Investigating the perceived language and teaching proficiency of English language teachers at compulsory education level in China: implications for learners.

Joanne Baumber
University of Leeds

 

ABSTRACT
This study aims to address what level of proficiency teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) have in China in terms of language and teaching skills and what effect this could ultimately have on students' English language development.

Chinese English language education is taught privately or unofficially from early-years, and officially from Grade 3 in compulsory education. At this stage, teaching is carried out primarily by Chinese nationals (domestic teachers) in the state system and both Chinese and non-Chinese overseas nationals (foreign teachers) in the private sector. This study is concerned with language and teaching proficiency at compulsory stage education (Grade 3-9) in both the state and private sectors. The study includes two focus groups: domestic and foreign teachers of English, both of whom have a long-held reputation for operating with weak oral English skills or are underqualified (Chen, 2014; Chen & Goh, 2011, Cheng & Wang, 2004; He, 2021; Xu, 2019; Zhao et al., 2015).

The framework for the study adopted an interpretive orientation using a mixed-method approach to collect information – examining available research and distributing a questionnaire (Appendix 3). The data was collected via online platforms and analysed using qualitative thematic analysis methods, as the subject matter dealt with opinion and experience and took a coded latent approach to reveal deeper meaning from the given text and a non-experimental correlational quantitative design to observe the relational variables. Key issues were to understand what qualifications or expertise teachers bring to the classroom and how this perpetuates the standards of English and English teaching and implications for learners. Findings suggest there are issues with a lack of relevant qualifications and inadequate language proficiency of both foreign and domestic English teachers in China.

KEYWORDS: EFL, language proficiency, pedagogy, China, competence, teacher qualifications.

KEY TERMS:

Foreign teacher: non-Chinese citizen working in China as an English teacher

Domestic teacher: Chinese national citizen working in China as an English teacher

MOE: Ministry of Education

Proficiency: Encompassing English language proficiency and teaching proficiency[1]

Policy: Chinese national policy

L1/L2: First/second language

 

INTRODUCTION
China has approximately 415 million English learners (Wei & Su, 2012; British Council, 2006; Hatch, 2021), making English as a foreign language (EFL) a substantial share of one of the biggest fields of education globally (McCulloch, 2018; OECD, 2016). The rapid expansion of English programs since the late 1970s led to an initial teacher shortage, with only 30% of junior teachers qualified (Hu, 2005). By 2000, 91% had the necessary qualifications in accordance with 'The Teacher's law of China, Chapter III: Qualifications and Employment' (MOE, 2001a). While China's Teacher's Law (MOE, 2009a) and Education Law (MOE, 2009b) outline requirements for teaching, which include the 'Teachers Qualification' for Chinese citizens and degrees for foreigners, there have been no explicit language proficiency mandates for domestic teachers or specific degree requirements for foreign teachers. As the English language market has grown (Zhang, 2017), the teachers in the two main contexts of state education and the after-school tuition centres of the private sector appear to have had significant leeway in terms of suitability criteria.

This study explores the recent situation through a cross-sectional, small representative population of teachers, with an exploratory, non-probability, purposive sample used to answer a questionnaire (Denscombe, 2017, pp.24 & 35). Thematic analysis was carried out manually by coding and identifying common themes from the data, implementing the principles of Glaser and Strauss's Grounded Theory methodology (1998). Complementary data collection from existing documents supported triangulation and theory building (Bowen, 2009, p.35).

Problem Statement
As the official language of almost 60 countries and the global lingua franca (GlobEd, 2020) in myriad industries, from aviation, medicine, academia, and politics, it is apparent that 'English' is an advantageous tool. While discussions on the problematic term of 'English as an international language', with assumptions of linguistic commonality and choice enforced by Western colonialist expansion (Pennycook, 2017) continue, it is clear that various forms of 'English' have been embedded as 'international gatekeeper' in global cultures and knowledge exchange (Pennycook, 2017, p.13). The development of a global standard, similar to the widely accepted yet outdated and inaccurate concept of 'standard' English (Schneider, 2016, p. 339), raises questions about its appropriateness for fostering mutual understanding and, more specifically, for teaching purposes (Modiano, 1999, p. 23). Alternatively, each variety of 'World Englishes' (Kachru, 1991, p. 179) could adhere solely to its own standards. Two possibilities are that each version will eventually transmogrify into new, distinct dialects (Schneider, 2016, p.340), or all will amalgamate into one generalised, mutually intelligible global language (Crystal, 2012, p.167). Whichever transpires, there is nonetheless an assumption that those teaching English will be proficient, but there are indications that this is frequently untrue (Hu, 2002, p.40; Lehmann & Leonard, 2019, p.156). The claims that domestic teachers have poor spoken language skills (Chen & Goh, 2011, pp.336-7) and orthodox teaching methods (Boyle, 2000; Cheng, 2019; Xu, 2021; Zhao et al., 2013), while foreign teachers have little to no formal training, or work illegally (Leonard, 2019; Quinn, 2019) have led to numerous policy developments, in some cases to eradicate unlawful employees and employers (Hua, 2020; Fan, 2019; Pan, 2019; The People's Government of Beijing, 2017) or to adjust the requirements for public school teachers (Cui & Zhu, 2014, pp1-4; Hu, 2004, p.20) by raising the threshold for academic qualifications, thus improving the quality of education for students (MOE, 2021a). The question of what constitutes 'standards' and what implications there are for teachers of English in China and beyond is explored in this study.    

Aims and Objectives
The research aimed to assess the proficiency of EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teachers in China, focusing on their teaching skills and language proficiency. This investigation sought to provide insights into the state of English teaching across generations in China, recognising that teachers influence the skills and teaching practices of future educators. The study also considered how China's evolving variety of English has global relevance as more Chinese individuals pursue international opportunities. The objectives were to expand the current body of knowledge on teacher proficiency, particularly regarding qualification requirements and pedagogical standards, and to explore the role of policymakers in ensuring fair and effective teacher recruitment. Teachers' experiences were gathered using international language proficiency standards (e.g., IELTS, TOEFL) to compare legal qualifications with personal perceptions of proficiency. The question of whether English teachers in China are adequately qualified, with appropriate subject-related degrees and language acquisition training is the key question in this research. This is explored by canvassing what qualifications existing teachers hold, asking if there are widespread concerns regarding insufficient language skills and underqualified teachers, what standards are used to evaluate these factors, and to what extent these standards are enforced. The goal is to understand what resources are being made available to English learners and to examine the broader implications of these provisions.

Relevance and Importance of the Research
As China's global influence grows, its teaching practices, particularly in English, increasingly impact international education, business, and politics. As a direct result of the proficiency of its teachers, of which there are an estimated 17.93 million Chinese teachers (Xinhua, 2021) and 400,000 foreign teachers (Quinn, 2019), China has been evaluating its EFL practices, deemed in need of improvement from within the country (Cheng & Wang, 2004, no pagination) to 'better prepare Chinese people to become global citizens' (Jin et al., 2017, p.7), an example illustrated by the increasing numbers of Chinese students studying abroad (Textor, 2024). This study seeks to explore the issue of teaching standards in China's EFL programs from the teachers' perspective.

LITERATURE REVIEW
There is extensive research on proficiency from the perspectives of national policy (Zhang, 2012), historical events, student perspectives (Cheng & Wang, 2004; Jin & Cortazzi, 1996a, b, 2006; Jin et al., 2017; Hé & Miller, 2011; Hu, 2002; Qi, 2016; Zhao, 2012), and the professional EFL/ESL market (Hé, 2017; Wang & Wei, 2016). Together, they illustrate how policy and proficiency have developed in tandem, though challenges remain, such as pedagogical methods, capitalist influence, and the competitive education system. In conducting a literature review, it was clear that less has been explored from the teacher's perspective.

