Is teaching and learning in Chinese higher education classrooms internationalized? Perspectives from international students in China

ABSTRACT

While China has emerged as a leading host country for international students, it reinforces its determination to build a global knowledge system by integrating Chinese and Western epistemological traditions in teaching and learning to promote epistemic justice. The study aims to explore international students’ challenges to current approaches to teaching and learning in Chinese higher education institutions in relation to the internationalization of curriculum. The study employed a qualitative exploratory design and collected data using semi-structured interviews with 30 international students at two prestigious Chinese universities. Based on the thematic analysis, the results highlight that international students struggle with issues such as Chinese language-dominated instruction, lack of discussion and autonomy in the classroom, limited engagement with domestic (Chinese) students and insufficient practical or hands-on learning opportunities. These findings are analysed against common standards required for the internationalization of teaching and learning. These findings have implications for classroom pedagogy in higher education institutions in China to sustain the interest of international students.

KEYWORDS:

• Teaching and learning
• higher education
• international students
• China

Introduction

The internationalization of higher education aims to understand individuals and cultures better, build a knowledge base, and equip students with values, attitudes and competencies to thrive in a globalized world (Harrison, 2015). However, a consensus on the definition of internationalization is either missing or evolving based on the exclusive agenda of the nation. Critiques have argued that the broad internationalization of higher education which is achieved through students, faculty, researchers and academic mobility, establishing links between international programmes and agencies, does not necessarily equip students with intercultural skills or global understanding (Knight, 2006). Leask (2012) asserts that the internationalization of curriculum is truly a way to achieve the internationalization of higher education. According to her, ‘the incorporation of international, intercultural, and/or global dimensions into the content of the curriculum as well as the learning outcomes, assessment tasks, teaching methods, and support services of a program of study’ (Leask, 2009, p. 209) represent a holistic approach to internationalization. While this should be the primary objective of institutions of higher education that strive to become internationalized, how it is achieved largely depends on the national agenda, institutional policies, disciplines and other contextual factors (Enders, 2004).

With China’s growing international student population, studies on students’ adaptation and acculturation are common (Qi & Li, 2009; Wen et al., 2014); however, studies focused on pedagogical challenges from an internationalization of curriculum lens, specific to teaching and learning practices (Leask, 2009, 2015) are scarce. Hence, the goal of this paper is to address the gaps in the literature on understanding the challenges international students face relating to their learning and teaching activities in Chinese universities and to understand if they align with an international curriculum. The focal research question of this paper is: ‘What are the teaching and learning challenges faced by international students enrolled at two prestigious universities in China?’

Internationalization of higher education in China

In recent years, the expansion of higher education in China has emerged as a new trend in the international higher education market. In 2018, the Chinese Ministry of Education reported a total of 492,185 international students present in China. These students came from 196 countries, pursuing their studies in 1004 universities. The majority came from Asia (59.95%), followed by Africa (16.57%), Europe (14.96%), America (7.26%) and Oceania (1.27%) (Ministry of Education, 2019). The top 10 sending countries were South Korea, Thailand, Pakistan, India, the United States, Russia, Indonesia, Laos, Japan and Kazakhstan. Most of these students were enrolled in undergraduate programmes (Ministry of Education, 2019). Based on the latest statistics, there were 397,635 international students studying in China in 2019 (Yue et al., 2021). Among the non-English speaking top three study destinations, China experienced the highest growth rate in its international student population between 2018 and 2019, with a 12.8% increase as compared to Japan (11.0%) and Russia (7.8%) (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2021). This data indicates that China is becoming one of the leading destinations for international students in the world, with the number of international students doubling since 2008 (Qi, 2021).

The primary drivers of China’s internationalization of higher education thrust are economic and diplomatic aspirations for establishing global influence (Wei & Hu, 2018). For example, international students are expected to ‘become China’s future political and business partners’ (Wen et al., 2018, p. 205) who, along with global competencies, will acquire educational knowledge and values embedded in Chinese culture and traditions, thus contributing to ‘internationalization with Chinese characteristics’ (Guo, 2021 , p. 4) goal. As a result, this aspiration has shaped China’s higher education institutions’ (HEI) internationalization approach, which is primarily integrating Chinese curricula and Western epistemological contexts (Wu & Li, 2021).

