Exploring Chinese higher vocational college teachers’ perceptions of reading and teaching reading in English

1 Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework that underpins the exploration of Chinese higher vocational college teachers’ perceptions of reading and teaching reading in English in this study is Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory. From a Vygotskian sociocultural theoretical perspective, human mind is social in nature (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986). Human learning, thereby, is seen as a dialogic process during which knowledge is co-constructed by and negotiated between learners (Johnson & Golombek, 2011, 2016). Reflected in the domain of teacher education, teachers’ knowing, thinking, being and doing derive from their participation in the social practices of learning and teaching within specific sociocultural contexts (Johnson, 2009). Central to Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory of learning is the social interaction which takes place between individual learners and the environment, as well as within the learner self by internalizing a set of psychological tools (e.g. language, culture; Johnson, 2009). Once internalized, as Johnson (2015) asserts, these tools provide the framework for teachers to think about themselves, students, the processes of teaching and learning, as well as to implement theoretically consistent classroom practices (p. 516). Nonetheless, Johnson (2015) indicates that the process of internalization ‘does not happen automatically’ but requires a systematic approach to learning how to teach (p. 516). In vocational contexts where there seems a lack of systematic learning for EFL teachers, it is imperative to organize TPL programmes that motivate teacher learners and engage them in professional learning within their own contexts (Johnson, 2015). The present study addresses this issue by implementing a three-month TPL programme comprising a workshop, professional learning conversations, classroom observations, and reflective practices. Within the TPL workshop, teacher learners are expected to engage with relevant literature on reading and teaching reading in English.

2 Views of reading

Historically and until recently, reading is perceived as a psycholinguistic process in which readers read to acquire information (Goodman, 1967; Harrison, 2004; Smith, 2012). With the emergence of social theories, the traditional psycholinguistic perspective is challenged by a social view of reading (Wallace, 2012). Within the social trend, reading is reconceptualized as a series of social practices in which the reader, the text and the writer exchange subjective realities (Wallace, 1992, 2003). These realities are alive, according to Freire (1985), as we live inside of them, they are being shaped and also shaping us. Therefore, Freire (1985) asserted that ‘it was impossible to read the text without reading the context of the text’ (p. 18). Reading the context of the text creates a space for readers to imagine the influences of the context on the writer who produces the text in ideological ways, to negotiate such ideology in multiple perspectives, and to redesign texts based on their understandings of self, others and world (Campbell & Parr, 2013; Luke, 2018). In this sense, reading as a series of social practices facilitates the development of reader identity (Wallace, 2012).

However, the social-practice perspective of reading has received less attention than it seems to deserve when considering reading in L2 (L2 refers to languages other than first language) within China’s vocational context. Reading in English, for example, is seen as a language skill in Li (2003), Liao (2010) and Shi (2015). This is a narrow traditional conception of what counts as L2 reading. Reading across languages and cultures involves identity construction, as suggested in Schmidt (2013). Towards this end, Schmidt (2013) holds that it is necessary and important to have access to practices that recognize and support a unitary repertoire of texts. This unitary conception of the repertoire of texts, as Schmidt (2013) points out, and I agree, is reflected in the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke & Freebody, 1999; Luke, 2000). The model will be introduced to teacher learners in the TPL workshop.

3 Four resources model

Freebody and Luke (1990) proposed four roles for readers to engage with texts in classroom settings, including ‘the roles of code breaker, text participant, text user, and text analyst’ (p. 14). Later when reviewing the four roles, Luke and Freebody (1999) redefined the term ‘role’ as ‘a family of practices’ (p. 4) and developed the four resources model (Luke, 2000). According to the four resources model, reading is composed of four necessary but insufficient practices: coding practices, text meaning-making practices, pragmatic practices, and critical practices (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke & Freebody, 1999; Luke, 2000). Within this model, learners are provided with four different resources to navigate texts and these resources are interdependent (Luke, 2000, 2018). The model recognizes each resource and relates one to another so that a unity in diversity can be achieved (Luke, 2000, 2018). Such a holistic view of language and literacy practices is relevant to the present study that considers both traditional and innovative approaches to reading are essential (Luke, 2000, 2018).

