System 53 (2015) 35e46

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

System
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/system

Oral participation in EFL classroom: Perspectives from the

administrator, teachers and learners at a Chinese university
Nan Zhou
Foreign Language Department, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The need to improve second language learners' participation in oral communication has
Received 11 April 2013 been documented in numerous studies. However, policies and practices that would
Received in revised form 3 June 2015 improve Chinese learners' oral language skills in English represent a complex issue that
Accepted 8 June 2015
presents numerous challenges to EFL teachers, administrators, and learners. Drawing on a
Available online 25 July 2015
dual Community of Practice conceptual framework, this qualitative study investigated the
perceptions of educators and learners on English education at a Chinese university. On the
Keywords:
surface, they demonstrated a joint awareness of the importance of classroom oral
English as a foreign language (EFL)
Classroom oral participation
participation; however, their perspectives on the underlying issues differed. This research
Community of practice delves deeper into the EFL context by exploring how the aspects of oral participation in the
Joint enterprise EFL classroom are perceived differently by the administrator, teachers and learners, and
Mutual accountability how these discrepant points of view may affect learners in the process of classroom oral
Brokering participation. This paper challenges the traditional approach of exploring learners' passive
Boundaries oral behaviors at the level of learners and teachers or based on the observation of inter-
Peripheries action between them in a classroom setting. The ndings of the study provide insight into
Chinese university
ways that positive Communities of Practice can support learners' English oral participation
in EFL classrooms.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

In countries where English is not the dominant language, classroom learning plays a critical role for English learning as
learners may have few opportunities to use the language outside the classroom. Oral classroom tasks are a major component
of English language instruction, and participation in these tasks is crucial for improvement of speaking skills. Language
learning is enhanced when the level of interaction rises (Kang, 2005). In consideration of this inuence, various scholars have
studied learners' levels of participation in English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) classrooms and have attempted to tease out
the inuences that inhibit learners' active participation in oral language tasks (Peng & Woodrow, 2010; Pomerantz, 2001;
Zarrinabadi, 2014).
To date, the research on Chinese college students' oral English participation has consisted primarily of two approaches:
interviewing the learners and teachers, and observing their verbal interactions during classes (Cao, 2011; Liu, 2005; Peng,
2012). Far less researched is how learners' communication behaviors are impacted by the educational context as a whole.
Recent Chinese English education reform has emphasized two major paradigm shifts: from teacher-directed to more student-
centered approaches and from a focus on reading and grammar to an emphasis on effective communication in English. This

E-mail address: nan.zhou78@gmail.com.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.007
0346-251X/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
36 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

has created numerous challenges for administrators and teachers in relation to pedagogical views, educational practices and
policy compliance. The purpose of this study is to explore factors inuencing learners' participation in EFL classroom oral
tasks by studying the issue from the multiple perspectives of three stakeholders in the process; namely, the administrator,
teachers and learners.

2. Second language learners' participation in English classroom communication

Research indicates that second language (L2) learners' willingness to communicate in English is mediated by a multitude
of situational and personal factors (Kang, 2005; MacIntyre, Cle
ment, Do rnyei, & Noels, 1998). The challenges learners may
encounter go beyond linguistic prociencies. Variables within the learners include communication condence, learner be-
liefs, learning motivation, investment in English learning, personality factors, affective factors and international posture
(Kang, 2005; Norton, 2000; Yashima, 2002). Contextual variables include classroom context and cultural-educational factors
(Peng, 2012; Peng & Woodrow, 2010).
Learners' use of English in spoken communication has become an area of widespread interest in L2 education. Never-
theless, the inuence of educational policies at the institutional level and pedagogical views at the teacher level in shaping the
holistic learning context has been underrepresented in existing research on this topic. The underlying premise of this research
is that, in order to better understand EFL teaching and learning, it is necessary to take the overall contextual situation of
learners into account (Peng & Woodrow, 2010). To that end, the conceptual framework used to guide the study is the
Community of practice (CoP).

3. The community of practice framework

In educational research, Community of Practice theory has been used in the investigation of members' access to and
engagement in a specic educational setting (Achugar, 2009; Hansen-Thomas, 2005). Yet in L2 research, in which engagement
and participation are indispensable themes, CoP theory has had little impact (Zhou, 2011a). CoP theory has been adopted as the
theoretical framework of the present study, for two reasons. First of all, the theory emphasizes participation and social interaction
as fundamental tools in the construction of knowledge. Second, the theory approaches learning as a process of transition from
legitimate but peripheral participation to full participation within a community. This study contributes to both the understanding
of the L2 eld and the development of CoP theory by applying CoP theory specically to the L2 educational context.
Based on CoP theory, a dual CoP framework (Fig. 1) is designed to suit the research context and the objectives of this study.
This framework consists of two circles, representing the teaching CoP and the learner CoP. The teaching CoP comprises two
dimensions: the administrative dimension and the teacher dimension, while the learner CoP is comprised of the students.

Fig. 1. A dual-CoP framework for analyzing the perspectives of the administrator, teachers and students in the EFL CoPs.
 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46 37