This approach is laudable as it supports the propagation of decolonization of curriculum for international higher education in China and negates equating Internationalization with Westernization. Internationalization is often criticized for its propagation as westernization of education with a few scholars labelling it colonization (Rhoads & Hu, 2012). This approach promotes epistemic justice through the creation of a new body of knowledge with the amalgamation of global (international) and local (Indigenous Chinese) knowledge (Li & Yang, 2020). In summary, China’s internationalization approaches are embedded in the mobility of international faculty and students, the establishment of international research alliances, international branch campuses and adoption of international curricula rooted in the Chinese model of education.

Alignment: international curriculum and Chinese pedagogy

The international literature on Chinese pedagogy and curriculum is often criticized for ‘teacher-fronted, knowledge-dominated, and expository approach’ (Hu, 2005, p. 673). Therefore, an ambition of integrating global and local curricula may appear troublesome, especially for international students pursuing higher education in China. Lo and Pan (2021) also highlighted that traditional Chinese practices may appear contradictory to Western norms, values and practices in some areas of teaching; for example, international students commonly criticized Chinese teachers ‘for spending excessive time on lecturing and memorizing and giving little attention to stimulating students’ motivation for learning’ (Ding, 2016, p. 329).

According to Leask (2015), learning, teaching and assessment are at the core of the internationalization of the curriculum for students to gain global competencies effectively. It is through university teaching and learning methods that universities can engage international students to deliver their internationalization agenda. It offers programme and course learning outcomes embedded with global dimensions and emphasizes the acquisition of skills, such as communication, problem-solving, lifelong learning, teamwork, experiential learning, ethical practice and social responsibility, as key competencies for internationalized graduate capabilities. It is proposed that these can be achieved with carefully planned and effectively delivered learning activities. However, the traditional Chinese teaching and learning practices and demands of internationalization of the curriculum can create potential complexities and tension due to the classroom arrangements for international students in China. Ma and Wen (2018, p. 1187) argued that there are two types of class arrangements for international students in Chinese HEIs: (1) ‘Separation’ mode: International students are placed in separate classes from domestic students with special courses designed exclusively for international students in English, and (2) ‘Merging’ mode: International students are placed in mixed classes with Chinese students where content is taught in the Chinese language.

Studies in the past have investigated the experiences of international students utilizing the sociocultural and psychological approaches to study students’ adaptation and acculturation process. For example, Wen et al. (2014) investigated cross-cultural, campus life and communication-related challenges of international students studying in China. A few other studies on international students in China have focused on the social-cultural adjustment of students from specific countries like Korea (Qi & Li, 2009) and Japan (Hou, 2010). However, none of these investigations have focused on the pedagogical experiences of international students from an internationalization perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to explore international students’ challenges to current approaches to teaching and learning in Chinese HEI and analyse these using the components required for internationalization of the curriculum (Leask, 2015).

Methodology

A qualitative approach was adopted to explore the experiences of international students studying in Chinese universities. Exploratory qualitative research provides an understanding of how people perceive their actions and how they interpret their experiences in their own words (Silverman, 2006), and thus exploring research participants’ personal reflections and perceptions (Creswell, 2008) is possible with this approach.

Participants and sampling

Tsinghua University in Beijing and Wuhan University in Hubei Province are identified as top-tier universities as they are members of the national programmes such as 211 and 985. Hence, they were chosen for this study. In 2016, Wuhan University attracted more than 3500 international students, studying over 200 majors in 30 departments/research centres (Wuhan University, 2022). In 2019, Tsinghua University attracted more than 4000 international students from over 130 countries, offering 82 undergraduate majors and 39 minors, covering science, engineering, literature, history, philosophy, economics, management, law, medicine and art disciplines (Tsinghua University, 2022).

