Qualitative study explores Chinese students’ teamwork experiences in UK engineering, highlighting cultural challenges and growth.
Teamwork is a central component of engineering education, particularly within UK programmes where project-based collaboration is widely embedded. Despite the large presence of Chinese students in these environments, limited research has examined how they interpret and navigate teamwork in intercultural settings. This study investigates how Chinese engineering postgraduates understand and adjust to collaborative practices in UK universities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 Chinese students, and the data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The findings reveal four interconnected patterns: students encountered general teamwork challenges such as uneven contribution and unclear expectations; they experienced language-related barriers that constrained participation; they navigated differences between Chinese and UK educational norms that shaped communication and role positioning; and they gradually developed better collaborative competence over time. The study highlights the need for engineering programmes to provide clearer guidance on teamwork expectations, scaffold intercultural communication, and create structured opportunities to promote their engagement. By foregrounding the perspectives of Chinese engineering students and drawing on an insider-informed interpretive approach, this research contributes to ongoing discussions about diversity, inclusion, and non-technical skill development in global engineering education. The findings reveal four interconnected patterns: students encountered general teamwork challenges such as uneven contribution and unclear expectations; they experienced language-related barriers that constrained participation; they navigated differences between Chinese and UK educational norms that shaped communication and role positioning; and they gradually developed better collaborative competence over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: