Who do they think they are? Professional identity of Chinese university-based teacher educators

ABSTRACT

University-based teacher educators (UBTEs) are critical to teacher education quality. Studies have mainly explored the professional identity of UBTEs who were previously schoolteachers, whereas less is known about those who followed academic pathways. This study examines how UBTEs perceive their identities in the Chinese context, where academic pathways are common. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 purposively sampled participants from two university types: first-class normal universities, and provincial normal universities. Five identities aligned with previous research: teacher in a higher education institution; researcher; teacher of teachers; collaborator; and coach. Three new identities emerged from the data: teacher of tradition; questioner; and doctoral student. Similarities and differences in identity perception were also discovered between university types. This study suggests the complexity of being a UBTE is shaped by institutional context, national and cultural milieu, and the nature of teacher education work, and concludes with recommendations for teacher education programmes.

KEYWORDS:

• University-based teacher educator
• academic pathway
• professional identity
• comparative perspective

Introduction

As a specialised occupational group in higher education, university-based teacher educators (UBTEs) contribute to shaping the teaching profession (Murray, Czerniawski, and Barber 2011), and are believed to be ‘the core’ of a high-quality teacher education program (White et al. 2020). In this context, an increasing number of studies have explored UBTEs’ professional expertise (Berry 2007), professional practice (Yamin-Ali 2018), and professional development (Cochran-Smith et al. 2020). However, less is known about UBTEs’ professional identity.

Professional identity refers to UBTEs’ understanding and (re)interpretation of who they are and how others perceive them in their work (Vloet and Van Swet 2010; ,Beijaard, Meijer, and Verloop 2004), arising from their knowledge base, interactions with others and their teacher education context (Day et al. 2006). Identity theories vary, drawing on psychological, sociological, and postmodern perspectives. In this study, professional identity is seen as more than a role description or a highly personal psychological phenomenon (Callero 1985). Instead, it is defined as a set of internalised meanings attached to specific roles that people occupy in society (Stryker 2002). UBTEs’ work is diverse, including teaching, research, service to their professional community, and contributing to higher education, which means that they negotiate diverse meanings, norms, and expectations attached to these different types of work (Stets and Serpe 2013). UBTEs’ professional identity is, therefore, multi-faceted and can be regarded as comprising sub-identities related to different parts of their work, for example, ‘teacher of teachers’, ‘researcher’, and ‘teacher in higher education’ (Smith and Flores 2019; Swennen, Jones, and Volman 2010). For individual UBTEs, some of these sub-identities are more relevant than others – Some sub-identities become dominant and come to be seen as the core of a UBTE’s professional identity, while others may become marginalised (Beijaard, Meijer, and Verloop 2004; Davey 2013). Identity salience is a way of thinking about which sub-identity is more active or relevant to individuals in certain situations (Stryker 2002). The professional identity of a UBTE is likely to comprise several sub-identities that will be more or less salient in different times or contexts, depending on who they are and what they are asked to do (Murphy and Pinnegar 2011; Izadinia 2014). The present study uses this conception of UBTE professional identity to examine a context in which many UBTEs enter teacher education from academic disciplines rather than from classroom practice, to understand what identities emerge in these circumstances and how that might impact teacher education’s form and quality.

Previous studies suggest that the professional identity of UBTEs is closely associated with their professional disposition (McAnulty and Cuenca 2014), engagement (Yuan 2019; White et al. 2020), and professional development needs (Swennen, Jones, and Volman 2010). Existing literature also highlights that simply taking up a professional role as a UBTE does not automatically translate to developing an identity as a teacher educator, suggesting that becoming a UBTE is not an easy and linear process but an iterative construction over time (Amott 2018). Although some studies have considered the formation of professional identities among UBTEs, most focus on the practitioner pathway (Davey 2013), where experienced schoolteachers transition to novice UBTEs (Murray and Male 2005; O’brien and Furlong 2015; Boyd and Harris 2010), particularly in the European, UK, Australia and New Zealand contexts. To date, several common identities for practitioner-pathway UBTEs have been found: researchers, schoolteachers, teachers of teachers, and teachers in higher education (Swennen, Jones, and Volman 2010). Research on UBTEs with higher degrees but little or no school teaching experience, characterised as an academic pathway (Davey 2013), has focused to date on the nature of their work and their professional development needs (e.g. Kelchtermans, Smith, and Vanderlinde 2018; Vanassche et al. 2015). Whether their academic pathway to teacher education makes a difference to their identity perceptions still needs more investigation (Newberry 2014). Understanding how academic-pathway UBTEs perceive themselves could provide additional insights for their induction, professional development and learning, and retention, as well as help us think about their potential impact on teacher candidates.

The academic pathway to becoming a UBTE is used in most teacher education programmes in North America, China, Israel, and some European countries (e.g. Portugal) (Davey 2013). In China, ‘universitisation’ reform in teacher education since the 1990s has resulted in ‘transformation and upgrade’ through an amalgamation of numerous teacher education institutions into the university sector (Shi and Englert 2008, 351). Chinese UBTEs usually hold higher degrees (e.g. PhD) but have limited or no K-12 teaching experience. They are required to engage in teaching and research concurrently, and they have been prepared for research. This contrasts with UBTEs who were previously schoolteachers, and therefore had teaching experience but often with minimal research preparation before entering higher education. Existing findings about professional identity of practitioner pathways UBTEs may not be generalisable in contexts where the academic pathway is common.