The participants were purposively selected, using the criteria that they were currently enrolled international students at undergraduate and postgraduate levels in Tsinghua and Wuhan Universities and were willing to share their learning and teaching-related experiences in China. The first author established professional contacts with the office of Institute of Education at Tsinghua University and the Economics and Management School at Wuhan University to recruit participants. Invitations to participate in interviews were sent to students who expressed their interest via the respective university offices. Relevant forms (Participant Information Statements, Consent, Withdrawal of Consent) were also provided, using the author’s institutional email. Snowball sampling was also used to recruit other participants (Minichiello et al., 2008). The data reached saturation after 30 interviews when no new information emerged and therefore, the interviews ceased (Guest et al., 2006). The study was conducted with La Trobe ethics approval (Human Ethics number is HEC18283).

Data were collected from 17 students from Wuhan and 13 from Tsinghua university. There were 18 males and 12 females; five came from Malaysia, South Africa and Pakistan; two came from Bangladesh and the United States of America; and one each from Thailand, Austria, Kenya, Gabon, Ethiopia, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Nigeria, Columbia, Zimbabwe and Indonesia. All in all, we had a student population from Anglophone countries (primarily Western culture) as well as English as Second Language students (ESL; primarily Eastern cultures).

Twenty were undergraduate students studying Business, Finance, Accounting and International Trade, eight were Master’s students in International Trade and Engineering, and two were PhD students (Regional Economics and Sciences). The Chinese government and home-government scholarships sponsored 21 students; nine were self-sponsored. The findings section identifies the participants as IS and the corresponding number.

Data collection

Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted using an interview protocol. The protocol included demographic and teaching and learning questions on classroom pedagogy. For example, (a) How did students go about exploring learning contents in terms of class activities (e.g., problem, project, inquiry-based learning)? (b) What were the classroom dynamics (e.g., collaborative, teamwork)? (c) What kind of resources did students seek to support their learning? (d) What learning-related competencies are acquired as international students (e.g., intercultural communication, diversity of learning)?

All interviews were conducted on university premises and by the first author, in English, for between 17 and 41 min. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim using a professional transcription service. Before the data analysis phase, each research participant was emailed their respective transcribed responses to verify content and delete any information they did not want to include (McClure, 2003), thus preserving data validity and trustworthiness.

Data analysis

This study sought to interpret international students’ experiences using inductive thematic analysis approach. This robust method focuses on ‘understanding the meaning of experience (by searching for themes) through greater interpretative engagement with the data’ (Langdridge, 2007, p. 109). The coding process first started by reading the transcripts using a selective approach to see which phrases represented the phenomenon under investigation (van Manen, 1990) – in this case, international students’ teaching and learning experiences. Keywords or phrases were assigned on the right-hand margin that described what the participant meant by asking the question: ‘What statement(s) or phrases(s) seem particularly essential or revealing about the phenomenon or experience being described’ (van Manen, 1990, p. 93), especially relating to internationalization of curriculum experiences.

The next step was to group similar codes to achieve a manageable number (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Creswell, 2008). As thematic analysis is an iterative process (Braun & Clarke, 2006), the coding list is reviewed against the data to see if any new codes emerged (Creswell, 2008). Subsequently, the codes are reduced to establish themes (Creswell, 2008) that addressed the research question of this study. Four themes emerged as the major areas in the current teaching and learning practices that function as challenges towards the internationalization of teaching and learning in Chinese HEI.

Findings

Language barrier

International students were required to learn the Chinese language prior to commencing their coursework degree, in the ‘merging’ mode class. They were taught how to write and speak in Chinese but this was not specific to the content learnt. As a result, they faced challenges when lecturers spoke in Chinese and translated the information into English:

We had to learn Chinese. It was challenging but we manage to pass. We had classes and it was bilingual – English and Chinese. The lecturer was speaking in Chinese and translating in English and I just do not understand what she was trying to interpret. (IS 4)

I did my course in Chinese. It was difficult at first because of the context. When you go back home to study, you have to first do it in English and then translate it. We had language class for a year but we wanted the school to also give us language classes in the study or field that we chose but that was not possible. Some of the lecturers were quite good, they were, like, you can write in English. So, that was one of the good relationships we had with the lecturers. (IS 2)

An undergraduate from an Anglophone country explained that textbooks are translated from Chinese to English and used in the classroom. Even the presentations by professors are delivered in English. However, the translation is not very good and the meaning is lost so students are required to learn in both languages. This has been shown to be difficult for international students who struggle both with English and Chinese languages.