Richards and Rodgers (1986, in Xinmin & Adamson, 2003, p.324) differentiate pedagogy as internal and personal, and methods as external and generalised. Zuzovsky (2009) states that teachers require specific skills or experience (in Yasin, 2021, p.39), and EFL teachers need development in three key areas: English proficiency, language knowledge, and teaching methodologies (Wu, 2001, p.193). The perception that teachers lack grounding in theoretical developments and language teaching (Lamie, 2006, p.69) persists. Hu (2010) highlights the importance of having teachers who are highly proficient in the target language and professionally trained, providing students with plenty of chances for genuine communication in the language, sufficient instructional time, teaching methods tailored to the needs of young learners, and ongoing, well-structured follow-up instruction in later grades (p.18) which at the time of writing were conditions largely missing in the Chinese context. He attributes students' poor language abilities to teachers' lack of proficiency (p.78) and varying pedagogical standards.

Historical context, EFL development, and teacher proficiency
The question of teacher proficiency in China begins by setting two contextual elements: a framework of standards and teaching practice. First, the concept of 'standards' should be clarified. Timmermans and Epstein (2010) explain that 'standards and standardisation aim to render the world equivalent across cultures, time, and geography' (p.69). By generating or repeating agreed-upon rules over periods of time, standards are created and then legitimised by professional bodies, with uniformity as a baseline (p.71). While organisations such as IELTS and TOEFL set language standards for some parts of the world, Cambridge International Education (2019) highlights no definitive set of international standards in education. However, surveys like PISA (the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment), TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) and PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) emphasise their importance (p.2). In teaching, 'defining competencies and developing standards' is essential to create continuity in English teaching across locations (Kuhlman & Kneževic, 2013, p.2). While each country sets its own teacher training standards, when demand exceeds supply, policy often balances between qualifications and desired characteristics. In extreme cases, teachers may teach without prior training (Villegas-Reimers, 2003 in Barrera-Pedemonte, 2019, p.3). TESOL International Association attributes accepted standards as a mainframe for education:

'In the case of education, we need to know where we are going (the standard) in order to know how to get there (the curriculum) and when we have arrived at a benchmark (the assessment and evaluation). Standards thus serve as a point of reference and a way of ensuring consistency when needed, both in school and in life' (Kuhlman and Kneževic, 2013, p.7).

When considering standards in relation to language, it is clear that Englishes have evolved across various geographical contexts, with the outdated term 'native English' not only being misrepresentative but increasingly becoming a minority form of usage worldwide (Rose et al., 2021). The result is no one universal 'standard' (McKay, 2012 in Kuhlman and Kneževic, 2013, p.16), challenging the constrictive term 'English as an international language' or 'global language' (Rubdy, 2009). Inevitably, making decisions about which English to use is a political issue. As we enter a new era where primacy appears to be shifting from West to East (Hagger, 2022; Kawakita, 2020; Layne, 2012), EFL teaching must also evolve (Brown, 2021; Li & Liu, 2024). What remains constant is the requirement for a 'standard' or 'standards' in teachers' proficiency (McKay, 2012 in Kuhlman & Kneževic, 2013, p.16) to ensure English language learners receive the best possible educational instruction.

Some theories that form the foundations of EFL teacher proficiency and provide context for this research lead us to the second element to consider - teacher proficiency in China. Existing literature highlights how policy and proficiency have evolved alongside one another while underscoring the ongoing challenges each group faces in reaching a satisfactory outcome (Gil, 2016; Guo, 2012; Hu et al., 2024; Pan, 2015; Zhang & Shi, 2023). All discuss areas of friction, including pedagogical methods, capitalist influence, and the demanding, competitive nature of the education system. The available literature is critical of both foreign and domestic teacher shortcomings. For example, Li and Jin (2020) posit that Chinese teachers hold 'a weak grounding in (EFL) pedagogy, lacked professional competence for [the] English language' (p.1098), and argue that their main strengths stem from an experienced understanding of the requirements to pass exams, the primary focus for every Chinese student (Kirkpatrick & Zang, 2011, pp.36-37). Similarly, Jin and Cortazzi agree that foundational training in English as a second or foreign language training has not been effectively deployed, if at all, yet also suggest that a cultural misunderstanding of how Chinese students learn and absorb information renders the differently-trained foreign teachers ineffective, as despite utilising a more interactive approach, there is a lack of exam-passing skill involved (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996a, p.6; 1996b, p.72; Jin & Cortazzi 2006, p.19). The result appears to be that each group possesses only half of the necessary skills—domestic teachers excel in literacy, while foreign teachers lead in communicative proficiency.

Looking at the historical context is vital to understanding the contemporary mindset and abilities of English teachers in China. From the Confucian origins of educational philosophy through the volatile political and social upheavals of the twentieth century, from internal civil wars, the savage incidents of World War II, and the Cultural Revolution (Hu, 2002; Hu, 2005; Xiong, 2012; Zhao, 2012), each negatively ramified the availability and quality of English education and continues to influence education in China well into the twenty-first century (Yahaya et al., 2011). The existing research examines the consequences of these historical events, which have resulted in alleged inferior fluency among the current generation of English teachers (Ross, 1992 in Hu, 2002, p.57) through inadequate resources and fluctuating attitudes toward English, and the oft-debated validity of using foreign or L1 English teachers (Li and Jin, 2020, p.1099; Wang, 2011, pp.81-82; Wu, 2001, p.192). Cheng & Wang (2004), Hu (2002) and Zhao (2012) consider English language education provisions and how historical pedagogical conventions have persisted, hindering teaching progress (Lo, 2019). These circumstances continue to influence new generations of English teachers, who, despite years of study, often leave university with low proficiency levels (Hu, 2002, p. 16) and stagnating pedagogical methods. The current generation of English teachers in China was cast from a mould that was shaped by a century of invisible forces that influenced society (Lo, 2019) and has been divided into 'five broad historical periods' catalogued by Hu (2002, p.16) that influenced the availability and quality of education, leading to the recent dilemmas:

1. The Soviet Influence (1949-1956) – Following the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, relations with the West deteriorated, and using English was seen as unpatriotic and so was replaced with Russian and its teaching methods, which were teacher-dominated, textbook-centred, grammar-translation modes. This set the foundations for language learning and teaching in China for the next half century (Hu, 2002, p.17).
2. Expansion of Public Education (1957-1965) – During the effort to accelerate development, an ideological divergence between neighbours known as the 'Sino-Soviet Split' occurred (Li, M., 2011, p.389; Li & Xia, p.3), and the importance of English re-emerged as diplomatic and trade relations were formed with other countries. However, a shortage of English speakers and teachers now existed. To quickly alleviate the problem, Russian teachers were re-trained and re-purposed, using politicised Chinese-produced teaching material (Liu, 2015, p.71), with an updated goal which focused on teaching and learning technical English 'as a means of access to scientific and technical information to support national development' (Liu, 2015, p.18). This partly resulted in a generation of future teachers rote-learning a narrow scope of content-specific English taught by underprepared Russian language teachers (Bolton & Graddol, 2012, p.4).
3. 'The Decade of Chaos' (1966-1976) – English was once again expunged during this tumultuous period. All English language broadcasts were prohibited, imported English books were banned, English language teaching programs were removed from secondary curricula, and all universities and colleges were shut down. As a result, the formal education system came to a halt (Hu, 2002, p.19). This group is now of retirement age and are the grandparents, parents and former teachers of the current generations of English language educators.
4. Opening Up and Modernisation (1977-1985) – The Cultural Revolution ended in 1976 and saw the reinstatement of international cooperation. Education underwent a reorientation, with English returning to the national curriculum in 1978 (Hu, 2002, p19). The seeds of capitalism took root, and accessibility to English-speaking countries was re-established through academia, professional connections, and media with the advent of TV (Hu, 2002, p.20). With limited screenings of American films from the 1990s (CNN 2021; Papish, 2017), learning English took its place as one of the most important tools for national advancement, and due to the population, became the biggest English language learning initiative in the world (Wei & Su, 2012, p.11). 'In the 1980s, teachers had a weak grounding in pedagogy, lacked professional competence for English language, and knew very little about recent developments in foreign language education both at home and abroad' (Li & Jin, 2020, p.1098). Only within the past 40 years has English been a consistent part of the Chinese education landscape, but it is built on a seemingly fragile foundation (Bolton & Graddol, 2012, p.7).
5. Educational Reform (1986 onwards) - Several models of reform were introduced to strengthen the quality of English language education, supported by the gradual opening of the country, including redesigning teaching material to contain less political content and focus more on student-oriented learning, increased foreign teacher recruitment and an expansion and development of pedagogical knowledge and skills through the deployment of Chinese teachers to Western universities, however 'outdated curriculums, rigid teaching methods, shortage of qualified teachers, and examination-oriented instruction' perpetuated low English proficiency (Hu, 2002, p.20).

