Assigned reading materials in Swedish universities are often in English. Therefore, pupils planning to pursue higher education need to develop a good receptive knowledge of English academic vocabulary. However, previous research indicates that upper secondary pupils completing obligatory English instruction may lack sufficient knowledge of English academic vocabulary. This study further explores Swedish pupils’ receptive knowledge of English academic vocabulary, focusing on how it is influenced by word frequency and word class, two factors found to impact L2 learner vocabulary knowledge. Moreover, we examine correlations between vocabulary test scores on word frequency and word class and self-reported extramural English activities. Ninety-three pupils at a Swedish upper secondary school completed a vocabulary test and a questionnaire about their extramural English activities. The results showed that pupils performed significantly better on high-frequency words than on low-frequency words. An analysis of how high- and low-scoring pupils answered different questions revealed some different tendencies in their receptive English academic vocabulary knowledge. We also found that low scorers performed more poorly on verbs than nouns and adjectives. Moreover, engagement in extramural English activities, such as reading and social media, was positively correlated with the vocabulary test scores, most consistently with scores on verbs. Based on the findings we discuss the need for pedagogical strategies for effective teaching of English academic vocabulary, including well-planned integration of extramural English activities into the English classroom. Such pedagogic support could help Swedish upper secondary pupils develop their knowledge of English academic vocabulary needed for success in higher education.

The intelligibility principle for second language (L2) pronunciation challenges the nativeness principle that suggests that L2 speakers’ goal should be nativelike pronunciation. However, in this corpus-supported review of studies based on the intelligibility principle, we show that the understanding of the principle is still underpinned by what we term ideologies of nativeness, which favor speakers of privileged first language (L1) varieties and undermine other L1 and L2 World Englishes speakers. We focus on discourses surrounding the two most prominent keywords: errors, frequently used to describe proficient L2 speech and blame it for compromised intelligibility, and comprehensibility, often uncritically used to gauge listeners’ understanding although it measures subjective perception and can be closely associated with nativeness. Such discourses can obscure a more complete understanding of communication that acknowledges variation in L1 speech and the mutual nature of communication, as well as contribute toward negative perceptions of L2 speakers. Based on our review, we suggest that teachers avoid prescribed pronunciation models, instead helping learners develop their pronunciation based on a broad perceptual repertoire. We further recommend that researchers focus on how communication difficulties are successfully repaired without relying on prescribed pronunciation norms, recognizing mutual responsibility and accountability for intelligibility by all interlocutors. 

Communication requires cooperative strategies by all interlocutors. Nevertheless, US undergraduate students’ complaints about multilingual international teaching assistants (ITAs) have typically led to training and assessment for ITAs, although the undergraduates may also benefit from training in global communication. The few previous undergraduate-training attempts have generally been too intensive to offer widely and did not investigate data from international undergraduates. The current study reports on a one-hour, completely online training at a US university addressing domestic and international undergraduates’ attitudes, comprehension, and strategies relevant to global communication; it analyzes participant responses to the strategies portion. According to their own ratings, participants in the treatment group (N = 534) were more likely than a control group (N = 528) to intend to use collaborative strategies with an international instructor. Positive correlations between international or multilingual background and willingness to use collaborative strategies were low, suggesting that international students may also benefit from training. Communicative strategies proposed by the students in response to open-ended questions differed for one-on-one vs. in-class communication and suggested ways of improving training to model collaborative behaviors.

Research has suggested that Swedish higher education institutions’ (HEIs’) language policies may exclude some academic staff from work-related activities due to (dual) monolingual ideologies requiring one language at a time. This study, based on the analysis of twenty-one language policy texts, investigates HEIs’ policies using a lens of inclusion at workplaces with linguistic diversity, drawing on concepts from diversity management and language policy for democracy of inclusion. All documents examined began with statements of HEIs’ values relevant to the policies. Inclusion was seldom explicitly emphasized, although policies suggested ways to facilitate it. We argue that some of the approaches – namely, taking a top-down monolinguistic approach to language choice, requiring staff to be highly proficient in both Swedish and English, and offering unspecified language support – reinforce language-based in-groups and out-groups, likely compromising rather than facilitating inclusion. Another approach, emphasizing individuals’ rights to choose what language they use, facilitates inclusion only if support is provided for everyone’s understanding. Providing immediate language support and encouraging bottom-up, flexible language choice were less common approaches but seem particularly likely to facilitate inclusion. Our analysis suggests that policies prioritizing successful communication, not specific languages, facilitate inclusion and help employees develop job-related language and intercultural communicative competence.