My courses are in Chinese, but sometimes the presentations or textbooks are all in English. Though a lot of Chinese professors translate these textbooks, they do not think the translation is good enough. So, they think that the original text book has more clear meaning and it is better for us to learn these materials. So, they told us to use the English text book but listen to the class in Chinese. It is difficult for a lot of my international friends who do not know English or Chinese that well. It is hard for us, because we have to learn material in two languages that are not our own. (IS 26)

Postgraduate international students, especially PhD students, had difficulty creating a teacher–student rapport with Chinese professors. This wase attributed to professors’ inability to communicate in English with international students:

The main [issue] is the language barrier, because if you are studying in a country where the language of instruction is not English and you have to rely on translation to speak to your professor, you may not be able to get close to your professor. For example, my friend’s supervisor always spoke Chinese to his Chinese students and barely interacted with international students due to his low English proficiency. (IS 25)

Postgraduate international students also have language issues with Chinese students. For instance, a research meeting with students was held in Chinese because there were only a few international students in the group:

I am having a big language challenge here in China. My research group is having a meeting this evening. But the meeting is going to be in Chinese. There is just two international students in the group and the rest in the group is Chinese. So, it does not make sense for them to speak in English because of the two of us. (IS 19)

However, some postgraduate international students are appreciative of their professors as they are experts in the fields. Although their professors are not fluent in English, they have assistant professors who are able to speak in English and translate the content for them. One PhD student was content because he was able to write his PhD thesis in English, which further eased his challenge with the language:

Actually, my assistant professor talks to me in English, as he is a Stanford graduate so he is good in English. He translates what my first supervisor says to me. My first supervisor can speak in English, but not clear, but he is an expert in the field, so I am blessed to be with him. I am writing my Ph.D. in English, so that is ok. (IS 28)

While postgraduate students at times were disappointed at not being able to establish a close relationship with their professors, they expressed gratitude to have professors who were experts in their field.

Passive instruction and classroom autonomy

Studies in the Western context (Rao, 2017) have reported that international students are passive learners and highly reluctant to participate in academic and social activities due to their lack of English proficiency and different learning styles. However, in this research, international students strived for interactive and dialogic learning. Nevertheless, their expectations were not fulfilled through the instructional approach adopted by most instructors in their classes. For example, a third-year undergraduate student from a country that uses English as a medium of instruction indicated that the instructors had a didactic teaching approach; they are more about lecturing and giving students information rather than engaging students in the classroom discussion:

Teachers are more concerned about giving you information rather than engaging with you in the class. Majority of the classes, the teachers will be in front of the classroom and they will just teach, they, like, give you information, and there is no any chance learners get to engage with the teachers so that they can learn more. The teachers give you information, [but] that I can do on my own by reading books. It is much better if we engage so that I hear different perspectives. (IS 14)

Another first-year ESL student labelled some of the teachers as controlling and too structured because students barely converse in the classroom and had to abide by their way of teaching and learning:

We want to discuss but there is no discussion with the teacher or other students. We want to explore more on the topic being taught. A lot of teachers are great but just a few of them are extremely controlling, because we cannot discuss further and we need to follow the teacher’s way. (IS 10)

Another second-year undergraduate student said that he came to class not to tick attendance like other students but to learn through discussion. He was extremely frustrated when the teaching staff member did not listen to what he was saying or asking:

Some students just come to class just for attendance, but I come because I want to learn, and sometimes is it disturbing when the teacher does not pay close attention to what I say. (IS 15)

A fourth-year ESL student claimed that he only had a good learning experience through collaborative discussion in his final year, because he had a teaching staff member who was youthful and energetic:

We had a very youthful teacher and he had just completed his PhD. He was very interested in the global trends. So, he brings in discussion like there ‘is this and that so what you think?’ This only happened in my fourth year. In my first, second and third years we did not have that much discussion. We just came to class, get knowledge and then go back. (IS 1)

As these international students come from active learning backgrounds in their home countries, they were expecting similar approaches in China. However, they were disappointed with the Chinese learning environment that was very much controlled by the teaching staff members and teacher-centred, reflecting the dominant and prevalent teaching model in China (Tam et al., 2009).