In addition to the impact of jurisdictions, different workplaces and organisational positioning in the same jurisdiction may also make a difference to UBTEs’ identities. For instance, provincial normal universities and first-class normal universities offer teacher education programmes in China. All universities with ‘normal’ in their names primarily offer teacher education. However, provincial normal universities are usually teaching-oriented, supervised by the provincial Department of Education, and are regarded as offering good teacher education for their provinces. These universities deliver professional and vocational courses mainly at the undergraduate level, and prepare qualified teachers for the local labour market. To resolve teacher shortage issues in specific areas, provincial normal universities offer apprenticeship-style school based models, so teaching and practicum supervision is a large part of UBTEs’ work in these universities. In contrast, first-class normal universities are research-intensive and are affiliated with the Ministry of Education in China. They usually rank at the top of national and international university league tables, and are regarded as offering nationally and internationally recognised programs, which function as a model for other teacher education institutions (Cao et al. 2019). UBTEs in first-class normal universities have higher research demands, not only because research productivity is the basis of their salary, probationary contracts, promotion, and institutional reputation, but also because their institutions set a higher-level goal of preparing excellent teachers who are also researchers. Due to the distinct cultures, expectations, priorities, and values between these two types of university, UBTEs in each place face different imperatives – more teaching in provincial normal universities and more research in first-class normal universities. This may shape their professional identities. However, little is known about the effect of different workplaces on UBTEs’ identities, and no agreement has yet been reached (Griffiths, Thompson, and Hryniewicz 2010; Murray, Czerniawski, and Barber 2011). This study includes participants from both types of normal universities to explore whether the different contexts impact their reported identities.

Despite the different manifestations of teacher education in each jurisdiction and workplace, most countries and universities share similar macro-discourses, where neoliberalism, marketisation, and managerialism increasingly permeate and threaten teacher education and UBTEs, via probationary contracts, tenure track processes, and performance systems (Yuan 2019). These measures emphasise higher qualification standards for UBTEs and quantify research performance and productivity, which shifts UBTEs’ time allocation and engagement from teaching and students towards research (Cochran-Smith 2005; Menter 2011). More novice UBTEs with higher degrees and excellent academic outputs are increasingly recruited for teacher education programmes (Yuan 2016) over expert practitioners. Consequently, UBTEs from an academic pathway may become increasingly important in teacher education, making it important to understand their professional identity.

This study investigates how Chinese UBTEs, who follow academic pathways into their roles, perceive their professional identities. Further, it examines whether these identities differ by university type. The overarching research questions for this study are: 1) how do Chinese UBTEs perceive their professional identities? and 2) To what extent are these identities similar and different in first-class normal universities and provincial normal universities?

Method

Participants

To collect data illustrating the identity perceptions of Chinese UBTEs, 34 participants were recruited voluntarily from 11 universities in mainland China: six provincial normal universities and five first-class normal universities. Each university offers teacher education as its main programme, with a long history and culture of cultivating prospective teachers.

Purposive sampling was used to obtain a group of participants that varied in professional title, subject taught, years of working as a UBTE, and particularly the type of Higher Education Institution (HEI) they worked in. As shown in Table 1, this group is typical of UBTEs in China (Ping et al. 2021).

Table 1. Demographics of participants.

Participant Characteristics	Number of interviewees (n = 34)
University type	First-class normal university (n = 5): 17
	Provincial normal university (n = 6): 17
Gender	Female: 13
	Male: 21
Educational qualification	Doctorate: 28
	Doctorate in process: 1
	Master’s degree: 3
	Bachelors: 2
Job title	Lecture: 10
	Associate professor: 13
	Professor: 11
Years as a UBTE	1–5 years (novice): 12
	6–14 years (experienced): 11
	15+years (veteran): 11
K-12 teaching experience	Yes: 3
	No: 31

Participants were assigned codes to preserve confidentiality. The letter indicates the type of university the participant worked at: T for first-class normal university and P for provincial normal university. The number identifies the participant.

Data collection and analysis

In-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted in Mandarin. The interview protocol centred on four themes: how participants became UBTEs, the differences between being a UBTE and being a schoolteacher or academic, their perceptions of what their work comprises, and the construction of their identities through work. Each interview lasted 30–90 minutes. This variation in timing depended on whether the participant felt they had shared all they could concerning the questions, and the schedules of the participants. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim in Mandarin, and then translated into English. To establish trustworthiness, participants were asked to verify the accuracy of the transcripts before analysis. To confirm the reliability of English translation, a bilingual expert was employed to conduct a back-translation of a random sample of 20% of the translated material, and compare the quality and meaning equivalence to the original text. After minor wording changes, there was consensus between researchers and the translator that the translations were reliable.

Due to the exploratory nature of this study, thematic inductive analysis was applied to capture the trends and patterns from the data, identify shared meaning and themes (Braun and Clarke 2006), and deepen understanding of Chinese UBTEs’ professional identity. Specifically, the first author familiarised herself with the data by reading transcripts and notes thoroughly, then labelled segments directly from raw data by inductive coding. This generated descriptive codes from meaningful segments. These codes related to specific examples of UBTE’s understanding of their work (e.g. ‘teaching’, ‘doing research’, ‘practicum supervision’) as well as the reasons for working in this way (e.g. ‘teaching demand’, ‘research interests’). After that, cross-case analysis was conducted to iteratively compare the similarities and differences among descriptive codes and combine similar codes into broader categories about UBTE identity perceptions (e.g. ‘member of organisation’, ‘role model’, ‘knowledge transmitters’, ‘broker’) and relevant reasons (e.g. ‘working context’, ‘role definition’, ‘professional experience’). Finally, identifying and naming themes were proceeded by continually comparing the relationships between each category, and synthesising core categories into eight themes that capture the main identity categories of being a Chinese UBTE (e.g. ‘teacher of teacher’, ‘researcher’, ‘collaborator’). Guided by the research questions and purpose, specific descriptions were developed for each theme (i.e. a specific aspect of UBTE professional identity). Co-authors were involved in each phase to check and test codes, categories, and themes at regular meetings. All analysis was conducted with NVIVO 12.

