Redefining the Role of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in China Amid the Rise of English Medium Instruction and Transnational Education

Abstract

The rapid expansion of English Medium Instruction (EMI) and Transnational Education (TNE) is reshaping higher education in non-Anglophone contexts. As English-taught programmes and cross-border partnerships proliferate, universities face heightened linguistic and academic demands, positioning English for Academic Purposes (EAP) as central to the university’s internationalisation agenda. Against this backdrop, understanding how language support is conceptualised and operationalised within EMI and TNE contexts is critical, given the increasing reliance on English as the medium through which these agendas are realised. However, there remains limited empirical understanding of how EAP teachers experience these shifting demands and how their roles are being reconfigured within EMI- and TNE-driven reforms. This study investigates professional development (PD) initiatives for EAP teachers in China, where EMI and TNE are rapidly expanding. Document analysis of teachers’ PD documents (n = 10) and interviews with EAP teachers (n = 20) and PD leads (n = 5) across 13 EMI institutions reveal a lack of EAP-specific training, persistent structural constraints, limited recognition within the institution, and uneven access to development pathways for EAP teachers. It highlights the need for systemic change to address the marginalisation of EAP expertise, amidst the changing higher education landscape. Positioning EAP practitioners as central to EMI and TNE policy implementation can help ensure higher education internationalisation initiatives do not remain superficial, largely symbolic and short-sighted.

1. Introduction

The internationalisation of higher education has become synonymous with the Englishisation of higher education, a process increasingly embodied in the global expansion of English Medium Instruction (EMI), and the growing prominence of Transnational Education (TNE). Governments across various higher education contexts have actively promoted English as a strategic resource for international competitiveness, research collaboration, and student mobility (Curle et al., 2020; Fenton-Smith et al., 2026). EMI is commonly defined as the use of English to teach academic subjects in contexts where English is not the majority first language. EMI has been widely characterised as one of the most significant developments in higher education systems worldwide over the past two decades (Coleman et al., 2024; Galloway et al., 2020; Macaro et al., 2018). The change in language policy and use is reshaping pedagogical practices, disciplinary knowledge construction, institutional language ideologies, and the overall higher education landscape on a global level. EMI is not only a pedagogical innovation, but part of broader strategic and policy-driven internationalisation reforms, where English has capital. In China, for example, EMI has been closely linked to national modernisation agendas (Zhang, 2018) and institutional English proficiency goals (Curle et al., 2020; Rose et al., 2020), as well as broader processes of higher education internationalisation. As universities in China seek to enhance global competitiveness and international engagement, EMI remains a key priority (Rose et al., 2020; S. Zhou et al., 2022).

The transition to delivering higher education through English is also related to the expansion of transnational campuses (Packer, 2026) and expanding TNE in higher education institutions (HEIs) in Anglophone contexts amidst dwindling international student enrolments. Anglophone governments and universities are progressively reorienting their policy agendas from recruiting international students for in-country study to extending their institutional reach across geographical borders (British Council, 2020; Wilkins & Juusola, 2020). This shift has been particularly evident in the UK, where recent fluctuations and declines in international student recruitment from key source countries, including China, have intensified institutional reliance on TNE partnerships as a strategic means of sustaining global engagement and revenue streams (British Council, 2020). TNE refers to educational provision in which learners are located in a country different from that of the awarding institution, typically delivered through international partnerships, branch campuses, or joint programmes (Knight, 2020). TNE takes many forms, from courses taken at overseas institutions to international credit transfer, degree accreditation, joint or dual degree programs, as well as distance education (China-Britain Business Council, 2022). TNE is certainly not a new phenomenon, but it has gained renewed strategic attention in recent years as governments seek to expand international engagement while strengthening domestic higher education capacity (Wilkins & Juusola, 2020). For example, UK HEIs have enrolled over 570,000 students studying for UK degrees overseas through TNE programmes since 2023, reflecting a major expansion of offshore provision (Universities UK International, 2023), particularly in light of the new UK government’s higher education internationalisation strategy (UK Government, 2026).

Such rapid growth raises critical questions about how teaching quality, language support, and staff development are sustained across institutional and national contexts, particularly in EMI-dependent TNE settings where English mediates both disciplinary teaching and international collaboration. Research on TNE staff development (e.g., Keevers et al., 2014; Sun et al., 2022; Wilding & Li, 2021) highlights persistent challenges, including fragmented provision, limited contextual relevance, and uneven access to PD opportunities. However, this literature largely focuses on content lecturers, with limited attention to EAP practitioners despite their central role in EMI/TNE delivery (Galloway & Rose, 2021). This omission is significant because EAP teachers are increasingly expected to navigate discipline-specific teaching demands (Basturkmen, 2021; Costa & Mastellotto, 2022) alongside multilingual and intercultural communication challenges (Macaro & Han, 2020), highlighting the need for greater research attention to EAP practitioners and their PD.

This is also significant from a UK perspective, as shifting student mobility patterns have increased institutional reliance on in-country TNE provision. Since 2004, China has experienced a significant growth in TNE in higher education. Part of the ‘internationalisation at home’ strategy, it is closely linked to EMI, and has directly led to an increase in EMI courses across Chinese institutions (De Costa et al., 2020). China has actively expanded TNE through Sino-foreign cooperative universities, joint programmes, and international branch campuses, reflecting a strong policy-driven approach to cross-border higher education (Ren & Tian, 2020; R. Yang, 2016). By the early 2020s, China had become the world’s largest host country for TNE provision, with thousands of approved joint programmes operating across disciplines, including over 2000 Sino-foreign cooperative programmes and institutions (British Council, 2020). While TNE partnerships vary in structure and governance (see McKinley et al., 2021 for a review), most adopt English as the primary medium of instruction, further accelerating the spread of EMI and intensifying demand for academic language support. This expansion has increased institutional reliance on EAP provision while also creating new expectations for EAP teachers to engage with disciplinary discourse (Hyland, 2022), EMI pedagogy (McKinley, 2025), and cross-departmental collaboration (Malmström & Zhou, 2025; Wang et al., 2025).

Despite strong top-down policy support, studies (e.g., Akıncıoğlu, 2024; Galloway et al., 2024; M. Li & Pei, 2024) have identified persistent pedagogical, linguistic, and institutional challenges, particularly relating to students’ English proficiency and disciplinary discourse demands (Wei & Macaro, 2024; S. Zhou et al., 2023). Hampson’s (2025) review of research trends in the rapidly growing field of EMI research from 2000 to 2023 highlights a recent explosion of research on challenges faced by EMI stakeholders (i.e., students and teachers). This growing body of research has, in turn, prompted increasing calls for the integration of EAP provision.

Recent scholarship increasingly advocates more targeted EAP approaches, closer integration between language and disciplinary teaching (Macaro & Aizawa, 2024; McKinley & Rose, 2022), and greater emphasis on ESAP approaches (Hakim, 2023; Hyland, 2022; McKinley, 2025). There are also growing calls for PD and collaboration between language and content teachers (Galloway et al., 2024; Malmström & Zhou, 2025). Nevertheless, EAP provision within EMI/TNE programmes often remains uneven and marginalised in practice.