Neither the teaching CoP nor the learner CoP is independent of the outside world. Boundaries and peripheries exist side by
side between the teaching CoP and the learner CoP. Both of them (boundaries and peripheries) refer to the edges of CoPs.
They emphasize different aspects. Boundaries are dened as the aspects that distinguish between the inside and outside of
the community and refer to inconsistencies between CoPs (Wenger, 1998). Peripheries refer to areas of overlap and con-
nections with other CoPs and allow for continuities to be established between and among CoPs (Boylan, 2002; Wenger, 1998).
CoPs connect with the rest of the world by providing peripheral experiences.
Teachers are the brokers negotiating the boundaries between the teaching CoP and the learner CoP. The role of teachers is
not only to impart English knowledge, but to broker across boundaries between the two CoPs thereby enhancing learners'
peripheral experiences. Teachers communicate the requirements of the institution to the learners, and directly experience the
frustrations and aspirations of the learners related to these communicated requirements. Effective brokers are able to make
new connections and enable coordination across CoPs (Wenger, 1998, p. 109).
The concepts of brokering, boundaries and peripheries are important to this study. The brokering concept proves useful in
understanding the divergence in a given community, especially when there is a great gap in knowledge and power among the
members (He, 2009, p. 154). Boundaries and peripheries are useful concepts for the analysis of some of the practices that
support or hinder learners' oral participation. In particular this study explores the boundaries that limit learner participation
in English classroom oral tasks and suggests ways to broker these boundaries.
Central to CoP theory's function in exploring members' engagement in a given community are the three dimensions of
(1) mutual engagement; (2) shared repertoire; and (3) joint enterprise (Wenger, 1998). CoPs are based on social relationships.
Practice exists because people are engaged in actions whose meanings they negotiate with one another (Wenger, 1998,
p. 73). It is mutual engagement that denes a CoP and makes it a coherent community. Where the EFL classroom is concerned,
this mutual engagement might be expressed through the frequent interaction between teachers and students in the course of
engaging in teaching and learning practices. A shared repertoire is a community's set of shared resourcesthat the com-
munity has produced or adopted in the course of its existence, and which have become part of its practice (Wenger, 1998,
p. 83). It is this shared repertoire that ensures the practices and resources of a community will evolve over time (Anderson,
2008, p. 96). In the educational context, a shared repertoire may include the ways students talk about their study, students'
participation and non-participation in classes and other activities, the language of instruction, and where students position
themselves and other classmates within the class CoP (Boylan, 2002, p. 32). Joint enterprise indicates that all members in a
given CoP can contribute to its development and the question of what concerns them through continuous negotiation. In an
EFL college course, students are engaged in a joint enterprise of learning English (Wenger, 1998). Sometimes, the joint
enterprise is simply a task or activity to be completed by the students.
This paper focuses on viewing learning as a joint enterprise; joint not in the sense that every participant in a CoP believes
in the same thing, but rather that the enterprise is shared and negotiated (Wenger, 1998). For example, learners vary
dramatically in their personalities, backgrounds, aspirations and frustrations, but their responses to their situationsesimilar
or dissimilareare interconnected in that they are expected to carry out the joint enterprise of language learning (Wenger,
1998). In the process of negotiating a joint enterprise, relations of mutual accountability arise, including what matters and
what does not, what to attach importance to and what to ignore, and when further improvement is needed (Wenger, 1998,
p. 81). Joint enterprise and mutual accountability open up the possibility of developing optimal EFL CoPs. They (Joint
enterprise and mutual accountability) point to the importance of forming common responses in relation to the difculties
encountered in EFL education, and a mutual approach to expectations about the future.

4. Research design

4.1. Purpose of the study

From what has been discussed so far, it is clear that to involve learners more actively in classroom oral activities, it is
important to improve the continuities between the teaching CoP and learner CoP relevant to English education and classroom
oral participation. In order to achieve this, it is essential to inquire to what extent mutual understandingein terms of pedagogical
views and teaching/learning practices between the two CoPsehas (or has not) been achieved. The present study follows this line
of investigation. Drawing on a dual CoP framework, this study explores how English education relevant to classroom oral
participation is understood by one administrator, four teachers and 104 students. Two research questions will be addressed:

1. To what extent are students' perceptions of English education and classroom oral participation recognized and valued by
teachers and an administrator?
2. How are the disciplinary requirements and academic practices regarding classroom oral participation understood by
students?

4.2. Context and participants

This study was conducted at a non-elite university located in Mainland China in February 2010. In 1995, Project 211 was
set up by Chinese government, aiming to strengthen approximately 100 higher education institutions as a national priority for
the 21st century (Li, 2004). Generally, the Project 211 universities are prestigious and the admission scores are higher than for
38 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

Table 1
Proles of the academic staff.

Name Gender Age Teaching experience Educational background Position

Director Female 46 23 years PhD in English Linguistic History Director
Lin Female 30 7 years M.A. in English Applied Linguistics Lecturer
Zhan Female 29 6 years M.A. in Foreign Linguistics and Applied Linguistics Lecturer
Kou Female 30 7 years M.A. in Foreign Linguistics and Applied Linguistics Lecturer
Cui Female 33 10 years M.A. in Curriculum and Teaching Methodology Senior Lecturer

other universities. The universities not participating in Project 211 are referred to as non-elite universities. Research has
indicated that there are signicant differences in English language development between students in elite and non-elite
universities (Wang & Gao, 2008). A summary of teacher and administrator proles is presented below (Table 1). All partic-
ipant names are pseudonyms and the university is referred to as simply the University.
The participating academics were all female, not atypical, given the gender imbalance of the EFL teaching profession in
China. The selection of specic classes to be examined in the study was affected by teachers' teaching experience, teaching
schedules, and a decision to equalize the respective numbers of students from (1) science and arts majors; (2) male and
female genders; and (3) urban and rural origins. The four teachers selected for this study are those who taught rst-year
undergraduates not majoring in the English language at the University (hereafter referred to as non-English majors). The
syllabi, curricula, textbooks and evaluation systems for the English majors and non-English majors are different. Each of the
four teacher participants had between six and ten years experiences of teaching tertiary English in China, with ve years
being a commonly accepted criterion in identifying experienced teachers (Tsui, 2003, cited in Hartt, 2012).
The participating administrator, director of the Foreign Language Department at the University, held charge of many
aspects of English education including choosing textbooks, deciding teaching schedules, and designing curricula.
The student participants were 104 rst-year non-English major undergraduates in the four English classes at the time of
this study. In case English language prociency (ELP) became the main factor hindering students' participation in classroom
oral tasks, all student participants had been identied by their English teachers as having adequate English communicative
competence to participate in most class oral activities. The demographic information of the student participants is sum-
marized below (Table 2).

