The institutional curriculum requires an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) module, which is essential for graduation and aims to enhance international research collaboration. A group of students refuses to engage actively, citing the perspective that English represents ‘linguistic imperialism’ and that participation validates cultural and economic imposition (Linguicism). You, as the person responsible for Internationalization, must develop a strategy to address this resistance.
Based on the critical perspective that you must go beyond methodology to consider political issues, analyze the following proposed actions and choose the correct alternative.
I. Initiate a mandatory, analytical seminar where students collectively debate how English is used in their field’s research, emphasizing that active engagement is key to preventing selfexclusion from global knowledge. II. Remove the EAP module from the curriculum, respecting the students’ resistance as a political decision to reject linguistic imperialism. III. Focus on improving students' grammar and vocabulary to native standards, dismissing their political arguments as irrelevant to communicative skills. IV. Promote a discussion where the EAP course is reframed to focus on English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), highlighting its use by non-native speakers to publish and circulate Global South research. V. Transfer the course to the History department, arguing that the political issues related to English are not the responsibility of the Internationalization Office.

A graduate research project involving the university you work for and a key German partner (whose researchers are non-native English speakers) has stalled due to a series of misinterpreted emails. The German partner found the Brazilian emails too direct and 'unprofessional' (low-context communication style), while the Brazilian team viewed the German responses as 'excessively formal and slow.'
In this case, which strategic action best demonstrates the application of Communicative Competence in an English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and Interculturality context to resolve the impasse and provide capacity building to the Brazilian team?

Consider the situation below:
“A: video? some doc – documentary about Climate Change hm hm hm yeah and . . . it B: yes and . . . and you know if you have a Climate Change policy in the future you, you might not A: it’s an immoral yes immoral because er Climate Change means anyway they restrict economic rights B: no no no, I mean – er you mean that Climate Change is immoral and we shouldn’t restrict A: which one is first? . . . the Climate Change eh yes? . . . what do you think, B: the reason that I er I’m against the Climate Change policy . . . when I was at school mh I A: very hard for the government. If er the Climate Change policy is not permitted and they will B: Climate Change? eh yes? . . . what do you think, Climate Change is an immoral act or not? hmm,”
The provided text analyzes a conversation in which the controversial concept of “Climate Change” functions as a keyword and is notably often preceded by the definite article ('the Climate Change'). This signals that speakers are often referring to the concept in general terms, which can heighten its sensitive, abstract, and politicized nature.
In your role as a Technical Specialist in Educational Affairs, advising a research team preparing a publication on an equally controversial, general concept (e.g., 'sustainable development equity' or 'global carbon tax') for an international journal, which directive best integrates Communicative Competence in ELF with the principles of Interculturality when addressing such “keywords”? Adapted from: DEWEY, Martin. English as a lingua franca and globalization: an interconnected perspective. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 17, n. 3, 2007, p. 340.