While the philosophical underpinnings of the four resources model seem compatible with Chinese teachers’ holistic way of thinking about reading practices, some potential limitations of this model are worth noting. For instance, Lankshear and Knobel (2004) are skeptical of its practicality within the multimodal context (Section II). While sharing their concern, Campbell and Parr (2013) point out that the four resources model ‘has the potential to apply to new technological and media terrains’ (p. 134). In order to realize its full potential, Hinrichsen and Coombs (2013) have added a fifth resource to the four resources model, focusing on the presentation of self (Persona) to address the issues of identity formation, reputation management, and social participation in the digital context (p. 12). I agree with the researchers that new practices are desirable to respond to emerging issues from the development of digital technologies. However, the lack of critical engagement with texts by learners is more concerning when considering their identity formation in the real world. With respect to the construction of locally grounded and globally minded citizenship (Wen & Zhang, 2021), learning how to deal with the self-other relation connotes different meanings across languages and cultures. Hence, as Butler (2013) addressed, a critical stance is needed to understand who we are and what we are becoming across time and space. It is to this matter that I now turn.

4 Toward critical language and content integrated instruction

In an age of uncertainty, ambiguity and paradox, when students are exposed to different ways of thinking, being and doing through reading English language texts, teachers are responsible for cultivating a sense of criticality in students (Wallace, 2012). However, as observed by Macknish (2011), many teachers do not help students to develop criticality in English reading courses due to lack of time and confidence. Although it would take ‘an extensive time commitment’ to assist students in gaining relevant knowledge and skills as noted in Sato et al. (2017, p. 61), I concur with Macknish (2011) that this should not be taken as an excuse for denying students’ opportunities to engage in critical practices of reading in class (p. 449). When it comes to classroom practice, Foley (2017) suggests that the lack of pedagogical strategies for developing criticality poses a challenge for teachers. In addressing this issue, Foley (2017) seems to agree with Luke (2000) that there is no singular way of practising criticality and thus a combination of approaches for use appears more practical. The use of language and content integrated instruction to develop criticality in L2 learners is worth considering, but relevant studies are largely informed by Freirean-inspired critical pedagogy drawing on the Frankfurt School of critical theory (e.g. Glynn & Spenader, 2020; Kubota, 2012; Sato et al., 2017). The critical tradition that forms the conceptual basis for critical pedagogy, according to Kincheloe (2007), is ‘concerned with power and its oppression of human beings and regulation of the social order’ (pp. 19–20). While reading from a power perspective is an important lens to conceptualize criticality and to guide critical practice, it should be noted that this is one of the many interpretations of criticality and failure to recognize culturally relevant critical practices might lead to no more than a replicate of other traditions. In light of the continuum of critical practices of reading (Macknish, 2011; Paran & Wallace, 2016; Wallace, 2018), criticality is seen as a fluid discourse in the present study, drawing upon knowledge from the Eastern and the Western critical traditions.

The idea of integrating language and content in educational settings is not new (Coyle et al., 2010; Mehisto et al., 2008). Nevertheless, much of the discussion is focused on the learning of language and content with high-achieving learners at universities (e.g. Jin & Zhang, 2016; Vega & Moscoso, 2019; Yang & Gosling, 2014). Little progress has been made with academically low-achieving learners. In vocational contexts where students are perceived as lower academic achievers, English is taught for specific purposes and relevant courses tend to use language and content integrated instruction (e.g. Dalton-Puffer et al., 2009; Denman et al., 2013). With regard to the teaching of EGAP in China’s vocational contexts, however, many teachers tend to focus on the teaching of language knowledge through the grammar-translation method (Gao, 2016). Although the grammar-translation method has value in developing higher vocational college students’ English language proficiency, it is inadequate to cultivate them as whole persons as locally grounded and globally minded citizens with critical minds (Wen & Zhang, 2021). As a hybrid model, language and content integrated instruction extends language teaching to citizenship building, as also noted in Sato et al. (2017). The learning of content across different languages and cultures, as indicated in Kubota (2012), creates a space for learners to develop a critical understanding of multiple perspectives on complex topics across historical, political, economic, social and cultural contexts. These perspectives, as Kubota (2012) notes, might be different from the mainstream narrative with which the learners are familiar. By raising critical awareness of the mainstream narrative, as Kubota (2012) suggests, and I agree, that learners might be able to construct and articulate their own narratives. Recognizing the absence of such an integrated approach in the situated context, the present study attempts to fill the gap by shifting the focus of teaching from language to the integration of language and content in English reading classes. In applying the approach to classroom practice, the development of criticality is seen as a key component of language and content integrated instruction in the present study. Nonetheless, the conceptualization, development and practice of criticality are relevant to the specific sociocultural context (Jiang, 2013; Peng & Nisbett, 1999; Spencer-Rodgers & Peng, 2018; Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2010).