4.3. Data collection

Each teacher was invited to participate in a one-hour interview. Their views contributed to an understanding of teaching
CoP in this study. The administrator was interviewed individually for 50 min by the researcher to gain insight into the
institutional aspects of the EFL program, i.e., the administrative dimension of the teaching CoP.
The interview questions relevant to this paper for the administrator and teachers included their interpretation of the
objectives of English education at the University, their perspectives on the relationship between the four English language
skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing), their understanding of students' expectations regarding English learning, and
views on the signicance of students' classroom oral participation.
The 104 student interviewees reected on their experiences of English learning and how they understood English learning
and classroom oral participation. Each student was interviewed individually for about one hour.
All the interviews were conducted in Chinese (see Appendix for interview questions contributing to this paper in English
translation). Member checking was conducted as a part of the interview process to ensure the credibility of the collected data
and the extent that the narrations adequately represented the interviewees' reality (Reilly, 2013). When the researcher
believed that an interviewee's statement might contribute to the study, she restated it and then questioned the interviewee
further to determine accuracy. At the conclusion of each interview, the researcher spent a few minutes casually conversing
with the interviewee to summarize and verify key information.

4.4. Data analysis

All the interviews were audio taped and transcribed. NVivo 9 (QSR International Pty Ltd, 2008), qualitative data analysis
software commonly used in educational research, was employed to code the transcripts.

Table 2
Demographic backgrounds of the student participants.

Teacher Lin Zhan Kou Cui Total

Number of students 25 27 24 28 104
Gender
(Male/Female) 10/15 12/15 8/16 5/23 35/69
Discipline
(Science & engineering/Humanity) 3/22 23/4 24/0 0/28 50/54
Region of origin
(Urban/Rural) 11/14 12/15 10/14 18/10 51/53
 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46 39

The analysis included the self-identication of the interviewees as English academics and learners and how they inter-
preted their self-identities regarding English education and classroom oral participation in the university setting. The chosen
categories/codes were stored at a node (Bazeley, 2007, p. 73). In the early stage, the free nodes, which categorized concepts
without assuming relationships, were used to store codes. Later the free nodes were organized into hierarchical tree nodes.
After a period of data analysis with NVivo 9.0, the researcher stopped temporarily to reect on which nodes were used the
most frequently, and how the nodes might relate to each other (p. 94). At rst, each node was given a name closely related
with the main idea emerging from that slice of transcripts. As the coding process moved on, if no one else used that term, it
became combined within a broader category (p. 70). When particular codes appeared consistently, patterns were identied.
In reference to CoP theory, data derived from the interviews were analyzed to identify the themes regarding members'
views on English education and classroom oral participation. The analysis brought to the fore particular boundaries and
inconsistencies between and within the teaching CoP and the learner CoP which tended to hinder students' classroom oral
participation. The identied themes include the objectives of tertiary English education, the value of the four English lan-
guage skills, students' aspirations for English learning, and students' expectations for classroom oral participation.

5. Findings: boundaries between the teaching CoP and the learner CoP and inconsistencies within each CoP

This section addresses the research questions concerning teacher and administrator awareness of the students' per-
spectives of English learning and classroom oral participation, and students' understanding of the way the course is struc-
tured by the teachers and administrator. In the interviews, all the academics, including the administrator and four teachers,
and 87.5% (n 91) of the 104 student interviewees held positive attitudes towards the importance of classroom oral
participation. Four themes, which reect the boundaries and negative peripheries1 between the teaching CoP and the learner
CoP and the inconsistencies within each CoP, are clearly present. These involve differences over: (1) the objectives of tertiary
English education; (2) value of the four English language skills; (3) students' aspirations for English learning; and (4) students'
expectations for classroom oral participation. The researcher understood that an individual's perception on the objectives
might vary with the change of time and situation. Therefore, this paper only takes the narrations which reect the in-
terviewees' understanding of the long-term objectives of the widespread mandatory two-year university English education
into consideration.

5.1. Objectives of tertiary English education

In the interview the administrator interpreted the educational objective of the English program as improving students'
overall English prociency and teaching them how to use English. This view was shared by three teachers. However, only 8
out of the 104 student interviewees closely shared the view of the administrator in this respect. A total of 27 out of the
104 interviewed students claimed that they had no idea what the objectives of English education at the University were.
All the 4 teachers and the other 77 students mentioned attaining higher scores in CET-4 as one of the objectives of English
program at the tertiary level. Statements such as the objective of English education is to pass CET-4 repeatedly appeared in
the interviews.
CET-4 is a nation-wide English prociency examination commonly held among undergraduates in China. Since it was rst
administered in 1987, passing it has been seen as key to personal and institutional success (Feng, 2009). Most universities in
China treat passing CET-4 as a criterion that measures a student's English language prociency (Liu, 2007) and as one of the
requirements for attaining degrees. In the job market, many employers, private or foreign-owned companies and government
departments, regard the CET-4 certicate as an important selection criterion (Feng, 2009). In the rst 12 years after CET-4 was
launched, English speaking skill was not tested. Though an oral test called College English Test-Spoken English Test was
included in College English Test system in 1999 to improve students' communicative competence, it was only available to the
students who achieved score above 550 in CET-4 out of the full score of 720, which, according to the author's 14-year tertiary
English teaching experience, appeared to be unattainable for a large majority of students in non-elite universities. When the
academics and students mentioned attaining good results in CET-4 in this study, this was taken to mean improving students'
English linguistic and grammatical knowledge.
As for the function of CET-4 in English education, the administrator stated:
CET-4 is the way to evaluate whether students meet the Curriculum Requirements [issued by the Ministry of Education]
The objective of English education is to teach students to use English, not to teach them how to take CET-4.
The administrator's perception on CET-4 reected in the above quotation is consistent with the national government
documents and literature. According to the Syllabus for College English Test issued by CET Committee in 2006, the purpose of
CET-4 is to examine whether students have reached the required English levels specied in the College English Curriculum
Requirements (CMoE, 2007). Some scholars (Jin & Yang, 2006; Zheng & Cheng, 2008) have explored the wash back effect of