Limited PD provision partly reflects the continued positioning of EAP as peripheral or remedial within EMI and TNE implementation (Ding & Bruce, 2017), rather than as fully integrated into disciplinary teaching and curriculum design (McKinley & Rose, 2022; Wingate, 2018). In TNE contexts, these tensions are further shaped by institutional leadership structures and enduring assumptions that language support remains secondary to disciplinary knowledge development (Dafouz & Smit, 2020; Fernandez-Chung & Singh Gill, 2025; Pecorari & Malmström, 2018).

Institutional positioning can be understood as both structural and relational (Davies & Harré, 1990), referring to how EAP is formally located within institutional arrangements (e.g., organisational affiliation, access to resources, and decision-making structures) and how it is perceived and enacted through professional roles, recognition, and participation in institutional processes. PD can, therefore, be examined as both an outcome and indicator of positioning: the extent, specificity, and accessibility of PD provision reflect the degree to which EAP expertise is institutionally recognised and strategically embedded within EMI/TNE structures.

Whilst there is limited literature focusing specifically on the positioning, professional identity, and PD of EAP teachers in TNE/EMI contexts, existing research on staff development in transnational education (e.g., Keevers et al., 2014; Wilding & Li, 2021) and on EAP practitioner identity more broadly points to ongoing tensions surrounding the role, recognition, and institutional support of language specialists. While these dynamics originate in Anglophone systems, emerging evidence suggests that similar patterns may be reproduced, and in some cases intensified, in EMI and TNE contexts where English-medium provision is rapidly introduced without corresponding institutional restructuring. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that EAP teachers or centres have failed to position themselves as central to sustainable EMI/TNE implementation. Ding and Bruce (2017) highlight the importance of EAP teacher training and PD as a means of increasing academic influence within a university. They argue that it is through increased professionalisation, a developed knowledge base and disciplinary identity based on scholarship, research and practice, that EAP teachers can reposition their work as central to higher education.

Empirical research examining how EAP teachers experience these shifting institutional expectations, specifically, how their professional roles on PD are being reconfigured within EMI- and TNE-driven reforms, remains limited. Existing studies suggest that EAP teachers in EMI contexts often face a range of challenges, including limited involvement in institutional decision-making (Dafouz & Smit, 2020), and increasing pressure to support students across diverse academic and linguistic demands (Pecorari & Malmström, 2018) without corresponding structural PD support (J. Zhou & Delogu, 2026). In Chinese contexts, where EMI programmes are often implemented rapidly within existing institutional frameworks (Wu & Tsai, 2022), such tensions may be further exacerbated, reinforcing the peripheral positioning of EAP provision. This has important implications for their PD opportunities, as EAP teachers are often expected to adapt to expanding institutional expectations and pedagogical demands (Galloway & Rose, 2021) without being fully included in the institutional processes that shape these expectations. As a result, PD often functions as a reactive response to immediate teaching demands rather than as part of a longer-term institutional strategy for integrating EAP expertise into EMI and TNE implementation.

This disconnect constrains the development of evidence-informed strategies for PD to support EAP teachers in responding to these evolving demands amid the rapid restructuring of internationalised higher education. Understanding this tension between increasing demand for EAP expertise—covering discipline-specific discourses, communicative practices, and epistemologies (Ding & Campion, 2016; McKinley, 2025)—and its persistent institutional marginalisation, which includes a lack of reactive PD, is critical for sustainable EMI and TNE implementation, particularly given the increasing reliance on English as the medium through which these internationalisation agendas are realised. Context-specific PD focused on placing language at the centre of policy and practice, and recognising EAP teachers as integral to the design and delivery of effective EMI and TNE programmes, is essential to ensure quality assurance amid growing TNE and EMI delivery and to ensure they deliver meaningful educational outcomes beyond surface-level internationalisation.

This study examines how institutional positioning and PD opportunities shape the experiences and practices of EAP practitioners working within Chinese EMI/TNE contexts, addressing a key gap in research where PD is often examined separately from broader institutional and policy structures. As one of the largest higher education systems globally and a major site of both EMI (Rose et al., 2026) and TNE experimentation (Ren & Tian, 2020), China provides a particularly important context for understanding how EAP roles are negotiated within rapidly internationalising higher education environments. By foregrounding practitioner perspectives on how their institutional roles, recognition, and PD opportunities are negotiated within EMI/TNE settings, the study contributes to debates on the professional reconfiguration of English language educators and offers insights for strategically repositioning EAP in EMI and TNE policy implementation, particularly through more targeted and context-responsive PD design and provision.

2. Literature Review

2.1. EMI and TNE in China

The development of EMI in China (

Table 1. Policy milestones for EMI in China.

Year	Policy/Initiative	Key Features	Impact on EMI
2001	MOE EMI mandate	5–10% UG courses taught in English	Rapid expansion of EMI programmes
2007	National language & HE policy	English as tool for internationalisation	Emphasis on English proficiency and content learning
2010	Education Reform Plan (2010–2020)	Increase attraction of international students	Growth of EMI programmes & international enrolment
2015	Double First-Class Initiative	Build world-class universities & disciplines	EMI becomes performance indicator for rankings
2021	International student enrolment	255,720 full-time students in EMI	Evidence of rapid EMI scaling nationwide

Sources: (Gao & Ren, 2019; Hu & Duan, 2019; Ministry of Education, 2001, 2022; Liao et al., 2025; Rose et al., 2020; Zhang, 2018).

) has been driven by national goals for higher education internationalisation and global competitiveness. In 2001, the Ministry of Education (MOE) mandated that 5–10% of undergraduate courses in leading universities be taught in English within three years (Ministry of Education, 2001), leading to the rapid establishment of EMI programmes across disciplines such as engineering, science, and business (Gao & Ren, 2019). EMI expansion accelerated with subsequent national policies emphasising English as a tool for academic and socioeconomic development (Hu & Duan, 2019; Liao et al., 2025). The 2007 MOE policy explicitly positioned EMI as a means to enhance both disciplinary learning and students’ English proficiency (Zhang, 2018). In 2010, the national long-term education reform plan aimed to increase China’s attractiveness to international students, contributing to 255,720 full-time international enrolments by 2021 (Ministry of Education, 2022). More recently, EMI provision functions as a performance indicator for university rankings (Rose et al., 2020), particularly within elite institutions under the Double First-Class Initiative (Ministry of Education, 2022).

In Chinese HEIs, EMI typically falls into three categories: EMI universities, EMI colleges (i.e., Joint Education Institutes jointly governed by Chinese and foreign partner institutions), and EMI programmes (

Table 2. Types of EMI Provision in Chinese Higher Education Institutions.

EMI Category	Description	Approximate Number	Typical Staffing and Student Profile
EMI Universities	Fully English-medium joint-venture universities with internationalised curricula and governance structures	10 institutions	Mixed international and local staff; domestic and international students
EMI Colleges	Semi-autonomous English-medium colleges affiliated with Chinese-medium universities	80 colleges	Combination of local and visiting faculty; primarily domestic students
EMI Programmes	Individual English-medium programmes embedded within departments of Chinese-medium universities	2200 programmes	Predominantly local faculty; mainly domestic students

Sources: Ren and Tian (2020); Ministry of Education (2022); Chinese University Ranking (2023); Y. Zhou and Curle (2024).

), ranging from fully English-medium joint-venture universities with predominantly internationalised practices, to affiliated EMI colleges within Chinese-medium universities, and individual EMI programmes embedded within departments and largely staffed by local faculty (J. Zhou & Delogu, 2026). Currently, China hosts around 10 EMI universities, over 80 EMI colleges, and approximately 2200 EMI programmes (Ren & Tian, 2020; Ministry of Education, 2022; Chinese University Ranking, 2023), with most courses taught by local staff and serving primarily domestic students, alongside smaller numbers of international students.