1 Research questions

This qualitative study poses the following research questions:

2 Research sites and participants

In this study, the research sites are 12 higher vocational colleges in a south-eastern province of mainland China. Within the 12 research sites, Tatong College (a pseudonym) was selected as the main research site to implement the TPL programme by using a combination of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Prior to the TPL programme, questionnaires were distributed to the 12 higher vocational colleges. Details of data collection are presented in Section IV.3. Purposive sampling is suitable for small-scale and in-depth studies as it enables the researcher to gain substantial information on the subject matter (Maxwell, 2012; Patton, 2015). Similarly, the sample for the TPL programme was recruited through a combination of convenience and purposive approaches. Given the voluntary nature of TPL, volunteer sampling as a strategy of convenience sampling was employed in this study (Lune & Berg, 2016). In practice, I chose the sample based on their answers to Question 22 on the questionnaire:

22. Would you like to attend a TPL workshop with the focus on teaching reading in English? Yes □       No □

After the workshop, I asked each attendee if they would like to continue with TPL. Two participants decided not to go on with this journey given the duration of this project. However, they contributed to the pilot pre-learning conversations. One participant recruited for the main study withdrew after three conversations. In view of this, I applied snow-ball sampling as a strategy of purposive sampling to recruit more participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Specifically, the sampled participants recommended several teachers of English reading who might be interested in TPL. I took their advice because some of the recommended teachers displayed certain attributes that were needed in this study (e.g. commitment in teaching). Therefore, I contacted the potential respondents and three of them expressed their willingness to participate. Considering that the three new participants missed the TPL workshop, I arranged another one for us to exchange our views of reading and teaching reading in English. The respondents who participated in the TPL programme were female teachers with 6–18 years of experience in teaching EGAP at Tatong College. Their background information is presented in Table 1, along with the abbreviations used in the dialogues in this article.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Teacher participants.

Teachers	Professional title	Degree	Position/expertise	English language teaching experience (years)	Notes
TA	Lecturer	Master	Course organizer for Writing in English	13	TA withdrew after the TPL workshop
TB	Lecturer	Master	Course organizer for Listening in English	13	TB withdrew after the TPL workshop
TC	Associate Professor	Master	Course organizer for English grammar teaching	10
TD	Lecturer	Master	Course organizer for Extensive reading in English	12
TE	Associate Professor	Master	Research on second language acquisition	10	TE withdrew after three conversations
TF	Lecturer	Master	Course organizer for Intensive reading in English	12
TG	Lecturer	Master	Head of the teaching and research section in Business English	13
TH	Associate Lecturer	Master	Team leader of lesson-planning for teaching Intensive reading in English (Grade 2)	6
TI	Associate Professor	Bachelor	Team leader of lesson-planning for teaching Intensive reading in English (Grade 3)	18

Note. TPL = teacher professional learning.

3 Data collection

In this qualitative study, I adopted a basic interpretive design because it fit well for the purposes of exploring the research enquiries and facilitating TPL. Comprising four stages, the process of data collection began with self-administered questionnaires, aiming to obtain an overview of higher vocational college teachers’ perceptions of reading and teaching reading in English. The design of the questionnaire in the present study was developed from the questionnaire in Foley’s (2013) study. After piloting the questionnaire with 10 participants excluded from the study, I handed out article questionnaires to 71 EFL teachers at the main research site and collected 63 copies back after they were completed. Concurrently, I sent Web-based questionnaire invitations to EFL teachers from other research sites. One hundred and seven questionnaires were completed and submitted online.

After the administration of questionnaires, I organized a two-session TPL workshop for respondents who expressed their interests to attend at the main research site (see Section IV.2). In the first session of the workshop, I guided the participants to share their understandings of reading, reading and teaching reading in English before presenting relevant literature. In the second session, I introduced the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke, 2000; Luke & Freebody, 1999) and delivered a micro-teaching session based on the model, followed by a group discussion.