1
This study found that the peripheral experiences between the teaching and learner CoPs did not necessarily lead to positive learning outcomes. In this
paper, the peripheral experiences which may hinder students' participation in English classroom oral tasks are referred to as negative peripheries.
40 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

CET-4 on English education in China and argue that the objective of CET-4 is to examine the results of English education and
that it is improper to consider it the objective of English education at the tertiary level.
It seemed that joint interpretation of the objectives of English education at the University was not achieved between the
administrator, teachers and students. While improving students' overall ELP was described by the administrator and three
teachers as an objective of English education, only 7.7% (n 8) of students shared this view. Also, the role the CET-4 should
play in English education was understood differently by a large majority of teachers and students. Though the administrator
explicitly stated that passing examinations should not be regarded as part of the English educational objectives, all the four
teachers and most (n 77) students stressed test preparation.

5.2. Value of the four English language skills

The researcher asked the participants to reect on the focus of their English teaching with regards to the four English
language skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. The participants' responses to the following two questions, which
are summed up in Table 3, illustrate their views: (1) Which of the four English language skills do you think is important for EFL
learners? (2) Which of the four skills is important for you (your students)? The participants were allowed to choose more than
one skill in responding to each question if they believed these were equally important.
A large majority (79.8%, n 83) of the interviewed students reported valuing English speaking skills. However, a close
examination revealed many of them were contradictory in their own views as to what should be emphasized in the process of
English education.
When answering the rst question, the administrator stated: The four English language skills are integrated and are
equally important. However, immediately after that, she said:
For students in our university, the focus of English teaching and learning should be on improving students' listening
and reading skills, which are the most fundamental among the four skills. As far as I know, many students in our
university spend the most effort in improving reading and listening skills due to their importance in the CET-4.
Here there is a contradiction in the administrator's statements. As someone with years of EFL learning and teaching
experience, she knew the equal importance of the four skills. Nevertheless, as an authority she was willing to condone her
colleagues' emphasis on reading and listening competences, and to identify her students as English learners with lower ELP
than those in elite universities and whose biggest concern was to attain good results in CET-4. While she was aware that
students at the University were decient in their speaking skills, she believed it was more fundamental for them to
concentrate on reading and listening competence. As the University authority in charge of every aspect of EFL education, the
administrator's understanding of students' ELP and their expectations towards English learning can naturally be expected to
inuence teachers' engagement in English teaching and English learning resources provided for students.
There was yet another contradiction in the administrator's statements. While she stated that the objectives of the English
program were consistent with government policy and the University's emphasis on reading and listening skills, she also
stated that students at the University were required to:
Meet the basic requirements [the lowest level] described in the Curriculum Requirements issued by the Ministry of
Education in 2007.
Nevertheless, in the description of the prociency that students had to achieve in order to reach the basic level, English
speaking and listening skills are highlighted in the Curriculum Requirements (2007) as skills that should receive more
emphasis than reading and writing skills in tertiary-level English education. With the introduction of the CET-Spoken English
Test (CET-SET) in 1999, students' comprehensive competence in the four basic language skills were taken into equal

Table 3
Participants' views on the importance of the four English language skills.

Q1: Importance of the four English language skills for general EFL learners

Skill categories Participants

Director Teachers Students

n/total n (percent)
Lin Zhan Kou Cui
Listening 37/104 (35.6%)
Speaking 83/104 (79.8%)
Reading 21/104 (20.2%)
Writing 25/104 (24.0%)

Q2: Importance of the four English language skills for students at the University

Listening 42/104 (40.4%)

Speaking 27/104 (26.0%)
Reading 73/104 (70.2%)
Writing 49/104 (47.1%)
 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46 41

consideration (Yang, 2004). The administrator's emphasis on reading and listening skills is apparently inconsistent with the
objectives of tertiary English education advocated by the Ministry of Education.
Even though the introduction of CET-SET represents the government's decision to put improving students' oral
communication skill in a prime position, the fact that most students in non-elite universities have to pass CET-4 (the written-
form examination) in order to get degrees is still unchanged. Under this circumstance, the academics and students in non-
elite universities have to face the dilemma between improving oral communication skills and attaining degrees. Policy
makers need to take this structural disincentive into consideration. It will not be further discussed here because it exceeds the
scope of this paper.
As indicated in Table 3, four teachers' and the administrator's views differed as to the relative value of the four English
skills, with some teachers contradictory in their statements as to the importance of the four English skills for general EFL
learners and for their students specically. Close examination of the teacher interviews suggested that the inconsistency was
largely caused by their views on the importance of the CET-4 to the students and on the relationship between the four English
language skills. Though all the four teachers understood English to be a tool of spoken communication, they were willing to
identify their students as learners who might not need an overall ELP for the real English communication context, including
sufcient speaking skills. Teachers Lin, Cui and Zhan shared views with the administrator where they described classroom
oral participation as highly demanding of students' ELP, requiring strong vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, listening
competence and the ability to speak in the presence of peers. As they saw it, given that the University was non-elite and that
the enrolled students had lower ELPs than their counterparts in elite universities, the focus of English learning should be on
mastering linguistic knowledge for the CET-4, which the students needed to attain the bachelor's degree. Teacher Kou did not
have the same understanding as the administrator and the other three teachers, stating:
Classroom oral participation can be achieved as long as a basic vocabulary and grammatical knowledge have been
mastered.
Nevertheless, she still viewed assisting students to achieve higher results on the CET-4 as a more important task than
improving their communicative competence.
Perhaps the inconsistency within the teaching CoP can be explained by a lack of communication between teachers and the
administrator. According to the administrator, the only instruction teachers received from the institution was the textbook
units they had to complete each semester. The teachers had never been formally informed of the expected teaching meth-
odologies or desired ways of organizing classes and their teaching was evaluated by whether or not the assigned texts had
been analyzed in the designated period of time. Communication among teachers on discipline requirements and teaching
practices was rare.
A similar trend was also revealed among the students. As illustrated in Table 3, a large majority (n 83) of the interviewed
students believed that speaking was the most important skill for English learners. Three responses from learners included:
The main function of a language is to communicate.
We have learned a lot of English grammar in high school. Now it's high time for us to improve our speaking skills.
A person who already has good speaking skills can usually read and write well.
In answer to the question about which of the four skills were most important (listening, speaking, reading, writing), the
learners' answers varied considerably. 70.2% (n 73) regarded the improvement of reading competence (crucial in passing
examinations) as their major concern. Only 27 out of the 104 students emphasized improving speaking competence. The
gure shows that some students tended to distinguish themselves from general EFL learners, which coincided with the views
of the administrator and teachers discussed above. In light of the analysis, it appears that the students' tendency to regard
English as a subject to be tested in examinations rather than to identify themselves as general English learners who need to
master overall ELP heavily informs the academics' inconsistent views.