In thematic analysis, the frequency of a category appearing is not important. If something is said often by participants, that does not tell us that it has more significance in answering the research question. However, this study presents the frequencies with which the themes occurred for two reasons: first, as an additional information source for the reader about the nature of these identity conceptions. As little is known about the multi-part nature of UBTE professional identity, this early exploration describes what UBTEs said and gives readers an idea of how prevalent that idea was in this data, to build a picture of how frequently UBTEs have multiple parts of their professional identity (Maxwell 2010). Additionally, the frequencies help identify possible patterns based on context, making it easier to compare data from the provincial normal universities and first-class normal universities (Neale, Miller, and West 2014). The frequencies provided in the results section below are intended to add to the picture provided by the themes from participants’ interviews, rather than to validate them.

Results

Overall, eight themes emerged from the thematic analysis, presenting several aspects of UBTE professional identity: teacher in a higher education institution; researcher; teacher of teachers; teacher of tradition; collaborator; coach; questioner; and doctoral student. Identities being discussed are fluid and interrelated. More than one might be present in a particular UBTE, together forming a picture of the key aspects of UBTE professional identity for UBTEs in this group. In this section, each theme (i.e. one aspect of UBTE professional identity) is described, with examples from interviews illustrating key points. Points of comparison between the two university types are highlighted.

Teacher in a higher education institution

Nearly all participants viewed themselves as ‘university teachers’, because most interviewees across both universities experienced a similar transition from doctoral students to university lecturers. Participants tended to identify their institutional identity as their fundamental identity; before seeing themselves as teacher educators in particular, they saw themselves as members of HEI where they worked.

Take T1TE2 as an example. She recalled how she initially suffered from inner fear about external expectations and recounted slowly embracing a new identity:

I continually explored the status of becoming a university teacher in the first three years. At that time, I needed to constantly show up in front of students due to insecurity, or prove my existence and affiliation with this institution. I felt that as long as I stepped onto the podium, I could truly become a teacher… (T1TE2)

In terms of what it means to be a teacher in HEI, participants from both types of universities highlighted that this identity is related to diverse types of teaching with different student populations, such as undergraduate or master students in education. Although interviewees recognised the importance of teaching and established a ‘university teacher’ identity, they were unclear about the different nature of teaching in teacher education programmes compared with teaching in schools or other subject areas. P4TE1 described her early confusion with her teacher education work:

I thought I was a university teacher at the beginning when someone asked what you are doing or where you work … I did not have precise positioning for my work. (P4TE1)

Another characteristic of being a teacher in HEI, common in both university types, is taking on management roles as an ‘academic citizen’, such as ‘counsellor’, ‘head-teacher’, ‘manager’, ‘program designer’, ‘coordinator’, and ‘dean’, who undertakes organisational assignments, conducts administrative work, and facilitates department development. Participants formed this identity while working on institutional policies (P3TE3) and designing and running programs (T4TE4).

Overall, being a teacher in HEI as a part of professional identity seemed to be attached to being a teacher in a particular institution, rather than being a teacher educator. Chinese UBTEs in this study saw themselves as university-level teachers, reinforced by doing institutional administration work, teaching different groups of students with different aims and not really understanding what it meant to be a teacher educator in a university.

Researcher

Chinese UBTEs saw themselves as a ‘researcher’ who conducts research to meet academic demands, solves frontline problems, and develops insights into teacher education. Participants believed that teacher educators should not just be instructors who transmit knowledge and skills but also study and reflect on teaching and learning. For instance, P4TE5 explained how research made the difference between being UBTEs and being schoolteachers:

Theoretical thinking is the most significant difference between university teachers and schoolteachers. UBTEs should be good at reflection rather than simply accumulating experience. (P4TE5)

Participants saw the creation of new knowledge as part of the UBTE role, including the role of self-study and reflection in creating knowledge about teacher education. This aspect distinguished them from a schoolteacher or instructor who only consumes knowledge and teaches existing knowledge, rather than producing new knowledge. A similar view was shared by P1TE1, who elaborated that research, for UBTEs, is one of the most critical duties and acts as a pathway from ‘instructor’ to expert:

Teaching well is not enough to become a good teacher or an expert. The core difference between a teacher who only teaches textbook knowledge and an expert is doing research. If teachers always teach without any reflection, then they, without any doubt, will be mere ‘jiao shu jiang’ (instructors). Reflection will gradually support growth into an expert. Therefore, research, for our teacher educators, is critical. (P1TE1)

In both university types, researcher identity was formed in response to external research expectations. Research demands were driven by job requirements and performance pressure from tenure, annual assessment, and career promotion, which required participants to produce research no matter where they worked. For instance, T2TE1 explained she viewed herself as a researcher because most of her time was allocated to research and fulfilling promotion demands. Otherwise, she could not ‘supervise postgraduates and apply for [higher-level] grants’ without an [associate professor] title.

Although research expectations seemed to influence researcher identity, distinct organisational missions, values, and orientations meant that participants became researchers differently across workplaces. Provincial normal universities, characterised as teaching-oriented, aim to prepare qualified teachers in teaching, while research-oriented first-class normal universities expect to cultivate teachers as researchers. This distinction in institutional weighting on teaching and research as well as teacher preparation goals seemed to affect participants’ perceptions of the purpose of being a researcher.

Participants from provincial normal universities tended to construct themselves as ‘practical researchers’ who emphasised the practical value of research. They argued that their primary mission was to prepare future teachers for local schools. Thus, the need to inform teaching encouraged them to engage in research and embrace researcher identity (e.g. P1TE1, P3TE1, P4TE1). Preparing teachers for future education and the new technological revolution encouraged UBTEs to accept researcher identity, conduct research, and teach prospective teachers to do research (P2TE1). Similarly, P5TE1 argued that ‘teaching can be vivid with the combination of teaching with research’. As he elaborated:

UBTEs should be researchers. I don’t think contemporary students will learn something valuable from teachers as a transfer station of knowledge, since the amount of information students can receive today is enormous. They can find all the knowledge online. Also, I want to demonstrate how to study their teaching and subjects when they become teachers. (P5TE1)

