A mixed-methods national study investigating key challenges in learning English as a foreign language: A Chinese college student perspective

INTRODUCTION: This mixed-methods national study has a two-fold purpose: (a) to invite Chinese college students to rate their overall difficulties in the eight areas of English learning, i.e., listening, speaking, reading, writing, pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and culture; and (b) to invite them to identify their key challenges in learning EFL. Specifically, the following three research questions were asked: (a) what are their overall difficulties in the eight areas of learning EFL? (b) Are there significant differences in rating their overall difficulties in these eight areas across the demographic variables of gender (i.e., male versus female participants) and subject discipline (arts versus sciences versus English subject disciplines participants)? And (c) what are their key challenges in learning EFL? METHODS: The participants included a sample of 1,525 freshmen and sophomore students currently studying at seven universities across China. The instrument was a survey that consisted of a five-point Likert scale self-evaluation form and a major essay question addressing their key challenges. The qualitative data can help to probe deeply into the research setting to obtain in-depth understandings about Chinese college students’ English learning; and therefore, they can greatly enhance the quantitative data. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The quantitative results indicated that listening, speaking, and writing were their three key difficult areas in EFL learning; further, students’ subject discipline (arts versus sciences verse English subject disciplines) had significant effects on their perceived learning challenges in English listening and vocabulary. The qualitative results confirmed that listening, speaking, and writing were their three key challenging areas. Their specific learning challenges in each area were examined. Implications for Chinese college English teachers and administrators are discussed in terms of pedagogy and policy making, respectively.