Moving to the third stage, I gathered textual data from TPL conversations, classroom observations, and reflective practices at the main research site. With participants’ consent, TPL conversations, classroom practices and verbal reflections were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. Specifically, I arranged individual pre-learning conversations with all participants to gain a deeper understanding of their perceptions of reading and teaching reading in English after the workshop. Apart from that, the participants and I discussed the syllabus, objectives, materials and methods of teaching prior to the classroom observation. While-learning conversations were composed of pre- and post-observation conversations. Pre-observation conversations were held to assist participants in making lesson plans whilst post-observation conversations were implemented to allow participants to deeply engage with their classroom practices and to improve their lessons. Additionally, two verbal reflective sessions were included with one session conducted after three or four while-learning conversations depending on each participant’s schedule and the other session undertaken one week before post-learning conversations. After that, post-learning conversations were implemented to enable participants to articulate their evolving understandings of reading and teaching reading in English.

At the final stage, all participants were invited to a plenary where they were guided to reflect on their learning trajectories and to envision next learning steps. Beginning with a written reflection, the participants were asked to examine their own classroom practices based on three questionnaire items (see Appendix). Next, I used PowerPoint slides to present what we have learned and how we learned during the three-month TPL programme as well as some initial findings, followed by a group discussion of some deep and challenging questions arising from the while-learning conversations I had with each participant and from my own reflection. The plenary ended with suggestions for further improvements in teaching and plans for TPL in the next semester. The overall research design is presented in Figure 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Research design overview.

4 Data analysis

As illustrated in Figure 1, the collection of data was processed alongside the analysis of data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For example, I began to generate some initial ideas of the data while observing and taking notes in the classroom. Note that these ideas were the sources of a series of focused questions I raised for discussion in while-learning conversations. Apart from that, some of the pivotal questions that I raised in the verbal reflective session 1 were based on pre-learning conversations. By the same token, the questions that were discussed in the verbal reflective session 2 were developed from the verbal reflective session 1.

With a large amount of data gathered from the fieldwork, I used Le Survey (a Chinese online survey tool operating on a freemium business model, https://www.lediaocha.com), Microsoft Word, and NVivo software to assist me in analysing the data. Considering that meaning-making was central in this qualitative study, I assumed that the theme-based analysis was a suitable approach to identifying, describing, and interpreting the explicit and implicit ideas within the data in detail (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2013; Braun et al., 2015). Taking a step-by-step approach, I adopted Braun and Clarke’s (2006) coding framework for the analysis of data in this study (p. 87). The steps of data analysis are presented below.

b Phase 2: coding

Moving to the formal coding stage, I adopted different strategies to analyse data. For instance, I summarized the topics of textual data from questionnaires (Table 2). This is termed as ‘descriptive coding’ (Miles & Huberman, 1994, as cited in Saldaña, 2011, p. 104).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

An example of descriptive coding.

Goal(s) of teaching reading in English	Initial codes
To accumulate sufficient amount of vocabulary, phrases and sentences	Vocabulary expansion
To acquire reading skills (e.g. skimming, scanning, comparative analysis)	Reading skills acquisition
To acquire knowledge	Knowledge acquisition

Descriptive coding was also applied to the coding of TPL conversations, classroom observation field notes, and reflective practices in this study. Aside from descriptive codes, I used participants’ words and phrases as codes in the process of initial coding. This is understood as ‘in vivo coding’ in the research literature (Strauss, 1987, as cited in Saldaña, 2011, p. 99).

1 From a skill-based to a social-practice perspective

Through constant comparison of data, I recognized that findings from questionnaires were in accordance with those from other instruments. Specifically, a skill-based view of reading in English was reflected in questionnaire data across the 12 higher vocational colleges in a south-eastern province of mainland China and in my pre-learning conversations with all participants at the main research site. For example, participants perceived reading as a psycholinguistic process, manifested in their understanding of the similarities between L1 and L2 reading:

(Excerpt 1. Pre-learning conversation)

Through the TPL programme, however, there was an extension from a skill-based to a social-practice view of reading.