In first-class normal universities, researcher identity, characterised as ‘research-focused’, was often linked to a passion for research, a sense of achievement, and the pursuit of academic goals. Half of the participants in these universities mentioned passion for research as part of their UBTE identities. T2TE1 expressed how she grew to like research as time passed, and her researcher identity was an outcome of both external factors and inner love. For the UBTEs in the first-class normal universities, succeeding in research can bring a considerable sense of fulfilment, acting as a catalyst for researcher identity formation, as in the following statement:

Research is the most crucial part of me. I feel a strong sense of achievement when I figure out a specific research question, or my paper is revised to a satisfying level, published, and then inspires others. That is the happiest time for me. (T4TE3)

‘Research-focused’ identity was also reflected by participants’ commitment to the broader teacher education community. For example, T1TE2 was motivated to be a researcher because of the limited discourse and significant gaps in education between China and developed countries. Hence, she wanted to ‘first learn western modes, then integrate with our Chinese styles, surpass the original one, and dominate our discourse systems’. T2TE1 and T2TE4 also considered themselves researchers with the aim to ‘guide future academic development and solve social problems’. T4TE3 mentioned his ambition to be a ‘facilitator’ of global dialogue between western and Chinese academia:

I deliberately introduce classic literature, discussions, and models to my students and colleagues, summarise Chinese experience into the concept through publications and bring it to the international community. Therefore, I am a facilitator of a global dialogue in teacher education. (T4TE3)

UBTEs discussed research-related parts of their professional identity, which seemed to differ by university type. UBTEs from provincial normal universities highlighted the practical value of research in informing teaching and supervision. UBTEs from first-class normal universities, however, were satisfying their curiosity and contributing to an international research community.

Teacher of teachers

‘Teacher educator’ was a relatively new term for most participants, who held a vague understanding of who teacher educators were and regarded ‘teacher educator’ as an ‘imported concept’. Most learned this term by reading literature conducted in international contexts and seldom used it to describe their identities. However, identity as a ‘teacher of teachers’ could be seen, especially when participants were asked how they perceive their work and the differences between their functions and the roles of schoolteachers or other academics.

Specifically, participants stressed the ‘teacher of teachers’ identity was affected by their sense of mission, beliefs, and responsibilities (e.g. P3TE5, T1TE2), passion for teaching (e.g. P3TE1, T2TE5, T4TE4), or professional practice (e.g. P3TE2, T4TE2, T4TE3). The ‘teacher of teachers’ identity manifested in multiple ways amongst these participants.

Across both types of universities, participants indicated that teaching the next generation of teachers with essential knowledge, skills, and professionalism was the most critical element of their identity (e.g. P1TE2, P4TE1, T1TE2). This suggested that UBTEs’ fundamental perception of their primary responsibilities and mission was relatively similar no matter where they worked, despite the abovementioned differences. For instance, P1TE1 underlined that a ‘teachers of teachers’ should be better in teaching skills, ability, and morality than university lecturers in other disciplines, since ‘the students we teach will become teachers, and further inspire pupils in the long run’. Also, T5TE1 mentioned that ‘teachers of teachers’ were different from generic university teachers, who just focused on their teaching and research and neglected students’ future employment. P4TE2, a veteran UBTE, exemplified this responsibility:

I have been doing this [teacher education] for more than 30 years. Our goal is to provide qualified teachers for compulsory education, make them enter and be competent for the profession, and finally be good teachers. (P4TE2)

‘Role model’ was also commonly used by participants across universities to describe their identity in pedagogical modelling (teaching professional expertise) and moral modelling (demonstrating what a good teacher should be like ethically and morally). One obvious case of pedagogical modelling is reflected in the following quote:

I am a teacher-of-teachers, who presents underlying ideas and strategies of teaching methods, such as the approach we use, how we use it, and why. Because students will enter the teaching profession in the future, our teaching should be their scaffold, contributing to their practice. (T4TE2)

Moral modelling was also seen as part of being a ‘role model’. A moral model, according to P3TE2, has a great impact on students’ growth and could avoid any ‘deviations in the teaching philosophy’. Similarly, P2TE2 explained that ‘teacher of teachers’ had a role in developing key teacher qualities in their students:

I think that teachers of teachers are reflected in morality and personal pursuit. The key for students to be a good teacher is not their grades or skills but whether they have the qualities that a good teacher should possess, alongside the strong willpower and desire to be a good teacher, which needs us to inspire and enlighten. (P2TE2)

Although ‘teacher educator’ was regarded as a new term in the Chinese context, participants recognised their ‘teacher of teachers’ identity when identifying that they teach prospective teachers rather than other professionals. It meant that their work had particular characteristics that other university teachers’ work did not have, particularly their responsibilities as role models in pedagogy and morality.

Teacher of tradition

‘Teacher of tradition’ identity was expressed across both types of universities. It can be distinguished from the ‘teacher of teachers’ and ‘teacher in a higher education institution’ identities by its connection with being an educator in the Chinese context. It indicates that participants were affected greatly by Confucian culture, and expected to be good teachers as depicted in Chinese tradition, norms, and culture, and further, pass on the qualities that good teachers should have to their students. For instance, P4TE3 clarified their view of teachers’ role in passing on cultural imperatives:

Both university teachers and schoolteachers conduct their activities mainly for educational purposes, which is related to their identity as teachers. So, what is a teacher? They should bring truth, goodness, beauty, and especially the better parts of culture to the younger generation through subjective construction, equal dialogue, and exemplary behaviours, so that civilisation can continue and evolve and society becomes better. The image of teachers is a bit like Prometheus – the fire thief. They preserve and pass on the flame of civilisation of our community and communicate with other torches, exchanging culture. (P4TE3)

The ‘teacher of tradition’ identity embodied traditional characteristics of Confucian culture and tradition, indicating that traditional teacher images and social norms seemed to reproduce in participants’ identities. The Confucian tradition’s influence manifested in UBTEs’ responses in three ways: knowledge-focused teaching and learning, the spirit of selfless dedication, and close and pastoral teacher-student relationships.