5.3. Students' aspirations for English learning

As discussed above, the administrator and all the four teachers interviewed for this study tended to regard passing and
attaining good results on the CET-4 as the students' major concern. With the aim of examining whether the students'
expectations for English learning conformed to those understood by the teachers and the administrator, the student
interviewees' responses to the question What do you expect to achieve from university English learning? were collected.
Mastering linguistic knowledge and getting good results in CET-4 were mentioned by 78.8% (n 82) of the student
interviewees as part of their learning objectives. This supports the claim that CET-4 exerts great inuence on Chinese tertiary
students' English learning (Cheng, 2008). However, students' emphasis on CET-4 results did not necessarily lead to the neglect
of communication skills. A majority 58.7% (n 61) of the student interviewees expected to improve communicative
competence, with statements similar to the following two:
I would be happy if I could speak English continuously for ten sentences.
I hope I can communicate with English speakers uently.
42 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

This conicts with the nding in the literature that most Chinese students have little interest in developing their spoken
English due to overemphasis on the CET-4 and examinations (Gu & Liu, 2005). Nevertheless, some teacher interviewees, such
as Lin and Cui, viewed student emphasis on CET-4 and communicative competence as mutually antagonistic. They took it for
granted that student emphasis on CET-4 meant the student might not expect to improve communication skills. The
boundaries between the teaching CoP and the learner CoP, and the mismatches between what students expect and what
teachers try to offer, increase the complexity of students' struggle in classroom oral participation and their efforts to improve
English communicative competence.
This was reected in student interviews. Many students (n 41) revealed that at the beginning of their university studies,
they decided to improve their spoken English. However, due to lack of support from teachers and little cooperation from
peers, they gradually gave up their efforts.
Nian, a student in teacher Zhan's class, was one of these students. She said that her high school English teacher valued
students' involvement in oral activities in class and often provided oral communication tasks. She habitually participated in
oral activities and was condent of her EFL communication skills. At the beginning of her university studies, Nian imitated the
strategies of her English teacher in high school by suggesting that her roommates speak English with each other in the
dormitory. Gradually Nian found that oral English did not seem to be as emphasized as in high school:
When I was in high school, my English teacher required us to chat with classmates in English after class. After entering
university, it seemed nobody around me was interested in practicing oral English. Our English teacher has never talked
to us about what we should do to improve English speaking competence.
At rst, Nian's roommates were happy to follow her suggestion. They spoke broken English with each other, without
uency. However, due to the lack of external support and emphasis from the teacher, they gradually gave it up. Nian's
experience appears to support the literature (Peng & Woodrow, 2010; Zarrinabadi, 2014) that teacher support and encour-
agement tend to improve L2 learners' interest in oral tasks and inuence their willingness to use English in communication.

5.4. Students' expectations for classroom oral participation

As for students' desire to take part in classroom oral activities, some teachers, such as Lin and Cui, stated that passive
students might feel more comfortable being excluded from classroom oral tasks. This view seems not to be supported by the
statistics collected from the student interviewees. In interviews most students (54.8%, n 57), especially passive participants,
said they wanted to be more actively engaged in classroom oral tasks, making statements such as:
I feel uncomfortable with my lack of involvement in English speaking activities.
I expect to make active contributions to English classroom oral tasks.
Many students (45.2%, n 47) revealed admiration for more active students. Though inactive oral participants lacked the
courage to participate, they were happy to be asked by teachers to participate. For example:
It makes the class more meaningful.
I hope to conquer the anxiety through more frequent participation, rst by being asked [by the teacher], and then
gradually forming the habit [of participation].
Apparently, these aspirations for more oral involvement in English class, expressed by inactive participants, were over-
looked by some teachers.
The analysis shows that the lack of knowledge about issues closely relevant to English education, such as the objectives of
English learning at the tertiary level, the desired attitude towards CET-4, students' aspirations for English learning and the
importance of the four English language skills, was apparent among students. This might be due to the ineffective broker role
that the teachers played in the educational process. According to the four teachers who were interviewed, few of them have
ever discussed the above issues with students, nor has the institution formally informed students about these. The teachers'
boundary and negative peripheral experiences in the learner CoP regarding the above issues might have been the cause of
frustration and dilemmas among the students in the process of English learning, which arose frequently during the
interviews.