According to the State Council (2003), TNE in China refers to higher educational services jointly run by Chinese and foreign institutions, which are mainly targeting Chinese students. TNE in China has taken two main forms: joint educational programmes (JEPs) and joint educational institutes (JEIs) (China-Britain Business Council, 2022). JEPs typically refer to programme-level collaborations embedded within existing universities, where specific degrees or curricula are co-delivered, whereas JEIs are independently established entities (e.g., colleges or universities) with joint governance structures involving both Chinese and foreign partners. Both initiatives are regulated and supported by national policies promoting international collaboration and capacity building (H. Yang, 2023). TNE, as with EMI, has become a central pillar of China’s higher education internationalisation strategy over the past two decades (Ren & Tian, 2020).

Since 2004, China has experienced a significant growth in TNE in higher education. This initiative is part of the “internationalisation at home” strategy, closely linked to EMI, and has directly led to an increase in EMI courses across Chinese institutions (De Costa et al., 2020). Conceptually, however, EMI and TNE serve different but complementary purposes. EMI primarily concerns language policy and classroom pedagogy (Macaro et al., 2018), whereas TNE is more closely shaped by political rationales, institutional governance structures, quality assurance mechanisms, and international partnership arrangements (Wilkins & Juusola, 2020). However, in the Chinese context, these distinctions are often blurred in practice, with EMI functioning as a key pedagogical mechanism through which broader TNE and internationalisation agendas are enacted.

2.2. The Position and Purpose of EAP in EMI/TNE Contexts

While much of the early literature (e.g., Ding & Bruce, 2017; Le Roux, 2022) on EAP positioning originates in Anglophone contexts, similar structural dynamics are increasingly reported in non-Anglophone EMI and TNE settings, suggesting that these challenges are systemic rather than context-specific. Given the increasing reliance on English as the medium through which these internationalisation agendas are realised, it becomes critical to understand how EAP practitioners work to develop their own knowledge of the role language plays. It is necessary to explore whether their PD provides them with a clear conceptualisation of what it means to provide and operationalise language support within a TNE/EMI context and the extent to which this might provide them with the academic authority and capital to play a more central role in institutional curriculum decisions.

EAP is widely defined as “the teaching of English with the specific aim of helping learners to study, conduct research or teach in that language” (Flowerdew & Peacock, 2001, p. 8). Within EAP, a commonly recognised distinction is made between EGAP and ESAP. EGAP typically focuses on generic academic skills such as essay writing and presentation skills that are assumed to be transferable across disciplines (Flowerdew, 2016). Whereas ESAP emphasises discipline-specific language, genres, and communicative practices, requiring closer alignment with subject content (Hyland, 2016). Interest in EAP has expanded due to ‘the status of English as an academic lingua franca; the internationalisation policies and increasingly global outlook of universities, including the establishment of TNE campuses; and to the move in many universities in non-English speaking countries towards teaching through English as a medium of instruction with the goal of internationalising their own student body’ (Bond et al., 2024, p. 1). Whilst most research literature argues for discipline specificity (ESAP) being the most effective approach to ensuring student success in communicating their own academic understanding in English (Costa & Mastellotto, 2022; Galloway et al., 2024; Hyland, 2016; Nesi & Gardner, 2012; Rose et al., 2019), in practice, most EAP teaching struggles to meet the specific disciplinary needs of each student (J. Zhou & Delogu, 2026). This is, to some extent, due to resourcing issues.

However, more concerning underlying reasons relate to ongoing uncertainty around the position, purpose and, importantly, the knowledgebase required for successful EAP teaching—‘a lacuna [that is] is symptomatic of the continued marginalisation of practitioners both within their own discipline and beyond in the academic community where the consequences are material (in terms of status, recognition, and power)’ (Ding & Bruce, 2017, p. 117). As is increasingly argued, at least within Anglophone contexts, (Bond, 2020; Ding & Bond, 2026; Ding & Bruce, 2017; Hyland, 2018), for EAP practitioners to be able to influence policy and broader curriculum decisions within their institution, they need to demonstrate an academic authority that is equal to academics working in other disciplines. However, as the literature also suggests, this remains problematic for most EAP professionals. There are three core reasons for this: structural positioning, contractual status, and lack of specific EAP qualifications.

2.2.1. Structural Positioning

Structural positioning refers to the formal organisational location and institutional embeddedness of EAP within higher education systems, including where EAP units are situated administratively, the extent of their access to institutional resources and decision-making structures. Across contexts, EAP has an uncertain and unstable home in higher education institutions, often positioned at the margins of core academic structures.

Even in Anglophone contexts where EAP has a long history (Hyland, 2007), the approach to English language development seems to be based on a view of ‘language as a transparent and therefore ignorable carrier of knowledge’ (Bond, 2020, p. 183). As Turner (2004) argues, EAP has, to some extent, “colluded in its own marginalisation” (p. 96) by failing to sufficiently challenge the separation between language and disciplinary content. Consequently, EAP teachers are frequently positioned as remedial support providers tasked with ‘fixing’ student language deficiencies, rather than working alongside, within and through disciplinary content knowledge. Ding and Bruce’s (2017) influential work argues that EAP operates on the edges of academia, both structurally and politically, but also with little academic influence or identity.

Fulcher’s (2009) survey into the status of EAP in the United Kingdom found that EAP units were housed variably, some in Schools of Education or Applied Linguistics, but some also in student support centres. Administratively and financially, they were generally tied to international student fee generation with little to no access to research activity and funding and with the expectation to ‘teach as many hours as could be fitted into a working week’ (Fulcher, 2009, p. 134), thus leaving little time to invest in development. As teaching-only units, they therefore lack access to many university structures and committees, hence finding themselves ‘operating on the edge of academia’ (Ding & Bruce, 2017). In some cases, EAP provision is further externalised through outsourcing to private providers (Bell, 2016), reinforcing its peripheral status.

However, similar patterns of marginalisation are increasingly documented in non-Anglophone EMI and TNE contexts. Research in settings such as Qatar (Hillman et al., 2021), Saudi Arabia (Barnawi, 2021), and Turkey (Sahan, 2021) suggests that English language support is frequently positioned as ancillary to disciplinary teaching, with limited integration into curriculum design and insufficient recognition of teachers’ expertise. In China’s TNE/EMI contexts, structural positioning is further complicated by the hybrid governance of institutions, where programmes or institutions are jointly managed by Chinese host universities and foreign partner institutions, often with overlapping but not fully aligned administrative and academic structures (McKinley et al., 2021). Emerging research in the Chinese context (e.g., Perrin & Wang, 2022) suggests that EAP provision in such settings is frequently embedded within programme structures yet remains administratively peripheral to disciplinary departments. This limits EAP teachers’ influence on curriculum design and institutional decision-making. Importantly, this marginalisation is not solely a result of internal institutional arrangements, but is also shaped by cross-partner dynamics, where responsibility for language support may be ambiguously distributed or deprioritised between collaborating institutions.

As a result, EAP in TNE/EMI contexts may experience a layered form of marginalisation, positioned not only at the periphery of disciplinary structures but also within complex cross-institutional governance systems. This reinforces broader concerns that EAP is conceptualised as a support service rather than an academic partner in knowledge production. Such positioning ‘threatens not only employment, status, and opportunities for practitioners, it diminishes the educational and academic roles and impact that EAP can and should aspire to … and risks an impoverished future for EAP’ (Ding et al., 2022, p. 101109).