A famous piece of Chinese literature has described that a good teacher can ‘propagate the doctrine, impart professional expertise, and resolve doubts’ (师者，所以传道授业解惑也). Following this tradition, participants identified themselves as ‘knowledge transmitters’, who are highly learned and wise, and equip future teachers with essential expertise (e.g. P1TE1, P3TE1, P5TE1, P5TE2). T4TE3, who completed his doctorate and worked as a UBTE in the US, also mentioned how he encountered a culture shock in role expectations between his understanding of an ideal UBTE and what Chinese preservice teachers wanted him to be. Specifically, he tried to guide students with open discussion and communication, but students preferred him to transmit the knowledge-oriented ‘take-home message’:

After returning to China, I found that my students were sometimes confused and wanted me to point out essential concepts, literature, and scholars, which I did not do in the US. So, I gradually changed my lecture style based on their suggestions. (T4TE3)

Moreover, being good teachers who are responsible, selfless, and committed to their students and work were identities constructed by participants in both types of universities, with references to ‘responsibilities’, ‘beliefs’, ‘conscience’, ‘sacrifice’, and ‘sense of mission’ (e.g. P1TE2, P4TE2, T4TE1). These traditions and norms guided them, especially when they suffered from conflicts between personal expectations of being a good teacher and organisational expectations of being research active, as the below statement indicates:

I would like to take more time to research. Nevertheless, as a good teacher, having research output is not enough. I should have a positive impact on students, so I am still happy to devote more time to my students, even with colossal research pressure. (T1TE2)

‘Rapport with students’ was the third manifestation of Confucian influence on UBTEs. They regarded offering professional assistance and emotional and pastoral care to students as a part of their work, viewing themselves as ‘friends’ and ‘parents’. For instance, T1TE1 preferred to create a relaxing classroom atmosphere and keep in touch with students. Additionally, T4TE1 referenced the traditional saying ‘a teacher for a day is a father for a lifetime’ (一日为师, 终身为父), indicating that a teacher should be responsible and care for their students as they treat their children:

I felt like their father. In ancient societies, the teacher-student relationship was identical to the father-son relationship. (T4TE1)

The ‘teacher of tradition’ identity was based on Chinese Confucian culture and was particular to Chinese UBTEs. Specifically, indigenous conceptions of teaching and learning may influence how the ‘teacher of tradition’ identity is formed.

Collaborator

Interviewees viewed themselves as preservice and in-service teachers’ collaborators, highlighting reciprocal relations between UBTEs and their students. For instance, P1TE1 shared his understanding of interpersonal relationships, saying ‘the relationships between teachers and students, university teachers and schoolteachers, or university and government departments are often collaborative. We help others and achieve ourselves simultaneously’.

Some UBTEs saw themselves as collaborators because they needed to compensate for their experience and knowledge deficits. Academic pathway UBTEs sought schoolteacher collaboration to help increase their credibility with preservice teachers and the teaching profession. Although it is common for Chinese UBTEs to be academics and not classroom teachers, their credibility is still questioned by preservice teachers and schools. For instance, T2TE7 recalled how he suffered from difficulties in teaching practice-based courses, and transforming the theory he learned into professional practice. UBTEs without K-12 teaching experience cannot convince their students and school mentors with sound stories and evidence drawn from practice (e.g. T1TE1, T3TE2, T4TE2). Some UBTEs saw themselves as collaborators, needing to learn from students and schoolteachers (e.g. P5TE2, T3TE2), and do research with them (e.g. T5TE1).

Provincial normal universities’ UBTEs gave particular attention to their collaborations with preservice teachers. They felt closely linked to their preservice teachers as fellow teachers, which opened them to learning from preservice teachers. These UBTEs spent much time in schools, supervising preservice teachers in practice. This enhanced their sense of connection to, and professional collaboration with, preservice teachers. For example:

I am a collaborator with students. The relationship between students and us is a kind of cooperation. We promote students’ development, and students, in turn, make us better. (P1TE1)

Participants from first-class normal universities seemed to pay more attention to brokering relationships with schools and schoolteachers, emphasising collaboration with schoolteachers in teacher professional development programs, research projects, and hybrid spaces between schools and universities. T2TE1, for instance, described herself as a ‘contactor’ or ‘bridge’ in the school-university partnership. Similarly, T2TE6 mentioned her ‘facilitator’ role in stimulating the engagement and creativity of schoolteachers in teamwork.

Although participants from both university types identified a collaborator identity, there was a difference in the meaning and purpose of collaboration across university types. For provincial normal university participants, they highlighted reciprocal relationships with preservice teachers, echoing their focus on teaching, while for first-class normal university participants, it was centred on bridging between university and schools, often around research projects.

Coach not gatekeeper

The metaphor of ‘gatekeeper’ to the teaching profession, particularly in professional ethics and morality, was mentioned by only three participants (P2TE1, P4TE1, T1TE1). More commonly, participants from both university types used metaphors of ‘coaches’ or ‘guides’, rather than keepers of standards or gatekeepers to the teaching profession to describe their identity with respect to developing competence in preservice teachers. Although their institutions have the power to decide if preservice teachers are good enough to be teachers, UBTEs positioned themselves alongside the students in their descriptions of professional identity. A common metaphor was soccer. UBTEs used this sporting analogy to describe teacher preparation as a football competition. Compared to a ‘defender’ who guards against students, they position themselves as a ‘coach’, who passes on professional knowledge and skills to their players (i.e. preservice teachers), accompanies them to practice playing ‘football’ and improve practical competence in real competition (i.e. school settings), and finally guides them to grow to be qualified ‘footballers’ and ‘shoot’ at the goal of the teaching profession one day (e.g. P2TE2, P4TE2, T2TE2, T2TE6). By this, they meant that students were well prepared to find work in kindergartens or schools. Other recurring metaphors used by UBTEs that seem to align with helping and supporting, rather than judging, were ‘crutch’, ‘scaffold’, ‘guide’, and ‘lighthouse’. While UBTEs may mean different things by these terms, their recurrence in the interviews across contexts suggested that a position as a supporter, not an arbiter of competence, was taken up by participants.