Following what Peterson describes as 'the most significant educational initiative in human history' (1997, p.3), where the percentage of adults who were literate grew from about 20% in 1949 to over 95% by the end of the 20th century (Chen, 2022), China's education system in the 21st century has undergone major reforms to further modernise and improve provisions (Law, 2014). The 2001 Basic Education Curriculum Reform (Cui & Zhu, 2014) shifted to a more integrated curriculum, fostering diverse learning styles and improved evaluation methods. Teacher education was also revised to better equip educators, with subject knowledge regarded as the most essential component of teacher preparation and professional training programs (Zhang & Yang, 2017, cited in Ye et al., 2019). The 2021 Double Reduction Policy overhauled the private education landscape to ease students' academic burdens, and by 2022, over 10 million students graduated from college (MOE, 2021b), reflecting China's rise to become a 'leader of educational excellence' (Li & Li, 2019). (Reportedly, the UK's current HE enrolment is 35.8% (Bolton, 2025), while China's is 60.2% (MOE, 2024)). Other reforms included China's education modernisation plan towards 2035 (MOE, 2019)​, aiming to standardise curricula, textbooks, teacher qualifications, and expand vocational education, all to enhance education quality and accessibility. Along with continuous and rapid improvement in education, the national context is shaped by long-standing cultural principles, with exams having deep historical roots in the region. They were first developed by the Chinese centuries ago - as early as the Han Dynasty (206 BC–220 AD) – and entry into the bureaucracy was determined by national examinations (Hill, 2010 in Kell & Kell, 2013). Based on this foundation, the education system in China administers high-stakes exams such as the Gaokao College Entrance Exam (Davey et al., 2007, p.385; Pires, 2019, pp.169-175), which filters students into different strata of higher education, vocational college or out of the system (Hu, 2002, pp.16-20). The consequences of low exam scores result in life-changing outcomes (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996a, p.16; Davey et al., 2007, p.385; p.14; Hill, 2010, p.8), with the added onus of carrying the family honour (Wang & Ross, 2010, pp.85-90; Zhao et al., 2015, p.5). This pressures current educators to focus on scores, and illustrates one element of the perpetuated inheritance of low aptitude in English (Zhang, 2012) through streamlining education to hit narrow goals. With this practice, education takes on a form of competition (Hanyi et al., 2021). With such entrenched educational customs focused on the dogma of examination success (Zhang & Koshmanova, 2021), current teachers of English may have been influenced not only through their own inherited learning journey but also by the perpetuated exam-driven approach in teacher training, with effectiveness assessed based on students' exam results (Lo & Ye, 2017) as opposed to communicative ability, which prevails despite two decades of curriculum reforms (Lo, 2019).

From investigating the existing literature, it was discovered that the historical and political perspectives are well-documented, along with suggestions for improvements in curricula, and pedagogical ideals are substantive and diverse. Common methodologies employed are often qualitative in nature and include literature-based exploration, case studies and interviews. These all provide a clearly established and comprehensive body of knowledge regarding TESOL in China; however, a significant gap is found in the scarcity of and necessity for more data on and from the teachers.

Key Debates and Controversies
One controversial element of the Chinese EFL market is that of foreign teachers recruited to work in the private sector, which has proliferated over the past thirty years. Typically, the preferred profile for foreign recruits problematically specifies that they are from one of seven 'native-English-speaking countries' (any of the four British nations, collectively known as the UK, Ireland, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa) (English First, Galea, 2021; 2021; Protulipac, 2020; Stanley, 2012; TEFL Society, 2022) and hold a degree and a TEFL (Li & Jin, 2020). Along with the now-unacceptable 'native' terminology, which forms a discriminatory binary on language (Jodaei, 2021; Wang & Fang, 2021), Lan (2022) and Liu (2021) further describe the highly racialised Chinese EFL job market, where white teachers are prioritised while non-white teachers experience discrimination, regardless of qualifications. This creates an imbalance in supply and demand, resulting in surplus vacancies which are allegedly filled with people outside the stated requirements, such as people without degrees, relevant degrees, or experience (Jang, 2023), where English-speaking recruits with the preferred visage (Jun-shuan, 2020; Wang et al., 2020) but lacking in pedagogical methods are processed using false or augmented documentation (Pan, 2019), and presented as a citizen of one of the seven countries. Although there is limited academic literature on this issue, there is a wealth of firsthand accounts and non-academic articles supporting this commonly accepted norm. The key debate raised in racialised hiring of foreign teachers (Kubota, 2023) is that of competency or lack thereof. This, in part, supports the reputation of under-skilled or illegal foreign teachers of English in China (Stanley, 2012), further impacting learners.

The implications of domestic teachers operating at compulsory education level with inferior or limited oral English skills (Amoah & Yeboah, 2021, p.57; Cheng & Wang, 2004, p.6; Hu, 2005, p.12; Xing & Bolden, 2019, p.835; Zhang, 2012) and unskilled, unqualified or illegal foreign teachers (Blatchford, 1983, p.1202; Qu, 2019, p.2; Cortazzi, & Jin, 1996a, p.34) working in both the public and private sector in a bid to meet consumer demand, and both groups deploying the use of inadequate teaching material (Xiong, 2012, p.500), all have a detrimental impact on learners. In the literature, criticisms have been levelled at teachers around four main areas:

1. limited or aperiodic availability of English language education due to political changes (Hu, 2002 - 2005),
2. ineffective EFL-specific pedagogy (Hu, 2002; Zhao, 2012),
3. unsuitable curricula/material (Xiong, 2012, p.501), and
4. inadequate teacher training/requirements (Cheng & Wang, 2004).

From a pedagogical perspective, there have been frequent developments from traditional teacher-centred 'chalk-and-talk' (Cheng, 1988, p.90) to more immersive learning environments and techniques (Cheng, 2012, p.380; Hammerly, 1987, p.395). As the evolution of pedagogy in China moved aspirationally to 'advance national development with access to international scientific and technical information' (Hu, 2002, p.17), English became 'not simply a tool but a defining measure of life's potential' (Gil & Adamson, 2011, p.23), more focus was put on 'authentic' English language learning including the import of foreign teachers for language instruction. Attracted by the cheap cost of living, less stringent scrutinisation of documents (Philippine Consulate, 2022), and abundance of well-paid jobs requiring little-to-no experience, the profusion of under-qualified or unskilled foreign teachers widely reported to be working in the shadows of the law (Cao & Hou, 2013; Connor, 2020; Samson, 2019) added to the dearth of proficient teachers. Along with policy reforms, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has frequently addressed the problem of foreign teachers, including the 2021 'Double Reduction Policy' (Government of the People's Republic of China, 2021), which dismantled the EFL market by effectively shutting down extracurricular schools and tightening the guidance on teaching materials and learning provisions, including pedagogical guidelines.