2.2.2. Contractual Status

This precarious positioning of EAP centres and, therefore, of practitioner status further exacerbates and is further exacerbated by the precarity of individual employment contracts. Those teaching-focused contracts more broadly have fewer opportunities for career development and promotion, meaning that their voices are rarely represented through senior leadership positions and in higher-level university committees. However, EAP practitioners’ entry to the profession, at least in Anglophone contexts, has historically been via short-term contracts teaching on summer presessional programmes. This work is both precarious and often removes practitioner agency. Le Roux (2022) is particularly scathing about the negative impact on EAP practitioner development, identity and self-worth of these short-term and precarious contracts.

In China’s TNE/EMI contexts, teachers may be employed by either host or partner institutions or work as short-term flying faculty (Ren & Tian, 2020). Such arrangements affect the wider academic workforce, often limiting access to PD, resources, and career progression pathways. However, these challenges may be particularly pronounced for EAP teachers, whose roles are already institutionally marginalised and whose access to disciplinary networks and decision-making structures is more restricted. Consequently, these conditions may further constrain the development of stable professional identities and sustained engagement in institutional processes, including PD.

2.2.3. Lack of Specific EAP Qualifications and Development Opportunities

Whilst Le Roux (2022) argues that those on precarious contracts are specifically denied access to ongoing PD, the problem of EAP practitioner qualifications, training and development runs much deeper and is a key contributing factor to EAP’s failure to establish itself as an equal partner in university curriculum development, even in EMI/TNE contexts where the need for focused language and communication work would seem to be particularly pronounced (Pecorari & Malmström, 2018; Wingate, 2018). This challenge is further intensified by the rapid expansion of EMI and TNE, which places new and complex demands on English language teachers (Galloway & Rose, 2021), requiring them not only to support academic literacy development but also to engage with disciplinary content and collaborate with subject specialists (Dafouz & Smit, 2020; McKinley et al., 2021). As such, there are growing calls for PD that extend beyond traditional language pedagogy (see Dafouz & Smit, 2020; Macaro & Aizawa, 2024).

However, there are very few EAP-specific qualifications on offer, and those that exist are largely short, if intensive, courses. Information available through BALEAP (2025) indicated that only seven EAP-specific qualification options existed (see

Table 3. TEAP-related courses as advertised (BALEAP, 2025).

University	Course Name and Focus	Length of Course	Qualification
Bristol	Leading in EAP	2 full days in person +6 × 2 h online sessions
Bristol	Moving into EAP	One week
Edinburgh	Teaching EAP	One week in person intensive
Glasgow	Teaching EAP	17 weeks online	20 credits at Level 7
Leeds	MA Teaching EAP PGDip Teaching EAP PGCert Teaching EAP Individual modules from the MA	30 months (part time online) 24 months (part time online) 12 months (part time online) 11 weeks + assessment (part time online)	Full Masters Post Graduate Diploma Post graduate Certificate 15 or 30 credits at Level 7
Manchester and Goldsmiths	CertPT in Teaching EAP	10 weeks (Tuesdays and Thursdays)	Trinity Certificate for Practising Teachers (Level 6)
Surrey	Teaching EAP	12 weeks (part time online)	A certificate of TEAP

), all of which were run by UK universities. In contrast, some institution-specific initiatives have begun to emerge in EMI contexts. Most EAP teachers, therefore, enter the profession via English language teaching qualifications, with little focus on the analysis of disciplinary discourses. This lacuna removes the usual route into traditional disciplinary status and results in an inability to ensure the reproduction of the discipline via the training of postgraduate students (Ding & Bond, 2026). An alternative means of ‘developing practitioner expertise, even if over an extended and interrupted period of time, can be achieved through undertaking scholarship’ (Ding & Bruce, 2017, p. 166). However, this requires significant time and investment—either at the individual or centre level, as well as the support of a mentor with previously acquired EAP knowledge.

Davis’ (2019) study found a significant lack of support and encouragement from EAP centre managers for those wishing to engage in scholarship activity. Studies by Fitzpatrick et al. (2022) and Knox et al. (2024) found that practitioner PD focused largely on learning technical and practical skills rather than scholarship or a focus on EAP-specific knowledge. Campion (2016) described the transition from ELT to EAP teaching as intense socialisation into a specific teaching context rather than the development of transferable or deep knowledge, ultimately requiring an individual practitioner to map out their own route for PD. Although the British Association of Lecturers in EAP (BALEAP) developed a teaching EAP competency framework (BALEAP, 2008) and fellowship scheme (BALEAP, 2014, 2020), cwith clear criteria relating to EAP knowledge and practice, there is little guidance provided as to how to develop this knowledge and application of the criteria requires collective and institutionally agreed interpretations for a specific context (Ding & Bond, 2026). Thus, most literature suggests that EAP practitioner knowledge development is seen as key to elevating the status of EAP, yet it is currently left to the individual rather than an institution or the discipline itself.

Although most literature relating to EAP practitioner identity, development and status is focused on Anglophone contexts, there are a growing number of texts relating to practitioner development in other contexts, particularly Iran and China (see Bi, 2020; Esmaeilpour & Shahrokhi, 2015; Estaji & Nazari, 2015; J. Han et al., 2021; Jiang, 2022, for example). Again, these focus on the individual practitioner development as they transition from ELT into teaching EAP. They describe similar trajectories to the wider studies outlined in Fitzpatrick et al. (2022) and Knox et al. (2024), of slightly ad hoc development in response to practical need rather than a systematic programme based round an understanding of the EAP knowledge base (see, for example, Bao et al., 2024; J. Han et al., 2021; Y. Li & Wang, 2018). Clear parallels can be drawn between this literature and TNE/EMI contexts, especially as many TNE institutions replicate academic structures across their educational sites and many EAP teachers work peripatetically. In such contexts, where English functions as the primary medium through which internationalisation agendas are enacted, the ways in which language support is conceptualised and operationalised become increasingly significant.

This is especially evident in the tension between EAP teachers’ seemingly essential pedagogical role in supporting students’ engagement with disciplinary knowledge and their continued marginalisation within institutional structures, pointing to a broader undervaluation of their contribution to student success, engagement, and the effective implementation of EMI and TNE policies. Despite these developments, there remains limited empirical understanding of how EAP teachers experience these shifting institutional demands and how their professional roles are being reconfigured within EMI- and TNE-driven reforms. Addressing this gap is, therefore, critical for developing more effective and sustainable models of language support within internationalised higher education, while also informing more evidence-based policymaking and ultimately enhancing the success of EMI and TNE initiatives by recognising the central role of EAP teachers within these processes. To address these issues, this study is guided by the following research questions:

RQ1. How are the roles and expertise of EAP teachers positioned and recognised within institutional structures of EMI in the Chinese context?

RQ2. How do EAP teachers in Chinese EMI contexts experience and engage with professional development?