Some also explicitly rejected gatekeeping, explaining that gatekeeping belonged elsewhere in the system: with the local educational bureau, teacher certificate organiser, and school principals. T2TE5 explained that ‘whether or not the school will ultimately hire students depends on student quality’. Similarly, T2TE2 elaborated that ‘gatekeeper’ was not a suitable identity for them, since their student quality was far better than the standard criteria for a teacher:

We teach according to the curriculum norms, professional standards, beliefs, knowledge, and competencies, and move forward with the educational ideal. Thus, our students are basically above par. (T2TE2)

The ‘coaching’ identity was often aligned with practicum supervision. There were different attitudes to this part of UBTEs’ work across university types. In provincial normal universities, practicum supervision was viewed as an essential part of preparing preservice teachers, and effective supervision was seen as an important indicator of UBTEs’ performance. UBTEs were required to visit practicum schools regularly and supervise and comment on preservice teachers’ professional practice. These activities seemed to support the development of a coach-type, supportive identity. P2TE1 developed himself as an ‘active participant’ in practicum because he believed in the benefits of practicum for the preservice teachers. Similarly, P1TE1’s awareness of collaborating within and outside the ‘ivory tower’ was clear, stating, ‘I put practicum coach in an important position, making schools accept our students and support our teaching’.

However, participants from first-class normal universities put less weight on practicum, which seemed to reduce viewing themselves as a ‘coach’. Few UBTEs identified themselves as practicum supervisors, especially experienced UBTEs with more than six years teaching experience in university. These UBTEs had usually become associate professors and engaged more in research and less in practicum supervision. They disliked practicum due to its time-consuming nature, and tended to avoid this responsibility. As T2TE1 and T2TE5 stated, ‘I do not want to visit practicum. It takes a lot of time and energy. I am very sorry for students if I cannot do it well’ or ‘practicum is not our business most of the time. We [experienced UBTEs] have taken a backseat and let younger teachers participate in the practicum’.

Rather than taking up a gatekeeper role in policing teachers’ quality, most participants saw themselves as coaches of their students. UBTEs in provincial normal universities seemed to associate their coach identity with practicum supervision, and saw practicum as a key part of their work and coaching as important to their professional identity. Few in first-class normal universities identified as coaches; they seldom undertook practicum supervision.

Questioner

Being someone who actively participates in critically discussing, reflecting, and questioning educational concepts, practices, and systems was part of some UBTEs’ professional identity. Participants in first-class normal universities mentioned the importance of asking questions through reflection to inform professional learning, improve research ability, promote educational equity and quality, and deal with educational issues. T3TE1 viewed himself as a ‘critical reflector’ and practised this identity through his academic publications to discuss and draw attention to specific education issues in theories or practices. Facing existing educational problems and challenges, such as corporal punishment, assessment and outcome-oriented discourse, T2TE3 was aware of the influence of culture, power and tradition in education. In response, his UBTE identity included critic, reflector, and advisor for modern education. He saw part of his role as calling for change to these problematic educational practices, and intended to raise questions about them through his scholarship and professional practice. Similar perceptions were shared by P4TE1, who stated that reflecting critically allowed her to raise questions about teacher preparation goals, education reforms and her teacher education practice. She also stressed that higher teacher quality and capacity, especially reflective awareness and ability, were needed in a rapidly changing world:

As times change, what students need and their core literacy as future teachers are changing. We, as UBTEs, must be critical and reflective, so that we facilitate preservice teachers’ growth and continually improve curriculum and practicum instruction. (P4TE1)

Being a questioner is seen by some UBTEs as part of professional identity, which seems to arise from their roles as researchers and advisors and their concern about the future. This identity differs from others in the data because it is about critiquing the status quo and asking questions about wider educational issues. Through their teaching and research, these UBTEs hope to contribute to change over time by asking and answering questions about education broadly.

Doctoral student

Following academic pathways, Chinese UBTEs usually graduate with higher degrees before entering higher education teaching. However, some participants in this study still connected with a doctoral student identity. Having a doctoral degree confers status and advantages, so being a doctoral student was a significant part of their journey to UBTE status. For instance, T4TE4 recalled that she had huge advantages because only a few UBTEs held doctorates when she qualified. Meanwhile, others’ positive evaluations of her academic ability and achievement enhanced her doctoral student identity during the first three years of her career.

Additionally, transitioning from doctoral students to UBTEs is sometimes challenging, with changes in expectations and demands as they move to be independent scholars and teachers rather than students. This had consequences for how they saw themselves as teachers:

When I was a student, my supervisor tolerated my mistakes. After I became his colleague, no one treated me as a student anymore. I had to be responsible for my actions, although I often think I am subconsciously a student. (T3TE2)

This unfamiliarity with their new role as teacher educators made participants choose to hold their ‘doctoral student’ identity even after they were appointed as lecturers. As T2TE2 explained, he is ‘both a teacher and a student’ since this transition is a long-term learning process:

I was not familiar with my new role at the beginning. I did not get into the state and know what I would do. I felt like a teaching assistant. Just watched and followed how other lecturers taught and learnt how to prepare for my courses. I slowly adapt to it every day in my work. (T2TE2)

Moving from doctoral students to scholars and teachers is an important transition when UBTE preparation is largely through academic pathways. It is the equivalent of the shift from schoolteachers to UBTEs in practitioner pathways. This identity may arise from the feeling that holding a doctorate conveys status in the research-oriented higher education context, or from the difficulties in transitioning from being students to independent colleagues, scholars and educators.