From the students' perspective, English is introduced officially in Year 3 (8-9 years old) (Silver, Hu, & Lino, 2002, p.11). However, some kindergartens and training centres have provided classes from the age of around five (p.10). Classes in China are usually around 40 minutes and often have more than 50 students (Bank & Yeulet, 2014, p.65; Cortazzi & Jin, 1996a, p.42.), enforcing teacher-centred learning. For students to participate individually in class is almost impossible due to both time and audio constraints, meaning 'didactic, instructor-centred methods' (Yang, Zheng, & Li, 2006, p.1217) are a product of circumstance and continue despite reforms (Lo, 2019).

This reflects the enduring socio-historical influences, where teaching is firmly rooted in its main objective of preparing students for a successful future through academic success (Lo, 2019). It has been frequently suggested that in the Confucian model of learning (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996a, p.31; Deng, 2011, p.564), the custom is for learners to absorb information for deep understanding, while Western pedagogy develops agency in individuals through critical thinking and self-expression (He, 2021, p.63). In Chinese tradition, the deeply ingrained custom of the development of inner knowledge being developed through meditative absorption is illustrated by the mode of learning common in Chinese classrooms. The model for English learning, despite pedagogical developments (Lo, 2019; Murray et al., 2023), perpetuates the stereotype of 'passive learning' (Chen & Wen, 2021) by limiting opportunities to interact authentically, and develop communicative English proficiency (Chen, 2014; Hu, 2003, p.295; Jin & Cortazzi, 2011, p.129; Jin et al., 2017, p.16; Zheng, 2012, p.7).

This may help explain the disunion between the rigorous learning environment and reported results following compulsory education (Chen, 2014). For example, Chinese students studying in the U.S. reported difficulty using English, having learned English in China through teachers with the same linguistic and cultural background (Jiang, Yang & Zhou, 2017, p.64), with few opportunities for diverse English language interactions (Gil, 2008, p.3; Hu, 2005, p.18). The resulting difference between a classroom setting and an authentic environment was so great that studying and communicating in English was challenging (corroborated by Nalbantova, 2023). He & Miller (2011) suggest that 'The ETCs' (English Teachers from China) not-so-competent communicative capability is one of the reasons for them to avoid the communicative approach and focus on examination-related skill development' (p.439). This is validated by Wei & Su (2012), who describe exam-focused learning as rendering learners unable to communicate in English. This is further corroborated by the claim that 'only 21% of English learners in China reported possession of a communicative competence in English that allowed them to sustain conversations beyond initial greetings' (Wei & Su cited in Liu, Lin, & Wiley, 2016, p.139). Contentiously, Tang (2002) reports that despite some university students advocating for the exclusive use of English in the classroom, some teachers prefer to utilise Chinese to facilitate learning (p.40). Conversely, He & Miller (2011) reported that students stated a preference for domestic teachers due to a mutual understanding of the requirements for passing exams, a familiarity with learning methods and the ability to discuss technical matters in their L1 language (p.437).

The combination of implied ineffective domestic pedagogical methods and inexpert foreign teachers creates an area of interest that may be difficult to explore due to teachers disputing or being unaware of perceived weaknesses in their practices and the reluctance to discuss potentially incriminating issues. Overall, the existing literature supports the notion of proficiency issues among both domestic and foreign teachers at compulsory education level, but with limited accounts from the teachers themselves.

 

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Theoretical framework
Biases in self-assessment of language proficiency are subjective and influenced by cultural norms, individual perceptions of language ability, confidence, exposure to the language, social contexts, and the standards or expectations set by educational systems or society, while teaching proficiency is assessed through qualifications and experience. The study adopts a non-positivist epistemological stance and a mixed methods approach to understand individual perceptions (Flick, 2018). Festinger's Social comparison theory (1954) suggests that individuals have an innate drive to compare themselves to others to assess their own opinions and abilities. Darvin & Norton (2021) discuss how language learners' view of effective teaching may differ from that of teachers, highlighting dissonance in how people assess each other. The research considers the subjective nature of the assessment of others by incorporating both qualitative methods and a non-experimental correlational approach to investigate relationships between qualifications and perceived ability (Galton, 1889; Jopling, 2019). By employing closed- and open-ended questionnaires, which include both self-reflection and peer assessment, the study aims to reduce bias and gain deeper insights. Critical analysis and thematic exploration reveal patterns in the proficiency of English teachers in China, enhanced through method triangulation.

Methods and Sources
Units of Analysis: The study analysed EFL teachers, their language proficiency, and teaching proficiency.

Sampling: A voluntary, non-probability sample of both domestic and foreign EFL teachers in China was recruited via social media platforms (WeChat, LinkedIn, Facebook). Participants were required to have teaching experience in China, ensuring a range of perspectives from different educational contexts. Results were not collated according to nationality in order to obtain a general overview. While the method facilitated broad geographic coverage, it did not allow for equal representation from both teacher groups or follow-up interviews.

Data Collection: Data was gathered via a questionnaire distributed online. The questionnaire included various question types (e.g., dichotomous, multiple choice, open-ended) to explore qualifications, language proficiency, and teaching experiences. The limitations included an imbalance in demographics and an inability to conduct follow-up interviews, partly due to pandemic restrictions.

Study Sites: Teachers from government schools, private schools (including international), and other settings (e.g., training centres, private tutoring) participated, representing a range of teaching environments in China.

Data Analysis

Data were collected through the questionnaire and analysed using thematic analysis and correlational analysis. Responses were categorised by themes, and language proficiency was assessed. Existing literature was cross-referenced for triangulation. The data analysis followed a structured approach, including coding responses, categorising themes, and comparing results with previous research. All participants met the study's inclusion criteria, and the findings were presented using a constant comparative method for analysis.

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the University of Dundee's (2022) Policy for Non-Clinical Research Involving Human Participants with full ethics approval. Informed consent was distributed to each participant prior to completing the questionnaire.

 

FINDINGS

Results
The questionnaire results provide insights into the demographics, English proficiency and teaching qualifications of English teachers in China, as well as their opinions on English education in the country. Questions 1-3 were open-ended, while Questions 4 -13 were closed questions. Questions 14 -16 were analysed using thematic analysis, coding the open-ended questions using a colour key to create categories of common themes that were revealed. Results for open-ended questions and thematically analysed questions were originally reported using histograms, while dichotomous closed question are reported using doughnut charts, some of which are reproduced here. There were 70 voluntary respondents, 20 of whom were Chinese and the remainder from 11 countries (Figure 1).

Section 1 - Personal Information
Contextual questions 1-4 on nationality, L1 and place of work were posed to establish an overview of respondents. The majority worked in training centres (27.1%) and kindergartens (15.7%), with others teaching at state and international schools. Daily language use revealed that 42.8% of the 70 respondents do not use English regularly, suggesting that English use is not consistent for all teachers. 32.8% of respondents had 2-5 years of experience, and 27.1% had 6-10 years.

