Chinese Studies, formerly known as Sinology, generally refers to scholarly research on China conducted by non-Chinese scholars, especially those from Western backgrounds (Hargrave, 2016). Consequently, it normally adopts an outsider’s perspective and tends to be inevitably Western-centred (Gu, 2013; Hou, 2021; Yu, 2019). In the past two decades, however, there has been a notable influx of Chinese international students into Chinese Studies programmes in UK universities, especially at the postgraduate level (BACS, 2021; Universitas, 2005). For these students, undertaking Chinese Studies courses abroad offers not only exposure to the host culture but also a unique external standpoint for introspection on their ‘own’ culture and ‘self’. This presents a valuable opportunity for them to develop the critical cultural awareness that is essential to their intercultural competence. This study aims to explore the intercultural experience of these Chinese students and understand how they make sense of it and how it relates to their identities. The following three research questions guide this research:

Q1: Why do Chinese students choose to undertake Chinese Studies abroad?

Q2: If, and how does their engagement with Chinese Studies influence their understanding of their ‘own’ culture?

Q3: How does their experience influence their perception of ‘self’ as being Chinese?

Existing studies in the field of intercultural communication and education have not linked research with programmes students undertake which aim to understand their ‘own’ culture – a gap this study seeks to address by focusing on Chinese Studies for Chinese international students. Unlike previous research in this field, which predominantly centred on acculturation or intercultural competence, this study adopts an interculturality perspective and focuses on their identity. Therefore, interculturality and identity, together with another closely related concept – culture, constitute the theoretical underpinning of this study, all understood through the lens of social constructionism (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Gergen, 2015), which guides this study as the overarching paradigm.

By interculturality, this study follows Dervin’s (2016) approach and believes it is ‘co-constructed, influenced, and somewhat determined by the presence of an Other (p.76), so it means a ‘ dynamic and critical process of making sense of intercultural experience in relation to people’s own backgrounds (Jin, 2021, p. 573)’. In other words, it is viewed as a liquid process of becoming intercultural, of acquiring intercultural awareness and sensibilities, sometimes with failures, exceptions, and instabilities. The term culture is comprehended within the field of intercultural communication, embracing a postmodern paradigm that recognises culture as fluid and socially constructed (Holliday, 2016). Likewise, the concept of Identity is approached from a social constructionist perspective, acknowledging its multiplicity, dynamism, and social construction (Risager & Dervin, 2015). Concerning the identity of ‘being Chinese’, this study does not confine it to national identity, although it focuses on Chinese students from mainland China. What is involved in interculturality is cultural identity, which means a collection of multiple identities (Zhu, 2016), though a nation as an external cultural reality usually provides a framing for identities(Holliday, 2010).

This study represents an initial exploration into the motivations and self-formations of Chinese international students engaged in Chinese Studies from an intercultural communication and education perspective. Beyond filling a research gap and contributing to existing literature and theory, this research offers practical implications for course designers, educators, and universities to review their policies, pedagogy, or services, thereby improving Chinese students’ overseas study experiences and satisfaction.

Aiming to understand how Chinese international students make sense of their intercultural experience and how it relates to their identities when they undertake Chinese Studies in UK universities, the study adopts social constructionism as its philosophical underpinning, which is mainly concerned with human experiences and how people make sense of them(Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Gergen, 2015). Accordingly, a qualitative interpretive approach is adopted, with an ethnographically inspired research design. This approach allows the researcher to study Chinese students in their natural setting and examine how they engaged in learning activities and how they interacted with peer groups or teaching staff from diverse cultural backgrounds in a way that value their own perspectives. To obtain a rich and in-depth understanding, the study opted for a relatively small sample size, focusing on 21 Chinese international students. Data was collected from a range of sources, including participant observation, unstructured or semi-structured qualitative interviews, and document analysis (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007; Jackson, 2016). Several teaching staff and non-Chinese students were also interviewed to triangulate and add richness to the data from the main sources. Data collection spans one year, comprising six months of intensive fieldwork and an additional six months of follow-up contacts and interviews. The collected data was subjected to thematical analysis, following Braun and Clarke’s (2021) framework and supported by NVivo for the coding process. The research was conducted multilingually, i.e. in English and Chinese (Mandarin), to capture nuanced and comprehensive data (Holmes et al., 2013). As a Chinese international student, my background facilitates rapport-building with the participants, which is essential for the data collection in ethnographic research (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007). It also enabled me to undergo a transition from an outsider before entering the field to an insider afterwards, so I could approach the project from a fresh viewpoint as an outsider, and also understand my participants’ experience better and easier as an insider, thereby enhancing the construction and theoretical conceptualization of the narratives from them. The research adheres to the ethical guidelines of the British Educational Research Association(BERA, 2018), and ethical approval has been secured from the School of Education’s Ethics Committee before commencing data collection.