3. Methods

This paper draws on data from a larger study conducted in 2023–24 by J. Zhou (2026), employing a multi-method qualitative design based on document analysis of institutional documents and semi-structured interviews with EAP teachers and PD leads. Data was collected from three types of EMI provisions in China—EMI universities, joint colleges, and programmes—selected from the Chinese-foreign cooperative educational institutions and projects list (Ministry of Education, 2023). As TNE typically adopts EMI policies (De Costa et al., 2020), some EMI universities in this study are situated within Sino-foreign cooperative institutions and therefore overlap with JEIs, while EMI colleges and programmes may, in some cases, align with JEPs. However, it should be noted that these categories are not equivalent and should not be treated as directly corresponding. Emails of invitation and ethical documentation approved by Zhou’s university were sent to 10 institutions of each type via probability sampling (Cohen et al., 2018), with 13 granting access (7 universities, 3 colleges, 3 programmes), anonymised as Ux, JCx, and Px (

Table 4. Profiles of participating institutions.

EMI Provision Types	Label	Number of PD Formats Provided
EMI university	U1	3 (2 certified)
	U2	1 (certified)
	U3	1
	U4	1
	U5	1
	U6	1
	U7	1 (certified)
EMI joint college	JC1	1
	JC2	1
	JC3	1
EMI programme	P1	/
	P2	/
	P3	/

). Participants were selected through maximum variation sampling (Flick, 2018), resulting in 20 EAP teachers (11 EGAP, 9 ESAP; 9 local Chinese, 11 international) across institutions, and 5 PD leads to provide managerial perspectives. Participants were coded by institution and role (e.g., U1-EGAP1), with full profiles provided in Appendix A.1.

PD documents were initially sought by contacting administrative staff at each participating institution by email. However, this proved unfeasible due to administrative restrictions. All publicly available documents collected (institutional PD policies, workshop introductions, training guidelines) were then synthesised under each institution into a table in Appendix A.2. Specifically, the total of 12 PD documents were drawn from 10 institutions, including 7 EMI universities and 3 EMI colleges, with no publicly available PD documents identified for EMI programmes. Notably, one EMI university (U1) provided three distinct PD provisions in relation to EAP teachers: general PD for all teaching staff (U1 PD), a certified PD for all teaching staff (U1 All Ts PD), and a certified PD for EAP teachers (U1 LT PD).

To enhance the transparency regarding the composition of the PD corpus,

Table 5. Summary of the PD corpus of each PD provision.

Institution	PD Provision	Types of Documents	Number of Documents	Words per Document (Approx.)	Total Words per Institution
U1	U1 All PD	Training guideline	1	1500	3200
	U1 LT PD	Training guideline	1	1200
	U1 PD	Workshop introduction	1	500
U2	U2 PD	Workshop introduction	1	1100	1100
U3	U3 PD	Workshop introduction	1	800	800
U4	U4 PD	Institutional PD policy; workshop introduction	2	1500	3000
U5	U5 PD	Workshop introduction	1	600	600
U6	U6 PD	Workshop introduction	1	1000	1000
U7	U7 PD	Workshop introduction	1	800	800
JC1	JC1 PD	Workshop introduction	1	500	500
JC2	JC2 PD	Workshop introduction	1	800	800
JC3	JC3 PD	Workshop introduction	1	500	500

below summarises the documents collected from each participating institution. 12 documents gathered across 13 institutions amounted to approximately 12,300 words. While the corpus does not capture internal or confidential PD materials due to administrative reasons, it nevertheless provides a robust indication of how PD is proposed, framed, prioritised, and communicated institutionally.

Document and interview data were analysed thematically using NVivo 12, following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase framework: familiarisation, initial coding, theme generation, theme review, naming and defining themes, and final reporting. An inductive approach was adopted to allow themes to emerge from the data, ensuring close alignment with participants’ perspectives and the study’s focus on institutional and individual conceptualisations of EAP in EMI contexts. While these data sources represent different dimensions, namely institutional discourse and stakeholders’ experience, they were analysed in relation to one another to generate overarching themes. This approach enabled the identification of convergences and divergences across data sources, providing a more holistic and contextually grounded understanding of how EAP is conceptualised and enacted within EMI/TNE contexts.

The complete interview schedule (see Appendix A.3) was piloted by five EAP teachers and two PD directors before the formal data collection. All interviews (average duration: 45 min) were conducted via Zoom in Mandarin or English according to the participants’ preferences, and were recorded, fully transcribed and translated by Zhou. To strengthen the trustworthiness of the study, member checking was undertaken, allowing participants to review and comment on the interpretations of the data. No dissent was elicited.

The study reflects the complementary positionalities of the three authors. Zhou, an L1 Chinese speaker and EMI doctoral researcher, conducted the fieldwork and brings insider knowledge of Chinese EMI contexts. Galloway, an L1 English speaker with over a decade of EAP and ESP experience in Japan, offers a comparative perspective on EMI. Bond, also an L1 English speaker, is an EAP specialist with expertise primarily in Anglophone higher education. Together, these perspectives provide a balanced yet situated lens on the data. To mitigate potential bias, the analysis involved iterative coding and cross-author discussion throughout the research process.

4. Results

4.1. Institutional Positioning and Recognition of EAP Teachers Within EMI Institutions

The data analysis revealed two sub-themes that capture how EAP is positioned and perceived within EMI/TNE contexts: structural positioning of EAP within EMI institutions, and institutional recognition of EAP expertise. These sub-themes highlight the ways in which EAP is both structurally embedded and discursively constructed within institutions, shaping the roles, responsibilities, and perceived value of EAP practitioners.

4.1.1. Structural Positioning of EAP Within EMI Institutions

With regard to the structural location of EAP within the participating institutions, institutional documents and interview data with EAP teachers and PD leads indicate considerable variation across sites. As shown in documents, among the 13 participating institutions, EAP teachers are affiliated with the faculty of Applied Linguistics (i.e., U1, U2, U3, U4, U5, U6, U7) or Foreign Studies (i.e., JC2, P1, P2, P3) under the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, followed by independent language centres (i.e., JC1, JC3). This diversity in institutional affiliation reflects multiple structural models for organising EAP provision and has important implications for the professional status and authority of EAP teachers within EMI ecosystems.

Moreover, in the interviews, participants consistently reported that EAP teachers located within language-focused faculties often experienced greater disciplinary legitimacy, whereas those based in independent language centres were more frequently positioned as service providers, which limited their involvement in curriculum planning and reduced opportunities for sustained collaboration with content teachers. As U4-EGAP1, based in a linguistics faculty, explained: “Being part of the faculty, [like] other disciplinary departments, gives us more academic recognition. Content departments are more willing to consult us because they see us as colleagues rather than just support staff”. Similarly, another participant (U1-ESAP2) noted that “when we are in the same faculty structure, it is easier to communicate with subject teachers because we are seen as part of the academic team.”

By contrast, an EAP teacher working in a language centre noted, “We are mainly seen as a service unit. Although we deliver EAP courses, we are rarely invited to EMI curriculum meetings or programme design discussions” (JC1-ESAP1). This perception was echoed by participants in similar organisational settings, although not universally. For instance, U4-ESAP2 suggested that “sometimes we are consulted, but mostly at a later stage rather than being involved from the beginning,” indicating partial rather than complete exclusion.

This structural separation was perceived to create barriers to cross-departmental communication, making it more difficult for EAP teachers to engage in integrated teaching practices, such as co-designing EMI curricula with content teachers or embedding academic literacies within ESAP courses (if any). Given that close collaboration between EAP and content teachers is widely regarded as a key indicator for effective EMI implementation, these organisational arrangements may inadvertently constrain the pedagogical potential of EAP provision.