Section 2 - English Proficiency
Questions 5-10 were self-assessments on English proficiency and revealed that many respondents had taken English proficiency exams. Of the 31 L2 English-speaking teachers, 20 claimed to have taken a test, with scores ranging from 6-9 on the IELTS scale, while others self-rated higher scores. Among L1 English speakers, most had not taken the test but self-reported a score of 10. Exposure to English in both work and social settings was reported, though only 28.5% of respondents were Chinese, potentially skewing the results towards foreign teachers. A majority claimed to engage with English media in their free time, indicating regular exposure to the language, while 42.8% stated (Figure 3) that they do not use English as a daily language in question 1. iii, while more than 50 respondents stated in questions 4 and 5 that they have regular contact with first-language or fluent English speakers in both work and social settings where they only communicate in English. This does not fully describe the English proficiency levels of the Chinese teachers, which was of interest in this research, however the fact that 13 responded that they have no contact with fluent English speakers in work, 10 responded that they have no contact with fluent English speakers outside of work and three responded that they do not engage with English language media shows that there are active teachers with limited exposure to the subject they are teaching. Concerns of language proficiency among teachers were apparent: 'Some of the Chinese staff in the English department I work for are definitely underqualified and lack the skills to properly teach. Their own English skills are lacking, so it makes it difficult for them to teach it' (Respondent 59); 'There are a lot of unqualified teachers in China from non-English speaking countries. Their English level is barely good enough to teach playschool kids' (Respondent 58).

Section 3 - Teaching Proficiency
Questions 7 – 11 investigated teaching proficiency from a number of perspectives, such as formal qualifications, relevant qualifications, ongoing professional training, and TESOL-specific training. 5 (11.4%) respondents stated they held a degree below the requirement of China (minimum of a Bachelor's degree) (Figure 2), 51 (72.8%) stated that their degree was not related to teaching English, however 58 (82.8%) stated they had TESOL-specific training in the form of TEFL or similar certification, and 39 (55.7%) stated that they do not receive or participate in ongoing professional training. It is not possible to affirm if these claims are true or false and if any respondents are prevaricating due to concerns about working under false documentation. In terms of qualifications, 51.4% claimed to have a bachelor's degree, and 38.5% held a postgraduate degree. However, 48.5% reported having degrees unrelated to teaching English, which shows that 72.8% of degrees held are unrelated to TESOL, with common fields being finance, business, and urban planning. 48.5% claim to hold a TEFL qualification, the minimum requirement for teaching English in China, and 55.7% indicated they did not participate in ongoing professional development.

Q8. Do you have a degree? If so, what level?

Q9. i) Is your degree related to teaching English as a second or foreign language?

Section 4 - Opinions on English Teaching in China
The last three questions were open-ended and were designed to allow the respondents to share personal experiences and opinions that may support or elaborate on the more limited answers provided in the first two sections of the questionnaire. The answers were coded using thematic analysis, which identified keywords and themes from the survey answers. The responses highlighted key issues in the English teaching profession in China. They were much more revealing and expressed a strong pattern of opinion which claims that illegal, unqualified teachers are common, as are low language and pedagogical proficiency. Many respondents identified unqualified teachers (39 instances) and illegal documentation (40 instances) as significant problems (Figure 4). While subjective, low English proficiency, particularly oral skills, was a recurring concern, with 62.8% of respondents believing English proficiency in China is low (Figure 5). Suggestions for improvement in TEFL included better curricula (17 mentions), more opportunities to practice English (21 mentions), policy changes (20 mentions), and a greater focus on qualified teachers and improved teaching methods (22 mentions) (Figure 6).

Q16. What is your experience of English teachers in China with regard to their qualifications or expertise?

The results suggest that there is an issue regarding proficiency among English teachers in China and that it appears to be an open secret as opposed to being explicitly acknowledged in an official capacity. Themes that frequently appeared, such as 'My experience of "teachers" in China is that they aren't teachers. They (foreign teachers)… wouldn't get hired in a school in Aus/UK because they aren't qualified' (Respondent 60); 'They generally lacked any kind of teaching experience, and in many cases didn't even have basic teaching qualifications (e.g., TEFL/TESOL)' (Respondent 45); 'I have worked with many unqualified teachers who have no relevant teaching degrees or teaching experience' (Respondent 46); 'I have known teachers who did not have qualifications, only a bachelor's degree in an unrelated area' (respondent 63); 'I feel that there are many teachers in China who are under qualified as their only qualification is that they are L1 English… At my last teaching job in China, an unqualified South African was hired over a highly qualified Chinese citizen whose English skills were comparable' (Respondent 62).

Q17. What is your opinion of spoken English proficiency in China and why?

In terms of opinions on spoken proficiency in China, Respondent 63 stated that standards are 'generally at a lower level than it should be considering that all students study English from grade three. Speaking is not commonly taught or assessed as far as I am aware. This may be the main reason';' There were and are loads of teachers who wasn't and isn't able to use the language very fluently themselves. Like, failed in the very basic level of English language commanding' (Respondent 48).

Q18. What would you suggest to improve English language education in China?

Evidence of continued use of dated curricula and grammar-translation methods, and insufficient recruitment practices were provided: 'Some teachers in China let students translate the passage sentence by sentence and mark Chinese on their book then let students recite them' (Respondent 54); 'I would that they change old syllabus especial in the public schools and…set new university entry exams' (Respondent 53);' There are few opportunities for Chinese students to practice spoken English, and most are not interested' (Respondent 52); 'Stricter rules on hiring foreign teachers. They should have an education-based degree and a TEFL certificate as a minimum' (Respondent 46).

 

DISCUSSION
The results, while sometimes subjective, reveal personal accounts of significant gaps in qualifications, proficiency, and pedagogical skills among English teachers in China, along with concerns about employment practices. Respondents expressed a strong desire for systemic changes to enhance both language and teaching proficiency to better serve learners.

Overall, the study supports the hypotheses derived within the literature review that there are issues with the qualifications and proficiency of both foreign and Chinese English teachers in China (Lamie, 2006, p.69; Wu, 2001, p.193). However, this is underrepresented in current available literature, particularly around domestic teachers' communicative proficiency and suitable foreign teacher recruitment. Respondents included individuals from several countries not listed as 'native' as specified in recruitment literature in China, which may indicate possible visa irregularities. This perpetuates the issues around 'native-speakerism' and illustrates the practical issues through persisting with these terms in employing under-qualified foreign teachers or employing non-L1 teachers contra to published visa requirements: 'Some teachers have worked using incorrect visas, like student visa or tourist visa' (Respondent 56). Unexplored in existing literature, there is clearly an issue with foreign teacher recruitment practices and terminology that needs updating to better reflect both contemporary opinions on L1/L2 speakers and how this relates to TEFL proficiency and ensures Chinese learners of English have high-quality teachers.

English proficiency was a main area of concern for both domestic and foreign teachers, who commented on low language proficiency in both groups. Subjective comments on current teachers with limited exposure to the subject they are teaching and contradictory self-assessments of high proficiency warrant further exploration. It is likely that the majority of domestic teachers have not had the opportunity to study, work or live in English-speaking countries, and so have more limited frames of reference when assessing their language skills. In agreement with the discussions in the literature review, the results show that inconsistencies in proficiency exist (Hu, 2010; Jang, 2023; Pan, 2019). Domestic teachers are closely scrutinised in terms of qualifications according to an ever-evolving policy that demands increasingly well-qualified teachers and benefits from perspectives such as shared L1, experience of learning English, and knowledge of the education system. However, in many instances, there is evidence of insufficient English. The responsibility lies in producing teachers who are fit for purpose, to cultivate each new generation of English speakers, who automatically become part of the global community of people using a shared language. The machinations in place from a policy standpoint appear to enable proficiency issues to persist, from the narrow parameters for foreign teacher requirements that exclude the majority of potential candidates through the persistent culture of 'native-speaker' preferences to the traditional pedagogy that continues to be practised in the exam-driven compulsory education system that limits the opportunities for both teachers and learners to develop meaningful English communicative skills. These can be addressed through policy changes, which have been frequently revised and implemented in the intervening time between carrying out this research and through a shift in public discourse around L1/L2 narratives (Brown, 2021; Li & Liu, 2024).

