Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic revew of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36-76.
Parmelee, S. D. (2015). "House, MD" and indirect communication: A close textural analysis. Doctoral Dissertation, Regent University.
Pecorari, D., & Malmstrom, H. (2018). At the crossroads of TESOL and English-medium instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 52, 497-515.
Reich, R. (2003). The Socratic method: What it is and how to use it in the classroom. Center for Teaching and Learning, Stanford University. Retrieved June 15, 2025, from tomprof.stanford.edu: https://web.archive.org/web/20220511021023/https://tomprof.stanford.edu/posting/810
Smit, U., & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating content and language in higher education: An introduction to English-medium policies, conceptual issues and research practices across Europe. AILA Review, 25, 1-12. doi:10.1075/aila.25.01smi
Tooley, M. J. (2024). Indirect communication as a teaching method for developing transference and capability in Taiwanese college students. Doctoral Dissertation, Liberty University.
Ustuk, O., & Hu, G. (2025). Teacher questioning for engaging EMI: A quest for the holy grail? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 34, 1101-1112. doi:10.1007/s40299-024-00924-4
Vrikki, M., & Evagorou, M. (2023). An analysis of teacher questioning practices in dialogic lessons. International Journal of Educational Research, 117, 1-16. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102107
Yeo, T. M. (1981). Kierkegaard on understanding and indirect communication. Doctoral Dissertation.