4.1.2. Institutional Recognition of EAP Expertise

However, it should be noted that the aforementioned difference in structural positioning of EAP may also be shaped by institutional leadership capacity and resource availability. In particular, variation can be observed across two interrelated dimensions: the extent to which institutions invest in PD for EAP teachers, and the degree to which EAP provision is systematically embedded within the curriculum. Well-resourced EMI universities are better positioned to develop both dimensions, establishing more comprehensive PD structures while also embedding EAP more fully within institutional teaching and learning practices. Specifically, as shown in the institutional documents, only one (U1) out of 13 participating institutions provided a dedicated PD programme (U1 LT PD) for EAP teachers, with a PD focus on specialised content knowledge: ‘… the importance of discipline-specific text analysis and discuss how to do this with our students’ (U1 LT PD). This limited provision highlights the uneven institutional support for EAP-focused PD, despite its critical role in enabling EAP teachers to engage in pedagogical practice. In addition, U1’s document shows U1 has branched and progressive EAP provisions for students (i.e., five-year one EAP (EGAP) modules, one-year two EAP (ESAP)). With such resources allocated, U1 positioned itself as a sector leader that provides a systematic and institutionally embedded approach to language teaching and pedagogical support for EMI implementation. This dual investment enables institutions to formally recognise EAP expertise and integrate EAP teachers more effectively into teaching and potentially wider decision-making processes. By contrast, in institutional documents, references related to EAP provision were largely absent in EMI joint college and programme settings, where PD tended to focus primarily on generic training such as workshop series offered to all academic staff (see Appendix A.2).

Both the PD documents and interviews indicate that PD leads in the participating EMI institutions are predominantly former EAP teachers with diverse teaching experience across educational contexts (see Appendix A.1). For example, U1 All Ts PD is coordinated by U1-PD2, an English L1 speaker with a master’s degree in education and extensive international language teaching experience. In addition, two PD programmes (U1 CT PD and U1 LT PD) are managed by an ELT specialist based in U1’s PD unit. This PD lead, from the UK, holds a master’s degree in Applied Linguistics and brings over 30 years of experience across both UK and EMI higher education contexts. This comparatively strong professional profile among PD leads suggests that institutions recognise the strategic importance of PD, even if such recognition is not yet consistently reflected in the scope and accessibility of provision across EAP practitioners.

4.2. Negotiating EAP Teachers’ Practised Roles and Professional Development Engagement in EMI Contexts

This section foregrounds how access to PD opportunities, leadership practices, and organisational resource allocation shape EAP teachers’ professional learning trajectories. EAP teachers’ practised roles refer to the roles that they actually play in their day-to-day professional practice, rather than formally prescribed or policy-defined roles. Two sub-themes have been generated from the interviews, namely, the practised roles of EAP teachers in EMI implementation, and institutional status asymmetries between EAP and content teachers.

4.2.1. Practised Roles of EAP Practitioners in EMI Implementation

In the interviews, EAP teachers discussed their daily teaching experience and particularly linked it to the challenges they faced, revealing various aspects that further PD could address. That is, participants’ PD needs were primarily articulated through reflections on their EMI teaching experiences, particularly in relation to their expanding and hybridised professional roles as enacted in practice. For example, based on repeated teaching encounters, over half (6/9) of ESAP teachers described their PD needs as closely linked to their mediating role between disciplinary content expectations and students’ disciplinary academic literacy development, which generated a perceived need for more discipline-sensitive pedagogical training.

Drawing on their EMI teaching experiences, ESAP teachers reported the concerning lack of PD focused on specialised content knowledge/discipline-specific academic literacies for their ESAP course preparation (e.g., English for Engineering, English for Business). This highlights how their practised roles extend beyond traditional language instruction to include elements of disciplinary mediation and curriculum alignment. It seems to be the norm among ESAP teachers that they should at least be familiar with some fundamental knowledge of the specific subject of their ESAP courses. As reflected by U2-ESAP1: “If we are talking about very specific English for academic purposes courses for music students, business students, or engineering students, then I think it is important to know the subject matter”. That is, students would find ESAP courses relevant to their studies if their ESAP teachers are familiar with how language is used in certain subjects.

Due to the current absence of such training in PD, some teachers shared pathways for gaining specialised content knowledge. For instance, U2-ESAP1, with a master’s degree in TESOL and also music education, shared her positive experience of designing a curriculum of EAP for music: “For example, when I teach EAP to music students, I firstly think about what kind of environment they usually use English, such as how they interact with music-related English materials. I need to know terms used in authentic music environments in order to teach the English class more effectively”. It seems that the best candidate for ESAP teacher should be EAP teachers with another educational background other than language teaching. As resonated by U6-ESAP1: “ESAP teachers should ideally understand both how to teach EAP as well as some basic disciplinary knowledge or the conventions of oral and written communication in that specific discipline. For example, teachers with knowledge of biology or chemistry would have more advantages compared with those colleagues who only know about TESOL”.

However, ESAP teachers are often in an “awkward situation” described by U7-ESAP1 that, in most cases, EAP teachers who are assigned to teach ESAP have to spare extra time looking for content materials by themselves: “For example, when I teach ESAP for Business, but I may not be particularly familiar with this field. So I have to spend a lot of time learning about the field by reading the textbooks or going to some business lectures, just like students”. Similar concerns were raised by several ESAP participants (i.e., U1-ESAP1, U2-ESAP1, U6-ESAP1, JC1-ESAP2), although not universally across all cases. In this sense, these accounts suggest that greater institutional support is needed for both pre-service and in-service ESAP teachers, particularly in developing specialised content knowledge aligned with disciplinary demands.

Teachers also reported skills needed in particular scenarios. As such, 3 EAP teachers reported PD needs of teaching international student cohorts, though local students (i.e., Chinese students) are the major group of students in the EMI contexts in China. As shared in the interview, EAP teachers “have to be prepared for different situations they may deal with, such as international students coming from various cultures and nationalities” (U1-ESAP1), and “In the future, if my classmates have more international students, I would say the good PD for me would be how to teach students from diverse cultural backgrounds” (U4-EGAP1).

Taken together, rather than viewing PD as static skill acquisition alone, participants framed their learning needs as part of an ongoing process of negotiating their professional positioning within EMI programmes with current and foreseen issues raised in teaching practices. These accounts suggest that PD engagement was shaped not only by pedagogical challenges but also by their own understanding of their roles that keep changing in EMI settings.

4.2.2. Institutional Status Asymmetries Between EAP and Content Teachers

Teachers reflected excessively on how their current roles as EAP teachers inhibit their further career advancement. In the review of teachers’ profiles (see Appendix A.1), EAP teachers are often titled as ‘lecturers’ and/or ‘senior lecturers’. However, they still viewed themselves as ‘teachers’ (mentioned by 10 teachers) or ‘language tutor’ (mentioned by 6 teachers) who are rarely given the same privileges as other academics, such as content teachers, due to the way they are recognised within the university. Specifically, observed differences in treatment and status within the university structure have been identified in the interviews with EAP teachers. For example, U6-ESAP1 shared her observation of the current situation of EAP teachers and how they want to escape from their current roles to be more ‘professional as an academic’:

“I do not want to put labels on us (EAP teachers), but at least some perceive EAP teachers as grassroots in the university setting. For example, I knew a content teacher who obtained her PhD in linguistics recently was an EAP teacher a few years ago. She works in the Education department (as a content teacher), saying goodbye to our school of language. Perhaps she thinks this (the language centre) is not a good environment for her career development, and now she can do more research and become an academic. So I have this reflection, it is necessary for us (EAP teachers) to find our own specialities and show our voice, especially in the academic community”.