In assessing the limitations of this study, the added complexity of teachers potentially providing damaging accounts of themselves or colleagues or the culture of reverence around teachers in China, making criticism discommodious, may have led to some answers being distorted or inaccurate. This is also true of the results pertaining to qualifications. False information may have been provided (one respondent admitted to 'doing a TEFL course online', and four admitted to having no degree) as most teachers claim to be fully qualified, yet also maintain that illegal documentation, unqualified and inexperienced teachers are commonplace. The matters of legality, which are also underrepresented in the literature (Stanley, 2012), are a matter for policymakers to implement, such as the 2021 Double Reduction policy, which introduced stringent rules for tuition centres, English language teaching and curricula.

Implications and contributions to knowledge
This study, which set out to investigate the perceived language and teaching proficiency of English language teachers in China and its implications for learners, several issues have come to light that deserve further attention, such as the disharmony between pedagogical goals and contextual realities. For example, the majority of Chinese teachers do not live in an environment that accommodates regular exposure to and practice of the English language, while foreign teachers are limited by the ingrained 'native speaker' narrative. By questioning the teachers, it is clear that widespread dilemmas directly affect each new generation of learners and, consequently, each new generation of teachers, perpetuating a cycle of inadequate standards. The implications will add another perspective to existing research on proficiency in TESOL and could better inform policymakers within and beyond China on the requirements for teachers of English.

 

CONCLUSION
The findings revealed that there is an existing and perpetuated issue with both domestic and foreign teachers of English in China. To improve student learning experiences, there is a need to improve oral English skills among domestic teachers, and for foreign teachers to be better qualified and trained, which can be achieved by actively changing the narrative around native-speakerism in public discourse, thus opening more opportunities for high-quality, non L1 English teachers. Through exploring the issue from the perspectives of the teachers, this study has highlighted the significant challenges related to the language and teaching proficiency of both domestic and foreign English teachers in China, emphasising the impact they have on students' language development. The findings underscore a critical gap between teachers' qualifications and the realities of English education, as well as the systemic barriers such as the exam-oriented approach and narrow recruitment parameters. These factors contribute to a cycle of inadequate standards that affect both learners and teachers. The study opens important avenues for further research, and provides valuable insights for policymakers, offering a clearer understanding of the challenges within China's English education system and suggesting areas for improvement to better support both educators and students.

Address for correspondence: [email protected]

 

REFERENCES

Amoah, S. and Yeboah, J. 2021. The speaking difficulties of Chinese EFL learners and their motivation towards speaking the English language. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(1), pp.56-69.

Barrera-Pedemonte, F., 2019. Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature. Classification framework for trained and qualified teachers. UNESCO [Online]. [Accessed 12th January 2024]. Available from: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000133010/PDF/133010eng.pdf.multi p.3.

Blatchford, C.H. 1983. Teaching in China: EFL teacher training. Asian Survey, 23(11), pp.1199-1203.

Bolton, P. 2025. Higher Education Student Numbers. (Research Briefing). House of Commons Library. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7857/CBP-7857.pdf

Boyle, J. 2000. Education for teachers of English in China. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(2), pp.147-155.

British Council. 2023. China – English In Numbers. British Council (Online). [Accessed 17th January 2024]. Available from: https://www.britishcouncil.cn/en/EnglishGreat/numbers.

Brown, A. (2021). Professional identity development by language background in a multilingual/cultural co-teaching TESOL practicum. English Language Teacher Education and Development (ELTED), 24, pp.1-15.

Burnaby, B., and Sun, Y. 1989. Chinese teachers' views of Western language teaching: Context informs paradigm. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 219-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587334.

Cambridge International Assessment. 2019. Standards in Education. Cambridge University Press [Online]. [Accessed 25^th May 2022]. Available from: https://271196-standards-in-education.pdf (cambridgeinternational.org).

Cao, N. 2021. Two Common Illegal Work Visa Types Foreign Teacher Get. Top Tutor Job [Online]. [Accessed 15^th July 2022]. Available from: https://www.toptutorjob.com/blog/common-illegal-work-visa-types.

Chen, L. and Wen, H., 2021. Understanding Stereotypes of Chinese International Students in a US University: A Case Study. Educational Research and Development Journal, 24(2), pp.73-91.

Chen, R. T. H. 2014. East-Asian teaching practices through the eyes of Western learners. Teaching in higher education, 19(1), pp.26-37.

Chen, Z., and Goh, C. 2011. Teaching oral English in higher education: Challenges to EFL teachers. Teaching in higher education, 16(3), pp. 333-345.

Cheng, L. and Wang, H. 2004. Understanding professional challenges faced by Chinese teachers of English. TESL-EJ, 7(4), p.n4. [Accessed 24^th May 2022]. Available from: http://tesl-ej.org/ej28/a2abs.html.

Cheng, S. 2019. A Study of Factors Affecting the Oral English Proficiency of English Majors. 2019 4th Annual International Conference on Education Science and Education Management (ESEM 2019) ISBN: 978-1-60595-623-7

Chen, X. 2022. Adult literacy policy and practice in post-1949 China: A historical perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 55(1), pp.120–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2022.2076312

China National People's Congress Standing Committee. 1993. Teachers Law of the People's Republic of China. The Congressional-Executive Commission on China [Online]. [Accessed 12^th July 2022]. Available from: https://www.cecc.gov/resources/legal-provisions/teachers-law-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china.

Cortazzi, M. and Jin, L. 1996a. Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. Society and the language classroom, 169(206), pp.1-53.

Cortazzi, M. and Jin, L. 1996b. English teaching and learning in China. Language teaching, 29(2), pp.61-80.

Cox, M. (2012). Power shifts, economic change and the decline of the West? International Relations, 26(4), pp.369-388.

Cui, Y. and Zhu, Y., 2014. Curriculum reforms in China: history and the present day. Revue internationale d’éducation de Sèvres.

Darvin, R., and Norton, B. 2021. Investment and motivation in language learning: What's the difference? Language teaching, 56(1), pp.29-40.

Davey, G., De Lian, C. and Higgins, L. 2007. The university entrance examination system in China. Journal of further and Higher Education, 31(4), pp.385-396.

Deng, Z. 2011. Confucianism, modernisation, and Chinese pedagogy: An introduction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(5), pp.561-568.

English First. 2021. Requirements for teaching in China. English First [Online]. [Accessed 23^rd July 2022]. Available from:  https ://www.englishfirst.com/work-abroad/requirements-for-teaching-english-in-china/

Fan, L. 2019. The Foreign Teachers Caught Up in China's Education Clampdown. Sixth Tone [Online]. [Accessed 15^th May 2022]. Available from: https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1004550/the-foreign-teachers-caught-up-in-chinas-education-clampdown.

Festinger, L. 1954. A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), pp.117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202

Galton, F. 1889. I. Co-relations and their measurement, chiefly from anthropometric data. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 45(273-279), pp.135-145.

Galea, L. 2021. The Requirements for Teaching English in China. International TEFL Academy [Online]. [Accessed 12^th June 2022]. Available from: https://www.internationalteflacademy.com/blog/requirements-for-teaching-english-in-china.

Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. L. 1998. Grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Bern: Huber.

Government of the People's Republic of China, 2021. '中共中央办公厅 国务院办公厅印发《关于进一步减轻义务教育阶段学生作业负担和校外培训负担的意见》' [The General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the Opinions on Further Reducing the Homework Burden and Off-campus Training Burden of Students in the Compulsory Education Stage]'. [Accessed 23rd September 2022]. Available from: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-07/24/content_5627132.htm.

Gil, J., 2016. English language education policies in the People's Republic of China. English language education policy in Asia, pp.49-90.

Guo, Y., 2012.  Teaching English for Economic Competiveness: Emerging Issues and Challenges in English Education in China Enseignement de l’anglais, une question de compétitivité économique: problèmes émergents et défis pour l’enseignement de l’anglais en Chine. Canadian and International Education 4(2). pp.28-50

Hagger, N. (2022). The Fall of the West: The Story behind Covid, the Levelling-Down of the West and the Shift of Power to the East with the Rise of China. Winchester: John Hunt Publishing.

