{"id":{"repo_id":"auckland-ms","oai_identifier":"oai:researchspace.auckland.ac.nz:2292/68477"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/auckland-ms/oai:researchspace.auckland.ac.nz:2292/68477","repository":{"repo_id":"auckland-ms","name":"University of Auckland","base_url":"https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Lecturers’ Humour in English Medium Instruction (EMI): Insights from Indonesian EMI and non-EMI Contexts","abstract":"Research in higher education has documented humour as one of a lecturer’s most important, desirable qualities. However, studies in twenty-three countries have highlighted lecturers' challenges in integrating humour within English-medium instruction (EMI). While most EMI lecturers feel comfortable teaching in a second or foreign language (L2), they observe a decline in humour and interactivity when delivering content in L2 compared to their native language (L1). Switching the language of instruction and the lecturer’s characteristics are the two commonly cited reasons, yet not much investigated for a solution. This qualitative study delves deeper into EMI lecturers' humour, examining factors such as language switch, lecturers’ characteristics, their L1-L2 humour productions, and students’ feedback from both EMI and non-EMI classes. Unlike previous inquiries on educational humour centred on humorous lecturers, this study embraces a spectrum of EMI educators with varying humour capacities. The research followed ten Indonesian EMI lecturers and their students across six universities in three provinces. Gender, education levels, and disciplinary fields of technology and humanities were equally represented among the participating lecturers. Data collection methods encompassed questionnaires, interviews, video observations of lecturers’ humour in teaching, and supplementary online materials. The analysis approach combined the applied thematic analysis with descriptive statistics. This study's original knowledge contributions stem from four main discoveries and one practical implication. First, participating EMI lecturers merged humour and play. Both are creativitydriven concepts with shared origins and structures but distinct functions. Second, the lecturer's humour profile alone proved insufficient to explain the influence of lecturers’ characteristics on humour. Instead, a triadic profile of humour, instruction, and language was crucial. Third, concerning language profile, the study revealed that register switch played a more central role in lecturers' humour than language switch. Lastly, student feedback indicated an awareness of both the benefits and challenges associated with lecturers’ humour, with most challenges arising from the instructional profile rather than the humour and language profiles. A practical implication from this study is that EMI lecturers can leverage humour matter, manner, and marker—three increasingly uncomplicated elements—to effectively incorporate humour in their teaching.","abstract_html":"Research in higher education has documented humour as one of a lecturer’s most important, desirable qualities. However, studies in twenty-three countries have highlighted lecturers' challenges in integrating humour within English-medium instruction (EMI). While most EMI lecturers feel comfortable teaching in a second or foreign language (L2), they observe a decline in humour and interactivity when delivering content in L2 compared to their native language (L1). Switching the language of instruction and the lecturer’s characteristics are the two commonly cited reasons, yet not much investigated for a solution. This qualitative study delves deeper into EMI lecturers' humour, examining factors such as language switch, lecturers’ characteristics, their L1-L2 humour productions, and students’ feedback from both EMI and non-EMI classes. Unlike previous inquiries on educational humour centred on humorous lecturers, this study embraces a spectrum of EMI educators with varying humour capacities. The research followed ten Indonesian EMI lecturers and their students across six universities in three provinces. Gender, education levels, and disciplinary fields of technology and humanities were equally represented among the participating lecturers. Data collection methods encompassed questionnaires, interviews, video observations of lecturers’ humour in teaching, and supplementary online materials. The analysis approach combined the applied thematic analysis with descriptive statistics. This study's original knowledge contributions stem from four main discoveries and one practical implication. First, participating EMI lecturers merged humour and play. Both are creativitydriven concepts with shared origins and structures but distinct functions. Second, the lecturer's humour profile alone proved insufficient to explain the influence of lecturers’ characteristics on humour. Instead, a triadic profile of humour, instruction, and language was crucial. Third, concerning language profile, the study revealed that register switch played a more central role in lecturers' humour than language switch. Lastly, student feedback indicated an awareness of both the benefits and challenges associated with lecturers’ humour, with most challenges arising from the instructional profile rather than the humour and language profiles. A practical implication from this study is that EMI lecturers can leverage humour matter, manner, and marker—three increasingly uncomplicated elements—to effectively incorporate humour in their teaching.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Sari, Florita Diana"],"institution":"ResearchSpace@Auckland","degree_name":"PhD","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":"Applied Linguistics","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Tin, Tan Bee","Barlow, Michael"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2024,"date_issued":"2024","date_published":"2024","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:03:37Z","subjects":[],"languages":[],"rights":["Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated."],"rights_urls":["https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/2292/68477","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Tin, Tan Bee","Barlow, Michael"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Sari, Florita Diana"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2024-05-23T20:30:20Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2024-05-23T20:30:20Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2024"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["ResearchSpace@Auckland"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Applied Linguistics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["PhD"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["The University of Auckland"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated."]