6. Discussion

Answers to both research questions can be summarized holistically. First, students' perceptions of English education and
classroom oral participation are little recognized or valued by the teachers and the administrator. Rather, the teachers and
administrator rely on their own views and, in the case of teachers, their own experience. Secondly, despite the fact that
students understand the disciplinary requirements and academic practices regarding classroom oral participation and the
University's need to comply with national guidelines, they were in some ways dissatised with the way that English was
taught at the University. The learners sought greater emphasis on the practical reasons for mastering English and support in
speaking the language outside of the classroom.
 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46 43

These insights are signicant, as they suggest that while the ideals of the students and the overall framework (as related
faithfully by the administrator) are in broad agreement, the classroom reality fails to foster this natural synergy between
learners' aspirations and research-informed policy.
The administrator, teachers and students alike demonstrated joint awareness of the signicance of classroom oral
participation to English education. However, the mutual accountability (Wenger, 1998) for the key issues underneath it has
not been achieved. The reection on the concerns of the administrator, teachers and students embedded in the educational
process revealed their real perceptions as to classroom oral participation.
Similar to the existing literature (Zhou, 2011b), the analysis presented in this study found that shared understandings
about the objectives of the English program have not been achieved by the administrator, teachers and students. The
administrator stated explicitly that improving students' overall English language prociency was the objective of the English
program at the University. The CET-4 was only a means of evaluating learning outcomes and passing the CET-4 should not be
regarded as an end in itself. Nevertheless, all the four teachers and a large majority of students interpreted passing CET-4 as a
tertiary objectives of the University's EFL program. The boundaries between the two CoPs and inconsistencies within the
teaching CoP in this respect might have caused the administrator, the teachers and the students to invest their efforts in
different skill areas of English language and decrease the authentic outcomes (and indeed policy compliance) of EFL edu-
cation, including oral skills.
This study suggests that students' apparent understanding of the issues relevant to English learning did not match
their practice. For example, all students, even those who hardly made contributions to English classroom oral tasks,
portrayed participating in oral tasks as important to English learning, contributing to both personal and academic
improvement; signicantly, these articulated values are not seen as furthered in the classroom setting. Rather, close
analysis of the data derived from students' reections on their English learning found that few regarded it as signicant
to their own experience. Teachers, too, stressed the importance of mastering spoken English, while actually placing more
emphasis on examinations that did not assess speaking skills. In CoP theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998;
Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002) peripheries are positive positions and provide planned and unplanned opportu-
nities for participation (Wenger, 1998, p. 120). However, it appears that greater peripheries between the teaching and
learner CoPs do not necessarily relate to better educational outcomes. The teachers' varying participation in the teaching
CoP and their readiness to conate the objectives of tertiary English education with test performance, as reected in the
analysis, make their peripheral experiences in the learner CoP less signicant. In addition, students tended to regard
themselves as learners whose major concern is passing examinations, rather than general English learners who need to
master overall prociency. This reduces the natural onow from their reported understanding of the value of English
learning to their English communication behaviors and achievement, as has been assumed in the existing literature (Peng
& Woodrow, 2010).
The ndings of this study show that there was a mismatch between students' personal approaches and the interpretation
of disciplinary requirements. Most students sought to acquire greater communicative competence in English at the university.
It is consistent with the assertions of previous research that most Chinese students prefer an active speech role in class
(Littlewood, 1999; Liu & Littlewood, 1997). Yet the vast majority interpreted passing the CET-4, which does not test speaking
skills, as one of the key requirements for the English discipline. The students' frequent mentioning of the CET-4 in interview
conrms the prestige that the CET-4 enjoys. However, this study found that student emphasis on the CET-4 did not necessarily
mean lack of aspiration to improve communicative competence. This is a new insight, and contrasts with past literature (Gu &
Liu, 2005). The administrator and teachers tended to overlook the learners' earnest desire to be able to carry on a conversation
in English. When noticing students' emphasis on the CET-4, they took it for granted that students would not spend much
effort in enhancing oral English. This can lead to students' investment of learning efforts in low priority areas while what they
value is neglected, as reected in the instance of Nian.
The above contradictions might be caused by the ineffective role that teachers played as brokers (He, 2009; Wenger, 1998)
between the teaching and learner CoPs. Due to little formal communication between the administrator and teachers
regarding disciplinary requirements and scant discussion among teachers on pedagogical views and academic practices, there
was a lack of agreement within the teaching CoP to emphasize English oral language prociency in the curriculum. This
coincides with Tran's (2010) major nding from a case study in an Australian university context that teachers seemed to rarely
discuss disciplinary requirements with their colleagues. It also supports the assertion by Nunan (2003) that adequate and
appropriate training for teachers is a major problem of English education in the AsiaePacic. In the absence of a unied view,
teachers tend to develop teaching strategies based on their own understanding, which may not meet the disciplinary
requirements regulated by the institution.
The lack of communication between teachers and students in terms of key issues regarding English teaching and learning
was also apparent. This made it challenging for the teachers to function effectively as brokers (He, 2009; Wenger, 1998)
between the teaching CoP and the learner CoP. It increased the challenges that students encountered in understanding what
was required of them and how to behave in class for the purpose of academic achievement. The teachers' unexamined
assumptions about the purposes of English education (Tran, 2009) may result in the silencing and marginalization of college
students attempting to learn English.
Based on the analysis, this study offers a glimpse into how institutional practices might be transformed. Following such
suggestions will nurture and support (Koeglreiter, Torlina, & Smith, 2008, p. 186) the teaching CoP and the learner CoP to
improve students' classroom oral participation.
44 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