The social-practice view of reading emerged from participants’ own critical practices of reading in lesson-planning based on the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke, 2000; Luke & Freebody, 1999). While analysing each text in the textbook, I noticed that participants were able to identify ideology and power relations embedded within the text and they could link some particular issues to the Chinese context. When making a lesson plan for teaching the main text in Unit 3 (Book 3; Li et al., 2017), for example, TH and I considered the text from a power perspective:

(Excerpt 2. While-learning conversation)

Evidently the conversation prompted TH to identify the gendered power dynamics embedded within the text and to extend it to the phenomenon of male dominance in the Chinese society. With my assistance, TH was able to see an alternative view in relation to discursive power. Following this, TH contextualized herself in the text in response to the author’s intention of writing the text:

(Excerpt 3. While-learning conversation)

In Excerpt 3, TH interpreted the author’s intention of writing and articulated her disposition by drawing on her own experience as a woman and a wife. While engaging with the text critically, TH made a connection between herself and the author, not only empathizing with the author, but also resisting the gender inequity together. In this spirit, TH seemed to have emancipated herself as a woman and a wife across different texts.

These two instances clearly showed that the participant was able to critically engage with social phenomena with guidance and support. In this sense, reading in English involved more than reading the word. This was also mirrored in other participants’ analysis of texts.

2 From language-focused to critical language and content integrated instruction

The analysis of 170 questionnaires indicated that teaching reading in English aimed at developing students’ English language proficiency and reading competencies within the 12 higher vocational colleges in a south-eastern province of mainland China. This was also indicated in my pre-learning conversations with participants at the main research site. At the third stage of the TPL programme (Figure 1), it occurred to me and participants that more attention was given to the development of critical perspectives through language and content integrated instruction. When reflecting upon the lesson based on the main text in Unit 3 (Book 3; Li et al., 2017), for example, TD was able to articulate the following objectives of teaching with my assistance:

(1) To enable students to gain a deeper understanding of the text.

(2) To enable students to compare cultures between the East and the West.

(Excerpt 4. While-learning conversation)

With objective (1), TD asserted that the pragmatic and critical practices of reading based on the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke, 2000; Luke & Freebody, 1999) would enable students to achieve a deeper understanding of the text:

Yes, I think it would because the practices of coding focus on words, phrases, and sentences. Students might be able to take notes, the content of text . . . probably the literal meaning. There’s no deep engagement with cultural background and cultural connotations.

(Excerpt 5. While-learning conversation)

In TD’s view, a deeper understanding of the text was referred to a critical engagement with the text in the context. Evidently, decoding and comprehension were insufficient to achieve the goal.

With objective (2), TD explained further:

Students might be able to discover different kinds of cultural differences in life. At least they would become more conscious of that. When encountering people and things of different cultural backgrounds, perhaps they would try to understand and initiate a discussion. When noticing these behaviours around them, students would be able to think from a different perspective, or have their own ways of thinking.

(Excerpt 6. While-learning conversation)

From TD’s point of view, intercultural awareness-raising was the first step. More significantly, students were expected to read from diverse positions and to construct their own perspectives. As I observed in her class, TD engaged students with the text critically by raising their critical awareness of language use (e.g. sacrifice, extreme; Wallace, 2018). These words were highlighted not for the purpose of memorization. Rather, students were expected to gain a deeper understanding of the text from interpreting the author’s attitude towards her Chinese husband and mother-in-law.

While reflecting on her classroom practice, TD provided the following justification:

I wanted my students to find the individual attitudes from the text and then to map out the triangle relationship in the family. Next, students would be able to think about each family member’s attitude from the author’s perspective. After that, students could make their judgement as to whether they would agree or disagree with these attitudes. It would seem reasonable to judge from different perspectives, but some students might say it was due to cultural differences. Therefore, I asked students to contextualize themselves in the text. If you were the author, would there be a different story?

(Excerpt 7. While-learning conversation)

In Excerpt 7, there was a clear indication of critical practice when students were instructed to put themselves in the author’s shoes. While imagining themselves in the situation of the author, students were encouraged to re-design the story and thus to realize the transformation of the text. The re-design of the text was also recalled by TH:

I asked my students to imagine what they would have talked about in their class reunion in a few years. It is normal to talk about family life in class reunion. According to the text, students can make some assumptions based on their experiences.