Hanyi, M., Tang, M. and Wu, M. 2021. Current Situation on Exam-Oriented Education in China and the Outlook for Quality-Oriented Education. 2021 3rd International Conference on Literature, Art and Human Development (ICLAHD 2021). Atlantis Press. p.325.

Hatch, T. 2021. Surprise, Controversy, and the 'Double Reduction Policy' in China. International Education News [Online]. [Accessed 3^rd May 2022]. Available from: https://internationalednews.com/2021/11/03/surprise-controversy-and-the-double-reduction-policy-in-china/

He, D. and Miller, L., 2011. English teacher preference: The case of China's non‐English‐major students. World Englishes, 30(3), pp.428-443.

He, Y. 2021. Analysis on the Comparison Between Chinese and Western Classroom Teaching. 7th International Conference on Humanities and Social Science Research (ICHSSR 2021) Atlantis Press. pp. 63-66.

Hill, P. 2010. Asia-Pacific secondary education systemic review examination systems (Series No.1). Bangkok: UNESCO. pp.1-8.

Hu, G., 2002. English language teaching in the People's Republic of China. English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore, 5(2), pp.71-77.

Hu, G. 2003. English language teaching in China: Regional differences and contributing factors. Journal of multilingual and multicultural development, 24(4), pp.290-318.

Hu, G. 2005. English language education in China: Policies, progress, and problems. Language policy, 4(1), pp.5-24.

Hu, H., Li, F. and Luo, Z., 2024. The evolution of China's English education policy and challenges in higher education: analysis based on LDA and Word2Vec. Frontiers in Education 9. p. 1385602

Hu, W. 2010. Communicative language teaching in the Chinese environment.

US-China Education Review 7(6) (Serial No.67), p.78

Hua, S. 2020. China Considers Toughening Rules for Foreign English Teachers. VOA China News [Online]. [Accessed 15^th May 2022]. Available from: https://www.voanews.com/a/east-asia-pacific_voa-news-china_china-considers-toughening-rules-foreign-english-teachers/6193758.html.

ITTT (International TEFL and TESOL Training), 2019. The 3 Most Important Chinese Policies to Know For Teaching Expats in China. [Accessed 1st June 2022]. Available from: https://www.teflcourse.net/blog/the-3-most-important-chinese-policies-to-know-for-teaching-expats-in-china-ittt-tefl-blog/

Jang, G., 2023. A critical ethnography of 'Westerners' teaching English in Stanley, P. China: Shanghaied in Shanghai, Language, Culture and Curriculum, 36(1), pp.76-79.

Jin, L. and Cortazzi, M. 1998. Expectations and questions in intercultural classrooms. Intercultural communication studies, 7(2), pp.37-62.

Jin, L. and Cortazzi, M. 2006. Changing practices in Chinese cultures of learning. Language, culture and curriculum, 19(1), pp.5-20.

Jin, L. and Cortazzi, M. eds. 2011. Researching Chinese learners: Skills, perceptions and intercultural adaptations. Springer. p.129.

Jodaei, H., 2021. Native Speaker Norms and Teaching English to Non-Natives: History and Research. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 9(3), pp.1-14.

Jopling, M. 2019. Using quantitative data. In Practical Research Methods in Education. Oxford: Routledge. p.59.

Jun-shuan, L.I.U., 2020. The perceptions of Chinese ELT stakeholders on the employment of foreign English language teachers. Journal of Literature and Art Studies, 10(6), pp.478-485.

Kawakita, K. 2020. Are We Entering an "Asian Century?": The Possibility of a New International Order. Master's thesis. The London School of Economics and Political Science.

Kell, M. and Kell, P. 2014. Global Testing: PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS. In Literacy and Language in East Asia. Singapore: Springer, pp.8-66

Kirkpatrick, R. and Zang, Y. 2011. The negative influences of exam-oriented education on Chinese high school students: Backwash from classroom to child. Language testing in Asia, 1(3), pp.36-37.

Kubota, R. 2023. Racialised teaching of English in Asian contexts: Introduction. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 36(1), pp.1-6.

Kuhlman, N.A. and Kneževic, B. 2013. The TESOL Guidelines for Developing EFL Professional Teaching Standards. TESOL International Association. pp.2-7.

Lan, S. (2022). Between privileges and precariousness: Remaking whiteness in China's teaching English as a second language industry. American Anthropologist, 124(1), pp.118-129.

Layne, C. (2012). The Global Power Shift from West to East. The National Interest, 119, pp. 21–31. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42896450

Law, W.W., 2014. Understanding China's curriculum reform for the 21st century. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(3), pp.332-360.

Lehmann, A., and Leonard, P. 2019. Destination China: Immigration to China in the Post-Reform Era: Immigration to China in the Post-Reform Era. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan doi:10.1057/978-1-137-54433-9. pp.147-173.

Leonard, P. 2019. 'Devils' or 'Superstars'? Making English Language Teachers in China. In Lehmann, A., Leonard, P. (eds) Destination China. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54433-9_7

Li, J., and Li, J. 2019. Educational Policy Development in China in the 21st Century: A Multi-Flows Approach. Beijing International Review of Education 1(1), pp.196-220.

Li, S. and Jin, C. 2020. Analysis on whether native or non-native English-speaking teacher is better in TEFL in China. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 416, pp.1098-1104.

Li, Z. and Liu, Y., 2024. 11. Transprofessional Identity of L1 Chinese Language Teachers in Changing Multilingual Contexts. Learning and Teaching Chinese as a First Language: International Perspectives.

Liu, J. 2021. Revisiting Native Speakerism in ELT: Viewpoints of Chinese EFL Program Administrators on the Recruitment and Workplace Situations of Foreign English Teachers. English Language Teaching, 14(9), pp.24-31.

Lo, L.N., 2019. Teachers and Teaching in China: A Critical Reflection. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 25(5), pp.553-573.

Lo, L. and Ye, J., 2017. The historical context of the role and status of scholars and teachers in traditional China. In X. Zhu, L. Goodwin & H. Zhang, eds. Quality of teacher education and learning. Singapore: Springer, pp. 157-192.

McCulloch, R. 2018. Why the EFL Market is set to boom in the next 10 years. CEFR Language Exam Resource Centre [Online]. [Accessed 14^th June 2022]. Available from: https://cefrexambot.com/EFL-market-due-boom-next-10-years-part-1/

McKay, S. 2012. English as an international language. In A. Burns and J. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Merriam-Webster. 2022. Standards, Merriam-Webster Dictionary [Online]. [Accessed 7^th May 2022]. Available from: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/standard.

MOE (Ministry of Education) Department of Planning. 1984. Achievement of education in China 1949–1983. Beijing: People's Education Press.