Administrators need to review policies on English language teaching and investigate the extent to which principles
enshrined in ofcial curriculum documentation are effectively realized at the level of classroom practice, (Nunan, 2003,
p. 610). In order to achieve consistencies within the teaching CoP, the prociency-based language requirementsedened as
those that emphasize students' ability to communicate effectively in English for real life purposeseshould be implemented
explicitly in higher education institutions. This helps teachers to construct positive pedagogical views on English teaching,
which will lead to greater emphasis on improving students' communicative competence and greater effort to facilitate
students' oral participation, as well as better coordination of purpose between teachers and administration.
Inviting teachers and students into the formation of English educational policies may be benecial for the teachers to
function more effectively as brokers to span boundaries and avoid negative peripheral experiences between the teaching and
learner CoPs. As the brokers linking students and administrators, teachers' reections around English educational policies
might help to develop joint understanding between teachers and administrators on specic issues in tertiary English edu-
cation, improving the implementation of policy in the teaching process. Communication with teachers and students also
exposes administrators to the aspirations and frustrations encountered by both groups. This enables the curriculum to be
adjusted for greater efciency in facilitating EFL education.
Teachers should share their own education philosophies explicitly and explore what it means to be successful and
competent EFL learners with students. It is crucial for students to realize that being competent English language learners is
not the same as being good English language students (Pomerantz, 2001). Teachers should also keep a close eye on students'
behaviors in the English classroom and explore students' actual intentions underneath their apparent behaviors. As shown in
the analysis, students' apparent neglect of classroom oral participation does not necessarily indicate their unwillingness to be
involved in classroom oral tasks. It is crucial for teachers to understand that most students are not passive by nature, nor are
they happy with their own reticent participation in English class.

7. Conclusion

In light of a dual CoP framework, this study explores discrepancies in the perspectives of the administrator, teachers and
students at a Chinese university regarding issues relevant to classroom oral participation. A key nding of this study is that,
despite sharing broad goals in improving student learning, the interpretation of this enterprise varies between the partici-
pating actors. In addition to the boundaries and negative peripheral experiences between the teaching CoP and the learner
CoP, within CoPs there are contradictions in views. The misunderstanding complicates students' struggles in classroom oral
participation, beyond factors explorable from the students' own perspectives or based on the observation of the interaction
between teachers and students in the classroom setting, which are approaches common in the current literature (Fushino,
2010; Liu, 2005; Peng, 2012; Peng & Woodrow, 2010; Yashima, 2002).
The major practical implication emerging from the study is that, while Chinese EFL policy at the national level stresses
learning to use the language naturally, the importance of an examination that does not measure oral skills overrides the policy
objective. For want of a more consistent non-eliteeyet high-stakeseassessment mechanism, universities should consider
supporting the known formative benets of classroom oral participation more systematically. The research might be
extended to more universities in order to widen understanding of how classroom oral participation is perceived differently by
various stakeholders and in various cultural contexts. Further research could also use classroom observation data in trian-
gulation with that of the interview.

Acknowledgment

This project was sponsored by the University of Melbourne and the Scientic Research Foundation for the Returned
Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry. I would like to acknowledge Associate Professor Sophie Arkoudis and
Professor Simon Marginson for their valuable comments and support for this study. I am also grateful to the editor and
anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback to improve the paper.

Appendix A. Administrator Interview Guidelines

I. Personal background information

Gender: _____
Age: _____
How many years have you been teaching English language? _______
How many years have you been in the position of the director of Foreign Language Department at this university? ___
What is your highest degree and what do you major in? ___________
II. Perceptions on English education and classroom oral participation
1. What do you consider to be the objectives of the English program at the university?
What should students achieve?
How do these aims meet the general policy of the National Government?
 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46 45

2. What do you think is the relationship between the four English language skills, i.e. listening, speaking, reading and writing,
in developing students' English language prociency?
What is the pedagogical relationship between them?
What aspects of English teaching are important?
What do you think should students spend the most effort and time on in their English language learning in the tertiary
level?
What do you think students expect to achieve in English learning?
What do you think of students' opportunities to use English in communication in the future lives and career?
3. Do you think students' oral participation in classroom activities is important for their English language learning? Why and
why not?
4. Do you think teachers/students see the role of classroom oral participation as one of the important factors assisting
students' English learning?
5. To what extent is students' classroom oral participation inuenced by English language tests, especially CET-4?

Appendix B. Teacher Interview Guidelines

I. Personal background information

Gender: _____
Age: _____
How many years have you been teaching English language? _______
What is your highest degree and what do you major in? _______________________
II. Perceptions on English education and classroom oral participation
1. What do you consider to be the objectives of the English program at the university?
What should students achieve?
2. What do you think is the relationship between the four English language skills, i.e. listening, speaking, reading and writing,
in developing students' English language prociency?
What is the pedagogical relationship between them?
What do you think should students spend the most effort and time on in their English language learning in the tertiary
level?
What do you think students value most?
What do you think students expect to achieve in English learning?
What do you put the most emphasis on in teaching?
What do you think of students' opportunities to use English in communication in the future lives and career?
3. Do you think students' oral participation in classroom activities is important for their English language learning? Why and
why not?
4. Do you think students see the role of oral-participation as one of the important factors assisting their English learning?
5. To what extent is students' classroom oral participation inuenced by English language tests, especially CET-4?