(Excerpt 8. While-learning conversation)

Re-designing a text required a sense of contextualization as indicated in TH’s instruction in Excerpt 8. The use of contextualization, as explained by TH, was helpful for students to critically reflect on the text. In my view, an association was made to extend their imagination from within the written text to the real world. For instance, TH raised the following two questions to expand student’s reading from navigating the ‘sacrifice’ and ‘extreme’ in the author’s family to that in Chinese family:

(1) How do you understand the ‘sacrifice’ in Chinese family?

(2) What is the ‘extreme’?

(Excerpt 9. Classroom observation)

Following this instruction, TH directed students’ attention to a triangle relationship in the author’s family (the author, her husband, and her mother-in-law). This is prevailing in Chinese families: husband, wife, mother- and/or father-in-law constitute a stable family. By comparing it with the author’s argument on gender equity, a critical understanding of the text was expected to occur: Which one is more important, family stability or gender equity?

While reflecting on their reading instruction in the plenary, three out of six participants asserted that they provided reading instruction A and D in ‘every or almost every lesson’ (Table 3), perhaps indicating that elements of didactic teaching remained. However, high percentages were given to the provision of reading instruction E and I in ‘about half of the lessons’, and F and J in ‘some lessons’, perhaps suggesting a move from didactic-oriented to more dialogic classroom practices.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Reading instruction for students of English as a foreign language (EFL) during the teacher professional learning (TPL) programme at the main research site (percentages).

Reading instruction		Every or almost every lesson	About half of the lessons	Some lessons	Never	No response
A	To teach students how to raise questions about a text.	50.0	16.7	16.7	0.0	16.7
B	To teach students how to challenge the opinions expressed in a text through dialogues with self or others.	0.0	33.3	66.7	0.0	0.0
C	To teach learners strategies for making generalizations and inferences based on what they have read.	16.7	33.3	50.0	0.0	0.0
D	To teach or model reading modes (e.g. skimming, scanning, intensive reading).	50.0	16.7	33.3	0.0	0.0
E	To assist students to relate what they have read to experiences that they have had in the real world.	16.7	83.3	0.0	0.0	0.0
F	To assist students to compare the historical, social, and cultural contexts of the text with those of other texts.	0.0	33.3	66.7	0.0	0.0
G	To assist students to consider in whose interests the text works.	33.3	33.3	33.3	0.0	0.0
H	To assist students to identify the invisible voice(s) hidden in the text.	16.7	50.0	33.3	0.0	0.0
I	To assist students to determine the writer’s perspective or intention.	16.7	83.3	0.0	0.0	0.0
J	To assist students to synthesize different perspectives embedded within the text to create new ways of thinking about self, society, and world.	0.0	33.3	66.7	0.0	0.0

As a result of data triangulation, I recognized the integration of language and content in all six participants’ classroom practices during the TPL programme. In recognition of this point, the development of criticality through language and content integrated instruction seemed to have challenged English language proficiency development as the ultimate goal of teaching reading in English. With criticality development placed at the centre, participants’ classroom practices extended from comprehension to interpretation. While great importance was attached to the textual world, a link to the reality was created by participants to enable students to engage with the real world critically in the classroom.

3 Criticality development and diversity

During the TPL programme, participants often referred to diversity when it came to the meaning of criticality. What did diversity mean to participants? TB’s response might ignite our mind:

Criticality is . . . I think it is . . . err . . . diversity. From different perspectives, to apply different values, as for me who has lived the same life for so many years, criticality means the change of perspectives. It means Zhong-yong, to think from different perspectives.

(Excerpt 10. Pre-learning conversation)

In Excerpt 10, criticality was perceived as diversity or the change of perspectives by TB. Such a perception was associated with the Confucian Doctrine of the Mean ‘Zhong-yong’, perhaps indicating a Chinese dialectical way of thinking about criticality (Jiang, 2013). I will elaborate on this notion in Section VI.

Other participants associated criticality as diversity with alternative voices that allowed them to explore and discover a new world. This view was reflected in my conversation with TD in terms of the importance of alternatives at the third stage of the TPL programme (Figure 1):

(Excerpt 11. While-learning conversation)

In Excerpt 11, TD took my voice and the voices of students as a challenge and an inspiration. In response to the alternative voices, a strong sense of stress was expressed initially by TD. Moving along the learning trajectory, however, TD learned to release her anxiety. Although anxiety and stress might return from time to time, it was the will to hear different voices that played a pivotal role in the transformation of teaching and learning.