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2009a. The Teacher's law of China. Chapter III Article 10. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (Online). [Accessed 29^th September 2024]. Available from: http://en.moe.gov.cn/Resources/Laws_and_Policies/201506/t20150626_191389.html

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2009b. The Education Law of the People's Republic of China. (VIII Article 70). Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (Online). [Accessed 29^th September 2024]. Available from:

http://en.moe.gov.cn/Resources/Laws_and_Policies/201506/t20150626_191385.html 

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2019. China issues plans to modernise education. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (Online). [Accessed 29^th March 2024]. Available from: http://en.moe.gov.cn/news/press_releases/201902/t20190226_371200.html

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2021a. Plan to boost qualifications of teachers. The State Council (Online). [Accessed 11^th December 2024]. Available from: https://english.www.gov.cn/statecouncil/ministries/202112/02/content_WS61a7fc3fc6d0df57f98e5e36.html

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2021b. China to see over 10m new college graduates next year. The State Council (Online). [Accessed 11^th December 2024]. Available from: https://english.www.gov.cn/statecouncil/ministries/202111/20/content_WS61982b06c6d0df57f98e5347.html

MOE (Ministry of Education). 2024. China has over 47 mln higher-education students in 2023. Xinhua (Online). [Accessed 12^th November 2024]. Available from: http://en.moe.gov.cn/news/media_highlights/202403/t20240304_1118146.html

Murray, N., Liddicoat, A. J., Zhen, G., and Mosavian, P. (2023). Constraints on innovation in English language teaching in hinterland regions of China. Language Teaching Research, 27(5), pp.1246-1267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820979855

Nalbantova, M., Are you talking to me? Influence of cultural background on international students' willingness to participate in open-class interactions (online and face-to-face). The Language Scholar, p.56.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 2016. Education in China: A snapshot. OECD [Online]. [Accessed 11th June 2022]. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/china/Education-in-China-a-snapshot.pdf

Pan, L. 2015. English as a global language in China. English Language Education 2. pp.90366-2.

Pan, M. 2019. Action Taken Over Illegally Hired English Teachers. In China Daily [Online]. [Accessed 15th May 2022]. Available from: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/global/2019-08/05/content_37498627.htm

Peterson, G., 1997. The Power of Words: literacy and revolution in South China, 1949-95 (Vol. 1). UBC Press.

Pires, M.D.J. 2019. Gaokao: far more than an exam. Revista Diadorim, 21(3), pp.168-185.

Protulipac, A. 2020. China: Why new draft legislation offers no relief for non-native teachers. TEFL.com [Online]. [Accessed 12^th June 2022]. Available from: https://www.tefl.com/blog/article.html?china-why-new-draft-legislation-offers-no-relief-for-non-native-teachers&document_id=1108111.

Qi, G.Y. 2016. The importance of English in primary school education in China: perceptions of students. Multilingual Education, 6(1), pp.1-18.

Qu, J. 2019. How do Chinese We-media Set the Agenda of Foreign English Teacher in China? Master's thesis. University of Oslo. p.2.

Quinn, C. 2019. The country where over 260 k ESL teachers work illegally. The PIE News: News and business analysis for Professionals in International Education [Online]. [Accessed 12^th May 2022]. Available from: https://thepienews.com/analysis/china-esl-teachers-work-illegally/.

Rose, H., McKinley, J. and Galloway, N., 2021. Global Englishes and language teaching: A review of pedagogical research. Language Teaching, 54(2), pp.157-189. doi:10.1017/S0261444820000518

Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. 1986. In Xinmin, Z. and Adamson, B. 2003. The Pedagogy of a Secondary School Teacher of English in the People's Republic of China: Challenging the Stereotypes. RELC Journal, 34(3), pp.323-337.

Ross, H. A. 1992. Foreign language education as a barometer of modernisation. In Hu, G., 2002. English language teaching in the People's Republic of China. English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore, 5(2), pp.71-77.

Rubdy, R., 2009. Reclaiming the local in teaching EIL. Language and intercultural communication, 9(3), pp.156-174.

Stanley, P. 2008. The foreign teacher is an idiot: Symbolic interactionism, and assumptions about language and language teaching in China. Linguistics & The Human Sciences, 4(1).

Stanley, P. 2012. A Critical Ethnography of 'Westerners' Teaching English in China: Shanghaied in Shanghai. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203078051.

TEFL Society. 2022. Teaching English in China. TEFL Society [Online]. [Accessed 12^th June 2022]. Available from: ttps://teflsociety.org/china/.

Timmermans, S. and Epstein, S. 2010. A world of standards but not a standard world: Toward a sociology of standards and standardisation. Annual review of Sociology, 36, pp.69-89.

University of Dundee. 2022. Ethics Procedures [Online]. [Accessed 22^nd June 2022]. Available from: https://www.dundee.ac.uk/research/governance-policy/ethicsprocedures/.

Wang, L. 2011. Foreign English teachers in the Chinese classroom: Focus on teacher-student interaction. Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(2). pp.81-82.

Wang, L. and Fang, F., 2020. Native-speakerism policy in English language teaching revisited: Chinese university teachers' and students' attitudes towards native and non-native English-speaking teachers. Cogent Education, 7(1), p.1778374.

Wang, L. (Evelyn), Fang, F. (Gabriel) and Khajavi, Y. 2020. Native-speakerism policy in English language teaching revisited: Chinese university teachers' and students' attitudes towards native and non-native English-speaking teachers', Cogent Education, 7(1). doi:10.1080/2331186X.2020.1778374.

Wang, Y. and Ross, H. 2010. Experiencing the change and continuity of the College Entrance Examination: A case study of Gaokao County, 1996-2010. Chinese Education & Society, 43(4), pp.75-93.

Wei, R. and Su, J. 2012. The statistics of English in China: An analysis of the best available data from government sources. English Today, 28(3), pp.10-14. doi:10.1017/S0266078412000235.

Wu, Y. 2001. English language teaching in China: Trends and challenges. TESOL Quarterly, pp.191-194.

Xing, D. and Bolden, B. 2019. Exploring oral English learning motivation in Chinese international students with low oral English proficiency. Journal of International Students, 9(3), pp.834-855.

Xinhua News Agency. 2021. China's number of teachers grows by 3.52 pct. China Daily [Online]. [Accessed 1^st August 2022]. Available from: https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202109/08/WS61385f49a310efa1bd66e2b6.html.

Xiong, T. 2012. Essence or practice? Conflicting cultural values in Chinese EFL textbooks: A discourse approach. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, 33(4), pp.499-516.

Xu, C. (2021, August). Oral English in China. In 2021 5th International Seminar on Education, Management and Social Sciences (ISEMSS 2021. Atlantis Press. pp. 575-579.

Yasin, G.M. 2021. Teacher Qualifications and Academic Performance of Pupils in Public Primary Schools in Hargeisa District. Education Quarterly Reviews, 4(3). p.39.

Ye, J., Zhu, X., and Lo, L. N. K. (2019). Reform of teacher education in China: a survey of policies for systemic change. Teachers and Teaching, 25(7), 757–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1639498

Zhang, H. and Shi, Y., 2023. Evolution of English language education policies in the Chinese mainland in the 21st century: A corpus-based analysis of official language policy documents. Linguistics and Education, 76, p.101190.

Zhang, Q. L., and Yang, X. W. (2017). 在深度学习与自由课堂之间保持奖励 [Maintaining the tension between "deep learning" and "free classroom"]. 教育科学研究 [Research in Educational Science], 7(13–17), p.22

Zhang, W. and Koshmanova, T., 2021. From personal experiences of transformative learning on educational challenges and reforms in secondary school in China. International Journal of Education (IJE), 9(3), pp.33-40.

Zhang, X. 2017. English language education in China: a historical, social and economic perspective. English Today, 33(2), pp.56-57.

Zhang, Y. 2012. China's English ability lagging behind. China Daily [Online]. [Accessed 4th May 2022]. Available from: https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012-11/03/content_15871496.htm.

Zhao, J., Joshi, R. M., Dixon, L. Q., and Huang, L. (2016). Chinese EFL teachers' knowledge of basic language constructs and their self-perceived teaching abilities. Annals of dyslexia, 66, pp.127-146.

Zhao, X., Selman, R.L. and Haste, H. 2015. Academic stress in Chinese schools and a proposed preventive intervention program. Cogent Education, 2(1), p.5.

Zhao, Z. 2012. EFL Teaching and Reform in China's Tertiary Education. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 3(6).

Zheng, H. 2012. Dilemmas in Teacher Development in the Chinese EFL Context? Journal of Cambridge Studies, 7(2). pp.7-13.

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Using academic qualifications, professional training and/or qualifications, recognised language proficiency scales and participant-volunteered information.