Lebanese EMI instructors’ role identity and teaching practices

English-medium instruction (EMI) typically requires disciplinary instructors to deliver content in a language other than their students’ and their own first language. While this practice is growing alongside related approaches (e.g., content and language integrated learning) EMI is distinct in that the primary objective is teaching the disciplinary content, with English merely playing an instrumental role. This has implications for how lecturers view their role in EMI classrooms and how this is enacted through their teaching and marking practices. The present study examines instructors’ beliefs about EMI instruction in a context where EMI has long been adopted but only minimally researched: Lebanon. Sixty-three instructors from two Lebanese universities were surveyed about their experiences teaching EMI, their views about the role of language, and their marking practices. Eight instructors were further interviewed to elaborate on these responses. Findings reveal that the majority of the surveyed instructors recognise that teaching English is at least part of their role as content instructors whereas the interviewed instructors distanced themselves from this dual-focused responsibility, despite reporting several examples of teaching English alongside the content. These findings highlight the ambiguity around instructors’ role(s) in EMI classrooms and raises the need for greater definition and clarity to ensure that EMI’s full potential is reached.