When teaching the main text in Unit 4 (Book 3; Li et al., 2017), TD had students compare it with a supplementary visual text in class. While analysing the visual text, TD instructed students to view it from different perspectives.

(Excerpt 12. Classroom observation)

Excerpt 12 demonstrated what TD meant by hearing different voices and reading from diverse positions. Evidently, the students were capable of thinking outside the box with TD’s assistance. When I asked TD how she engaged students with the text critically, she replied:

This visual text presents a completely different viewpoint. Therefore, students were able to see a new perspective beyond the text. Students might have doubt about some ideas expressed in the text from the textbook. It’s possible. At least students’ mind was widened. I’ve never thought about the possibility of questioning the text before, but now there was one. This is an example. Perhaps I can challenge other ideas expressed in the text. Isn’t that so?

(Excerpt 13. While-learning conversation)

In Excerpt 13, a critical engagement with text was perceived as a social practice to enable students to view the text from a new perspective, echoing TD’s understanding of diversity. Reviewing her instruction in this lesson, I noticed that the concept of possibility was highlighted (Excerpt 12). The emphasis on many possible answers seemed to suggest that TD’s perception of diversity was congruent with her teaching practice. By acknowledging the possibility of transforming the text in the textbook, students were assured that it was possible to challenge the ideas expressed in both written and visual texts. By encouraging students to challenge the ideas expressed by the author/speaker as well as by their classmates, they were expected to construct their own opinions. The implication of diversity was also found in other participants’ understanding of the purpose of criticality development during the TPL programme.

1 Orientation to a sociocultural view

The perception of participants in this study that reading in English involved more than word recognition was the point of departure for seeking an alternative way of understanding reading in China’s vocational contexts. As the Brazilian educational philosopher Freire (1983) noted, ‘reading the world always precedes reading the word, and reading the word implies continually reading the world’ (p. 10); it is ‘impossible to read the text without reading the context of the text’ (Freire, 1985, p. 18). The Freirean legacy is reflected in this study. For example, reading the word in the context was emphasized in TH’s reading instruction. By navigating the meanings of two words ‘sacrifice’ and ‘extreme’ in the contexts of Canadian and Chinese families (Excerpt 9), students’ pragmatic, intercultural and critical awareness was fostered (Wallace, 2018). During the TPL programme, participants came to realize that background knowledge enabled them and students to undertake text analysis on a deeper level, leading to a better understanding of the text. Such realization shifted the participants’ focus of teaching from decoding and comprehension to interpretation (Table 3). Reader interpretation, according to Wallace (2012), is an alternative framework for the teaching of reading (p. 265). Based on a sociocultural view of reading, Wallace (2012) suggests that reader interpretation takes into account the reader’s ‘identities, dispositions, and stances’ in the course of reading (p. 266). Nevertheless, this alternative framework of text analysis is largely missing in China’s vocational contexts.

In line with the skill-focused, practice-oriented, and occupation-driven principle of vocational education in mainland China (State Council of People’s Republic of China, 2014), TEFL in vocational contexts is chiefly concerned with skills acquisition, manifested in how to apply theory to practice and in how to transfer knowledge and skills to workplaces (Murray, 2011, p. 75). As high English language proficiency could add to vocational college students’ competitive edges in the job market, developing English language proficiency for employment is often seen as the ultimate goal of TEFL (An & Zhou, 2010; Liu & Zhou, 2015). Despite its positive effects on employment probabilities, English language proficiency development should not be regarded as the ultimate goal of TEFL. Rather, TEFL should aim for developing higher vocational college students as whole persons as locally grounded and globally minded citizens with critical minds (Wen & Zhang, 2021). The multilayered citizenship building broadens language education to meet societal needs and thus requires teachers and students to move from the text to the context of the text (Sato et al., 2017). Such move, however, can hardly be realized under the current circumstances as noted by Gao (2016, p. 126):

[T]eachers pay more attention to the explanation of vocabulary and grammatical structure and less attention to the comprehension of text in the classroom. Considering that higher vocational college students have a low level of English language proficiency, many teachers insist on teaching through grammar-translation method with focus on word recognition and syntactic analysis.