The preliminary findings highlight that Chinese international students tended to identify themselves more as ‘students’ rather than ‘Chinese’ when they engaged in China-related courses. Notably, they exhibited a remarkable level of tolerance to the course content, whether the speech delivered by the lecturer, opinions expressed in class, or assigned reading materials and videos. It appeared that they were able to, and willing to, accept a wide range of comments on China or Chinese issues, even including some critical voices, with a positive attitude of ‘good to know’ and very few students would bother to argue with others, whether in or out of class, even when they disagreed with the presented viewpoints. This inclination could be attributed to various factors, encompassing their motivations, language barriers, language sensitivities, cultural habitus, and self-censorship. Simultaneously, these students attached great importance to the development of critical thinking skills, whether in terms of the Western discourse or the Chinese discourse, with some asserting that their most significant achievement from their experience of undertaking Chinese Studies abroad was the enhancement of their criticality. Furthermore, the research unveils the intricate and conflicting dynamics of the Chinese international students' self-perception as sojourners. While consistently emphasizing their patriotism, they simultaneously exhibited a nuanced reflection on nationalism. In the UK, they experienced a sense of liberated self, yet demonstrated varying degrees of self-censorship, particularly concerning political matters. This dual perspective underscores the complexity of their identity, caught between bound and unbound expressions of their Chinese self.

BACS. (2021). Report on the present state of China related studies in the UK. BERA. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018-online Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality : a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: a practical guide to understanding and doing. Los Angeles: SAGE. Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in education: a theoretical and methodological toolbox. London: Palgrave Pivot. Gergen, K. J. (2015). An Invitation to Social Construction (Third ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473921276 Gu, M. D. (2013). Sinologism, the Western World View, and the Chinese Perspective. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2213 Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography : principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge. Hargrave, J. L. (2016). Marco Polo and the Emergence of British Sinology. SEL Studies in English Literature 1500-1900, 56ch(3), 515-537. https://doi.org/10.1353/sel.2016.0029 Holliday, A. (2010). Complexity in cultural identity. Language and Intercultural Communication, 10(2), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708470903267384 Holliday, A. (2016). Studying culture. In H. Zhu (Ed.), Research methods in intercultural communication: A practice guide (pp. 23-26). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2013). Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International journal of applied linguistics, 23(3), 285-299. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12038 Hou, Q. (2021). Reflections on the Research History of American Sinology. International Sinology, 3. https://doi.org/10.19326/j.cnki.2095-9257.2021.03.016 Jackson, J. (2016). Ethnography. In H. Zhu (Ed.), Research Methods in Intercultural Communication: A practical guide (pp. 239-254). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119166283.ch16 Jin, T. (2021). Interculturality in learning Mandarin Chinese in British universities. Routledge. Risager, K., & Dervin, F. (2015). Introduction. In F. Dervin & K. Risager (Eds.), Researching identity and interculturality (pp. 1-25). New York: Routledge. Universitas. (2005). An evaluation of HEFCE’s Chinese studies initiative. Yu, X. (2019). Haiwai Zhongguo Yanjiu Ruogan Cihui de Shuli ji Qifa (Inspiration from sorting out some terms in Foreign Chinese Studies). Foreign Theoretical Trends, 12, 112-117. Zhu, H. (2016). ‘Where Are You From?’: Interculturality and Interactional Practices. In A. Komisarof & H. Zhu (Eds.), Crossing Boundaries and Weaving Intercultural Work, Life, and Scholarship in Globalizing Universities (pp. 147-159). London: Routledge.