Appendix C. Student Interview Guidelines

I. Personal background information

Gender: _______
Hometown: _______ (city/town/village)
Major: _______
Mobile phone: _______
How many years have you learned English? _______
II. Perceptions on English education and classroom oral participation
1. What are your objectives of English learning?
What are the objectives of English program at our university?
What do you expect to achieve in university English learning?
For what purpose do you learn English?
2. State your views on the relationships between the four English language skills, i.e. listening, speaking, reading and writing.
Which of the four skills do you think are the most important for English learners? You are allowed to choose more than
one if you think these are equally important. Please explain the reasons for your choice.
Which of the four skills are the most important for you in the present stage? You are allowed to choose more than one if
you think these are equally important. Please explain the reasons for your choice.
What do you expect to learn in English class?
3. What do you want to use English language for in the future?
46 N. Zhou / System 53 (2015) 35e46

What do you think of the opportunities to use spoken English after undergraduate study? Please choose one from the
following ve choices and explain.
(a) A lot; (b) Some; (c) Have no idea; (d) Few; (e) Denitely no
Do you think English language prociency, especially communication skill, is important for you? If yes, in what respects
do you think it might be useful?
4. What do you think of the importance of English classroom oral participation? Please choose one from the following ve
choices and explain.
(a) Very important; (b) Important; (c) Neutral; (d) Unimportant; (e) Very unimportant
5. For what reasons, do you participate in English classroom oral tasks?
6. Do you think your English teacher emphasizes students' classroom oral participation? How do you tell?
7. To what extent is your English language learning inuenced by tests, especially CET-4?

References

Achugar, M. (2009). Constructing a bilingual professional identity in a graduate classroom. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 8(2e3), 65e87.
Anderson, L. J. (2008). Community college ESL teachers' perceptions of their work: A phenomenological case study (PhD Thesis). Illinois State University.
Bazeley, P. (2007). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London: Sage Publications.
Boylan, H. M. (2002). Peripherality or marginality: Socialization of English learners into a high school community of practice (PhD Thesis). University of Colorado
at Boulder.
Cao, Y. Q. (2011). Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second language classrooms from an ecological perspective. System, 39(4),
468e479.
CET Committee. (2006). CET 4 syllabus. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press [In Chinese].
Cheng, L. Y. (2008). The key to success: English language testing in China. Language Testing, 25(1), 15e37.
CMoE document. (2007). College English curriculum requirements. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press [In Chinese].
Feng, A. W. (2009). English in China: Convergence and divergence in policy and practice. AILA Review, 22(1), 85e102.
Fushino, K. (2010). Causal relationships between communication condence, beliefs about group work, and willingness to communicate in foreign language
group work. TESOL Quarterly, 44(4), 700e724.
Gu, W., & Liu, J. (2005). Test analysis of college students' communicative competence in English. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2), 118e133.
Hansen-Thomas, H. H. (2005). Learning to use math discourse in a standards-based, reform-oriented middle school classroom: How Latina/o ELLs become
socialized into the math community of practice (PhD Thesis). The University of Texas.
Hartt, G. J. (2012). How class size reduction mediate secondary students' learning: hearing the pupil voice. Asia Pacic Education Review, 13, 299e310.
He, A. (2009). Bridging the gap between teacher educator and teacher in a community of practice: a case of brokering. System, 37(1), 153e163.
Jin, Y., & Yang, H. Z. (2006). The English prociency of college and university students in China: as reected in the CET. Language, Culture and Curriculum,
19(1), 21e36.
Kang, S. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33(2), 277e292.
Koeglreiter, G., Torlina, L., & Smith, R. (2008). Reaching beyond the boundaries: Communities of practice and boundaries in tertiary education. In C. Kimble,
P. Hildreth, & I. Bourdon (Eds.), Communities of practice: Creating learning environments for educators (Vol. 1, pp. 163e190). Charlotte, North Carolina:
Information Age Publishing.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Li, L. X. (2004). China's higher education reform 1998-2003: a summary. Asia Pacic Education Review, 5(1), 14e22.
Littlewood, W. (1999). Dening and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts. Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 71e94.
Liu, M. H. (2005). Reticence, anxiety and performance of Chinese university students in oral English lessons and tests (PhD Thesis). The Chinese University of
Hong Kong.
Liu, J. (2007). Learner autonomy and Chinese university students' English prociency: A quantitative and qualitative study (Doctor of Education Thesis). Regent
University.
Liu, N., & Littlewood, W. (1997). Why do many students appear reluctant to participate in classroom learning discourse? System, 25(3), 371e384.
MacIntyre, P. D., Cle
ment, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: a situational model of L2 condence and
afliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545e562.
Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. Harlow: Longman.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacic region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4),
589e613.
Peng, J. E. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System, 40(2), 203e213.
Peng, J. E., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: a model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language learning, 60(4),
834e876.
Pomerantz, A. I. (2001). Beyond the good language learner: Ideology, identity, and investment in classroom foreign language learning (PhD Thesis). Pennsylvania:
University of Pennsylvania.
Reilly, R. C. (2013). Found poems, member checking and crises of representation. The Qualitative Report, 18(Art. 30), 1e18. Retrieved from http://www.nova.
edu/ssss/QR/QR18/reilly30.pdf.
Tran, L. T. (2009). Making visible hidden intentions and potential choices: International students in intercultural communication. Language and Inter-
cultural Communication, 9(4), 271e284.
Tran, L. T. (2010). Embracing prior professional experience in meaning making: Views from international students and academics. Educational Review, 62(2),
157e173.
Wang, W., & Gao, X. S. (2008). English language education in China: a review of selected research. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,
29(5), 380e399.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Yang, H. Z. (2004). An analysis of the English prociency of the Chinese students as reected in the National CET test. Foreign Languages in China, 1(1), 56e60
[In Chinese].
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: the Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54e66.
Zarrinabadi, N. (2014). Communicating in a second language: Investigating the effect of teacher on learners' willingness to communicate. System, 42, 288e295.
Zheng, Y., & Cheng, L. Y. (2008). College English test (CET) in China. Language Testing, 25(3), 408e417.
Zhou, N. (2011a). The signicance of the three dimensions of the community of practice theory to class construction. Modern Educational Technology, 2,
86e89 [In Chinese].
Zhou, N. (2011b). Cultivating joint enterprise: a way to improving curriculum development. Modern Education Management, 7, 82e85 [In Chinese].