She also witnessed the ‘dilemma’ of EAP teachers being ‘trapped’ in teaching year after year without having working hours left to enhance their research abilities, which is prioritised in universities which prioritise research output. As a consequence, “For the majority of us (EAP teachers), we should accept the reality that we have to teach for many hours year by year. It is quite miserable, and accepting misery is also a part of our characteristics” (U6-ESAP1). This EAP teacher’s thought-provoking reflection further leads to the discussion of the recognition of teachers’ efforts made in their different roles, such as teaching and researching.

EAP teachers’ desire to do research and the importance of research skills have also resonated with EAP teachers with PhD degrees. For instance, U2-EGAP1, who holds both a PhD and EdD degree, highlighted that the cultivation of researching and publishing skills can significantly enhance the career development of EAP teachers: “My experience is if EAP teachers are not researchers, they will be stuck in teaching”. Similarly, another EAP teacher with a PhD degree argued that engaging in research benefits both teachers and students: “Teachers should be good at researching. You (EAP teacher) need to acquire certain research goals, not only because you need to teach the students about academic writing, how to do research in English, but also the teacher can benefit from doing research. For example, the action research. We can improve our teaching practice by doing that” (U7-EGAP1). Beyond its pedagogical value, engagement in research also has important implications for EAP teachers’ professional status and institutional positioning. As in many higher education contexts, research output remains a key criterion for promotion and access to senior academic roles, which in turn are more closely associated with influence over curriculum design, policy development, and institutional decision-making.

PD leads also noted that EAP teachers’ lower position compared to content teachers who usually have research skills, and cast doubt on the personnel structure in universities: “I do think that there is a problem that content lecturers often feel that they are in a higher position than the language teachers. They think that way because of how they are placed within the university system. Language teachers are not lecturers; they are titled as teachers. You know the title is very important in education” (JC3-PDL1). U1-PDL2, therefore, encouraged EAP teachers to take the lead in educational practices such as collaboration to change their status in the university: “So we would hope all language teachers would take the lead (in collaboration) rather than just following content teachers and being their assistants, at least they should work with each other, not for one side”. By doing so, EAP teachers’ efforts made in teaching can be recognised by leads at the institutions, which may do good to improve their peripheral situation in the university.

5. Discussion

The findings reveal a series of tensions relating to the professional recognition, identity, and legitimacy of EAP teachers in Chinese EMI/TNE contexts. They provide insights into how institutional structures, policy priorities, and PD practices simultaneously foreground and marginalise EAP work within EMI/TNE ecosystems, with important consequences for the sustainability and pedagogical effectiveness of EMI/TNE implementation. They also demonstrate how these dynamics are shaped by the interplay of organisational structures, leadership priorities, and resource allocation.

A key finding concerns the scarcity of specialised PD for EAP teachers, echoing previous reports of insufficient institutional awareness of their PD needs (Jiang et al., 2020; Kaivanpanah et al., 2021). Despite the increasing pedagogical importance of EAP within EMI/TNE contexts, PD opportunities remain largely generic and linguistically oriented, limiting teachers’ ability to engage with disciplinary discourse, collaborate with content specialists, and support the academic literacy demands created by EMI/TNE expansion. Only one of the 13 participating institutions (i.e., U1) offered targeted EAP PD, highlighting a general institutional disconnect between the expansion of EMI and TNE policies and the provision of appropriate teacher support. This uneven provision reflects how the influence of EAP expertise remains contingent on local institutional conditions, with better-resourced institutions more likely to integrate EAP into curriculum design and teaching practices.

The predominance of generic pedagogy often comes at the expense of specialised content knowledge, a vital component of ESAP teaching (Campion, 2016; Fitzpatrick et al., 2022). Participants noted that insufficient support in discipline-specific knowledge weakened their ability to align language instruction with disciplinary content, potentially limiting the effectiveness of EMI learning outcomes. ESAP teachers, responsible for aligning language instruction with disciplinary content (Flowerdew, 2016), expressed concerns that insufficient support in this area risks weakening course relevance and learning outcomes of EMI. This lack of specialised training is particularly problematic given that the success of EMI and TNE initiatives depends not only on language proficiency but also on the effective integration of linguistic and disciplinary knowledge within the curriculum (McKinley, 2025). Such a lack of specialisation training also reflects the broader structural challenge faced by EMI institutions, which is to integrate linguistic and disciplinary expertise within constrained resource systems (Deroey, 2023; Galloway et al., 2024; Jiang et al., 2020). In addition, it has implications for Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and Applied Linguistics programmes worldwide that may not be currently preparing pre- and in-service English teachers for the complex internationalised higher education systems. TNE and EMI provision are expected to grow, and given that ‘[d]elivery of quality and its success requires innovative practice’ (Wilding & Li, 2021, p. 151), innovation in terms of pre- and in-service teacher PD is crucial.

The findings also highlight the central role of institutional leadership capacity and resource distribution in shaping the structural positioning of EAP and the availability of meaningful PD opportunities. Consistent with previous research, well-resourced EMI universities tend to adopt more strategic and integrated approaches to EAP support for students (S. Zhou et al., 2022). Such comprehensive EAP provision is closely tied to the availability of targeted PD for EAP teachers, as the design and delivery of discipline-specific EAP curricula require teachers to develop specialised pedagogical and disciplinary knowledge. The case of U1, with its dedicated PD provision for EAP teachers, reflects what Macaro et al. (2018) describe as EMI implementation as “planned and resourced” (p. 67), in which language policy, staff development, and curriculum design are aligned to support sustainable EMI delivery. In such contexts, EAP teachers are more likely to be recognised as integral contributors to teaching and learning, with greater opportunities to engage in curriculum design and institutional processes.

By contrast, the limited visibility of EAP provision in joint colleges and programme-based EMI settings mirrors earlier critiques that EMI expansion is often driven by market-oriented priorities, with insufficient investment in language pedagogy and staff development (Airey, 2020; Liao et al., 2025). Furthermore, the predominance of PD leads with extensive ELT teaching experience (Appendix A.2) suggests that responsibility for EMI-related teacher PD is largely assumed by individuals with practical expertise in language teaching. This indicates an emerging recognition of the value of EAP expertise in supporting EMI pedagogy, particularly in addressing the linguistic and academic challenges faced by both teachers and students. At the same time, this aligns with calls for EAP teachers to play a more active role not only in teacher development but also in broader institutional processes, including curriculum design and policy-making (Bruce & Bond, 2022; Galloway & Rose, 2021).

Another noticeable issue concerns the intercultural and research dimensions of EAP professional identity. Intercultural communication skills were recognised as critical in EMI settings (Macaro & Han, 2020), particularly by non-local teachers, as EAP teachers are required to navigate culturally diverse classrooms, mediate between different academic conventions, and support students from varied linguistic and educational backgrounds (Dong & Han, 2024; Y. Han & Dong, 2023). However, their PD needs in this area were inconsistently addressed across PD systems. Similarly, academic research training was found to be scarcely available, even though teachers actively linked research competence with identity construction, academic status, and career advancement. These structural constraints, particularly teaching-intensive roles, limit opportunities for research engagement and may restrict EAP teachers’ progression into senior or leadership positions or positions where they have more of a voice regarding university-wide strategic internationalisation initiatives.