While the importance of decoding in L2 reading should not be downplayed, a strong emphasis on code might have been counterproductive to multilayered citizenship building. In Gao’s (2016) view, higher vocational college students’ low English language proficiency appears to be the reason they are taught through grammar-translation method. This is a deficit view of higher vocational college students, indicating that low-proficiency learners cannot learn about some deep and challenging issues until they acquire lexical and grammatical knowledge (Luke, 2009). Based on the research findings in Singapore and Australia, Luke (2009) argued that low-achieving learners were able to engage in discussion of meaningful topics even if they had language knowledge problems. The key lies in teachers and their pedagogies, as Luke (2009) posited, teachers need to find ways to engage low-achieving learners in cognitive demanding activities and to show them the connectedness between what they are learning in the classroom and what is happening in the real world. Rather than focus on a particular dimension of knowledge, as elaborated by Luke (2009), teachers need to learn how to weave the repertoire together, moving across one or another dimension of knowledge. The phenomenon of weaving between different knowledge is reflected in the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke, 2000; Luke & Freebody, 1999) which was implemented in this study. The finding that development of reading competencies as well as of reader identities was taken into consideration by participants when giving instruction to students was significant (Table 3). It signified that participants acknowledged cognitive, linguistic and sociocultural potential of higher vocational college students, on the one hand. On the other hand, participants were capable of guiding students to move across known and new resources, as Luke (2009) noted for Singapore and Australia. The resources that participants found that seemed to have made a difference for their students were culturally relevant critical practices of reading. It is to this issue that I will turn next.

2 Culturally relevant critical practice

The development of criticality as a core component of language and content integrated instruction in the present study was anticipated to empower higher vocational college students in learning. In my conversations with each participant, diversity was a key theme that emerged from their perceptions of criticality during the TPL programme. As illustrated in Section V.3, diversity was associated with the possibility of change which was appealing to TB. However, the changeable was seen as a force to complement the unchangeable so that a state of balance can be achieved. The conceptions of change and balancing act seemed to indicate a Chinese dialectical way of knowing about criticality. Such dialectical epistemology is thought to have its roots in the East Asian naïve dialecticism (Peng & Nisbett, 1999; Spencer-Rodgers & Peng, 2018; Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2010). Peng and Nisbett (1999) identified three principles that govern naïve dialecticism: ‘principle of change, principle of contradiction, and principle of relationship or holism’ (p. 743).

The principle of change, according to Peng and Nisbett (1999), refers to a worldview that reality is in a constant state of fluidity. Within this trend, they point out that ‘contradiction is constant’ and yet opposing sides can find harmony (Peng & Nisbett, 1999, p. 743). Such a way of knowing about the world, as Jiang (2013) asserts, leads to the Chinese belief in Zhong-yong, as indicated in TB’s comment (Excerpt 10). Zhong-yong, or the Confucian Doctrine of the Mean, can be translated as ‘the constant practice of the middle road in everyday life’ (Suh, 2020, p. 61). With Zhong-yong in mind, as Jiang (2013) suggests, it is likely for the Chinese to take a more inclusive stance when considering different opinions. Such an inclusive stance was taken by TD and her students in their critical practices of reading (Excerpt 12). As a result of the principles of change and contradiction, the principle of holism asserts that ‘everything is connected in time and space as a whole’, as described in Peng and Nisbett (1999, p. 743). This principle is exemplified by effective practices of the four resources model (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Luke, 2000; Luke & Freebody, 1999) in this study, namely the act of weaving between a skill-based and a sociocultural view of reading as well as between didactic and critical approaches to the teaching of reading in English (Luke, 2018). From a power dynamics perspective, there is often a tension between didactic and critical pedagogies (Luke, 2018). However, the tension also creates spaces for the two visions of education to negotiate and collaborate, leading to the formation of a sense of unity (Luke, 2018). In this respect, culturally relevant critical practices of reading enabled the teachers to develop a unitary repertoire; and thus they could select particular resources to meet individual learners’ needs in their own contexts (Luke, 2009, 2018). More importantly, as Luke (2009) noted, it opens up a world of possibilities for low-achieving learners.