English- vs. Chinese-Medium Instruction in Chinese Higher Education: A Quasi-Experimental Comparison

Haitao Guo, Fuhui Tong, Zhuoying Wang, Yue Min and Shifang Tang
Additional contact information
Haitao Guo: College of Mass Communication, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518000, China
Fuhui Tong: Department of Education Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA
Zhuoying Wang: Department of Education Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA
Yue Min: Department of Education Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA
Shifang Tang: Department of Education Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA

Sustainability, 2018, vol. 10, issue 11, 1-17

Abstract: Through a quasi-experimental approach, we compared Chinese college students’ learning motivation, content knowledge, English language proficiency, and instructor’s pedagogical practices between an English-medium instruction (EMI) and the parallel Chinese-medium instruction (CMI) course in a non-traditional discipline. Results indicated that EMI was more effective, as compared to CMI, in motivating students’ learning of the focal subject. More specifically, EMI students held a stronger external goal orientation than did their CMI peers. Further, EMI and CMI students performed on par in their final exam in the subject and English after one semester of participation, controlling for their prior performance. The finding suggested that EMI did not carry a detrimental effect on Chinese college students’ content area learning. Finally, observation revealed a significantly higher percentage of English language instruction focused on higher-order dense cognitive area in the EMI classroom where students were more engaged in their learning. Implications for policy and research were discussed regarding this educational approach for sustained and optimized student learning.

Keywords: English-medium-instruction; Chinese-medium-instruction; quasi-experiment; learning motivation; English proficiency; academic outcome; affective outcome (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4230/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4230/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4230-:d:183320

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().