ABSTRACT
This chapter engages the readers in further discussion of what the recommendations regarding language (broadly speaking) mean for English-medium instruction (EMI) practice. Lasagabaster and Doiz disclaim any intention to “turn content teachers into language teachers”, and rightly so, given that many content teachers feel that teaching language is neither their responsibility nor within their realm of competence. The socialization of students into discipline, i.e. their learning in a discipline and their maturation as “disciplinarians,” is contingent on them becoming “fluent in a critical constellation of different semiotic resources—or modes of disciplinary discourse as the students depict them—in order to experience holistically the disciplinary way of knowing that these resources/modes potentially give access to”. By refraining from positioning the content teachers to do a job they are not equipped for (i.e. teaching language)—and by avoiding framing the content classroom as focusing on something other than disciplinary content—a disciplinary literacy approach to EMI is both more attractive and more intuitive to teachers.