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/2292/68477"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Research in higher education has documented humour as one of a lecturer’s most important, desirable qualities. However, studies in twenty-three countries have highlighted lecturers' challenges in integrating humour within English-medium instruction (EMI). While most EMI lecturers feel comfortable teaching in a second or foreign language (L2), they observe a decline in humour and interactivity when delivering content in L2 compared to their native language (L1). Switching the language of instruction and the lecturer’s characteristics are the two commonly cited reasons, yet not much investigated for a solution. This qualitative study delves deeper into EMI lecturers' humour, examining factors such as language switch, lecturers’ characteristics, their L1-L2 humour productions, and students’ feedback from both EMI and non-EMI classes. Unlike previous inquiries on educational humour centred on humorous lecturers, this study embraces a spectrum of EMI educators with varying humour capacities. The research followed ten Indonesian EMI lecturers and their students across six universities in three provinces. Gender, education levels, and disciplinary fields of technology and humanities were equally represented among the participating lecturers. Data collection methods encompassed questionnaires, interviews, video observations of lecturers’ humour in teaching, and supplementary online materials. The analysis approach combined the applied thematic analysis with descriptive statistics. This study's original knowledge contributions stem from four main discoveries and one practical implication. First, participating EMI lecturers merged humour and play. Both are creativitydriven concepts with shared origins and structures but distinct functions. Second, the lecturer's humour profile alone proved insufficient to explain the influence of lecturers’ characteristics on humour. Instead, a triadic profile of humour, instruction, and language was crucial. Third, concerning language profile, the study revealed that register switch played a more central role in lecturers' humour than language switch. Lastly, student feedback indicated an awareness of both the benefits and challenges associated with lecturers’ humour, with most challenges arising from the instructional profile rather than the humour and language profiles. A practical implication from this study is that EMI lecturers can leverage humour matter, manner, and marker—three increasingly uncomplicated elements—to effectively incorporate humour in their teaching."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Lecturers’ Humour in English Medium Instruction (EMI): Insights from Indonesian EMI and non-EMI Contexts"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Tin, Tan Bee","Barlow, Michael"],"dc:creator":["Sari, Florita Diana"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2024-05-23T20:30:20Z"],"dc:date.available":["2024-05-23T20:30:20Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2024"],"dc:description.abstract":["Research in higher education has documented humour as one of a lecturer’s most important, desirable qualities. However, studies in twenty-three countries have highlighted lecturers' challenges in integrating humour within English-medium instruction (EMI). While most EMI lecturers feel comfortable teaching in a second or foreign language (L2), they observe a decline in humour and interactivity when delivering content in L2 compared to their native language (L1). Switching the language of instruction and the lecturer’s characteristics are the two commonly cited reasons, yet not much investigated for a solution. This qualitative study delves deeper into EMI lecturers' humour, examining factors such as language switch, lecturers’ characteristics, their L1-L2 humour productions, and students’ feedback from both EMI and non-EMI classes. Unlike previous inquiries on educational humour centred on humorous lecturers, this study embraces a spectrum of EMI educators with varying humour capacities. The research followed ten Indonesian EMI lecturers and their students across six universities in three provinces. Gender, education levels, and disciplinary fields of technology and humanities were equally represented among the participating lecturers. Data collection methods encompassed questionnaires, interviews, video observations of lecturers’ humour in teaching, and supplementary online materials. The analysis approach combined the applied thematic analysis with descriptive statistics. This study's original knowledge contributions stem from four main discoveries and one practical implication. First, participating EMI lecturers merged humour and play. Both are creativitydriven concepts with shared origins and structures but distinct functions. Second, the lecturer's humour profile alone proved insufficient to explain the influence of lecturers’ characteristics on humour. Instead, a triadic profile of humour, instruction, and language was crucial. Third, concerning language profile, the study revealed that register switch played a more central role in lecturers' humour than language switch. Lastly, student feedback indicated an awareness of both the benefits and challenges associated with lecturers’ humour, with most challenges arising from the instructional profile rather than the humour and language profiles. A practical implication from this study is that EMI lecturers can leverage humour matter, manner, and marker—three increasingly uncomplicated elements—to effectively incorporate humour in their teaching."],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/2292/68477"],"dc:publisher":["ResearchSpace@Auckland"],"dc:rights":["Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated."],"dc:rights.uri":["https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm"],"dc:title":["Lecturers’ Humour in English Medium Instruction (EMI): Insights from Indonesian EMI and non-EMI Contexts"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Applied Linguistics"],"thesis:degree_level":["Doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["PhD"],"thesis:institution_name":["The University of Auckland"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:03:37Z"}