Limited diversity – lack of interaction with domestic Chinese students

Previous researchers (Singh & Jack, 2022; Trahar, 2014) have cited international students’ incompatibility with domestic students as the domestic students were characterized as upfront and, at times, unfriendly and uncooperative while learning together in one classroom. However, undergraduate international students in this study barely had any contact with local students as they were disappointed and surprised that their classes were separated, with international students in one class and domestic students in another. This situation led to a lack of communication and limited opportunities to meet domestic students and learn about them or their culture.

We only have international students in our class, no Chinese students. We have about 48–50 international students. I was a bit disappointed because I expected that we are going to have, like, maybe mixed international and Chinese students together, but we did not have this. (IS 1)

We have specific classes for international students and Chinese students. In my classes, we see a lot of international students. Probably only one class we have together and we hardly can talk to them as we have lesser chances to meet and talk to them. (IS 23)

Similar observations were made by international students in Larbi and Fu’s (2017) study: international students indicated there was a ‘wide separation between Chinese students and international students’ (p. 91), not only in the learning and teaching process but also socially, as there were separate dormitories for both groups (Ding, 2016).

Insufficient opportunities for experiential learning

International students seek international education to enhance and strengthen their employability skills through practical or hands-on experiences (Singh & Jack, 2018). However, in this research, international students were disappointed because they were learning too much theory rather than understanding the practical side of learning the courses that they were enrolled in:

With the university’s top reputation, I thought it is going to be awesome, like we are able to have access to all the resources. I am studying tourism, the practical side of tourism is very important for experience. So, I thought, since I am in one of the best universities in China, my practical classes might be freely accessible, but they were mainly theory-based. You only get to do your practice when you are in your last year and with someone in my field, practice and experience are needed. (IS 2)

There is too much focus on learning theory. I was expecting more practical or hands-on work to sharpen management skills. Get exposed to some companies so that to know what we are studying in practical terms. (IS 4)

International students were looking forward to gaining some real-life experience in terms of trips to Chinese companies or inviting employees or managers from these companies into their classes so that they were able to understand how to apply what they learnt at the workplace:

We only study and go to classes. We need some trips to the Chinese companies to see how people work in China to get some real-life experience. I did not experience this. (IS 8)

We are just relying on theory only. Can improve on bringing people from the company or managers so that they can come and talk to us or we can go to the company to see how the real world of the workplace just to gain experience. (IS 12)

Research suggests that inviting industry experts as guest lecturers into the classrooms does provide benefits to students because the guests provide industry insights, practicalities of theory in action and industry contacts for future internships or employment opportunities (Singh, 2022).

Discussion

As China aspires to become one of the leading hosts of international students and internationalize its teaching and learning through integrating Chinese and Western epistemological traditions, it is important to understand the learning experiences of international students studying in Chinese elite universities, underpinned by internationalization of the curriculum concept (Leask, 2009, 2015).

The first theme relates to the language issues. Although English is adopted as a language of instruction in international programmes, there are issues related to using English as a language of instruction in Chinese universities (Larbi & Fu, 2017; Liu & Liu, 2021). International students face language-related challenges in their studies because they have to translate what is being taught in Chinese into English on their own. This issue is attributed to the class arrangement dynamics where international students are studying with Chinese students where the courses are taught in Chinese and a high level of Chinese proficiency is needed to attend these classes (Ma & Wen, 2018). Larbi and Fu (2017) found that some relevant educational materials are in Chinese and international students find it problematic to access the materials for academic purposes. Although they understand Chinese teaching staff members are knowledgeable, the teachers may not be clear in translating and elaborating the content into English at an effective level. Similar findings are observed in Liu and Liu (2021) and Wen et al. (2018), where teaching staff members have inadequate English proficiency levels and are incompetent in expressing themselves in English.

In addition, students also have to learn subject content from both languages’ textbooks. Even though the textbooks are translated into English, the meaning may be lost during the translation process. Hence, international students are encouraged to learn in both languages, which has imposed added pressure on international students who come from neither English nor Chinese backgrounds. Larbi and Fu (2017) found that international students who are ‘from non-English speaking countries find it difficult to comprehend some English literature, express themselves in classroom discussions and write proper academic papers and final thesis’ (p. 90).

