Analytic Philosophy and Philosophy of Language

Using English as the medium of instruction for academic subjects (EMI) is an increasing practice in different countries and universities in both Europe[1] and across the world.[2] Many students prefer to attain knowledge in English because it helps them improve both overall and specific language competence, access international certifications, and enhance their academic records. Many policy makers and university administrators promote the wide and active usage of English in the learning process at national universities to internationalize their educational offerings and stimulate the writing of high-quality research papers in English by university faculty, which in turn helps universities move up in international rankings.

Additionally, there are some subjects for which learning in English is preferable. Analytic philosophy is a good example. A requirement for master’s degree students is a profound knowledge of professional subjects. For philosophy students, reading primary sources in the original language is important for understanding the true and deep content of the philosophical thoughts. Because most of the main texts of analytic philosophy were written in English, the main terms of this philosophy are also in English. So, learning analytic philosophy in English is a good way to achieve deep knowledge in this subject.

This instructor’s manual with student exercises is intended to assist the instructor in teaching the subject to students for whom English is a second language. When you teach a content subject in a language that is not the learners’ mother tongue, teaching strategies are extremely important. There are different forms of education in a second language around the world, such as “content and language integrated learning” (CLIL), “immersion education,” “minority education,” “bilingual education,” “English-medium education in developing countries,” and “recent English-medium science and math programs.” Many of them demonstrate that it is possible for students to learn subject knowledge in L2 without reducing the cognitive challenge of the subject learning.

After studying the specifics of these learning strategies, I chose CLIL as the methodology framework for designing my course. At my university, for which I have created the course “Analytic Philosophy and Philosophy of Language,” students are mainly taught in Ukrainian, not English. So, CLIL was the best choice because CLIL pedagogy enables obtaining good results even when students have one or a limited number of CLIL subjects. The other forms of education in L2 involve a large proportion of the curriculum.

“Content and language integrated learning” is a recent set of practices that originated in Europe in the 1990s. CLIL practitioners have good track records. Research shows that “CLIL tends to work – in the sense, for example, that learners can acquire good levels of subject knowledge.”[3]

The term “CLIL” describes both learning another (content) subject, such as philosophy or history, through a foreign language and learning a foreign language by studying a content-based subject. CLIL lessons are neither language lessons nor subject lessons transmitted in a foreign language. CLIL lessons have their own peculiarities. According to Steve Darn, whose teaching experiences were recommended by the British Council, CLIL can be characterized as follows:

– Knowledge of the language becomes the means of learning content.

– Learning is improved through increased motivation and the study of natural language seen in context.

– CLIL is based on language acquisition rather than enforced learning.

– Language is seen in real-life situations in which students can acquire the language.[4]

During CLIL lessons, an instructor not only facilitates students’ knowledge of subject content, but also develops their knowledge of content-related lexis and all four language skills – speaking, reading, listening, and writing. CLIL lessons focus on the subject. There is an idea that a language is learned best when one uses it to learn something else. In a CLIL course, English is learned mainly through utilization and acquisition. In short, English is used to learn and to communicate.

There are two kinds of CLIL techniques: one is a language-led approach; the other is content-led. The term “Soft CLIL” is used to describe supporting content learning in language classes; the term “Hard CLIL” is for supporting language learning in content classes. My course is based on “Hard CLIL.” According to the authors of Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers: Putting CLIL Into Practice, “‘Hard’ CLIL is a form of subject teaching in L2 which highlights academic achievement within the subject and treats language development as important, but as a bonus.”

Of course, providing CLIL lessons requires that the subject instructor have proper language skills. The Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine demands qualification B2 CEFR for EMI instructors in universities. The expert UK consultants of the British Council in Ukraine also write in their recommendations that level B2 would be appropriate for EMI academics.[5] The instructor’s subject knowledge and motivation level are also important in CLIL teaching. The instructor must know his or her subject sufficiently and be well motivated. Students of EMI teachers also need a proper level of fluency in English. In my course, I am oriented to students with level B1+.

This book is a result of my experience with teaching the course “Analytic Philosophy and Philosophy of Language” in English at Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukraine, for three years. Using CLIL techniques enables me to teach effectively. All three groups of my master’s degree students who learned the course using CLIL techniques demonstrated good results. They not only achieved strong knowledge of analytic philosophy, but also sufficiently improved their skills in English writing, speaking, reading, and listening.[6]

This instructor’s manual with student exercises begins with a syllabus and propaedeutical chapter that describes the peculiarities of learning activities during this course. Next are topic chapters, each of which has four sections: a synopsis of the lecture on the topic; a lecture lesson worksheet with tasks; a seminar lesson worksheet with tasks; and assignments for essay writing. At the end of the manual is a list of key definitions for the course, answer keys for seminar tasks and lecture worksheets, a list of exam questions, and a list of further reading.

I thank all those experts in philosophy, in methods of teaching and in English language, who contributed in any way to having this book published. But there are several people to whom I am especially grateful: Yaroslav Shramko, Alla Anisimova, Lyudmila Baisara, and Sergiy Shevtsov, all of whom have read the draft and made important suggestions on how to improve it.

[1] Wächter B., Maiworm F. (eds.). (2014). English-Taught Programmes in European Higher Education. The State of Play in 2014. Bonn: Lemmens Medien GmbH.

[2] Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction – a growing global phenomenon. London: British Council.

[3] Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2016). Oxford handbooks for language teachers: Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[4] Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning. Retrieved from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/content-language-integrated-learning

[5] Bolitho R., West R. (2017). The Internationalisation of Ukrainian Universities: the English Language Dimension. Kyiv: Stal. 82.

[6] The detailed results of my teaching this course were presented at the All-Ukraine Scientific Conference “Education and Science in the Context of Global Transformations,” Dnipro, Ukraine, 24–25 November 2017 and at the International Scientific-Methodological Conference “Innovations-2016,” Kostanay, Kazakhstan, 15 January 2016.