Discussion and implications

The interviews with 34 UBTEs suggested that UBTE professional identity comprises many parts, which are closely linked to the types of work UBTEs are asked to do in different settings. In line with previous studies of UBTEs grown in the practitioner pathway (Swennen, Volman, and van Essen 2008; Tryggvason 2012), Chinese UBTEs also constructed identities as teachers in HEI, researchers, teachers of teachers, collaborators, and coaches, but how these identities are held and understood differed from previous findings. First, forming a teacher in HEI identity resonates with previous studies (e.g. Swennen, Volman, and van Essen 2008), but this identity establishment is much easier for academically-prepared UBTEs than those who were schoolteachers before (Gong, Young, and MacPhail 2021). Chinese UBTEs first adapted to this institutional identity because institutional authority gave them a sense of security and credibility. In studies of practitioner pathway UBTEs, transitioning from schools to universities was tough; they needed to develop new pedagogy, work with adult learners, and adapt to new institutional requirements that underlined research and scholarship (Williams and Ritter 2010; Griffiths, Thompson, and Hryniewicz 2014).

Second, almost everyone had a PhD degree and systematic research training, which explains why participants identified themselves as researchers. Both types of universities underscored research productivity and output by explicit and implicit means, such as probationary contracts, workload, performance assessment, tenure, career promotion, and ‘publish or perish culture’ (Yuan 2019), which led participants to develop a solid researcher identity. This result contrasts with prior research that establishing a researcher identity was challenging for UBTEs transitioning from schoolteachers to UBTEs (Griffiths, Thompson, and Hryniewicz 2010). They encountered a sense of insecurity, felt de-skilled, and questioned their research ability due to limited research experience, lack of institutional support and agency, and performance pressure (Murray, Czerniawski, and Barber 2011; Hökkä, Eteläpelto, and Rasku-Puttonen 2012).

The ‘teacher of teachers’ identity reported by participants confirmes that teaching the next generation of teachers and role modelling are part of UBTE main tasks, which aligns with previous studies (Lunenberg, Dengerink, and Korthagen 2014; Ellis et al. 2014). ‘Teacher of teachers’ might mean ‘teacher educator’ in other jurisdictions; however, Chinese UBTEs saw this as an imported idea. Participants were committed to teachers, teaching and education, and felt responsible for preparing teachers but had not adopted the ‘teacher educators’ label. Overall, being a teacher of teachers may be a widely shared identity across different contexts with UBTEs from different pathways. This might seem logical, as this is the task they are doing. Both the academic pathway UBTEs in this study and practitioner pathway UBTEs in other studies (Harrison and Mckeon 2010; Yuan 2016; Khan 2011) explain this identity by conveying respect for teaching as a profession; they are very connected to teachers and teaching as the end goal of their work (rather than, for example, teaching about psychology for its own sake).

Fourth, being a collaborator also echoes earlier studies (Lunenberg, Dengerink, and Korthagen 2014; Harrison and Mckeon 2010). However, Chinese UBTEs formed this identity for different reasons. In contrast to previous participants who were familiar with school settings and gained credibility from school partners, participants in this study had little experience in school settings. Consequently, their credibility was more likely to be questioned by students and schoolteachers. The collaborator identity seemed to be part of building credibility with practitioners.

Fifth, this study partially confirms the work of Lunenberg, Dengerink, and Korthagen (2014) about coach identity but reveals different perceptions about the gatekeeper role. Although the gatekeeper identity was mentioned, many participants rejected it and instead saw themselves as coaches, with explanations that deciding who can step into the teaching profession, the gatekeeper role, belongs to other professionals based on the Chinese licensure and employment system. The ‘gate’ is not placed at the end of teacher education. UBTEs instead played the coach role, equipping preservice teachers with professional expertise and attempting to prepare teachers to a level far greater than the appointment standard. Hence, they tended to identify themselves as a ‘coach’ rather than a ‘gatekeeper’.

Three identities found in this study may reflect the particular circumstances of Chinese UBTEs in academic pathways. First, the ‘teacher of tradition’ identity seems to arise from the Chinese context. Abundant ancient poems and literature in China depict teachers as wise and knowledgeable in teaching content and responding efficiently to students’ questions. Meanwhile, a good teacher is likened to a ‘silkworm’ exhausting its silk until death, or a ‘candle’ burning itself out to give light, meaning that teachers should have a spirit of sacrifice and a solid commitment to students. Rapport with students is also highlighted. Overall, Confucian culture provides an image of a good teacher, who is erudite, highly learned, generous, humanitarian, devoted, and establishes a good rapport with students, influencing Chinese UBTEs to form a teacher identity with the above qualities. Second, being a ‘doctoral student’ relates to Chinese UBTEs’ preparation through academic pathways. The doctoral experience laid UBTEs’ research foundation and brought them confidence in their competitive workplaces. They were familiar with the HEI rather than with schools, leading them to identify with their previous role in the institution, that of a doctoral student. The questioner identity arises from a desire to be part of change, or of solving educational problems through UBTEs’ work as teachers and researchers. With their knowledge and perspectives, these UBTEs sought to contribute to the wider education system.

Workplaces seemed to make a difference in the reported identities of UBTEs. These findings accord with previous findings that the institutional environment with varied workloads and organisational positionings shapes UBTEs’ professional identity (Menter 2011). Under the subtle impact of institutional climate, participants from provincial normal universities had a solid commitment to students and the local community, which guided them to value practicum supervision, engage with preservice teachers and practically-focused research activities. However, their counterparts in first-class normal universities tended to be research-active and display higher and wider visions of their work as a benefit to national and international communities and academia. These orientations explained why participants differed in identity perceptions as researchers, collaborators, coaches, questioners, and doctoral students across university types. Regarding researcher identity, those from first-class normal universities identified themselves as ‘research-focused’ with solid intrinsic motivations to satisfy research interests, establish themselves in a specific field, and benefit a broader community (Harrison and Mckeon 2010). However, their counterparts in provincial normal universities, characterised as ‘practical researchers’, preferred practical research to inform teaching and help preservice teachers effectively transition from instructors to experts (McGregor et al. 2010). Regarding collaborator or coach identity, participants in provincial normal universities stressed practicum supervision as key. They aspired to influence and develop students’ potential via open discussions, collaborative communications, and fieldwork, and viewed themselves as collaborators or coaches. Those in first-class normal universities seldom viewed themselves as practicum supervisors, because it conflicted with their time allocation and work priorities as active researchers. They tended to develop as questioners or celebrated their past identity as doctoral students, which better matched their institutional orientations and brought them credibility and legitimacy. As discussed above, most reported identities were mentioned by participants from both university types. As noted, some identities seemed to be slightly different in the two contexts, and there were key points around research and practicum in particular, where workplaces seemed to play a role in the identities taken up by UBTEs.