Postgraduate international students had a spectrum of experiences relating to language in bonding with their professors. Larbi and Fu (2017) further elaborated that in China, ‘the intimacy of the teacher–student relationship is similar with the parent–child relationship’ (p. 90), whereby students and teachers have close emotional and personal connections for reliance and support. However, this relationship was non-existent between international students and Chinese professors due to language barriers. This indeed ‘is one of the most challenging issues in the internationalization process of higher education in China’ (Larbi & Fu, 2017, p. 90). As a result, Chinese professors do not engage with international students in their research projects. However, at the other end of the spectrum, postgraduate students do appreciate the expertise of their professors and they find a means to communicate, impart and share research knowledge with postgraduate international students (i.e., through assistant professors who are fluent in English). This language has a direct negative implication for the student–teacher dynamic, feeling of relatedness and positive experiences associated with learning is limited, which is a bedrock for the internationalization of curriculum (Singh et al., 2022; Leask, 2015).

The second challenge is about lack of discussion and classroom autonomy due to a controlling teaching style sometimes labelled as an ‘authoritarian’ style (Tam et al., 2009). The classroom instruction was structured and controlled by the instructor and students had little or no autonomy as they were not encouraged to hold discussions with other students or even with the instructor. Arguably, international students in this study wanted more interactive and discussion-based learning approaches because of their learning experiences and expectation from education in their home countries. The teaching process was merely a focus on teacher-centered pedagogy as opposed to learner-centeredness (Tam et al., 2009), which is a similar argument to this study’s findings. Although there was an urgent call for Chinese higher education to embrace a major educational reform to adopt a more flexible and learner-centred method (Tam et al., 2009), there is no clear indication, based on this study’s findings, that the reform has been successfully navigated in Chinese universities. There were very few youthful staff members in this study who understood the importance of active learning in the classroom as they promoted active student engagement with the content during class time through discussions and questioning. Moreover, Leask (2015) proposed that active learning, experiential learning and active experimentation as key teaching and learning strategies to achieve the internationalization of curriculum

The third challenge is related to a lack of engagement with domestic students due to the structural policy which segregates international students in one class and domestic students in another, following the ‘separation’ mode of arranging the classroom (Ma & Wen, 2018). Yu and Moskal (2019) argue that classrooms or campuses are effective spaces for establishing intercultural friendships because they provide opportunities for interactions between students. Commonly, previous research studies have reported on interaction and engagement challenges between international and domestic students due to cultural differences, low English proficiency, institutional environment and campus culture (e.g., Yu & Moskal, 2019), whereas others (Zhu & Bresnahan, 2018) have claimed that international students are unwilling to make friends with domestic students because they are only comfortable befriending co-nationals or other international students. However, contrary to those findings, the international students in this study wanted to engage with local students but were not provided with the opportunity to do so due to rigid institutional classroom arrangements. Leask (2015) strongly emphasizes that intercultural interactions have a positive impact on student’s critical thinking and collaborative skills.

The final theme includes limited practical or hands-on experiences of workplace stimulation. International students in this study were extremely disappointed with the limited application of theoretical knowledge in practice. They genuinely wanted the exposure to understand Chinese workplace culture through Chinese company visits or listening to company representatives to provide practical knowledge. Pitan and Muller (2021) urge that ‘universities [should] incorporate more employability programmes into the curriculum’ (p. 464) so that students are able to acquire relevant employability skills through the curriculum. Some of the programmes proposed by international students in this study include invited guest lecturers from the industry in the classroom or delivery of full courses by industry experts, practical sessions that include training that mimics real-world scenarios and industry applications, and students being invited to visit an industry or firm. In this case, Chinese universities will need to re-look at their curriculum to provide international students with the necessary hands-on experience that will enhance their employability and gain successful employment upon graduation.

Conclusion

The findings emanate from current teaching and learning practices that are grounded in Chinese traditions. However, in some ways, this potentially contradicts the criteria required for internationalizing a curriculum (Leask, 2015). The findings are unique because the experiences are exclusively rooted in international students’ experiences in a Chinese learning environment and analysed from the lens of the internationalization of learning and teaching curriculum.

