The internationalization of higher education aims to foster competencies and qualifications at both individual and collective levels, enriching students' interaction with diverse learning styles and contexts.  Amid the burgeoning interest in China's transnational higher education (TNHE) programs, including articulation programs like "2+2", "3+1", or "1+2+1", these initiatives offer Chinese students opportunities to pursue degrees abroad, fostering intercultural learning and knowledge acquisition (Yang, 2008). Existing research has further explored the adjustment and acculturation of international students, emphasizing how they overcome challenges in the intercultural space, fostering cross-system learning and resilience development (Gill, 2007; Ungar, 2010 & 2019; Li & Yang, 2016). However, TNHE represents a unique field within which students encounter diverse academic, cultural, and social challenges. In the neoliberal and neoconservative context, the overemphasis of the individual adaptation can unintentionally lead to self-exploitation, where students become instrumental in the internationalization agenda (Mu, 2022). A psychological approach to adaptive resilience may inadvertently reinforce constraining social structures and inequalities by ‘coercing’ TNHE students to fully adapt to the new systems (Bottrell, 2013).

As such, there is a need to re-examine the resilience process of TNHE students while acknowledging the systemic roots of social inequalities that are both created and perpetuated (VanderPlat, 2016). As Bourdieu’s theoretical framework is valuable in illuminating underlying structural or systemic factors, which provides a new lens for us to recognise the “embeddedness of resilience in social inequities, social processes, and the differentiated societal and ideological expectations of young people” (Bottrell, 2009, p. 321). This study thus draws insights from Bourdieu's conceptual tools—field, habitus, and capital (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992) to provide a sociological understanding of the resilience process and its construction in the dynamic reality of TNHE settings, with a primary focus on the experiences of Chinese students in this context.

For Bourdieu, the trajectory is constructed by those choices made under the constraints of an individual’s inherent disposition (habitus), which is the internalization of the social fields. These social fields are conceptualised as field, defined as ‘a network, or a configuration, of objective relations between positions’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992, p. 97). Bourdieu (1986) defines capital as time-intensive resource with the potential capacity to yield profits and replicate itself in identical or expanded forms. Forms of capital include economic (financial resources), social (networks, relationships), cultural (knowledge, skills, education), and symbolic (prestige, recognition) (Bourdieu, 1986). The analysis of objective structures within a field extends beyond merely examining the distribution and competition for capital. It also encompasses habitus, which Bourdieu describes as ‘an embodied history internalized as a second nature and so forgotten as history’ (Bourdieu, 1977, p. 78). In applying these concepts, Chinese international students' resilience in TNHE is not just a result of individual traits but is deeply influenced by the interplay of their habitus (social and cultural backgrounds), the fields (TNHE setting) they navigate, the capitals (resources) they possess or lack, the symbolic violence they may encounter, and the structural constraints they face.

This study aims to investigate the structural inequalities and constraints that extend beyond the challenges of cross-cultural communication in resilience building and explore the pathways to change for students in TNHE settings. It sets the stage for investigating students' resilience from the perspective of their social transformation. This sociological perspective offers a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved in students’ mental health experiences, going beyond mere adaptation to also consider the broader structural forces at play. Therefore, this study seeks to bridge the gap between individual agency and structural conditions in TNHE settings by delving into the structural constraints within the field that contribute to students' resilience building.

This study explored the process of building resilience for students in Sino-American “1+2+1” articulation programs. In the ‘1+2+1’ model, students complete their first-year studies at a Chinese university, then transition to a partner university in America to continue their second- and third-year studies, before returning to complete their final year of study in China. Upon completion of this program, students earn degrees from both countries. The study adopted an exploratory qualitative design and a semi-structured interview approach. Purposive sampling was used to recruit research participants, and 35 participants who completed Sino-American articulation programs voluntarily joined this research. The first author conducted semi-structured interviews online with these students in China from February to July 2023. Students were interviewed in Mandarin, and the interview were audio-recorded between 1-1.5 hours. The research was informed by three broad interview questions: Can you please tell me about the difficulties you faced in the program? What support do you receive in this program? What outcomes have you achieved? More open-ended and probing questions were also asked during interviews. The transcripts of these interviews were analyzed and interpreted through thematic analysis, allowing researchers to draw insights from actual events and experiences and further elaborates on the social context associated with interpreting these experiences (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The data were initially analyzed inductively to identify the significant challenges, supporting factors, and outcomes in participants' resilience process. Subsequently, we undertook a deductive analysis of the transcripts, taking into account our theoretical frameworks. This deductive perspective facilitated our interpretation of the participants' resilience process, with a particular focus on resilience to symbolic violence.

This study investigated the resilience process of students in the TNHE setting, revealing valuable insights into resilience to structural constraints. In response to the questions posed, we argue that students construct their resilience by simultaneously confronting a multitude of challenges within the context of symbolic violence. Students utilize their cultural capital as a response mechanism to navigate and counteract symbolic violence, ultimately shaping their resilience-building process as they contend with the structural complexities inherent in TNHE settings and the associated constraints. Furthermore, we contend that these structural constraints intrinsic to the TNHE setting contribute to an instrumentalist orientation. Specifically, the "1+2+1" program structure, which prioritizes English proficiency, the pursuit of high GPAs, and timely program completion, underscores the structural significance accorded to conforming to this predefined habitus. This structural emphasis within the TNHE field restricts students' flexibility and autonomy in shaping their habitus from an internationalism perspective, reinforcing an instrumentalist approach wherein education is primarily perceived as a means to attain specific cultural capital. These findings not only illuminate the significant challenges facing individuals within articulation programs but also highlight their resilient responses to the symbolic violence inherent in this field. Within the transnational habitus, participants grappled with seeking assistance from peers and universities. Their adaptive strategies exemplify a form of resilience, defined as the capacity to effectively navigate and cope with substantial challenges. Additionally, the disposition characterized by critical inquiry into symbolic violence itself demonstrated a sociological form of resilience. This form of resilience transcends individual adaptation to challenges; instead, it involves a deeper exploration of the fundamental roots of these challenges, potentially paving the way for transformative change.

Bottrell, D. (2009). Understanding ‘marginal’perspectives: Towards a social theory of resilience. Qualitative social work, 8(3), 321-339. Bottrell, D. (2013). Responsibilised resilience? Reworking neoliberal social policy texts. M/C Journal, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.708 Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). Réponses (Vol. 4). Paris: Seuil. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Gill, S. (2007). Overseas students’ intercultural adaptation as intercultural learning: A transformative framework. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 37, 167–183. doi: 10.1080/03057920601165512. Li, M., & Yang, Y. (2016). A cross-cultural study on a resilience-stress path model for college students. Journal of Counselling and Development, 94(3), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12088 Mu, G. M. (2022). Sociologising child and youth resilience with Bourdieu: An Australian perspective. Taylor & Francis. Ungar, M. (2010). What is resilience across cultures and contexts? Advances to the theory of positive development among individuals and families under stress. Journal of family psychotherapy, 21(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/08975351003618494 Ungar, M. (2019). Designing resilience research: Using multiple methods to investigate risk exposure, promotive and protective processes, and contextually relevant outcomes for children and youth. Child abuse & neglect, 96, 104098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104098 Yang, R. (2008). Transnational higher education in China: Contexts, characteristics and concerns. Australian Journal of Education, 52(3), 272-286. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410805200305