For three key identities, all centred on teaching; the institutional environment did not seem to be an influence: teachers in HEI, teachers of teachers, and teacher of tradition. Despite being in different university types, participants experienced similar transitions from doctoral students to university lecturers, leading to commonalities in their reported identities. UBTEs from both university types had similar constructions for ‘teachers in higher education institutions’, which were reported as being dominant early in their careers. Additionally, a ‘teacher of teachers’ identity had similar meanings for both groups. The mission to nurture the next generation of teachers and be role models seemed to be determined by the unique nature and caring culture of teacher education as an activity, rather than the place where UBTEs worked. Similarly, Confucian culture and tradition affected what it means to be an educator in the Chinese context. These ideas seemed to underpin a consensus between both groups about the ‘teacher of tradition’ identity.

In considering the current findings, it is important to consider the study’s limitations. While 34 participants is a reasonable number for an interview study, they cannot be taken to represent all Chinese UBTEs’ views. The patterns and ideas found in this study were the outcomes of a thematic analysis, carefully conducted, but subject to researcher preconceptions or biases. The co-authors come from two jurisdictions, providing insider and outsider views on the data, but it is important to remain open to other interpretations when considering these findings.

If teacher educators are key to a quality teaching force (White et al. 2020), then how they perceive themselves as teacher educators influences the quality of teacher education programmes and their graduates. This study suggests that different pathways to being a UBTE bring different identity patterns and challenges. Additionally, this study highlights the impact of context on UBTE’s identity: both the institutional context and the broader national and cultural milieu in which teacher education occurs are implicated in the Chinese UBTE’s views of themselves and their work. For people who are hiring UBTEs, or for policymakers and teacher education programme designers, this study has several implications. First, the pathway to being a UBTE leads to different identity challenges and professional learning and induction needs. Academically-qualified UBTEs without experience as schoolteachers may need explicit support to make an effective transition into UBTE work, including ways to build collaborations with schools and schoolteachers. Second, the type of work valued by the institution seems to shape UBTE’s views of themselves, so institutions that wish to shift their practice in teacher education, perhaps towards closer liaison with schools, need to attend to how they convey messages to UBTEs through contracts, promotions and giving time for different tasks. Teaching and teacher education seems to have a moral and ethical dimension and an emotional component. Even in HEIs, teaching appears to be associated with sacrifice, virtue, caring, and connection. This insight might help HEIs better understand UBTE work within the academy and shape teacher education in ways that allow connections to be made and teaching to be modelled well. Furthermore, UBTEs’ identities comprise elements that might be particular to UBTE work, no matter where they are, and elements that are particular to the jurisdiction they work in and the type of institution they work for. This insight could help institutions design roles and professional learning for UBTEs to help them develop effective practices in preparing new teachers and find ways to motivate or incentivise elements of UBTEs’ work. Knowing that some things seem to be characteristic of teacher education across contexts shifts the conversation from individual preferences about teaching or research, to situating choices about approaches in a wider understanding of why teacher education works the way it does. Finally, there are implications of the differences between university types for the learning experience of preservice teachers. Students at different types of normal universities have UBTEs who see themselves and their tasks differently. This likely results in different approaches to teaching, content selection and support by the UBTEs, impacting what is learned and how it is learned. Further work is needed to understand how different UBTE identities and ways of working might impact preservice teachers as they move into their careers in kindergartens or schools.

Conclusion

This study unpacks how 34 UBTEs, from 11 HEIs in China, perceive their professional identiy and reveals similarities and differences in their identity perceptions across two types of universities. These findings are beneficial to understand professional lives and identity perceptions of academically-prepared UBTEs, in China. While further research is needed to establish which of these identity perceptions might apply elsewhere, these findings may also relate to other academcially-prepared UBTEs, thereby giving voice to this under-researched group in teacher education, letting them be seen, receive more attention, and claim their legitimate membership in the teacher education community. The seemingly core and consistent elements of UBTE professional identity that were identified in the literature on schoolteacher preparation for UBTE work and in this study could be a starting point for international discourse about teacher educators and their work, to work on global issues (e.g. where the next generation of teacher educators will come from, teaching-research challenges) collaboratively. Finally, UBTE perceptions of their identity will impact their work with future teachers, shaping their knowledge and practice, as well as impacting how teacher education programmes function. There seem to be aspects of teacher educator identity that go beyond being a teacher in a higher education institution, and these aspects are the ones that are particularly related to preservice teacher development as teachers: passing on teaching traditions, coaching, supervising practice and working in the middle of the research-practice nexus for example. Chinese education policymakers could consider using the term teacher educator to signal these differences, guide organisational practices in recruitment, promotion and professional learning, and encourage further research into UBTE work to understand and support this specialised occupational group.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This research is supported by the China Scholarship Council [202008250009]

Notes on contributors

Jingjing Liang

Jingjing Liang ([email protected]) is a doctoral student in the Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Auckland. Her research interests are teacher education and higher education.

Fiona Ell

Fiona Ell is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Auckland. Her research interests include teacher education and mathematics education.

Kane Meissel

Kane Meissel is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Auckland. Kane’s research focuses on the use of advanced quantitative methodologies to identify and reduce educational disparities, as well as promote equity and social justice for traditionally marginalised learners.