The findings suggest that PD opportunities cannot be separated from broader institutional hierarchies that shape the positioning of EAP within EMI/TNE systems. Interview data further revealed tensions in how EAP teachers are positioned institutionally, which reinforces a hierarchical division that limits EAP teachers’ access to PD, institutional recognition, and participation in decision-making related to EMI policy and curriculum design. Some EAP teachers resisted labels such as ‘non-researchers’ or ‘lecturers’, feeling they ‘will be stuck in teaching’, where they are seen as inferior to content teachers, who are typically PhD-qualified and whose research expertise is institutionally recognised. This marginalised position within universities (Cheng, 2016; Ding & Bruce, 2017; Tilakaratna, 2024) is further reinforced by broader structural conditions within Chinese higher education. Chinese HEIs are largely measured by research-driven goals. In response to the national internationalisation of higher education agenda (Zhang, 2018), Chinese academic outputs have grown rapidly. Recent data indicate that China has become the world’s largest producer of scientific knowledge, generating approximately 830,000 research papers annually and accounting for around 15% of global output (Owens, 2024). China now ranks first globally in natural sciences research output (Nature Index, 2023), and its researchers contribute a substantial and growing share of highly cited publications worldwide. With regards to publications related to EAP, China ranks one of the three most productive countries, contributing 940 publications between 2001 and 2020 (Hyland & Jiang, 2021). In this regard, content teachers with research duties are usually more highly valued by the universities, while EAP teachers, largely employed on teaching-only contracts, are evaluated primarily through teaching hours or student satisfaction, similarly to the UK context (see Taylor, 2019). The lack of time for research for EAP teachers exacerbates disparities in recognition, remuneration, and access to academic resources, further marginalising EAP practitioners. As some interviewees noted, being perceived as ‘non-researchers’ relegates EAP teachers to a service role (Cheng, 2016) rather than as full academic staff, which is also a concern echoed in wider contexts (Ding & Bruce, 2017). While many participants expressed strong aspirations to develop research expertise and professional visibility, heavy teaching loads and limited institutional recognition constrained their ability to realise these ambitions, thereby reinforcing cycles of professional immobility.

Taken together, the findings suggest that PD in EMI/TNE contexts is often fragmented, reactive, and unevenly distributed, reflecting the broader marginal positioning of EAP within institutional internationalisation agendas. Rather than functioning as a strategic component of EMI/TNE implementation, PD for EAP teachers frequently remains peripheral, inconsistently resourced, and disconnected from wider curriculum and policy development. While previous research has highlighted the importance of collaborative and context-sensitive PD for EMI and TNE staff more broadly (e.g., Hillman et al., 2021; Sahan, 2021), our findings suggest that EAP teachers are often overlooked within these initiatives despite their central role in supporting disciplinary communication and academic literacies. We therefore support calls for providing time for EAP teachers to engage in scholarship and PD to enable them to challenge their marginalised status as mere language support staff and reposition themselves as active contributors to universities’ core missions of “knowledge production and knowledge dissemination” (Ding & Bruce, 2017, p. 165). As Ding suggests (Ding, 2016):

“Scholarship is, in a way, an invitation—a challenge—to reconsider our identity as language educators: it suggests an identity that expands into areas often occluded in the past to one that is more visible, more vocal, making contributions to professional knowledge, exerting influence, shaping practices and policies, engaging with students differently and accumulating social and epistemic capital and recognition.”

In rapidly internationalising EMI/TNE systems such as those in China, supporting EAP teachers’ scholarship and PD is therefore not peripheral, but central to sustainable and equitable internationalisation.

6. Conclusions and Implications

The findings of this study highlight the complex and often contradictory positioning of EAP within EMI/TNE contexts, where its expanding pedagogical importance is accompanied by persistent marginalisation in institutional structures. EAP operates within a tension between increased visibility and continued marginality, with its contributions unevenly recognised and enacted across institutional contexts. EAP paradoxically shapes and is central to student support needs and practices, and yet remains peripheral. Addressing such tension requires more than simply expanding EAP provision. It calls for a reconfiguration of institutional structures and priorities that shape how EAP expertise is valued and utilised. This includes recognising the need for sustained, specialised PD, as well as creating pathways for EAP teachers to develop research profiles and assume more active roles in institutional processes. Such changes are essential if EAP is to move beyond a compensatory function and become more fully integrated into curriculum design, teaching practices, and policy implementation in EMI/TNE settings.

Some limitations of the study should be noted. Firstly, restricted administrative access limited institutional document collection and participant recruitment, resulting in relatively few interviews per institution and limiting the availability of detailed comparative data on PD provision across EMI provision types. While the study draws on multiple qualitative data sources, perspectives from additional institutional stakeholders, such as programme directors and department heads, were not included, despite their important role in shaping institutional structures and PD provision. Similarly, although Appendix A.2 provides an overview of PD provision, more granular data relating to the frequency, duration, and participation patterns of PD activities were not consistently accessible across institutions. Furthermore, while the study includes both locally and internationally recruited EAP teachers, it does not seek to systematically compare these groups. However, we acknowledge that teacher background, particularly differences in training, institutional affiliation, and prior professional experience, may shape how EAP practitioners experience institutional positioning, recognition, and access to PD. Future research could therefore incorporate a broader range of stakeholders, as well as additional data sources such as classroom observations and EAP course syllabi, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how EAP is positioned and supported in EMI/TNE contexts. Nonetheless, by including multiple EMI provision types, this study offers a broad, though not exhaustive, view of current PD practices and provides valuable insights into EAP teachers’ evolving roles within China’s rapidly expanding EMI/TNE landscape.

For EMI and TNE initiatives to be sustainable and to ensure quality, we support calls for context-sensitive PD initiatives developed collaboratively across institutions (Hillman et al., 2021; Keevers et al., 2014; Sahan, 2021). This requires not only the inclusion of EAP practitioners in PD initiatives, but also broader systemic shifts in how universities conceptualise expertise, particularly in balancing teaching and research and recognising the interdisciplinary nature of language and disciplinary knowledge. At the same time, the continued reliance on generalised ELT approaches within EMI programmes risks reinforcing reductive views of language as separable from disciplinary knowledge, thereby limiting the transformative potential of EAP.

Given the integral role of EAP in EMI (Rose et al., 2020; Costa & Mastellotto, 2022; Wang et al., 2025), EAP practitioners should play a more central role not only in course provision but also in shaping institutional policy and programme design (see Bruce & Bond, 2022). In TNE settings specifically, this also involves strengthening connections across transnational teaching teams and ensuring that EAP teachers are meaningfully included in collaborative teaching, curriculum, and PD initiatives, rather than positioned at their margins (Keevers et al., 2014). Moreover, recognising ESP/EAP as an integrated domain of linguistic, epistemological, and disciplinary knowledge necessitates that teachers develop expertise across these domains (Ferguson, 1997), a requirement increasingly reflected in evolving professional expectations (Galloway et al., 2024).

Overall, the evolving roles of EAP teachers in rapidly expanding EMI/TNE contexts represent not merely a response to institutional demands but an active venue of transformation within higher education. While challenges related to recognition, professional identity and institutional positioning still exist, these tensions open possibilities for EAP teachers to redefine their academic legitimacy, bridge disciplinary divides, and contribute to more equitable and sustainable EMI and TNE practices.