Forskning har visat att språkpolicyer vid svenska lärosäten kan exkludera viss akademisk personal från arbetsrelaterad verksamhet på grund av (dubbelt) enspråkiga ideologier, som förespråkar användning av ett språk i taget. Denna studie, som undersöker språkpolicy-texter hos tjugoen svenska lärosäten, analyserar språkpolicyer på flerspråkiga arbetsplatser utifrån ett inkluderingsperspektiv. Studien bygger på begrepp från mångfaldshantering och inkluderingsdemokrati. Alla granskade dokument började med uttalanden om de värderingar vid lärosätena, som är relevanta för policyerna. Inkludering betonades sällan uttryckligen även om policyer föreslog hur inkludering kunde underlättas. Vi hävdar att några av tillvägagångssätten – nämligen enspråkigt ”top-down” förhållningssätt till språkval, höga krav på mycket goda kunskaper i både svenska och engelska, och ospecificerat språkstöd – förstärker språkbaserade in- och utgrupper, och bidrar troligen till att inkludering försvåras snarare än underlättas. Ett annat tillvägagångssätt, som betonar individers rätt att välja vilket språk de ska använda, underlättar inkludering, men endast om stöd ges för allas förståelse. Att ge omedelbart språkstöd i en arbetsrelaterad situation och uppmuntra ett flexibelt, ”bottom-up” språkval, var mindre vanligt även om det verkar underlätta inkludering. Vår analys tyder på att policyer som prioriterar framgångsrik kommunikation, inte specifika språk, underlättar inkludering och hjälper medarbetare att utveckla jobbrelaterad språklig och interkulturell kommunikativ kompetens.

The Swedish national syllabus for English recommends that upper secondary English education promote competence ininternational communication (Skolverket, 2022). As pronunciation differences may be the major cause ofmisunderstandings in international communication (Deterding 2013), listening skills and positive attitudes related todiverse accents need to be part of English education (Forsberg et al. 2019; Jeong et al. 2021). However, there is alack of research-based teaching methods and tools, reflecting the longstanding monolingual bias in the study of secondlanguage acquisition (Ortega 2014). We therefore investigate the effects of an intervention conducted over three weeksin an upper-secondary class (N=32) and using six listening activities designed based on contact theory (Allport 1954;Pettigrew & Tropp 2006) and the principles of high-variability perceptual training (Lindemann et al. 2016). Pre- andpost-tests measuring the intervention’s effect on listening comprehension and attitudes towards unfamiliar accents willbe compared with a similar class as a control (N=32). In addition, a focus group of pupils from the intervention groupwill share their experience of the activities and potentially demonstrate effects not measured by the quantitativedata. The findings will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of this contact- and perceptual-training approachwith English learners, informing the development of global Englishes teaching and challenging the monolingual bias inresearch on second language acquisition.

Language policies in higher education institutions (HEI) in Sweden, as well in other Nordic countries, centrally involve ‘parallel language use’ of the principal national language and English (Gregersen et al., 2018). This approach attempts to resolve the conflict between two goals that HEIs have as governmental authorities: protecting and developing Swedish in compliance with the Language Act; and internationalization (SOU [Swedish government reports], 2018:3 & 2018:78), uncritically linked to English and economic goals (Hult & Källkvist, 2016). These policies likely inherit from the Language Act its impracticality and the possibility of compromising democracy (Landqvist & Spetz, 2020). Requirements to use Swedish in administrative meetings as prescribed by these policies, for example, could limit international faculty participation while overburdening Swedish faculty (Karlsson & Karlsson, 2020).  Drawing on theories of language management by different agencies from national to individual (e.g., Spolsky, 2019) and language ideology (e.g., Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994), our study critically examines how Swedish HEIs’ language policies may compromise or facilitate effective, democratic communication and participation, focusing on the application of the parallel language use approach to faculty activities including administration. We compiled nineteen language policy documents from HEIs who posted them publicly or responded to our request. These policies were coded for language choice, requirements, and support. Preliminary findings suggest that language requirements are often unrealistic (e.g. learning Swedish sufficient to participate in decision-making meetings within a year of full-time employment), with support to help faculty meet requirements underspecified. These policies, like the Language Act, exemplify top-down language management, often with inadequate regard to potential participants. The limited participant choice focuses on speakers’ preferred language, without considering negotiation of meaning to ensure mutual understanding. More generally, the policies exhibit a purist ideology that treats languages as separate entities to choose between, rather than as resources for negotiating successful communication.