The language barrier has been a recurring theme for international students studying in Anglophone institutions of higher education as a challenge to academic and sociocultural adaptation (Lashari et al., 2022). However, in the Chinese context, these challenges were exacerbated since international students, especially from non-English speaking countries, struggled to learn two foreign languages. Also, to the best of our knowledge, the issue of translated text material and teaching resources has not been cited anywhere as a challenge for international students. These findings are unique, as prior research has claimed that international students are inactive, dependent learners and are less involved in their learning (Rao, 2017). Contrary to this, international students in China struggled for active participation and their voices to be heard in the classroom due to the rigid learning and teaching strategies adopted by Chinese academic staff members. Additionally, in international students’ adaptation literature, it is rare to read international students desiring to study alongside domestic students as was found in the current study. However, due to the structural segregation classroom policies in these Chinese universities, it hinders the engagement, integration and interaction experiences between international and Chinese students.

The findings present insights for Chinese HEI to make amendments to truly internationalize their curriculum while preserving Chinese characteristics. The requirement to learn the Chinese language to pursue higher education in China is legitimate to be able to build new knowledge on Chinese epistemologies with experts in China. Nevertheless, it is equally important that faculty imparting instruction to international students is also proficient in the English language to be able to establish clear and meaningful communication. Effective communication is key to student–faculty connection (Awang-Hashim et al., 2022 ) and quality of learning (Singh et al., 2019).

Similarly, Chinese HEIs aspiring to internationalize their curriculum while integrating Chinese values should include local Chinese students in classroom teaching and learning activities. Students’ diversity is a hallmark of international education and having students learn in heterogeneous groups and facilitating them in establishing networks of friends can result in achieving international learning outcomes that concern knowledge and applications beyond borders (Leask, 2015). Finally, the faculty imparting instruction to international students should learn to value active and experiential learning strategies by recognizing their benefits. Moreover, studies have confirmed that one of the drivers for international students to choose China as their study destination is the opportunity to work in the Chinese market (Yu et al., 2021). The faculty at HEIs can benefit from this motivation by creating opportunities for students to explore professional practice in the Chinese cultural context and analysing issues from multiple cultural lenses (Leask, 2015).

The findings have important practical implications, especially in the area of university learning and teaching. There are micro (international students) and macro (higher learning institutions) implications of the challenges faced by international students in China. At the macro level, higher learning institutions in China should appoint teaching staff members who are fluent in English so that international students are not disadvantaged in their learning process (Larbi & Fu, 2017). In addition, the teaching style in Chinese universities also needs to change to accommodate discussion-based learning so that international students are able to participate and engage not only with other students but also with the lecturer. Hassan (2008) argues that a lecturer who interacts with students tends to guide students’ learning better than just lecturing at students. Initiatives to include international and domestic students in a classroom should be supported to provide a global learning experience for both cohorts of students.

For international students, there should be opportunities to interact with domestic students, either in academic or social settings in their respective universities, since one of the benefits of studying overseas is to gain international experience via interacting and engaging with local students and communities (Singh et al., 2019). In addition, international students also should be more confident in engaging in discussion and collaborative work with other students and lecturers in the classroom. Although Rao (2017) argues that international students are typically shy and passive learners in class because of their heavy native accents, recent work by Singh and Jack (2018) and Singh (2018) claims that, when international students interact with other students, inside and outside the classroom, they feel more confident and involved in the discussion.

While this research contributes to the emerging literature on international students’ experiences of academic challenges in China, it has to be acknowledged that it has several limitations. Firstly, the findings cannot be generalized to other contexts, as only international students from two prestigious Chinese institutions were interviewed. Therefore, quantitative or mixed-method studies are highly recommended to probe further international students’ academic and social issues in other Chinese universities. Secondly, in this research, only international students were interviewed. It is recommended that perspectives from teaching staff members who are teaching international students as well as domestic students (Chinese students) are included in future studies. This will provide multi-dimensional perspectives on the academic and social challenges experienced by international students in Chinese universities. Finally, studies in the future may also consider exploring pedagogical challenges specific to each major, discipline, gender and/or level of study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).